This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
On July 1, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 47th Battalion (Australia), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
— Rlevse • Talk • 18:02, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
On July 5, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Richard Travis, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
— Rlevse • Talk • 18:02, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
I'm wondering what the reason is for changing the page numbers given in the citations on the Battle of Mons page (particularly the citations to Ernest W. Hamilton's book). I gave those page numbers when I wrote the relevant sections, and unless the problem is that I was using a different version of the book from you, I'm fairly confident they're correct. Groundsquirrel13 ( talk) 04:59, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
Your opinion is solicited at Talk:John Whitelaw (general)#John-the-younger. Cheers, Pdfpdf ( talk) 13:07, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
The
June 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
18:40, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
I put the Battle of Piave River (1809) in the July WPMILHIST contest. In fact, I already updated the article, but I did so on 5 July. I'm not sure if this is within the rules. I asked Dank but he referred me to you. If I'm bending the rules, please let me know and I'll withdraw it. Thanks. Djmaschek ( talk) 01:22, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi I am asking what do you think of adding Pope Benedict XVI military service to his infobox. He is a WWII veteren and I wanted to put it up. There is a discussion on Talk:Pope Benedict XVI about putting it on. I wanted to see what you think of it since youra Military History cordinator. Aslo we cant find his rank in the german army. Spongie555 ( talk) 04:33, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Nice work creating this article. It's stuff like not having an article on the corps ranked first in Australian Army Order of Precedence which amuses me when there are discussions of how hard it's becoming to find new articles to start or expand! Cheers, Nick-D ( talk) 08:23, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Regarding more images for this article, I found many on this site [1]. However, the terms of use [2] mention -
I think this is not agreeable to Wikipedia standards. Also, do you think the article is GA material? Cheers! -- MT ( talk) 05:14, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
I'm soliciting your comments & opinions here. (Thanks in advance.) Pdfpdf ( talk) 14:08, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
I need to create articles about 2 Generals, Ma Dunjing and Ma Dunjing. The problem is, that they both have the same name. And they are identical in other aspects too, both being muslim, and being related to each other. So i have no idea what to put in parentheses next to the name.
the name is different in Chinese, but i don't see how thats going to help me write their name in english when the romanization is the same.
If this helps come up with a solution, their fathers were Ma Hongkui and Ma Hongbin. Should i create it like this? Ma Dunjing (Ma Hongkui's son), Ma Dunjing (Ma Hongbin's son). Дунгане ( talk) 20:06, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Great work on Battle of Hongorai River, I have finished the review now and promoted to GA. Just one suggestion though which I have left on the review page. Please have a look when you can. Cheers. Anotherclown ( talk) 17:33, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Hey thanks for reviewing this :) I'm going to be away for a few days though (I'm likely getting my wisdom teeth removed) and I'll be unable to edit for a few days due to RL as well. I'd like to work on this article and get it done in 7 days but I'm scared that this is not possible. Can you extend the deadline a few more days for me so I can finish this? Thanks,-- White Shadows I ran away from you 15:57, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the Support! ' Perseus 71 talk 20:30, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for your detailed peer review. I have made a lot of changes to the article and I would really appreciate it if you could go through it once again and comment on it, if you get the time. Gremaldin ( talk) 14:39, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for your comments and help. I'll see to it that all citations are after the punctuation. I'll try to expand the single sentence paragraphs or I'll just join them. I just hope I didn't bother you. Thanks once again!! -- Gremaldin ( talk) 09:40, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Gremaldin has given you a
cookie! Cookies promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{ subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{ subst:munch}}!
Would you mind reviewing 206th Field Artillery Regiment (United States) again. I have made several additions and corrections. Damon.cluck ( talk) 03:55, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Hey mate, I have put up a couple of GA noms up (foolishly) and was hoping you might be able to have a go at reviewing Battle of Sungei Koemba for me? Of course if you're too busy that's fine, but I'm hoping not to have to wait a decade given how long the queue is currently! Cheers. Anotherclown ( talk) 07:56, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
No worries. Looks good. Take care. AustralianRupert ( talk) 12:37, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the support in the A Class review. Just need some other now. -- Jim Sweeney ( talk) 10:36, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi Did you ever come across BritishRupert does not say much but has a hell of a head for heights.-- Jim Sweeney ( talk) 21:00, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello. You recently did a good article review for this article. The article included a citation to a book from the " Webster's Quotations, Facts and Phrases" series published by Icon Group International, but unfortunately Icon Group International is not a reliable source - their books are computer-generated, with most of the text copied from Wikipedia (most entries have [WP] by them to indicate this, see e.g. [3]). I've only removed the reference, not the text it was referencing. I'm removing a lot of similar references as they are circular references. Despite giving an appearance of reliability, the name " Webster's" has been public domain since the late 19th century. Another publisher to be wary of as they reuse Wikipedia articles is Alphascript Publishing. Fences& Windows 02:40, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi !
Thanks for the extensive corrections and assessing for B Class. I know you are still making corrections to this article. Like I said in the request for B Class review, my goal is GA class. So given its current state, do you think this article is ready for GA class review ? If its not, can you give me some pointers or areas needing improvement ? P.S. Thanks for the support on A class review of Organization of Luftwaffe. TIA ' Perseus 71 talk 03:59, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Passed - good work. GregJackP Boomer! 22:58, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi mate, I have done a bit of a copy edit on the article but want to confirm that I haven't muffed one of your paras. I reworded the first para in the El Alamein section, in which you wrote:
After Tobruk, the 9th Division was sent to Palestine and Syria to train and rest. Under their new commander Lieutenant-Colonel Heathcote Hammer—who had taken over after Windeyer had stepped up to take over the 20th Brigade—the 2/48th proceeded to train in high terrain and temperatures.[6] The 26th Brigade was moved south before being called up and rushed to the First Battle of El Alamein in early July 1942. On 1 July, Axis forces commanded by Erwin Rommel launched an attack British 8th Army line and on 7 July the 9th Division received its orders to attack; they were to traverse the coastline and capture a ridge (Trig 33) north of the "Tel el Eise" station.[1]
I changed the last sentence to: "On 1 July, Axis forces commanded by Erwin Rommel launched an attack on the British Eighth Army line and on 7 July the 9th Division was ordered into the attack, as part of which the 2/48th was subsequently ordered to traverse the coastline and capture the Trig 33 ridge north of the "Tel el Eise" station.[1]" Is this a correct interpretation of what you meant? Cheers. Anotherclown ( talk) 08:56, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Hey I noticed that you have put a GAN of mine on a German U-boat on hold. I just got back from a 12 hour trip from Montreal tonight and I have not been editing for the past 4 days due to my vacation there. Do you mind if you "reset" the GA review of that article for me so I still have 7 days to fix the issues that you added? Thanks,-- White Shadows It's a wonderful life 02:30, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi mate. I have just finished expanding the article (I think). Per your suggestions I have added a bit more on WW2 from Hopkins. I'm hoping you could give it a quick proof read for gross errors as I'm getting too close to the article. I will have a look at Aitape-Wewak campaign soonish. Got to go for a run now though. Cheers again. Anotherclown ( talk) 07:57, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Greetings!
We had an edit conflict. Given that your edit looked automated, and mine was completely manual, I effectively "undid" you edit so that I could implement mine.
Before you re-implement your edit, could you cast your eye over my changes and "improve" them? (Please?)
Cheers,
Pdfpdf (
talk)
12:58, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
"We" seem to have a number of "very similar, but slighly different" articles. I'm "a bit uncomfortable" about it, but not uncomfortable enough to start making amalgamations and step on toes. What are your thoughts?
Articles include:
And there's another one that I can't remember the name of at the moment.
Cheers,
Pdfpdf (
talk)
13:05, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I'm writing to you as a Coordinator of the History Project and would be grateful for your advice.
I've got some information which is more or less a side issue - the 42nd Infantry Division on 5 August 1916 the second day of battle, when ordered to move forward suffered terribly from thirst; there are published descriptions of personal accounts both by and individual infantryman and camel transport personnel who followed the division with water and a later reminiscence which I would refer to. The two infantry divisions were blamed for their inability to move sufficiently quickly and the Ottoman Army was able to get away, but this interpretation does not take into account the conditions - summer in the Sinai. The NZds also suffered from the conditions during their first reconnaissance in the desert in early spring.
I'm not sure whether this information should be incorporated directly into the Battle of Romani page or the 42nd Infantry Division page - or a bit in both?
The other thing was that I would like to create a new page the 'WW1 Egyptian Camel Transport Corps and the Egyptian Labour Corps' but I don't have that much information. Is it ok to create a short page which may grow in the future? -- RoslynSKP ( talk) 04:10, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Would you have any objection to posting your sandbox work-in-progress to WT:MHSTT? We're trying to get the think tank off the ground and encourage its use, and your proposed guidelines are an ideal topic to get us all started :) EyeSerene talk 09:24, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Do you mind taking a look at 39th Infantry Division (United States) when you have time. I think it is past Stub class at this point. Thanks Damon.cluck ( talk) 14:07, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi there I can remember seeing/reading many years ago an Australian fighting knife/dagger that had a knuckleduster for a handle. Must have been something like the one on this image on the Sgts belt. Do you know anything about it, was an official issue and if so does it have an official name. ?-- Jim Sweeney ( talk) 16:58, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, I've attended to your comments YellowMonkey ( vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 02:44, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your ACR comments. Looks like not many people are very interested in the AFL; I really appreciate the review. Should be able to fix virtually everything pretty quickly; if you're happy, I'll insert a tickmark and let you score them out when you think they're appropriately fixed. Regards Buckshot06 (talk) 14:19, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi, If you do decide to put your hand up for the admin tools I'd be very happy to nominate you - I think that you'd make a great admin. Passing a RfA isn't particularly hard for level-headed editors like yourself and the tools are useful for day to day article editing (eg, moving articles over redirects, stopping articles on your watchlist from being repeatedly vandalised, etc). Regards, Nick-D ( talk) 12:04, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
First of all, thanks for your help on USS PC-1264. I am an entomologist with the University of Florida and was also in the service as a USMC officer and am a Viet Nam vet. I also feel about the service as you do. When people ask me what it was like, I reply, "Those were the best and the worst four year of my life." I am an American Civil War nut and contribute to those WP articles, but also have a great interest in WW II - particularly small unit actions. The Civil War Web site I do for a battle in Florida ( Battle of Olustee), where I live, was rated as one of the Top 95 Civil War Web sites on the Internet in two editions of the book The Civil War on the Web: A Guide to the Very Best Sites, written by the Director of the University of Virginia's Center for Digital History and the Editor of the New York Times on the Web.
