The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
This election is to appoint the project coordinator team for one year, from 30 September 2016 to 29 September 2017. Coordinators are generally responsible for maintaining all of the procedural and administrative aspects of the project. All of the coordinators, and especially the lead coordinator (or lead coordinators), serve as the designated points-of-contact for procedural issues and focus on specific areas requiring special attention. They are not, however, endowed with any special executive powers.
The primary responsibility of the project coordinators is the maintenance and housekeeping work involved in keeping the project and its internal processes running smoothly; this includes a variety of tasks, such as keeping the announcement and open task lists updated, overseeing the assessment and review processes, managing the proposal and creation of task forces, and so forth. There is fairly little involved that couldn't theoretically be done by any other editor, of course—in only a few places have the coordinators been explicitly written into a process—but, since experience suggests that people tend to assume that someone else is doing whatever needs to be done, it has proven beneficial to formally delegate responsibility for this administrative work to a specified group.
The coordinators also have several additional roles. They serve as the project's designated points of contact, and are explicitly listed as people to whom questions can be directed in a variety of places around the project. In addition, they have (highly informal) roles in leading the drafting of project guidelines, overseeing the implementation of project decisions on issues like category schemes and template use, and helping to resolve disputes and keep discussions from becoming heated and unproductive.
Practical information on coordinating may be found here and here.
Nomination period: 2 September to 23:59 UTC 15 September
Voting period: 16 September to 23:59 UTC 29 September
Any member of the project may nominate themselves for a position by adding their statement in the "Candidates" section below by the start of the election. The following boilerplate can be used:
=== Name ===
{{user|Name}}
: Statement goes here...
==== Comments and questions for Name ====
*''What have been the achievements of which you are most proud within the Military history WikiProject?''
**
*''What skills/qualities can you contribute as a coordinator?''
**
==== Votes in support of Name ====
#
The election will be conducted using simple approval voting. Any member of the project may support as many of the candidates as they wish. The candidate with the highest number of endorsements will become the lead coordinator (provided he or she is willing to assume the post); this position may be shared in the event that multiple candidates receive the highest number of endorsements. The remaining candidates with twenty or more endorsements will be appointed as coordinators to a maximum of eleven appointments (including the lead coordinator). The number of coordinators may be increased or reduced if there is a tie or near-tie for the last position.
Both project members and interested outside parties are encouraged to ask questions of the nominees or make general comments.
Given the limited interest there seems to be in filling these positions again this year I am prepared to put my name forward to continue in the role of co-ordinator with the standard proviso that commitments in real life will continue to limit the amount of work I can take on here and will take precedence. However, I strongly encourage any member of the project to nominate themselves (especially those that have not been a co-ordinator before) as we desperately need to increase the number of editors with experience in the functioning of the project rather than just "the usual suspects" if we are going to arrest what seems to be the start of a general decline project-wide. It would also be good to give our members a number of candidates to choose from, rather than having less nominees than positions, as seems increasingly likely.
What have been the achievements of which you are most proud within the Military history WikiProject?
I'm not sure I think of what I've done here in quite those terms. Wikipedia can be an awesome tool to help make military history accessible to the general public, and this is probably in part why I have devoted a large part of my (limited) free time to it for most of the last 8 years. Yet I am increasing mindful that it is also at best imperfect and that trends suggest that the project faces numerous threats in the medium term, including some which range from serious to potentially existential in order of magnitude. However, just as in life, despite its many challenges we trudge forward through the dust from whence we came (and to which we will inevitably return), one foot after the other, trying to play our part, and hoping that if we live quiet and blameless lives and raise our children to be decent and hard working and to contribute to society, that just maybe everything will turn out ok in the end after all. As such it is my hope that I have helped to build the encyclopaedia by writing / re-writing a few articles (including some A / GA / Bs etc.) and that in doing so I haven't buggered them up too much that I have added to the weight of incorrect information that we seem to be increasingly complicit in propagating (usually by accident) due to the issues inherent in an encyclopaedia any clown can edit and Wikipedia's enormous popularity as a source of information (although with certainty I can say that I have to take my share of the blame here). I have also contributed to a few FA/A/GA/Peer Reviews etc. (hopefully constructively), and like to think that I have occasionally been able to help new or existing editors with advice or in helping to reach consensus on editorial or other issues, in addition to pitching in with various administrative work such as article assessment and backlog drives, as well as very occasional and in-frequent contributions to our academy articles and The Bugle etc.
