Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/MIT Radiation Laboratory

Support from Hawkeye7

This is a great article! Wish I wrote something like this. Some comments:

• I know MIT is defined in the lead, but you should define it in the body as well.
  •  Done First body mention is now "Massachusetts Institute of Technology"
• "Army Chief of Staff George C. Marshall" -> General George C. Marshal. And link Chief of Staff of the United States Army.
  •  Done Added link and corrected title
• "Bolling Field in Washington" -> Washington, D.C.
  •  Done Amended to Washington, D.C.
• "Los Alamos, the research laboratory of the Manhattan Project" Los Alamos was not the only research laboratory of the Manhattan Project; there was also the Radiation laboratory at Berkeley and the SAM Laboratories in New York. Suggest "the Los Alamos Laboratory of the Manhattan Project".
  •  Done Corrected as suggested.
• "Bell Labs, General Electric, RCA, Westinghouse and Sperry Gyroscope" Link?
  •  Done Added wikilinks to each. The same firms have prior links in the "American mobilization of civilian science", sub-section, but it's distant from the collaborators sub-section.
• Link D-Day? Japanese air attacks on the Mariana Islands?
  • D-Day linked. I will review sources for information on Mariana Islands attacks and MEW use.
  •  Done Now ready for review, @Hawkeye7. Craven and Cate covers the Pacific theatre gap, and the National Archives had a nice photo. You may wish to check the ranks. Do let me know if details should be moved to the AN/CPS-1 article.
• " General Orvil Anderson" -> Major General Orvil Anderson
  •  Done Rank corrected.

... more to come. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 05:37, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the first read, look forward to more comments. The finesse of the Manhattan Project articles inspired me to dig into this one, and I hope the influence is apparent. Nickknack00 (talk) 05:22, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

• "By 946–47" -> "By 1946–1947"
  •  Done. Implemented same format for all year ranges.
• "dollars worth -> dollars' worth"
  •  Done
• Thrall (1946) is not used - move to Further reading section
  • Comment: Incorporated into text. Thrall is one of the lab's three official NDRC summary reports, so I see some value in presenting all three together. So I've now cited Thrall in "Blind bombing" and the first "Fire control" sections to describe weaknesses of the systems. I've used the reports for technical details and make "limiting" claims about the lab's impacts, since the reports aren't an arms'-length treatment of the subject.
• "Two former RLE directors emerged from the Rad Lab, Julius Stratton and Jerome Wiesner and later became MIT presidents;" comma after "Weisner"
  •  Done. Modified clause order.
• "1961 Boston bank study" -> bank of Boston"
  • Comment: The source (Leslie) is ambiguous on which bank authored the study. A footnote traces this to 1986 dissertation, but it's not digitized on ProQuest. So I've modified the phrase to "a Boston bank."

Great work! Hawkeye7 (discuss) 03:31, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

@Hawkeye7, I think I've addressed all recommendations. Let me know if further edits are required! Nickknack00 (talk) 15:35, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Support Comments by A.Cython

This is my second A-class review so I might miss a few things, and if I say something off do not hesitate to ignore. This is a learning process for me as well. I hope you find my comments helpful.

Lead

• had lasting influence in postwar → had a lasting influence on postwar
  •  Done

Main body

• pulse radar does this correspond to Pulse-Doppler radar, if so add a wikilink and perhaps using the full name?
  • Pulsing is the general technique that was improved, but Doppler radar evolved separately and later.
    • I see, very interesting.
• Both Army and Navy should "the" be added
  •  Done
• airborne systems respectively add a comma before "respectively"
  •  Done
• under single divisional heads rewrite as "single" and "heads" (plural)
• By September 1941 add comma after this
  • Similar to By July 1943
    •  Done, and verified all other clause use a comma
• none satisfactory → none of which were satisfactory
  •  Done
• when Japanese air attack → when a Japanese air attack
  •  Done
• on June 25, 1944 → on 25 June 1944
  •  Done, and have converted all dates to the same style to match the consistency criteria

Sections

• Replace pseudo-section titles, e.g., ;Official histories with normal subsection titles === Official histories ===
  •  Done

Thanks for the close read!