As for PC-1264, I will be following your advice later this month for seeking A-class or GA status. On 23 August, the University of Florida starts its Fall semester and the roads around town are in chaos with the traffic. As a result, I always take the first week of classes off as I do not have teaching responsibilities. I'll work on getting PC-1264 into the queue then.
Regarding WW II, I have a great interest in guerrilla warfare and a number of books on that area that are hard to find. One, One-Man War, is about Jock Mclaren, who served with the 8th Australian Infantry Division at Singapore and was captured there. He escaped twice and fought with the guerrillas in the Philippines. The Japs had a price of 70,000 pesos on his head. There was no WP page on him and I started one based on the book. I have questions about some things he did, the unit he was with, and perhaps you might know the answers. Please see that Discussion page.
My mother is Australian. Dad was a radio operator/gunner on a B-24 in the U.S. 5th Air Force. They met on New Year's Eve 1944, married in April 1945, and he was shot down over China a few weeks later. Fortunately, Chinese guerrillas rescued him and the rest of the crew and he got out. Especially fortunate for me, as I was born in 1947. He died in 2002 and Mom still lives, near me. Mom's uncle was a member of the 9th Australian Infantry Division and was badly shot up at Tobruk. Mom, my brother and I, went back to Australia in 1956, where I was in the 5th grade. We stayed six months. Mom and Dad visited Australia many times, but I only got back once more in Dec72/Jan73. When I was a kid, I didn't have a Teddy Bear, but a stuffed Koala Bear. I think I knew more about Australian history and geography then I did about the U.S. until I reached high school. Take care. Thomas R. Fasulo ( talk) 17:01, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
I did another search for info on Jock McLaren. And found some interesting stuff that I added to the External Links section:
The bit about the appendix also is mentioned in the book. The radio show can be downloaded. Did you see anything on your Australian sites about him receiving the Silver Star?
I also added to the Discussion page that he might have been born in 1898. Two 1948 newspaper articles list him as being 50 — one might have been copied from the other. This would make him older than he may have admitted, and not as young in WW I as we might have thought. Charles Parsons, from the Wendell Fertig page, also did the same thing (lied about his age) according to his son, who I corresponded with about his father. Thomas R. Fasulo ( talk) 02:12, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
I finally "completed" the Wendell Fertig article today and plan to take it for review. I finished finding all the page numbers associated with Schmidt's thesis on the guerrilla forces on Mindanao. I plan to read that again to pick up any more interesting tidbits. However, I thought you might be interested in something I did find and add to the Fertig and McLaren pages today, with the Schmidt citation.
Another ship, called The Bastard, was a 26-foot whaleboat captained by Australian Robert "Jock" McLaren, an escaped prisoner-of-war from the Sandakan POW camp on Boreno. McLaren would sail his boat into Japanese controlled ports in broad daylight, shoot up the supply vessels and piers with machine guns and a mortar, then turn tail and run.
Thomas R. Fasulo ( talk) 19:04, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi, Rupert: First off, let me thank you for taking the time to assess Confederate privateer. I think I have responded correctly, and have supplied the information you requested.
I am writing, however, because of a statement you made on the Assessment page, to the effect that MilHist guidelines require a citation at the end of every paragraph. If that really is a policy, I am not about to challenge it, but I have had reasons for putting the citations in the middle. I have had later editors of articles move sentences around, leaving the footnotes at some distance from the relevant material. (They were different articles; this one has not attracted any attention that I can discern. (Sob.)) It got so that I initiated a discussion at the Village Pump; it is still going on, if you are interested. It seems interminable, and I for one would welcome a resolution. PKKloeppel ( talk) 00:02, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for the B assessment on Battle of Melle - I notice you have looked in on the Cartagena article. Opinions have run strong on this battle, I've tried to maintain consensus and verifiability through extensive referencing. Any suggestions for bringing up to B? Tttom1 ( talk) 01:06, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
|
|
|
July's contest results, the latest awards to our members, plus an interview with Parsecboy |
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. |
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot ( talk) 21:11, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I am about to enter into discussions here about Coastal Forces of the Royal Australian Navy. In my opinion the lead is misleading at it talks about Royal Navy first? Your opinion as a "expert" would be appreciated. You may leave comments on my talkpage or User_talk:Epipelagic. Regards Newm30 ( talk) 11:26, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Ian & "Rupert": I thought you might be interested in what's been going on at Talk:John Whittle#Commonwealth armed forces ? and User talk:Abecedare#British Commonwealth. Cheers, Pdfpdf ( talk) 13:45, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! Donner60 ( talk) 06:20, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello AustralianRupert. Do you edit from any public locations or public computers? Please answer honestly, it's quite important. You can reply to me in e-mail if you'd prefer to keep your response private. Thanks. -- Deskana (talk) 10:03, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
I've added new citations where necessary. If there are any other problems with the article, please feel free to point them out. Thanks for your time,
-( Wikipedian1234 ( talk) 14:09, 22 August 2010 (UTC))
As you recommended, I have added additional citations to the article. Please take a look when you can and see if its now up to B. Thanks. Tttom1 ( talk) 04:24, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
On 23 August 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Ratsua, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
— Rlevse • Talk • 18:04, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Have taken your advice and added citations. Also expanded text. A couple new refs link to terrific maps on the siege which would look great directly in the article. Any ideas? Please take another look when you can. Thanks. Tttom1 ( talk) 06:12, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks - added Dunning now - good job someone's around to check these things. -- Jim Sweeney ( talk) 08:34, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
HI 29th/46th Battalion (Australia) looks like Keogh is missing fro the references. -- Jim Sweeney ( talk) 12:14, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Awesomeness | ||
This tasteful little barnstar is mostly for your astounding contributions to Milhist's review department with around 140 A-Class and peer reviews made in the last year and is quite separate from any official gong. But this also reflects your dozens of contributions at B-class assessments (which have gone unnoticed). Well done, Roger Davies talk 07:29, 30 August 2010 (UTC) |
The WikiChevrons | ||
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews during the period July-December 2009, I am delighted to award you the WikiChevrons. Roger Davies talk 10:37, 30 August 2010 (UTC) |
The WikiChevrons | ||
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews during the period January-June 2010, I am delighted to award you the WikiChevrons. Roger Davies talk 10:47, 30 August 2010 (UTC) |
Many thanks. I've fixed up the rather obvious errors again YellowMonkey ( new photo poll) 02:18, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
|
|
A recap of the month's new Featured and A-Class articles, including a new featured sound |
Our newest A-class medal recipients and this August's top contestants |
|
To change your delivery options for this newsletter please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot ( talk) 22:58, 7 September 2010 (UTC) |
Nice to see someone else with an eye for sub-editing! Fifelfoo ( talk) 03:00, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your assistance at Talk:Battle of Ridgefield/GA1 -- Jim Sweeney ( talk) 18:08, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Replied YellowMonkey ( new photo poll) 01:55, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. You are cordially invited to help pick fourteen new coordinators from a pool of twenty candidates. This time round, the term has increased from six to twelve months so it is doubly important that you have your say! Please cast your vote here no later than 23:59 (UTC) on Tuesday, 28 September 2010.