What skills/qualities can you contribute as a coordinator?
I have served three years as a MILHIST co-ordinator (2012–13, 2013–14, and 2015–16) so I have a bit of an idea how this aspect of the project functions. Although I will not be able to give a lot of time to the role, I am of course willing to continue to help out with some of our less interesting, but necessary administrative tasks in order to (try) to keep the lights running / organ grinder turning (yes I am aware of the monkey analogy here).
After careful review, I have decided to support your nomination, but then you already knew that, didn't you? ;) Glad to see you back again. TomStar81 (Talk) 03:33, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Family duties called me away for part of the year, but I have finally gotten my elderly aunt moved to more appropriate digs and her situation better supervised. Between this and starting a new job in June I've been somewhat distracted, but all seems much more copacetic now.
What have been the achievements of which you are most proud within the Military history WikiProject?
For most of this past year, I have slogged away at the backlog of reviews and assessments. A worthy goal, but it can be boring. I've not contributed as much content as I'd like, but I'm hoping to get back to that this year. Regardless, I'll hold up my end on the B level reviews, etc., and try to keep going on the less than glamorous tasks. I'm always ready to help out with some of the grammatical issues, smooth out writing challenges, and assess historical sources.
What skills/qualities can you contribute as a coordinator?
I too have served three years as a MILHIST co-ordinator. Good at solving problems and smoothing over some of the rougher edges on some of the conflicts.
Welcome back! I was worried there for a while, but I'm glad to see you've return safe and saound, and that you are willing to come back and help out. TomStar81 (Talk) 03:31, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I had been hoping to take a break from co-ord duties this year, but given that a couple of our best have beaten me to the punch, I will put my hand up again if others see fit. AustralianRupert (talk) 10:37, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What have been the achievements of which you are most proud within the Military history WikiProject?
I think my most valuable achievements have been working to help keep the project's ACR process going through offering reviews and helping new nominators through the process. I have also really enjoyed writing articles in collaboration with some of our stalwarts such as Nick-D, Ian Rose, Anotherclown, and Hawkeye7. The experience of collaborating on an article can be most rewarding, as we all have strengths and weaknesses as writers, so pairing up with someone else can often help us learn from our peers.
What skills/qualities can you contribute as a coordinator?
I've got some time up, I'm prepared to listen, and I'm willing muck-in when the weapons need cleaning. I will even take my turn carrying the heavy equipment, even if it makes the CSM frown. (Sorry, bad work joke). Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 11:00, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
An absolute asset to the project, does the lot, always high on the quarterly reviewing tallies, closes ACRs and hands out awards in a timely way, checks entries in the monthly contest, always friendly and welcoming of new editors, the complete coordinator package. I feel like he's being co-opted to some extent, but I think we should take advantage of his professed willingness to keep carrying the heavy gear for another year. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:25, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support. AR is so active that I sometimes feel that he is following me round with his incisive comments. Pointing out errors and omissions so tactfully that I can't help but take it positively. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:42, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Here we go again. I've been a Milhist coord for 6.5 years. I cover less territory than other reviewers do at Peer Review, A-class and FAC, specializing in copyediting. I compensate by doing more reviews, although it won't be as many this coming year, so I can spend more time on WP:Today's featured article and a new project intended to pull in new editors. If for some reason you want to know more about my tour of duty on Wikipedia, wander around my userspace.
What have been the achievements of which you are most proud within the Military history WikiProject?