Many thanks, it was an interesting read. Good luck. A.Cython(talk) 20:31, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Image review - pass

• File:MIT Radiation Laboratory BW logo 1946.png: does not meet the threshold of originality needed for copyright - okay
• File:MIT Radiation Laboratory magnetron tests RL-35-193.jpg, File:MIT Radiation Laboratory trainees 1945.jpg, File:SCR-584 radar in Steenbergen RL-SCR-584-188.jpg, File:Massachusetts coastline PPI scope Bell telephone magazine (1945) (14569797239) (cropped).jpg, File:Lee DuBridge MIT Radiation Laboratory c1945 (quarter length crop).jpg, File:Francis Wheeler Loomis 1944 Radiation Lab (cropped).png, File:Isidor I. Rabi Rad Lab Office GCP-00020880 (quarter-length crop).jpg, File:MIT Radiation Laboratory Theory Group 1945.jpg, File:Raytheon magnetron assembly RL-35-227.jpg, File:Trump duBridge 1945 cropped.png, File:MIT Radiation Laboratory Radome Roof Lab RL-35-279.jpg, File:Douglas B-18 Bolo RL-DR-024 (cropped).jpg, File:Radiation Laboratory Steering Committee.jpg, File:LORAN Electronicnaviga00unit 0009.jpg, File:Technician with MEW Plan position indicator scope c1945.png, File:ANCPS-1 antenna Mount Topachau Saipan U.S. Air Force Number 56404AC.jpg, File:SG Radar Console 1945.jpg, File:Radar System Engineering Radiation Laboratory Series cover 1947.jpg - In the public domain because it was published in the United States between 1931 and 1963, and although there was a copyright notice, the copyright was not renewed - okay
• File:MEW ANCPS-1 antenna and bombers NAID 6922416.jpg, File:Massachusetts Institute of Technology at the End of World War II 6922654.jpg, File:Loran day night coverage 1946 photonegative NAID 205578225.jpg, File:Ground Controlled Approach in France 1945 NAID 6922417 (cropped).jpg, File:Start Point MEW D-Day Radar 0703H 19440606.jpg - NARA image - PD - okay
• File:SCR-270-set-up.jpg, File:SCR-582 radar in Algiers 1943.png, File:SCR584 antenna mount diagram.jpg, File:SCR 584 radar.jpg, File:Flak (1944).webm - US Army image - PD - okay
• File:B-17F Radar Bombing over Germany 1943.jpg, File:B-24 Liberator 15th AAF Bombing Ploesti Romania 15 July 1944 (cropped).jpg - US Air Force image - some editors might insist on a US Army tag, as the USAF was separated from the Army in 1947 - okay
  • Thanks for catching this. I've updated the templates to PD-US-Military-Army Nickknack00 (talk) 17:11, 21 May 2026 (UTC)
• File:Grumman TBM-3W Avenger in flight, circa in 1946 (cropped).jpg - US Navy image - PD - okay
• File:NDRC first meeting 19400702.png - Image by unknown federal government employee?
  • The provenance on this image is weaker than I'd like. It's immediate source is an article submitted to Science by Vannevar Bush. I'm assuming it was taken by an aide to the NDRC at its first meeting, which would make it work created for the federal government.
• File:Thinktank Birmingham - object 1972S02605.00004(1).jpg - CC4.0 - okay
• File:Edward Mills Purcell.jpg - Needs a US tag as well
  • This is not one of my uploads, but I can look into it for US copyright purposes. The issue is that the Nobel Prize committee website doesn't give the original author, so I can't identify copyright status. I'll see if I can get a library scan of the original 1952 yearbook source.

• • This has long been a source of frustration for me. When I was a newbie, I thought that I could just take images from Commons and they had been properly checked and tagged. This turned out to not be the case; Wikipedia reviewers were far more critical. But in some cases images were rejected on grounds that carry no weight whatsoever on Commons, as the two projects have different rules. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:28, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

  I've been doing illustrations for a while, but wasn't aware that there were different standards across the projects. I'll double my effort to get this one cleared. Nickknack00 (talk) 12:05, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

• File:Lawrence Compton Bush Conant Compton Loomis 83d40m March 1940 meeting UCB.JPG - okay per Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2026 March 7

Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:31, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

Source review - pass

I will do the source review. I need a few days to go through the sources. A.Cython(talk) 02:59, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

Please fix citation 168 as it produces: Harv error: link from CITEREFWhite1946 doesn't point to any citation. Harv error: this link doesn't point to any citation. It seems to me that the source by White is missing.