With many thanks in advance for your participation from the coordinator team, Roger Davies talk 21:20, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I would like to add some orders of battle to the Egyptian Expeditionary Force article but because they are long lists of units and sub units, with indents to make sense of them, the editing in Wikipedia is beyond me. Can you give me some advice? Is there such a thing as a template for an order of battle? :) -- Rskp ( talk) 07:04, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
Happy to help. I'd suggest adding in a footnote (such as in I ANZAC Corps) stating that it uncertain, rather than a question mark as it looks a bit "cleaner" that. In regards to the AFC units, it sounds like they might have been "independent" divisional assets, so maybe just include this beside them in brackets, e.g. "(divisional asset)" so something like that? AustralianRupert ( talk) 06:03, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for that. I set myself a target of 50, just over half way there. -- Jim Sweeney ( talk) 08:29, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
Thankyou for your help about the army, although i stopped it yesterday, some guy from the federal police told me that it was illegal for me to attempt to gather classified material so i stopped it but thx, i really dont like how someone can actually trac me to my home from wiki -- Gargabook ( talk) 13:30, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Congrats on your election as Coordinator of the Military history Project! In honor of your achievement, I present you with these stars. TomStar81 ( Talk) 19:31, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
The WikiProject Barnstar | ||
In gratitude of your service as coordinator for the Military history Project from March 2010 to September 2010, I hereby award you this WikiProject Barnstar. — TomStar81 ( Talk) 23:19, 29 September 2010 (UTC) |
I've come across an issue with your recent archival of No. 4 Commando, the oldid and date is not that of the last edit to the review, it is for the time you archive the review and the condition the article is in. I've fixed this one, but there may be others if you've archived some reviews that way. - MBK 004 06:00, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
The WikiChevrons | ||
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews for the period 1 April-30 September 2010, I am delighted to award you the WikiChevrons. Roger Davies talk 07:58, 7 October 2010 (UTC) |
Hi there did I say congratulations ? Would you mind looking at Attacker class escort carrier its still a work in progress but you know how I have problems with images and white space if you could check everything is ok with this one. Thanks -- Jim Sweeney ( talk) 15:22, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
Yes for the lead. I've put up Nguyen Chanh Thi for FAC too YellowMonkey ( new photo poll) 05:55, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Why is a citation like this [1] replacing plain English citations in edit mode in the Battle of Rafa article? Having just gone 'show preview' you can't see the meaninglessness of the typing unless you are in edit mode which is where its useful to have the source so it can be read and checked. Why is this alphabetic system being imposed? -- Rskp ( talk) 06:59, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
I have visited many of the main battlefields in Europe (WW1 & WW2) and North Africa (WW2). I want to do a trip to Volgograd (ex-Stalingrad), Kharkov, Orel, Kursk, Belgorod, Smolensk and then Moscow in early summer 2011 (possibly renting a vehicle and driving - which may force the exclusion of Kharkov (Ukraine)). My wife has made it clear to me that she is just so totally not interested in the trip.... thus, what better travelling company than some editors from the MilHist forum who have an interest in WW2 Eastern Front, particularly with the inclusion of one or more Russian editors who speak English. Now, the question - is it acceptable practice to post something like this on a more regularly viewed MilHist forum / page, and if so - where do you recommend the right place to be? Please let me know your views. Rgds. Farawayman ( talk) 13:18, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
I am keen to incorporate photos from the AWM and Library of Congress photo collections into Wikipedia articles. There are photos from both these institutions already in Wikipedia -
eg. File:Australian 11th Battalion group photo - First Australian Imperial Force subsection of Military history of Australia during World War 1 article
eg. File:The camel corps at Beersheba2 - 1915 January - March subsection of Middle Eastern theatre of World War 1 article
Can you please tell me how this is done? -- Rskp ( talk) 01:59, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
I just came across this page 'User:RoslynSKP/Egyptian labour corps' which is now redundant, I think. Can I delete it?-- Rskp ( talk) 01:49, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
(I'm really procrastinating over First Gaza) Regarding the Battle of Magdhaba article, its still got a March 2007 note regarding need for citations. Can it be reevaluated? -- Rskp ( talk) 02:43, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
I've added some suggestions to the article's talk page. Please take a look if you get a chance. Cheers. AustralianRupert ( talk) 11:18, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
Hey mate, I had a look and it looks quite good (re the B class criteria IMO). For completeness could you possibly add a sentence about the battalion not being reraised after the abandonment of the Pentropic organisation (in 1965 I think). As I assume this is what transpired. Anyway just a suggestion. Cheers. Anotherclown ( talk) 07:46, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I saw some wiki articles you have contributed too and noticed you were apart of the Military history WikiProject. I'm new to editing on Wikipedia, I've recently been writing an article about Sidney Mashbir and I was wondering if you could help me review it and give me some pointers on how to develop it further, I have stacks of information relating to Col. Sidney Mashbir and the US/AUS Allied Translator and Interpreter Section {which is another article I would like to write soon} but I am unsure as to whether I'm on the right track or not. Cheers - Aeonx ( talk) 04:01, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi From your work on this subject can you cay if a fighter ace qualifies as notable? Jim Sweeney ( talk) 20:59, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
|
The results of September's coordinator elections, plus ongoing project discussions and proposals |
|
|
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot ( talk) 21:03, 21 October 2010 (UTC) |
Thank you for your assessment, I am currently working on the issues. Bobby122 Contact Me (C) 16:42, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for your comments and attention to the Mississippi class battleship article and the A-class evaluation. I was substantialy gone from WP for a couple weeks, absorbed in producing a regatta for our yacht club, and just got back to the Mississippi project yesterday. I noticed that you closed the discussion based on elapsed time, but my sense is that my absense was not really a factor, as other contributions were waning. This evaluation process is a first for me and I want to learn from it. My observation is that the level of expectations and the opinions on what is the "right" solution vary significantly. My main objective here is to determine the proper format for US battleship articles and apply that format to the other U.S. pre-dreadnought articles. The first in the series, Indiana class battleship has FA status, but most of the others are a mess. Is my scope appropriate? Is the level of detail adequate? I've tried to make this an informative stand-alone article without digressing too far afield -- is this the right approach? Should the other articles include this level of discussion? Cheers! -- Kevin Murray ( talk) 17:33, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
Yes, I fixed Hammond. Thanks YellowMonkey ( new photo poll) 01:17, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
Please assist..... Having completed the peer review for 6 Armd Div (S Afr) I followed the instructions to archive the peer review.
Apologies!!!! Farawayman ( talk) 10:05, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
On 25 October 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 30th Battalion (Australia), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
— Rlevse • Talk • 12:03, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
Hey, I think I've fixed all your concerns on List of battlecruisers of Japan. Cam ( Chat)( Prof) 15:26, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar | |
On behalf of the coordinators, I'm pleased to award you this barnstar for reviewing articles in our October 2010 Contest-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 18:35, 1 November 2010 (UTC) |
Would you mind reviewing Arkansas Militia in the Civil War for me? It is the first step in breaking up the larger Arkansas Army National Guard Article. I am using the template as an outline to break up the article. Let me know what you think, thanks. Aleutian06 22:09, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I would like to create a link from the mention of Nekhl in the Magdhaba article to the subsection 'Raid on Nekhl' in the Sinai and Palestine Campaign article. Is this possible? -- Rskp ( talk) 07:09, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
G'day Rupert, back in May, I posted a message on the Military Biography task force talk page about unreferenced BLPs. I've also posted a similar message on the Milhist talk page twice since then. Back then there were 237 UBLPs assigned to the Military Bio task force. Today, six months on, there are 227. For a project that is the leader in so many areas, this is a pretty poor effort. There are also 177 on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Unreferenced BLPs list (which are probably mainly duplicated on both lists). Do you have any ideas on how the military project can be motivated into clearing out this list? As a comparison, working mainly by myself (little bit of help from some NRL guys) cleared out the 200 remaining WP:Australia UBLPs during October, so 227 should be a couple of weeks work for a big project like the Miltary one. We have another group at WP:URBLPR clearing them out month by month, rather than by topic, and doing between 30 and 50 per day. But how do you rally the troops into paying attention to the bottom end of the article tree, not just FAs, GAs and DYKs? The-Pope ( talk) 14:13, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
Greetings! I am sorry but I was unable to address earlier your recommendations in the peer review for Ivan Vladislav. I am grateful for the review and you can see the responses to your notes there. Best, -- Gligan ( talk) 13:15, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the help on my History of the Arkansas National Guard Series. I hope to have the split of the Arkansas Army National Guard Article done in the next week. Appreciate you comments! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Damon.cluck ( talk • contribs) 20:25, 6 November 2010
Hi
Thanks for reviewing both of my lists List of Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross with Oak Leaves recipients: 1940–1941 and List of Knight's Cross with Oak Leaves recipients: 1942 at FLC review. You just gave your approval for the first list. Can I safely assume that the generic elements pertaining to both lists are now okay from your point of view? Thanks MisterBee1966 ( talk) 16:32, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed User:Mad_Man_American has listed a bunch of articles to be assessed, is it ok if I assess these articles? I think I have a reasonable understanding of the Stub, Start and B-Class criteria for the Militory History project and for wikipedia articles in general. If there are any articles I have worked on, or I think may be more than stub/start I will leave for another more experienced reviewer. Is this ok?