Longevity, mostly.
What skills/qualities can you contribute as a coordinator?
I try to be a useful cog in the machine. I respect all of you, and I've been treated respectfully by all of you, the whole 6.5 years. - Dank (push to talk) 02:23, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
While Dan doesn't do a huge amount of the procedural stuff that coordinators generally do, what he does (and does very well) is copy-editing and reviewing Milhist articles nominated for Featured class, something that is very important to our Wikiproject and something that is also generally underrated. He also has institutional knowledge that makes him an asset to the coord team. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:32, 23 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I'm Harry. I think I'm still known around these parts, but it's been a while. I was a coordinator for four years until last year's elections, where I stepped down wile I was, for want of a better expression, sorting my life out. Things are more stable now, though I'll be upfront: I was once very active, making dozens of edits and admin actions every day; I'm not likely to return to that level of activity for the foreseeable future (I now have a full-time job and various commitments and I keep strange hours because of my work), but things are stable enough that I can help shoulder some of the burden again.
What have been the achievements of which you are most proud within the Military history WikiProject?
A lot of my article work, including all of my seven featured articles, have had some connection to military history. My current focus is on war memorials, and I've just finished creating articles for all the free-standing war memorials by Sir Edwin Lutyens in Britain. My next task is to go back through the ones that already had articles and improve those, and to tweak some of my better ones (like Spalding War Memorial and Northampton War Memorial) with a view to putting them through the review processes, so it would be only right to help with the backlogs there.
What skills/qualities can you contribute as a coordinator?
I'm an admin and an oversighter. I know my way around most of the inner workings of Wikipedia and the military history project. Last time around I was heavily involved in the ACR process. And I can advise on article-writing; perhaps not as well as some of our more distinguished coordinators, but i like to think I know roughly what I'm doing!
I see you've got around 113 archive pages for your talk page. They're not fluffy archives either; it's all business and people coming by to get the benefit of your experience. I'm glad we can call on that experience at Milhist. - Dank (push to talk) 00:33, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I was a coordinator from March 2009 to September 2015, the last year as lead coordinator, before taking a break. I'm also co-editor of the Bugle newsletter and, outside MilHist, a FAC coordinator. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 15:23, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What have been the achievements of which you are most proud within the Military history WikiProject?
I still consider myself primarily a content creator, and enjoy collaborating with other editors to take subjects all the way to Featured status. You never know where this sort of partnership might take you: in the past couple of years I've worked on my first ship FA with Sturmvogel 66, the first RAAF wing Featured Topic with Nick-D, the first Empire Air Training Scheme squadron FA with AustralianRupert, and my first double-barrelled TFA with Cliftonian. Reviewing articles is also very important, so I'm pleased that I usually figure quite highly in the project's quarterly reviewing tallies.
What skills/qualities can you contribute as a coordinator?
Experience, enthusiasm and, I hope, even-handedness. I've been around long enough to know how the machine is oiled, and I think I can provide reasonably sound advice and contribute intelligently to discussion, as well as perform the day-to-day coord activities like closing reviews, distributing awards, and so on.
Just his work on the Bugle is more than enough, but Ian does far more than that. He steadily works away at the reviewing workload, and checks entries in the monthly contest, all while creating interesting and engaging content. He provides sage advice when asked, and his previous experience as a coord and lead coord will be needed in the coming year. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:39, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support: A solid content creator and reviewer, in addition to his many contributions at FAC and the Bugle. Thanks for offering to help out with the co-ord duties. Anotherclown (talk) 21:11, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I first started editing with bacteria, but moved on to history, military history to be more precise, however I also do some work in general history, such as "my" Shule kingdom, or Sidicini pages, and enjoy working on many pages, such as my namesake article, I also enjoy peer reviewing articles (Although my peer reviews are few ((I believe I have done 9) I put a lot of effort into them.) I would like to become a coordinator to help the community, as they have helped me.
What have been the achievements of which you are most proud within the Military history WikiProject?