•  Done. White wrote the opening chapter in Thrall's edited volume.

Spot check

• #4 Y
• #15 Do you mean p. 17, instead of p. 9?
  •  Done, Should be Stewart, not Baxter
• #23 Could you please provide a quote to support the —far exceeding any American microwave source.
  • I'm amending this because it is a synthetic claim. Bowen and Cockcroft report 10kW in a UK test, which they describe as "roughly a thousand times the best American tube on the same wavelength" (p. 37). This sentence discusses the 15kW Bell Labs tests, which Buderi only compares as a seven-fold improvement on Bell Labs' best longer-wavelength tube. So I can't draw the thousand-fold inference without reaching across both claims.
• #26 It would be more reasonable to have pp. 14–25 instead of pp. 24–25. Also adding pp. 144–145, where it is more clearly stated that MIT was selected
  •  Done this is now FN28
• #31 Y
• #45 Y
• #56 Y
• #68 Can you provide a quote from the source?
  •  Done Should be Stewart, not Baxter. Now FN70
• #90 Y [optional] I think p.44 is not needed
  •  Done, now FN92
• #112 Y
• #159 Y explain a bit better in the text what is a wolf pack also consider to wikilink it Wolfpack (naval tactic)
  •  Done, good idea
• #164 Y consider adding a wikilink for Wilhelmshaven
  •  Done
• #171 Add the page 1095 where the quote is located
  •  Done Now FN172. Did not modify--p. 1095 cited
• #183 Mostly checks out but can you explain the fewer than one V-1 in four? Also, change the page range to pp. 857–859.
  •  Done Now FN184. One in four refers to the number intercepted by AA (23 percent) compared to all interceptions. Corrected page range.
• #190 Y
• #193 Y
• #194 Y
• #211 Mostly checks out except for opened roughly two hundred times more radio channels on p.16
  •  Done Now FN212. Fixed, the multiplier comes from Buderi p. 252
• #215 Y
• #216 Can you double check this one? All I see is the Appendix C.
  •  Done. The article quote predates my redraft. It does not appear in my sources, so I have removed.

@Nickknack00: I completed the source review. Let me know if something is unclear. Thanks. A.Cython(talk) 04:32, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

• @A.Cython: You should see all addressed! Nickknack00 (talk) 03:51, 6 June 2026 (UTC)
  • Thanks, passed.A.Cython(talk) 16:12, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

Review by Dumelow

Looking at the text

• "James Conant of Harvard,"

You've not mentioned Harvard before, I would name it in full and link it here rather than a couple of sections further down.

Y

• "As the Rad Lab's official historian observed"

Consider naming and linking him if possible

Y now named as Henry Guerlac

• "John Randall and Harry Boot at Birmingham University"

"Birmingham University" is colloquial, it's proper name is the University of Birmingham

Y Changed to "University of Birmingham"

• I would review your image placement. Most should be right aligned in accordance with MOS:IMAGELOC, the ones at the start of sections are likely to be most problematic.

Y I've now moved most to right-aligned. Keeping the "Origins" image left-aligned because it competes with the infobox in most non-mobile views.

• "The fall of France in June 1940 made Allied scientific interchange urgent."

As the US wasn't in the war at this point then I am not sure "Allied" is the right term to use here.

Y Removed "Allied."

• Ministry of Aircraft Production could be linked

Y

• "The mission arrived before the Army and Navy had authorized NDRC to disclose information to them"

It is plausible that a reader might not know who "them" was in this context

Y Now reads "The mission arrived before the Army and Navy had authorized NDRC to disclose information to their British counterparts."

• "Initial plans to locate the facility at Bolling Field in Washington, D.C. met delays"

Do we know what caused these delays?

Y I've removed "delays", clarifying that initial attempts to host at Bolling required NDRC to operate. (there were also issues with interservice rivalries in research.)