Regards, Aeonx ( talk) 02:34, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
I thought its time to say thanks to all the editors who have assisted me in the articles I have been working on; so I took a look at toolserver.org and it shows that you have done 23,619 edits. I think you not only deserve, but are entitled to the below award in accordance with the award criteria. I know that one is supposed to award this medal to yourself, but we never do, so I am doing it on behalf of you! Thanks for all your help. Farawayman ( talk) 14:16, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
The Great Arkansas Barnstar | ||
I award you this Great Arkansas Barnstar for your guidance and oversight of the Arkansas Army National Guard Articles. Thanks! Aleutian06 16:23, 11 November 2010 (UTC) |
A month ago I edited Chauvel's article but the changes were undone - the editor saying he 'prefers original version'. Having corresponded with the editor without a satisfactory outcome, I'm wondering if there are any other options. -- Rskp ( talk) 02:52, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the review - I wasn't quite finished, as guests arrived for the afternoon. I'll finish up this evening. Your help and suggestions are greatly appreciated. Acroterion (talk) 20:33, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi. It's not just the Royal Dublin Fusiliers, check out some of the revisions at Frederick Roberts, 1st Earl Roberts pushing the line that Robert's ancestors were English invaders of Ireland. I'm not totally unsympathetic to that viewpoint but it's not relevant, IMO, to an article about someone 300 years later. Sadly I'm worried that we're straying into the very contentious world of viewpoints on Irish history which are polarised and lacking in common ground. NtheP ( talk) 23:02, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the welcome to the Military History Wikiproject. However, when I went to improve the citations in the massive backlog, I found that sections "Design" and onward on M79 grenade launcher appear to be a copyvio of this webpage. How do I know whether they copied Wikipedia or whether the Wikipedia article is a copyvio? If it is, what should I do about it? Reaper Eternal ( talk) 02:03, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi, Would you mind peer reviewing sword? I'll appreciate your input on ways to improve the article. thx-- 84.229.106.220 ( talk) 12:13, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
AustralianRupert,
You may know me from editing and contributing to the Z Special Unit Wikipedia article. In the last 30 minutes I've come across two Z Special Unit personnel Jock McLaren and Robert Kerr McLaren. I have noticed that they have similar information on their article such as their lives, military and civilian information, while some information is on one but not the other or slightly different to the other. I also noticed if you try and edit Jock McLaren's WP Biography banner on his talkpage, it's listed him as "Jacob Brown". They are also listed in the Z Special Unit Personnel category. Would appreciate feedback. Adamdaley ( talk) 06:06, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot ( talk) 21:56, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
I just saw this - congratulations! Nick-D ( talk) 11:28, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
Have you noticed the Sperrbrecher has reached Class B? Anything I could help you with that is on the english wikipedia, I would certainly look at it and give my thoughts and opinions on it. Just leave a message on my talkpage. Appreciate your help and hope we can create or improve more articles together! Adamdaley ( talk) 23:56, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I'm sorry to bother you but I put this photo up and the file seems ok but it looks like I've missed a step because its not linked to the Mughar Ridge article. Could you have a look at it, please? :) -- Rskp ( talk) 01:37, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
Once again I've come for a little advice concerning the Walter Wolfrum article. It states that he joined the Luftwaffe in 1943 til the end of the war. I would like to point out the years of service in the article and then compare them to the years served in his infobox (1939 - 1945). To me it is only a minor mistake by someone. Adamdaley ( talk) 06:13, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
No, please, feel free to make any spelling to grammatical changes you feel are necessary. If you have any content suggestions, let me know; I did think it may be a tad long at first. bahamut0013 words deeds 12:59, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Hey mate. Good additions on the engineer stuff for this article, great to see it now fully referenced because it is a very interesting and obscure unit. Unfortuantly I think there is a bit of a discrepncy which has now been unintentionally introduced though. Specifically you mention Lt Col John Overall in one paragraph (forming in early March 1943) and then the next para below the original text has Maj John Overall being appointed CO in Sept 1943. This is probably just the way its written and not that the refs are incorrect so hopefully you wont need to go back to SLQ... frustrating I know! Anotherclown ( talk) 20:43, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your valuable suggestions - your interest is very much appreciated. I put it up in rather a rush but will now spend some time, because it would be really great to get GA or A. Re the peer review - I think its just that people have not looked at this area of the war because there is quite a lot of mythmaking running through the sources. And the campaigns have been subjected to simplification - starting with the Battles Nomenclature Committee in 1922! I hope Wikipedia can be the vehicle which changes all that. -- Rskp ( talk) 00:46, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi mate, as you and I tend to be the main guys administering the contest, thought I'd get a reality check... Pls see this and let me know your thoughts, i.e. let it stand and count for this month's or treat them as unassessed and let them count to next month's, or something else again... Ed17 seems to have done the same thing on one of his entries... Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 03:19, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
Once again, I've come back for a little help. This time for the Erwin Ding-Schuler article. The category banner at the bottom containing Births, Deaths etc, the Births 1913 should be changed to Births 1912 for Erwin Ding-Schuler. How do I change it? Adamdaley ( talk) 07:20, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Thanks Rupert. Look forward to your evaluation. Try not to be too harsh! Cheers. Dapi89 ( talk) 13:06, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
I have left a comment on the Battle of Magdhaba talkpage to see if the British should be added to the Countries that were involved. You can read my comment on the article talkpage. Adamdaley ( talk) 15:08, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Tom and I have recently put together a guide on closing milhist ACRs. I've used a review of yours as an example. I probably should have asked for your permission first, but it's only just occurred to me - please accept my apologies for the omission, and if you have any objections just let me know and I'll rewrite the page content. Best, EyeSerene talk 17:07, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
I got a negative reply back from the History Division. They didn't have anything on hand, which in my mind clinches the notability argument, because they tend to have records on just about everyone. They suggested I try the
Military Personnel Records Center, but without a serial number, there's not much to go on. In any case, I don't really think that records like that make for verifiable sources, since they are so hard to find copies of.
Since I don't think there's anything more I can do, let me know if you want to pursue the records.
bahamut0013
words
deeds
23:26, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot ( talk) 21:59, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Is it possible to stop this process as its questioning place names as if they are people! And I think the meaning is being changed - e.g. 'On 12 November, while General Allenby prepared for battle by ordering the 52nd (Lowland) Infantry Division to attack the Ottoman Armys right flank, the Australian Mounted Division was reinforced by two additional brigades. After advancing towards Tel es Safi they encountered a determined and substantial Ottoman counterattack.' who is advancing and encountering the Ottoman counterattack - it could be the 52nd and/or the AMD!! when it was just the AMD with 2 additional brigades. :)-- Rskp ( talk) 06:32, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Generally a lead doesn't need to be cited so long as everything is cited in the body. There are exceptions, though, for instance where a direct quote is used in the lead, a citation should be provided, also where something might be considered controversial then it is best to cite. Ultimately though, whether to cite a lead or not is determined on a case by case basis and there is no strict rule in this regard. The relevant policy link is WP:LEADCITE. Regards, AustralianRupert ( talk) 02:43, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
I would like to see if you are able to rate its class for the following article Paul Colin (journalist). I will also be sending the same message to the following users User:1ForTheMoney and User:The Bushranger. If you can help with this I'll appreciate it. Adamdaley ( talk) 23:39, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Hello AustralianRupert - I'd like to start updating the "Air Forces Memorial" page and as far as images are concerned have previously placed these directly on the page concerned, but I'm advised this may contravene the wiki self-promotion policy. However if I wait for approval (especially as this is a stub and others may not happen along frequently) the update may take a long-time. I've placed some example images on the discussion page. Is this a case where I could update the page and then have it examined for potential contravention of policy? Better to get approval for such action first rather than after the fact! Thanks for ant help WyrdLight ( talk) 19:18, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
PS: Until recently and for some time the wiki page also carried a link to my single topic web page about the memorial - I'm not so concerned about the possibility of adding this back in although that would I believe add to the wiki page (definitely for others to determine) but you'll see its generally the source of the material I'm proposing to place on wiki & has been of direct interest to families abroad with commemorated relatives.
Hey there - Regarding the page on the IJA 18th Infantry Regiment, if you really think an infobox is sufficient for "supporting materials" at this stage, would you do the honors and change the assessment in the Military History box on the Talk page? I feel like if I do it, without having done something to the article, then it might look inappropriate or self-serving or something related to impropriety. Thanks! -- Boneyard90 ( talk) 22:34, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I am very confused about editing the Battle of Jerusalem (1917) page. It looks like I did a complete re-edit of the page at 1100 wiki time but I was not aware of it! Can you help sort this out?-- Rskp ( talk) 23:30, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
I have made a Peer Request for Josef Fitzthum since information has been fixed up, added and a picture of "Josef Fitzthum" was included recently. Was wondering if you could re-assess and give feedback on the article. Adamdaley ( talk) 01:25, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Hey mate. I was just thinking that the main thing this article appears to be missing still is a final concluding paragraph in the aftermath section that details casualties of the beligerants etc. As far as I can tell (from a skim read only) this info is really only included in the infobox. Maybe you might consider including a paragraph on this? I could do it myself but given that you're the main contributor to the article you probably have a bit more knowledge about it (and where to find the info) etc (plus I'm really lazy at the moment). Anyway just a thought. Anotherclown ( talk) 08:48, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Hello there! There is an article called " Argentina-Brazil War", it's about an international conflict that occurred between 1825 and 1828 between the Empire of Brazil and the United Provinces of South America over the possession of the Brazilian province of Cisplatina (which had a mixed Portuguese and Spanish population). The problem is that is was never called "Argentina-Brazil War". An editor probably created this name for it.
Thus, I proposed the name to be changed for "Cisplatine War" because it is "the name which is most commonly used to refer to the subject of the article in English-language reliable sources" ( WP:COMMONNAME). A few examples: [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], [32], [33], [34], [35], [36], [37], [38], [39], [40], etc...