Perhaps bringing the Roman military history task force to (or back to) life, it has a lot of potential, and while it is no means large or important, it is taking steps, additionally general edits, while a lot of my page creations and edits are talk page and category, I do a lot of work on mainspace.
What skills/qualities can you contribute as a coordinator?
A lot of free time, general knowledge in military history, I would say I am good with working with people and helping people work together, along with willingness to help the members of MILHIST.
Good to see someone with a specialism outside of the normal reaches of the project; this would bring some fresh thoughts and perspectives. Miyagawa (talk) 08:20, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What have been the achievements of which you are most proud within the Military history WikiProject?
I first started editing Wikipedia when reading some articles on US Air Force units that contained some real howlers. It took me about a year to figure out how to edit acceptably (I think I devoted a month to removing "Ibids.") At any rate I've been contributing regularly to US articles, trying to get them to an acceptable level, including cleaning up departures from the WP:MOS. My aim is usually to bring these articles to B Level, taking types of units in a group -- Air Defense Groups (including Fighter Groups (Air Defense)), Air Divisions (numbered in the 800s done), Air Refueling Squadrons (numbered in the 900s done), and am currently working on the impact of the multiple reserve group reorganization of 1963 on groups (done) and wings (including the period from activation until 1963). I'd hope to continue this while coordinating.
What skills/qualities can you contribute as a coordinator?
Most of my work has been expanding and referencing these units, but in the process, I've done a bit of WikiGnome work, which strikes me as an attribute for a coordinator. I've pretty much been able to avoid controversies (in the sense of mano a mano), but have entered into posted discussions on controversial subjects on occasion, with (hopefully) helpful comments.
I'm keen to see some new blood on the coord team, and Lineagegeek has been around long enough to know when to ask for help or advice and when to just crack on with what needs doing. Will definitely be an asset on the coord team. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:51, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm glad you took Peacemaker's suggestion and ran; you've got nothing to worry about. You've always been a knowledgeable voice around here, and I particularly like your big pile of B-class articles on the USAF. Keep "aiming high". - Dank (push to talk) 00:56, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The oldest new coord (is that a thing?) standing for election this cycle - I was a coordinator several years ago (from 2009 to 2011, including the last year as the lead coordinator) but stepped aside while I was in grad school, since I couldn't commit to spending the time. Now that I have a bit more free time than I did, I'd be happy to come back and help out with coordinator duties.
What have been the achievements of which you are most proud within the Military history WikiProject?
I've written GAs or better on just about every major German warship from the 1860s to 1945, and have been working on getting the Italian and Austro-Hungarian fleets to that standard too. Not a small project by any means (the German ships are in the neighborhood of 250+ articles and the Italians are over 100 and counting). This includes 50 FAs, most of which have been in support of WP:OMT, one of Milhist's special projects.
What skills/qualities can you contribute as a coordinator?
I have pretty extensive experience writing articles, so I can help with article reviews, advice for new contributors, and such. I am also an administrator, so I can handle issues that require those tools. Lastly, I've done the job in the past, so I have some familiarity with the responsibilities.
Always one of the consistent article improvers here (among many, admittedly!) and with the prior experience it's a straight forward yes from me. Miyagawa (talk) 08:17, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What have been the achievements of which you are most proud within the Military history WikiProject?
I've written hundreds of GAs or better many different warships from the 1860s to 1945, with a focus on battleships and battlecruisers for WP:OMT, one of Milhist's special projects. This includes over 50 FAs, and about half of the articles in the largest featured topic on Wikipedia, Battlecruisers of the World.
What skills/qualities can you contribute as a coordinator?
My main focus is on writing articles so I can offer advice for all that. And I've reviewed hundreds of Good Article nominations so I'm very familiar with that process as well.