• Consider adding modern equivalents for dollar values stated in the text

• "nuclear physicists familiar with high-frequency techniques from accelerator work"

I would consider providing a link to explain what an accelerator is

• "a secure 10,000-square-foot space"

Provide a metric conversion (also recurs later)

Y Implemented

Read down to "Organization" so far, will continue when I can - Dumelow (talk) 11:29, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

• "The laboratory operated as a civilian contractor under OSRD's Division 14"

You've not previously mentioned the OSRD

Y I've modified this section to more fully explain the NDRC ⊆ OSRD relationship. It's a little clunky because it changes over the course of the lab's operation.

• "One laboratory member characterized the division of labor succinctly: DuBridge said "Yes." Loomis said "No.""

Might be a WP:ENGVAR thing but this would read better to me withour punctuation in the quotes: One laboratory member characterized the division of labor succinctly: DuBridge said "Yes" Loomis said "No".

Y I've modified to indicate that the punctuation is exact from the source.

I would clarify which Loomis this was referring to

Y The new paragraph structure should address this.

• "1,301 nonstaff men, and 1,407 nonstaff women"

Might be ENGVAR again but I looks better to me as "non-staff"

Y Reformatted as requested

• "Discrepancies grew pronounced enough that a 1942 restructuring authorized selective merit increases to prevent what administrators feared would be a collapse in morale"

Very minor but this reads better to me as "selective merit-based increases"

Comment: I think the term is merit pay in U.S. government parlance, so I've modified to read as "merit pay increases." (I don't think a wikilink is justified per MOS:OL)

• There are some duplicated links on Bell Labs, General Electric, RCA, Westinghouse and Sperry.

Comment: Per MOS:DUPLINK, my thinking is that this is the first mention in a section dedicated to these contractors, and the links are contextually important in understanding the section. But I am happy to delink if it improves reading clarity.

• You could link HP Hood for "Hood Milk Company"

Y Done

• Might be worth stating somewhere that the US Army ran the air force in this period. Otherwise an uniformed reader might wonder why only the navy and army were involved in the research.

Y First mention of the Army now reads: "The Army Signal Corps, serving the combined Ground Forces and Air Forces before their 1947 split into separate branches, took a different path under Major William Blair." This is the section where the Army/Navy coordination issues are already clearest.

• "Plans for a similar field operation in the Pacific took shape in spring 1945, when OSRD organized a Pacific Branch under Karl Compton's direction. General Douglas MacArthur's headquarters approved the arrangement, but Japan's surrender came before the organization became fully operational."

Might be worth addng the date of the surrender for context

Y Done

Read down to the Early development section - Dumelow (talk) 13:14, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

• Cosnider linking Gun laying, Analog computer, Battle of the Atlantic (when talking about the anti-sub radar)

Y Done.

• "It returned to Cambridge after Pearl Harbor interrupted the schedule"

I would make it expressly clear at this first mention what "Pearl Harbor" means (ie US entry into the war) as some readers may not know this, also a link would probably be helpful.

Y Done, including an appositive describing U.S. entry into war.

• "The laboratory's model shop, the Research Construction Company, built fifty ground-based sets by hand for the Signal Corps. Five of these became the first microwave ground equipment to see combat, deployed during the North Africa invasion in November 1942"

Are these 50 sets anti-submarine radar (this comes from that section), a very similar statement in "Entry into war" suggests this might relate to the SCR-584 radar?

 Not done It is a separate set. SCR-582 was also ground-based like SCR-584, thus the same prefix, but its use was harbor surveillance, not gunlaying. I think the close numbering just means the Signal Corps adopted both systems around the same time (late 1941). I cover it here because it was the lab's first effort at "crash" manufacturing, but the sources don't give it full treatment that they give to surveillance systems like MEW. I will red-link it, since it has modest coverage in several radar histories.

• The sentence fragment "But the laboratory itself required restructuring" doesn't feel right to start a paragraph

Y. Now reads "To prepare combat-ready radar systems, the laboratory itself required restructuring"

Read down to "Radar navigation and control systems"

• In discussing radio wave propogation and the ionosphere some additional links would be useful for context. Perhaps Skywave and Ground wave?

Y Done, with some further revisions to make these differences clearer.

• "The 150-meter band system continued as the postwar standard, designated Loran A. A low-frequency successor, Loran C, became operational in 1957 "

I found it strange to refer to LORAN-A by wavelength and LORAN-C by frequency

Y I've modified to describe each by frequency. The issue here is that the citation uses mixed modes.