Your comment in Talk:Argentina–Brazil War#Requested move would be very welcome! Kind regards, -- Lecen ( talk) 21:47, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
I'd like to hear your input on the matter, If you can add your view here it will be most appreciated, Regards--- Macarenses ( talk) 14:34, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
Recently, I have been told to stop doing the way I edit. I generally keep to myself and try not to cause any trouble on en.wikipedia.org at the same time try and become online friends with some of the contributors such as yourself. Most of the edits I did on Christmas night have been reverted back, except for a couple of them. Even one that I was trying to contribute to Vilyam Genrikhovich Fisher my whole comment and pointing out differences in the article in bullet type, was reverted to the previous. Would like you to look at the comments that have been made on my talkpage: User_talk:Adamdaley#Changing_Wikiproject_to_WP
Honestly, this has really got me down because I have learnt so much knowledge from Wikipedia and have alot of respect for the information on it even a small percentage of it maybe wrong. The en.Wikipedia.org, is the only website I really enjoy contributing too and reading about things I never knew. This situation has made me consider not to contribute to Wikipedia anymore. Even though it's the main website I go to to occupy my time and have a special interest in helping improve the information. As for my personal life, it's not perfect and nobody is considering I do have a mental illness for a number of years. Advice or feedback would be appreciated. Adamdaley ( talk) 16:29, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Douglas Bader is being reviewed for GA listing. It has been put on hold for an initial 14 days to allow issues such as prose, inline citing and detailed coverage to be addressed. SilkTork * YES! 16:51, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Dear sir, i've just read your suggestions in the "Discussion" section and i will bear them in mind. Thanks for the encouragement & have a merry christmas. Pietje96 ( talk) 11:32, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
The source you added to this unreferenced BLP in November was a Wikipedia mirror. Please be more careful when adding sources to BLPs. Fences& Windows 00:22, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
I noticed you have done the "B-Class Status" for the WikiProject Military History on the František Fajtl article. Thanks for doing that. I tend not to do that because I don't really know what to look for so I let other people who know more what to look for to do it. I appreciate you doing that it's your contribution to the article. Adamdaley ( talk) 19:55, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
On 30 December 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Sattelberg, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Tom Derrick received the Victoria Cross for his actions during the Battle of Sattelberg in November 1943? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Materialscientist ( talk) 08:05, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
On the Talk:Bar Confederation someone has suggested a merger between 2 articles. I've replied to the original comment and agreed they be merged under a different name. You can see my comment on the above talkpage. Adamdaley ( talk) 00:30, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi mate, Happy New Year... Tks for finishing off the verification -- do you want to take a break and I'll do the total/newsletter/awards or are you on a roll...? Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 12:58, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
Thanks for Invisible Barnster Award! It's appreciated. Adamdaley ( talk) 03:28, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
The WikiChevrons | ||
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews for the period Oct–Dec 2010, I am delighted to award you the WikiChevrons. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 23:00, 4 January 2011 (UTC) |
Greetings! I am grateful that you have awarded me a barnstar but I think that it is a mistake because I don't deserve it since unfortunately I haven't done a single review ever in Wikipedia. I suppose you wanted to award someone else and I am notifying you now so that you can encourage the person who deserves it :) Regards, -- Gligan ( talk) 10:57, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Thank you AustralianRupert for the award that you gave me. Regards, Kebeta ( talk) 12:18, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
The Bronze Wiki | ||
I am delighted to inform you that your extensive contributions to the Military history WikiProject have earned you 3rd place in the 2010 "Military historian of the Year" contest. We're grateful for your help, and look forward to seeing more of your excellent work in the coming year. Kirill [talk] [prof] 22:26, 6 January 2011 (UTC) |
Ed! and I are talking about whether to write "United States (US)" or just United States or US. In Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Battle of the Bowling Alley, you wrote:
Ed! says that he's sometimes been asked to write "United States (US)" at GAN. I'd rather follow Chicago 10.33, AP Stylebook (at "U.S."), and everything else I've seen over the years ... no one who reads AmEng needs to be told what "US" means. ROK and UN, sure. UK, I'd vote not to write it out, but I can see an argument (considering how geographically challenged Americans are). - Dank ( push to talk) 21:43, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
You are probably aware there is a Biography infobox for people who served in the Military. Recently, I've been putting the full parametres of this infobox. My point is when I put the "Birth date" as (example):
Mickey Mouse | |
---|---|
Birth name | Mickey Mouse |
Nickname(s) | Mickey |
Allegiance | Australia |
Service/ | Royal Australian Air Force |
Years of service | 1939 — 1945 |
Rank | Captain |
Battles/wars | World War II |
It automatically calculates the age of the person. Now, when I've done this (following the template and infobox requirements), other contributors have changed it for example not YYYY|MM|DD (as above) but as "15 October 1913" (another example) and without the parameters which is included in the template. I feel it should be the template and not human input of date. I have queried this in #wikipedia-en-help and they suggested to leave a note in the infobox that the default "Birth date" and "Death date" are the default input of dates. Adamdaley ( talk) 05:02, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Rupert. Thank you for starting a look at the Battle of Towton. I have addressed your concerns and suggestions raised at the A-Class review, and look forward to your continuing input at your pleasure. Jappalang ( talk) 00:56, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
This article has had a pretty thorough reedit resulting from the very valuable copy edit. What do you think should happen next? :) -- Rskp ( talk) 06:51, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
"This review has now run for 28 days, so it is due for closing. An uninvolved co-ordinator will do this soon (it might take a couple of days). Given that it doesn't seem to have gained the three explicit votes of support it will most likely be closed as unsuccessful. I hope this won't discourage you, though. There are probably only a few more issues to iron out before it could be successful at WP:GAN or here. I'd recommend working through the last of Anotherclown's comments after the review is closed and then requesting a peer review. After that you could take it to GAN and once successful there, an ACR shouldn't be too hard to complete successfully. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 08:31, 7 February 2011 (UTC)"
thanks for all your time and effort you have put into this. It seems one reviewer opposed it on the basis of some last minute suggestions, one of which - the citations in the lead, is debatable as I don't think its mandatory either way. It was a surprise to have two major changes suggested after working through all the style corrections. But even if all the suggestions were followed to the letter, there would still be only one vote. Relying on the opinion of one reviewer who is not an expert in the field, places a huge burden on that person. Indeed I think too much was expected from Anotherclown and its equally unfair to the article to head its discussion page with "Not approved". The implication is that it was reviewed by three editors who checked the article thoroughly and found it wanting but this did not happen. The same can be said for "No consensus to promote" this suggests there was more than one vote. Or was there? -- Rskp ( talk) 00:24, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Australian Rupert
I've came across Suitcase nuke with a merger on its Discussion page. I would like to see it has been done properly (the banner maybe even removed if it's been merged) and see if you could assess the WikiProject Military History on the Suitcase nuke against "B-Class". It would be appreciated. Anything in return, I'll have a look at. Adamdaley ( talk) 09:19, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
We will keep you and the other people in Australia in our prayers. Aleutian06 23:18, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
I see you've been trying to improve the 2/17 RNSWR page, I can find out the info for you on CO's of the unit if you wish the next time I go in. Any other info you want about 2/17 RNSWR? Let me know, Cheers. Veritas Blue ( talk) 11:15, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi mate. I had a play around and came up with this, let me know what you think. Anotherclown ( talk) 09:25, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
It looks good, but I can't seem to get it to sit right in the Sattelberg article. For some reason the text sits right up against it, instead of having a neat border of blankspace around it. AustralianRupert ( talk) 09:36, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
|
Hi! I noticed your activity as a Good Article reviewer, and wanted to let you know about the Wikipedia Ambassador Program, and specifically the role of Online Ambassador. We're looking for friendly Wikipedians who are good at reviewing articles and giving feedback to serve as mentors for students who are assigned to write for Wikipedia in their classes.
If you're interested, I encourage you to take a look at the Online Ambassador guidelines; the "mentorship process" describes roughly what will be expected of mentors in the coming term. If that's something you want to do, please apply!
You can find instructions for applying at WP:ONLINE. The main things we're looking for in Online Ambassadors are friendliness, regular activity (since mentorship is a commitment that spans several months), and the ability to give detailed, substantive feedback on articles (both short new articles, and longer, more mature ones).
I hope to hear from you soon.-- Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation ( talk) 20:20, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
I'm here to ask where would I be able to find article sizes based on their size so I can assess them right? For example I was told that from another WikiProject anything over 3000 bytes (I guess) in size would be assessed as "Start" on their WikiProject. How about on WikiProject Military History that covers all of the sub-categories of Military History such as regions, periods, wars etc? Adamdaley ( talk) 00:49, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
FYI: Your opinion is solicited at Talk:List of Australian Victoria Cross recipients#OzVC2. Cheers, Pdfpdf ( talk) 04:44, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
I hope things are getting back to normal for you. When you have an opportunity, like when you’re not rescuing yourself from flooding! Would you take another look at Arkansas Militia in the Civil War. I have added many secondary sources and addressed most of the “to do” list that you left me the last time you looked. I have asked someone from the Copy Editor Guild to take a look at it, but they are on a big drive to clear up their backlog right now. Thanks.Aleutian06 23:25, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
Article: Balquhain Castle
I am trying figure out which period or timeline that this castle was built, the war it was involved in. It's not my area. I thought I'd give it an assessment it, but no idea on the years it was in use. If you take a look at it, and know when or roughly when it was then it would be appreciated. It is a very very short article 5 lines at the most with a picture. Because I can change it once I get feedback. Adamdaley ( talk) 06:40, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
Wow! She can't put a foot wrong, can she! (Even when she does, cf Kovco, it looks like water off a duck's back!)
I can't see them making a female Chief of Army, or CJOPS. Nor VCDF, for that matter. CCDG however - that's not impossible. I predict they'll make her CCDG some time in the next 5 years.