Sturm has been a good lead coord this last year, but what has always really impressed me about him is his continuing commitment to content creation and his absolutely phenomenal commitment to GAN reviewing (650 and counting..., something that is underrated within the project IMO). He chips in with with discussions on difficult topics, and doesn't do groupthink on AfDs. A major asset on the coord team. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:48, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The GAN reviewing is what jumps out ... holy hand grenades. That's some dedication, and keeping the wait time down at GAN is so important. - Dank (push to talk) 02:04, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've been a coordinator for like forever, and to my knowledge I'm the longest serving coordinator (excluding the emerti coordinators, of course). I'll stand again if the community will have me back. TomStar81 (Talk) 02:00, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What have been the achievements of which you are most proud within the Military history WikiProject?
It'd be a long post if I listed everything I've ever done to help, but the short version is I've suggested a lot of stuff that has been adopted by the project to varying degrees over the the last decade or so, most recently the reorganization of the task forces we use to track our articles.
What skills/qualities can you contribute as a coordinator?
I think, that's mostly my thing. I do some other stuff too, but I generally see my contributions as suggestions and advice, with a leavening of action and outreach. TomStar81 (Talk) 02:00, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Tom knows where everything is (and probably also knows where the bodies are buried...). He is also an innovator — I especially appreciated the work he put into the task force re-organisation this year, which closed some geographical gaps that had irritated me since I joined the project. He is also someone who keeps the project cogs turning, closing ACRs and handing out awards in a timely manner. He also engages new editors in a welcoming way and points people in the right direction. Good to have an old hand on the team who still gets stuck in. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:35, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
As probably the only non-Australian voter, I vote for you for this role and would even elect you for President of the United States because of the political mess we're in now. Thanks for your work and leadership! Your Pal, MooperVeltresleex 13:54, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
What can you say -- Tom is an institution who keeps on proving his dedication to the project, not just in coord work and discussion, but also his phenomenal run of thoughtful op-eds and useful timelines in the Bugle to commemorate the centenary of World War I. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:08, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Tom has been one of the driving forces behind many of our initiatives in recent memory, and like a number of others has become almost indispensable. Anotherclown (talk) 21:11, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Following a bit of a nudge from a couple of fellow editors, I thought I would throw my hat in the Coordinator ring for 2016/2017. When I started out here in the Milhist project back in 2011, I was doing little gnoming things like adding infoboxes to biographies but then gradually moved into article expansion and creation. During this period of time I was the beneficiary of a lot of goodwill, advice and assistance from fellow editors (many of whom are also current co-ordinators). I hope that being a coordinator will be one way to pay all of that forward. Zawed (talk) 10:43, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What have been the achievements of which you are most proud within the Military history WikiProject?
Creating and expanding articles relating to New Zealand military history in the First and Second World Wars, which was nowhere as comprehensive as the Australian content on Wikipedia. There is still of a lot of work to do to improve coverage in this area, but at least it is better than what it was. I also enjoy doing article reviews, helping editors with the final polishes on an article that will be a credit to the project.
What skills/qualities can you contribute as a coordinator?
I don't pretend to be an expert in all the policies of the project but anticipate most of my efforts, initially at least, will directed to the procedural stuff; closing reviews, updating the contest scoreboard and so forth. I have done a fair bit of content creation and expansion so as well as continuing with my reviewing, I will be looking to encourage and help out newcomers in this area. We really need to make sure this place is accessible and welcoming as possible to newcomers to help arrest or minimise the decline in editor numbers. Zawed (talk) 10:43, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm keen to see some new blood in the coord team, and I think Zawed fits the bill nicely. Great content creator, good reviewer. Helps out around the place with advice. Does plenty of coord work already, checking entries in the monthly contest on a regular basis. Will be an asset. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:31, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I brightened up when I saw your name here. I knew your work on kiwi units and officers from A-class, but I see now that you've written a wide range of articles. I'm glad we'll have the benefit of your experience and dedication. - Dank (push to talk) 02:12, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
How could I say no to another Antipodean biographer -- more than that, Zawed is always collegial in review and discussion, just the right temperament for coord work. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:11, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