• I think the concept of "unwanted side lobes" needs some more explanation. Is Lobe switching the solution described or something else?

Y The article now gives a fuller explanation of the practical issues with side lobes and Alvarez' mitigaton. The alternating dipoles were a step towards the phased array, but my understanding is that this was only fully realized in his work on Ground Controlled Approach.

• "Shortly after installation, operators detected a formation at 270 kilometers over the Atlantic: fourteen B-17s with 140 men, lost and preparing to ditch. A telephone call to a station beyond the aircraft's range allowed controllers to vector the bombers home"

I didn't understand what the bit about the station being outside the aircraft's range. Were they directing them to a different station that was within their range?

Y Other stations lacked a radar fix, but had voice contact. I've rewritten as: " On 20 March, before its communications were installed, trainee operators tracked a formation 270 kilometres (170 mi) out over the Atlantic. A telephone call to a nearby aircraft communications station, which could not see the aircraft, identified them as fourteen B-17s carrying 140 men, lost and preparing to ditch. The pilots were given their position and vectored home."

• Ninth Air Force, Invasion of Elba can be linked

 Done

• "Commanding General Hap Arnold had sent MEW No. 4 to Saipan despite urgent requirements in Europe"

What was Arnold commanding?

 Done I've clarified that he was commanded the U.S. Army Air Forces at this point.

• "a 3,000-pound explosive charge"

Provide a metric conversion

 Done

Read down to Major combat systems. Your responses so far all look good to me - Dumelow (talk) 08:42, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

• "Convoys of submarines, known as "wolfspack" hunted ship convoys at night, surfacing to use their high speed for pursuit and escape"

"convoys of submarines" doesn't sound right. Perhaps "groups of submarines"?

"wolfpacks" instead of "wolfspack"?

 Done Both amended.

• There's a duplicate link on Loran

 Done Removed

• Our article doesn't capitalise plan position indicator

 Done Adjusted to lower case. My sources vary in capitalization, but lower case seems consistent on Wikipedia.

• Mid-Atlantic gap can be linked

 Done Added

• "By war's end, Loran stations covered approximately 30 percent of the Earth's surface and served 75,000 aircraft and surface vessels" has already been stated in the Loran section

 Done Removed. Holdover from drafting, thank you for catching it.

• "withdrew his submarines from the North Atlantic on May 24"

Elsewhere you have used the day-first order

 Done Now consistent with other uses.

• Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress can be linked (first mentioned in the MEW section)

 Done added

• Pathfinder (USAAF) probably worth linking

 Done added

• RAF Bomber Command can be linked (first mentioned in the LORAN section)

 Done added

• "By year's end, the original twelve H2X aircraft were leading 90 percent of American bombing missions"

Presumably this is strategic bombing missions

 Done Buderi does say "90 percent of bombing missions," but I agree that this is reasonable inference.

"The radar proved essential when strategic bombing turned to oil."

Think this could be misunderstood, should be "began to target oil production and storage facilities" or similar

Oil campaign of World War II is a worthwhile link

 Done I have modified as "The radar proved essential when Allied strategic bombing began to target oil infrastructure."

• Ploiești could be linked

 Done Added

• Provide a metric equivalent for "1,800,000 tons", also presumably this is short tons?

This should also be done for "half a million tons" and "66 tons"

 Done conversions added in all cases. Sources are American English, so I also assume short tons.

• "On July 6–7, 1945,"

Again elsewhere you have used the day first convention, which would also remove these awkward commas

 Done converted. Hopefully the last of these conversions.

• "the most successful radar bombing of this command to date"

I would clarify (in square brackets as this is within a quote) what command he is referring to

 Done, but outside quote

• Louis Ridenour can be linked

 Done linked

• Servomotor can be linked

 Done linked

• "the team conscripted a servo-driven gun turret"

I know it is used in a literary sense but conscripted jars a bit for me when referring to a gun turret

 Done Fair, changed to "requisitioned"

• "combined with the proximity fuze—a miniature radar in the shell nose that detonated when near a target"

Clarify if the Rad Lab was involved with this development

 Done Okay, I have added a footnote noting its parallel development by the Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Lab

• "Modified versions guided tactical aircraft to targets that pilots could not see"

Worth a link to Tactical bombing

• "At a site near Malvern, observers watched through a loudspeaker system as a controller directed Typhoon pilots by radio"

Malvern, Worcestershire should probably be linked as there are several Malverns across the world.