What do you think? Cheers, Pdfpdf ( talk) 11:01, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi! Since you started an A-class review of the Croatian War of Independence, I would like you to take a look at Talk:Croatian War of Independence#Infobox as that section contains some concerns I have about the infobox there. Since the article is edited by a number of editors I posted those there to see if any consensus could be found on those, but I would also like to hear opinions of other editors. All suggestions are welcome. Thanks!-- Tomobe03 ( talk) 19:15, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Can you let it rest for another day or two? The ed17 has hidden comments in the article body, and I would like the chance to round all those up and add them in my section so I can work on addressing them. Also, I would like to leave a message for the other editors inviting them to make one last pass through and add anything they feel is still outstanding before this goes to archive. TomStar81 ( Talk) 23:41, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
Article: Blanche Charlet
I've come across an unassessed article who was an SOE Agent during World War II. I've found a source that has her born five years earlier (in 1893 not 1898) than stated on the article located here: Special Forces. While trying to confirm her birth, I am also trying to confirm her death (if she has already died, possibly in 1985 as it states in the article) or any other year. Adamdaley ( talk) 04:02, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi mate, tell me when you get tired and I'll do the rest of the verification and/or totalling/awards/newsletter.... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 01:41, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Regarding the assessment - I was originally going to ask for B-class, but then realised there were other sources out there I needed to pick through first (Clay Blair's second volume, for instance), so I left it as Start, but forgot to change the template. I've done that now, hopefully it's OK. :) - The Bushranger One ping only 02:07, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
Article: Edwin A. Loberg
I've completed an infobox for Edwin A. Loberg and assessed the WikiProjects. In his infobox, I have put him in as "United States Air Force", while when I look at the Wiki-page of ranks it states Colonel in the Army. Are you able to fix this? It's probably a little mistake, but I'm confused about it. It would be appreciated if you looked at it. Adamdaley ( talk) 02:47, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Your welcome. I had to do something, the disaster area that currently is El Paso has kept me home most of the week, so I'm finding the internet and the wiki a nice escape for my frustrations over our response to the blizzard. TomStar81 ( Talk) 02:51, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
Having laughed myself silly for a couple of minutes over this, I soon discovered that WP is a very rich source on this topic! Pdfpdf ( talk) 13:37, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
The Wars of the Roses Barnstar | ||
Thank you for your comments and suggestions on the Battle of Towton. They have really helped to improve the article and be recognised as a Featured Article. Jappalang ( talk) 22:01, 9 February 2011 (UTC) |
Thank you very much for taking the time to fix my appalling grammar! Also your copy-editing on the King George V article helped get it to GA class. So once again thank you so much! Thurgate ( talk) 17:31, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
Article: 145th Armored Regiment (United States)
I would like to bring to your attention that viewing the above article with Internet Explorer 8 it leaves a BIG gap between the first paragraph at the top of the article to the next paragraph near the bottom of the Infoboxes. I have viewed it with Mozilla Firefox 3.6.13 and it looks the way an article should appear on wikipedia with minor tweaks. I will also let User:Ian Rose know. Adamdaley ( talk) 03:53, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Would you mind reviewing Pulaski Light Artillerywhen you have an oppertunity?Aleutian06 22:26, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
Article: 542nd Parachute Infantry Regiment (United States)
I feel that this article needs a picture and a Military Unit Infobox. I am able to do the Infobox without the picture and the number of people who were in the unit during World War II. It could possibly improve the article greatly but I am concerned about the "orphan" tag (from 2009) at the time. To me there is enough links in the article to remove it. I'll also send this message to User:Ian Rose. Any feedback would be appreciated. Adamdaley ( talk) 00:07, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
Article: 192nd Tank Battalion
I would like to suggest that an Military Unit Infobox be included in this article, have the US tank as main picture in the Infobox. I am able to do the infobox, but I feel I should leave the template tag at the topic of the article until someone can add more information to the beginning of the article then it can be removed. User:Ian Rose will also get this message. Feedback be appreciated. Adamdaley ( talk) 01:46, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I would like to note my appreciation for being one of the people that helped to raise the quality of the Manhattan Project article.
This user helped promote Manhattan Project to good article status. |
-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 19:47, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi Australian Rupert, The following message appears at the very bottom of the User:RoslynSKP/First Transjordan attack on Amman (1918) after the Bibliography - In Red "Cite error: There are ref tages on this page, but the references will not show without a Reflist|group=Notes template or a references group="Notes" tag; see the help page." This is weird because there are reflists and notes and they seem to be all showing ok as well as the citations. Can you let me know what is wrong, please? Regards, -- Rskp ( talk) 03:31, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Article: Maginot Line
Over the past few days there has been a discussion between an administrator (on en.wikipedia.org) as well as Tim PF and myself concerning the English version to use on this particular article. So far we have agreed to go with "British English" and have done distance conversions where appropriate. I suggested the following people may help the three of us that has started the conversation to improve the article or have suggestions. The following users have been named by myself who could be of some assistance:
Hope you can join the conversation on the Maginot Line Discussion page. Feedback would be appreciated. Adamdaley ( talk) 01:29, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot ( talk) 15:13, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
NOTICE: I wrote these messages on Ian Rose's talkpage and he hasn't replied to them. That is maybe why they sound a little confusing.
Australian Rupert,
Article: Ernst Voß
While reading Ernst Voß's article. I noticed at the very bottom of his Infobox that his later work was a Police Officer. But have a look when he was killed? Would that have been in between World War I and World War II? It certainly could not have been after World War II. Maybe an error by the original author? Maybe need's a reference to when he was a Police Officer? Adamdaley ( talk) 02:28, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
Article: Ernst-August Fricke
Once again I am back. I am still uncertain if AustralianRupert is back to normal with Wikipedia. As the article above Ernst Voß I have added "citation needed" to him (meaning Ernst Voß) for being a Police Officer (inbetween World War I and World War II). Another article is Ernst-August Fricke am I correct to put a citation needed for reference for being an officer because it doesn't say in the article that "after World War II he went onto being a Police Officer" (I added a line in Ernst Voß that he was a Police Officer and you can look at his talkpage. I feel there needs to be a citation needed or a source or something to confirm when or roughly when he was a Police Officer. Adamdaley ( talk) 11:08, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
I've just responded to all your comments in this review. Thanks, Nick-D ( talk) 09:39, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Dear AustralianRupert,
I have some photos (about 40) taken by my uncle Les, who was a member of this regiment. If you can use some of them for the article on the 9th Division Cavalry Regiment. I don't have the skills to add them and you are obviously a wikipedia expert. Please email me mailto:ian@cossor.com.au
I am the publisher/editor of the book http://itunes.apple.com/au/book/albury-to-el-alamein-and-back/id420214936#. The original hard cover was printed 2004 and has been out of print since 2006. I have just been successful in publishing it as an iBook. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grumpyoldman1959 ( talk • contribs) 22:37, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
When you have an oppertunity, could you review Arkansas Militia and the War with Mexico? Thanks! Aleutian06 ( talk) 03:31, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
FYI, have a look at User talk:Pdfpdf#"Hidden" not working? Cheers, Pdfpdf ( talk) 12:31, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
Article: Edward Innes Pocock
I am trying to work out what war/battle Edward Innes Pocock was in. To properly fill out the WikiProject Military History template on his talk page. Would like to say I have some privileges using "Twinkle" for Wikipedia usernames. Adamdaley ( talk) 03:20, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi mate, tks for tidying up there -- I saw in WPMILHIST Announcements that there was an apparently active PR as well as a new ACR and started the archive process, before noticing the Article History had already been updated in the article talk page -- but I forgot to remove it from Reviews when I removed it from Announcements... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 07:58, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
John, King of England is currently at FAC but not tagged by Milhist. Heads of state during wartime qualify, right? To tag something, should I just add the {{ MILHIST}} tag and wait for someone or some bot to add parameters? And ... I've got a general sense of which articles to tag, but is there something I can read that will help me with close calls? - Dank ( push to talk) 00:15, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
You know I'm planning on expanding the 6th Division (Australia) article some time. I've already got a biography on someone who was in the 6th Division, and someone in the 6th Division Signal's wrote a book during the world when he had time. Today, I managed to pick up two copies (1949 and 1954) of "SIGNALS - Story of the Australian Corps of Signals". It has some 6th Division in it as well 6th Division Signals in it among other Divisions. Thought I'd let you know. Adamdaley ( talk) 08:08, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Article: Royal Australian Corps of Signals
I was wondering if there should be a section on signals being used in World war II. Since I have two Signals books 1949 and 1954. Also, would it be appropriate if these books were put under "Bibliography" section? It's mostly about the Australian Signals during World War II. Adamdaley ( talk) 22:49, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot ( talk) 21:12, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for reviewing the article, the Dover patrol commander was Sir Reginald Bacon who actually wrote one of the sources i used. Ive added him into the text of the article. XavierGreen ( talk) 20:14, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your review of USCGC Point Gammon (WPB-82328). A fresh set of eyes on an article always helps catch those things that could use a bit of polish. Point Gammon had about the least remarkable tour of any of the Point class cutters that served in Vietnam and I'm somewhat disappointed to find so little on her service history. After I finish two more of her sister cutters, I will have completed all of the 26 that served in Coast Guard Squadron One. That is the title of the article that is in my user space sandbox that is about half written. I would be flattered if you would peek at it in your limited spare time and let me know if I'm headed the right direction. User:Cuprum17/ Coast Guard Squadron One Cheers! Cuprum17 ( talk) 14:05, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks very much for your review. I believe I've addressed all but one (which I've queried) of your concerns. I'd appreciate it if you could take a second look when you get a minute. Cheers, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:50, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the review, I replied there. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 17:09, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi, just wondering whether with your expertise whether you could make the New Guinea campaign template box autocollapse in the Battle of Wau article, as it is always expanded and leaves whitespace when viewing on a 19in screen. Regards Newm30 ( talk) 02:34, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi mate, I'll be away for the w/e starting this afternoon so given Storm's responsbile for about half the entries (!), I've asked him if he'd mind taking my place this month re. initialising for April and verifying/tallying/awarding for March... Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 23:25, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
The WikiChevrons | ||
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer, A-Class and Featured Article reviews for the period January–March 2011, I am delighted to award you the WikiChevrons. - Dank ( push to talk) 11:07, 3 April 2011 (UTC) |
Rupert, thanks for taking care of all the recent contest awards and everything, but I really don't think that I deserve one each of all the awards for the backlog contest. Usually it's just the highest one and the placement award.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 18:55, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
Hey Aussie, I think these are the ones you get; if I missed any, please let me know. Thanks for all your work during the drive! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:41, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
Military history service award | ||
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your contributions to the WikiProject's March 2011 backlog reduction drive, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject award. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:41, 5 April 2011 (UTC) |
Military history service award | ||
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your contributions to the WikiProject's March 2011 backlog reduction drive, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject award. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:41, 5 April 2011 (UTC) |
Military history service award | ||
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your contributions to the WikiProject's March 2011 backlog reduction drive, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject award. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:41, 5 April 2011 (UTC) |
March 2011 backlog reduction drive | ||
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your placing third in the March 2011 backlog reduction drive, I award you this Bronze Wiki. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:41, 5 April 2011 (UTC) |
Not to pressure you or anything but you are aware that a vote, whether support or oppose, with no comment as you did, here, is not considered a vote at all so I am just suggesting that you add a comment and I would like to encourage you to vote in Rehman's election. Thanks and cheers. maucho eagle 02:10, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the invaluable suggestions. I will try to improve the article accordingly. As you mentioned in one of your suggestion, I would like to create a map for this battle and Lahore front but I am unaware of how to create maps on or for wikipedia. Are they created using some wikipedia tool of some seperate software?? Please provide some guidance or links to tools, if any. Thanks.-- UplinkAnsh ( talk) 06:14, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Hey, could you review the article once again. I think I have found most of the reliable sources that could be found and I think the article gives the best view it could ever give with the amount of reliable sources available.Thanks.-- UplinkAnsh ( talk) 13:51, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
I've ordered and received three images from the Australian War Memorial. All three images are in the public domain and the copyright has expired. I am allowed to publish these images on Wikimedia within 30 days. What is the best "lisence" to use for these images on Wikimedia? The help channel was unhelpful, so I've come to you for advice. Adamdaley ( talk) 07:29, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
AustralianRupert - I have uploaded the three images to Wikimedia. They are named:
Adamdaley ( talk) 08:28, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
Hey Rupert! I've gone over Russian battleship Sevastopol (1895) and fixed the A-Class review, and I'd like you to just quickly look over it. If you think it's fine, I'll put it up again. Buggie111 ( talk) 18:19, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Do you think that 16th Brigade (Australia) and 16th Aviation Brigade (Australia) should be merged? (ie, do you know if the new 16th Brigade inherit the lineage of the first one?). Cheers, Nick-D ( talk) 08:59, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
We'd like to put a column in the Bugle encouraging people review at FAC, or at least to assist the frequent FAC reviewers. Is there anything that new reviewers could do at FAC that you would find particularly helpful? (Watching) - Dank ( push to talk) 19:01, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
I read on the Australian SAS article Vietnam war. It says," Australian and New Zealand SAS killed at least 492 and as many as 598 and losing only two men killed in action and three fatalities from friendly fire." Can anybody tell where does this battle take place? Was if three friendly fire from Australian SAS or new Zealand? 67.164.105.159 ( talk) 07:36, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Howdy! I've been looking for informative sources. So far, this is the only one I've found.