How do you watch through a loudspeaker?

 Done Changed to "...listened to a loudspeaker."

• The Flak video is currently aligned with a paragraph that talks only about tactical bombing, perhaps swap it with the SCR-584 image?

 Done Swapped

• "approximately $1.3 billion ($23.2 billion in 2025)"

  I would add "equivalent to" before "$23.2"

 Done Added.

Read down to Postwar legacy section

• "Because the Series was produced with federal funds"

  Not overly familiar with the treatment of titles of works, but should Series be italicised here (as the full name would be)?

 Done Yes, that seems right as a proper name.

• I feel Louis Brown probably has a decent claim to be notable and could be redlinked

 Done Agreed and added. Full obits in WaPo and Physics Today

• "The Rad Lab broadly influenced the organizational structure of post-war research. Buderi characterized the wartime approach as"

  You haven't introduced who Buderi is

 Done Revised as "Technology historian Robert Buderi"

• Link US presidents Kennedy, Truman, Eisenhower and Nixon

 Done

• I would briefly explain who Daniel P. Gross and Bhavan Sampat are and why their opinion matters

Comment: I have modified to "A 2023 study in the American Economic Review. Publication in a top-4 econ journal is a better claim to notability than the specific authors.

• Link Massachusetts Route 128 and MIM-23 Hawk (for "Hawk missile")

Comment: I've linked Hawk missile. I'm red-linking Route 128 technology corridor instead of the highway article. "Route 128" is a metonym for the cluster of technology firms built in the Boston suburbs after World War II. There are a collection of books, dissertations, and websites dedicated to this history, which I think fall outside the roadway coverage. Open to suggestions about how to handle this.

• This is the third mention of Loran extending to "30 percent of the Earth's surface"

 Done I've removed this mention.

• Link Nobel Prize

 Done

• "At least two Nobel Prizes—for nuclear magnetic resonance and the maser—can be traced directly to wartime radar work."

  I would identify who won these prizes as you've just listed all the individual winners.

Comment: I pared this back. The original sentence discussing both technologies is drawn from Buderi, who gives some broader history of the maser in the wartime radar research ecosystem. In my view, it is too oblique to credit directly to the Rad Lab. Maser developers took place at Bell Labs and Columbia, and possibly NDRC/Rad Lab contracts contributed. But I don't come away with confidence that the technology can be attributed to the MIT Rad Lab activities.

• Link Open sesame for context

 Done

• In the lead, I am not sure that "LORAN, the first worldwide radio navigation system" is supported by the main text at the moment

Comment: I've expanded the distinctions between LORAN and other wartime radio navigation systems: "Loran was one of several long-range radio navigation systems used during the war, among them the British Gee and Decca Navigator and the German Sonne–Consol. Loran was the only of these systems to cover multiple continents, and remained in service longer than any other wartime radio navigation system."

• Also can you clarify what supports "Its staff designed approximately half of the American radar systems deployed during World War II." I assumed it was "Measured by dollar value, equipment of Rad Lab design accounted for $640 million of the $1.2 billion in American radar produced during the peak year of 1944, representing over half of total output and the vast majority of microwave systems" but this appears to only cover production in 1944?

• "The 28-volume MIT Radiation Laboratory Series disclosed the lab's classified discoveries for postwar electronics development"

  I think the relevant section of the article should state that the Series was disclosing classified information to support this statement. At the moment it only says that otherwise the information would only be known to Bell

That concludes my review - Dumelow (talk) 10:55, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

@Dumelow: Ready to support now? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:23, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

Nickknack00, I don't think you have responded to my comments of 29 June? - Dumelow (talk) 06:34, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

Dumelow Correct, buried in a non-volunteer writing project this month. Will try and knock out remainder incrementally over next two weeks, and will tag you both when I'm done. Nickknack00 (talk) 00:08, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

No worries, take whatever time you need - Dumelow (talk) 05:31, 24 July 2026 (UTC)