Cadet Instructor's Handbook 2006 section 1.26 on the 11th of the 104 pages.
(Actually, I found pretty-much all of Chapter 1 interesting. And Chapters 2&3 ... (I know, I need to get a life.))
I must admit, I'm puzzled why Australia made the moves in 1921 & 1929, when the British made them in 1922 & 1928. As yet, I haven't found anything to say when the Australian rank insignia changed - the British insignia changed in 1928. Your thoughts & comments? Cheers, Pdfpdf ( talk) 15:01, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the ACM, Rupert, but I've declined the nom. Could I please be nominated when I actually have a third A-class article? Buggie111 ( talk) 00:03, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Would like to inform you I'll be going on holidays from May 2nd till July 12th, 2011 (Roughly 70 days). Give me a couple days to get over flying back from the Philippines and I'll continue with Wikipedia. I'll have free Internet access while I am over there, so I can check for any messages on here. Just leave them on my talkpage, if you would like me to look at an article or leave a message or something. I also plan on taking images for Wikipedia on articles on here so expect alot of images from me when I get back! Regards, Adamdaley ( talk) 12:50, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot ( talk) 01:14, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
I would like to thank you for having reviewed and fixed many mistakes at Armed Forces of the Empire of Brazil. I really appreciate your effort, even more since you did it without no one having asked you to. Good to see this kind of editors around. Regards, -- Lecen ( talk) 13:10, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi, your opinion would be greatly appreciated at the same heading at User_talk:Anotherclown. Regards Newm30 ( talk) 00:21, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
There was this guy name wee curry monster and he kept putting that one that killled three paratroopers on Operation Crimp on friendly fire article. Someone asked wee to change it back to January 3rd yet he simply refused to due stockings. 170.91.194.9 ( talk) 16:38, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
AustralianRupert, I wonder if you have seen the article Woomera, South Australia? The tone of the article concerns me as it contains words and phrases suggestive of editoralising, puffery or even propaganda. Examples are legendary, passionate forward thinking, nationalistic visionaries, very professional interpretive gallery, famous national historic site. The author appears to promote the size advantage of the range several times, and there is other duplication. If you can spare a couple of your valuable minutes, I would appreciate your opinion. As I am a new editor (March 2011) I am reluctant to tag the article, however if you thought it was warranted, I would be prepared to do some work on it. Regards Summerdrought ( talk) 02:32, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot ( talk) 21:53, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Wanted to drop by to see how things were going. Of course I am in the Philippines now and can stay till June 30 with my Visa, have to pay more money for the 12 days in July. I do check wikipedia when the internet isn't slow and do have a list of images to take, just need a few days to get around and take them! Adamdaley ( talk) 11:55, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! Much appreciated MisterBee1966 ( talk) 14:16, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
HJ Mitchell |
Penny for your thoughts? has extended an
olive branch of peace.
I do hope you didn't take my comments about the Harrier ACR as being critical of you (or even of your close). I was only using it for illustrative purposes and no criticism was intended. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:11, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi mate, just FYI, I was going to move Buggie's to June rather than score them zero, on the assumption he'll re-nom them... Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 11:55, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
|
To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot ( talk) 22:05, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi thanks for you copy edits on the parachute brigade/battalion articles, they are very much appreciated. Jim Sweeney ( talk) 08:11, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. (Good work.)
Unless someone requests me to do otherwise, I won't add anything until after the IP has stated something. Cheers,
Pdfpdf (
talk)
09:53, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
Woud you check Arkansas Territorial Militia against the B-Class Criteria for me when you have time? Thanks. Aleutian06 ( talk) 21:36, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
Thank you. Dapi89 ( talk) 19:55, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
When some editors group duplicate citations they replace readable references with autogenerated arbitrary numerals which bear no relationship to the work cited. This is not an issue for anyone reading articles but virtually amounts to vandalism in edit mode as there is no way of knowing the name of the source. These autogenerated citations seem to have been added to the Sinai and Palestine Campaign page some time this year. Is it possible to identify when it was done and undo it? -- Rskp ( talk) 05:17, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
When I realised what had been done to the Jerusalem article, twice I requested an explanation or that the edits to the citations be undone. Not only was there no reply but my messages on delta's talk page were deleted. Delta does not appear to have any other interest in the articles except to insert these citations.
As I found in the Jerusalem article, replacing these citations by hand is very time consuming and mistakes could easily creep in. Is there any way delta's autogenerated citations in the Sinai and Palestine campaign article can be undone automatically? Or is it possible for the Military History WikiProject to protect articles from this kind of attack? -- Rskp ( talk) 02:13, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
autogenerated1
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
On July 1, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 47th Battalion (Australia), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
— Rlevse • Talk • 18:02, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
On July 5, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Richard Travis, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
— Rlevse • Talk • 18:02, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
I'm wondering what the reason is for changing the page numbers given in the citations on the Battle of Mons page (particularly the citations to Ernest W. Hamilton's book). I gave those page numbers when I wrote the relevant sections, and unless the problem is that I was using a different version of the book from you, I'm fairly confident they're correct. Groundsquirrel13 ( talk) 04:59, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
Your opinion is solicited at Talk:John Whitelaw (general)#John-the-younger. Cheers, Pdfpdf ( talk) 13:07, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
The
June 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
18:40, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
I put the Battle of Piave River (1809) in the July WPMILHIST contest. In fact, I already updated the article, but I did so on 5 July. I'm not sure if this is within the rules. I asked Dank but he referred me to you. If I'm bending the rules, please let me know and I'll withdraw it. Thanks. Djmaschek ( talk) 01:22, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi I am asking what do you think of adding Pope Benedict XVI military service to his infobox. He is a WWII veteren and I wanted to put it up. There is a discussion on Talk:Pope Benedict XVI about putting it on. I wanted to see what you think of it since youra Military History cordinator. Aslo we cant find his rank in the german army. Spongie555 ( talk) 04:33, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Nice work creating this article. It's stuff like not having an article on the corps ranked first in Australian Army Order of Precedence which amuses me when there are discussions of how hard it's becoming to find new articles to start or expand! Cheers, Nick-D ( talk) 08:23, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Regarding more images for this article, I found many on this site [1]. However, the terms of use [2] mention -
I think this is not agreeable to Wikipedia standards. Also, do you think the article is GA material? Cheers! -- MT ( talk) 05:14, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
I'm soliciting your comments & opinions here. (Thanks in advance.) Pdfpdf ( talk) 14:08, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
I need to create articles about 2 Generals, Ma Dunjing and Ma Dunjing. The problem is, that they both have the same name. And they are identical in other aspects too, both being muslim, and being related to each other. So i have no idea what to put in parentheses next to the name.
the name is different in Chinese, but i don't see how thats going to help me write their name in english when the romanization is the same.
If this helps come up with a solution, their fathers were Ma Hongkui and Ma Hongbin. Should i create it like this? Ma Dunjing (Ma Hongkui's son), Ma Dunjing (Ma Hongbin's son). Дунгане ( talk) 20:06, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Great work on Battle of Hongorai River, I have finished the review now and promoted to GA. Just one suggestion though which I have left on the review page. Please have a look when you can. Cheers. Anotherclown ( talk) 17:33, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Hey thanks for reviewing this :) I'm going to be away for a few days though (I'm likely getting my wisdom teeth removed) and I'll be unable to edit for a few days due to RL as well. I'd like to work on this article and get it done in 7 days but I'm scared that this is not possible. Can you extend the deadline a few more days for me so I can finish this? Thanks,-- White Shadows I ran away from you 15:57, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the Support! ' Perseus 71 talk 20:30, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for your detailed peer review. I have made a lot of changes to the article and I would really appreciate it if you could go through it once again and comment on it, if you get the time. Gremaldin ( talk) 14:39, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for your comments and help. I'll see to it that all citations are after the punctuation. I'll try to expand the single sentence paragraphs or I'll just join them. I just hope I didn't bother you. Thanks once again!! -- Gremaldin ( talk) 09:40, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Gremaldin has given you a
cookie! Cookies promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{ subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{ subst:munch}}!
Would you mind reviewing 206th Field Artillery Regiment (United States) again. I have made several additions and corrections. Damon.cluck ( talk) 03:55, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Hey mate, I have put up a couple of GA noms up (foolishly) and was hoping you might be able to have a go at reviewing Battle of Sungei Koemba for me? Of course if you're too busy that's fine, but I'm hoping not to have to wait a decade given how long the queue is currently! Cheers. Anotherclown ( talk) 07:56, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
No worries. Looks good. Take care. AustralianRupert ( talk) 12:37, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the support in the A Class review. Just need some other now. -- Jim Sweeney ( talk) 10:36, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi Did you ever come across BritishRupert does not say much but has a hell of a head for heights.-- Jim Sweeney ( talk) 21:00, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello. You recently did a good article review for this article. The article included a citation to a book from the " Webster's Quotations, Facts and Phrases" series published by Icon Group International, but unfortunately Icon Group International is not a reliable source - their books are computer-generated, with most of the text copied from Wikipedia (most entries have [WP] by them to indicate this, see e.g. [3]). I've only removed the reference, not the text it was referencing. I'm removing a lot of similar references as they are circular references. Despite giving an appearance of reliability, the name " Webster's" has been public domain since the late 19th century. Another publisher to be wary of as they reuse Wikipedia articles is Alphascript Publishing. Fences& Windows 02:40, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi !
Thanks for the extensive corrections and assessing for B Class. I know you are still making corrections to this article. Like I said in the request for B Class review, my goal is GA class. So given its current state, do you think this article is ready for GA class review ? If its not, can you give me some pointers or areas needing improvement ? P.S. Thanks for the support on A class review of Organization of Luftwaffe. TIA ' Perseus 71 talk 03:59, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Passed - good work. GregJackP Boomer! 22:58, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi mate, I have done a bit of a copy edit on the article but want to confirm that I haven't muffed one of your paras. I reworded the first para in the El Alamein section, in which you wrote:
After Tobruk, the 9th Division was sent to Palestine and Syria to train and rest. Under their new commander Lieutenant-Colonel Heathcote Hammer—who had taken over after Windeyer had stepped up to take over the 20th Brigade—the 2/48th proceeded to train in high terrain and temperatures.[6] The 26th Brigade was moved south before being called up and rushed to the First Battle of El Alamein in early July 1942. On 1 July, Axis forces commanded by Erwin Rommel launched an attack British 8th Army line and on 7 July the 9th Division received its orders to attack; they were to traverse the coastline and capture a ridge (Trig 33) north of the "Tel el Eise" station.[1]
I changed the last sentence to: "On 1 July, Axis forces commanded by Erwin Rommel launched an attack on the British Eighth Army line and on 7 July the 9th Division was ordered into the attack, as part of which the 2/48th was subsequently ordered to traverse the coastline and capture the Trig 33 ridge north of the "Tel el Eise" station.[1]" Is this a correct interpretation of what you meant? Cheers. Anotherclown ( talk) 08:56, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Hey I noticed that you have put a GAN of mine on a German U-boat on hold. I just got back from a 12 hour trip from Montreal tonight and I have not been editing for the past 4 days due to my vacation there. Do you mind if you "reset" the GA review of that article for me so I still have 7 days to fix the issues that you added? Thanks,-- White Shadows It's a wonderful life 02:30, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi mate. I have just finished expanding the article (I think). Per your suggestions I have added a bit more on WW2 from Hopkins. I'm hoping you could give it a quick proof read for gross errors as I'm getting too close to the article. I will have a look at Aitape-Wewak campaign soonish. Got to go for a run now though. Cheers again. Anotherclown ( talk) 07:57, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Greetings!
We had an edit conflict. Given that your edit looked automated, and mine was completely manual, I effectively "undid" you edit so that I could implement mine.
Before you re-implement your edit, could you cast your eye over my changes and "improve" them? (Please?)
Cheers,
Pdfpdf (
talk)
12:58, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
"We" seem to have a number of "very similar, but slighly different" articles. I'm "a bit uncomfortable" about it, but not uncomfortable enough to start making amalgamations and step on toes. What are your thoughts?
Articles include:
And there's another one that I can't remember the name of at the moment.
Cheers,
Pdfpdf (
talk)
13:05, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I'm writing to you as a Coordinator of the History Project and would be grateful for your advice.
I've got some information which is more or less a side issue - the 42nd Infantry Division on 5 August 1916 the second day of battle, when ordered to move forward suffered terribly from thirst; there are published descriptions of personal accounts both by and individual infantryman and camel transport personnel who followed the division with water and a later reminiscence which I would refer to. The two infantry divisions were blamed for their inability to move sufficiently quickly and the Ottoman Army was able to get away, but this interpretation does not take into account the conditions - summer in the Sinai. The NZds also suffered from the conditions during their first reconnaissance in the desert in early spring.
I'm not sure whether this information should be incorporated directly into the Battle of Romani page or the 42nd Infantry Division page - or a bit in both?
The other thing was that I would like to create a new page the 'WW1 Egyptian Camel Transport Corps and the Egyptian Labour Corps' but I don't have that much information. Is it ok to create a short page which may grow in the future? -- RoslynSKP ( talk) 04:10, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Would you have any objection to posting your sandbox work-in-progress to WT:MHSTT? We're trying to get the think tank off the ground and encourage its use, and your proposed guidelines are an ideal topic to get us all started :) EyeSerene talk 09:24, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Do you mind taking a look at 39th Infantry Division (United States) when you have time. I think it is past Stub class at this point. Thanks Damon.cluck ( talk) 14:07, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi there I can remember seeing/reading many years ago an Australian fighting knife/dagger that had a knuckleduster for a handle. Must have been something like the one on this image on the Sgts belt. Do you know anything about it, was an official issue and if so does it have an official name. ?-- Jim Sweeney ( talk) 16:58, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, I've attended to your comments YellowMonkey ( vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 02:44, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your ACR comments. Looks like not many people are very interested in the AFL; I really appreciate the review. Should be able to fix virtually everything pretty quickly; if you're happy, I'll insert a tickmark and let you score them out when you think they're appropriately fixed. Regards Buckshot06 (talk) 14:19, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi, If you do decide to put your hand up for the admin tools I'd be very happy to nominate you - I think that you'd make a great admin. Passing a RfA isn't particularly hard for level-headed editors like yourself and the tools are useful for day to day article editing (eg, moving articles over redirects, stopping articles on your watchlist from being repeatedly vandalised, etc). Regards, Nick-D ( talk) 12:04, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
First of all, thanks for your help on USS PC-1264. I am an entomologist with the University of Florida and was also in the service as a USMC officer and am a Viet Nam vet. I also feel about the service as you do. When people ask me what it was like, I reply, "Those were the best and the worst four year of my life." I am an American Civil War nut and contribute to those WP articles, but also have a great interest in WW II - particularly small unit actions. The Civil War Web site I do for a battle in Florida ( Battle of Olustee), where I live, was rated as one of the Top 95 Civil War Web sites on the Internet in two editions of the book The Civil War on the Web: A Guide to the Very Best Sites, written by the Director of the University of Virginia's Center for Digital History and the Editor of the New York Times on the Web.
As for PC-1264, I will be following your advice later this month for seeking A-class or GA status. On 23 August, the University of Florida starts its Fall semester and the roads around town are in chaos with the traffic. As a result, I always take the first week of classes off as I do not have teaching responsibilities. I'll work on getting PC-1264 into the queue then.
Regarding WW II, I have a great interest in guerrilla warfare and a number of books on that area that are hard to find. One, One-Man War, is about Jock Mclaren, who served with the 8th Australian Infantry Division at Singapore and was captured there. He escaped twice and fought with the guerrillas in the Philippines. The Japs had a price of 70,000 pesos on his head. There was no WP page on him and I started one based on the book. I have questions about some things he did, the unit he was with, and perhaps you might know the answers. Please see that Discussion page.
My mother is Australian. Dad was a radio operator/gunner on a B-24 in the U.S. 5th Air Force. They met on New Year's Eve 1944, married in April 1945, and he was shot down over China a few weeks later. Fortunately, Chinese guerrillas rescued him and the rest of the crew and he got out. Especially fortunate for me, as I was born in 1947. He died in 2002 and Mom still lives, near me. Mom's uncle was a member of the 9th Australian Infantry Division and was badly shot up at Tobruk. Mom, my brother and I, went back to Australia in 1956, where I was in the 5th grade. We stayed six months. Mom and Dad visited Australia many times, but I only got back once more in Dec72/Jan73. When I was a kid, I didn't have a Teddy Bear, but a stuffed Koala Bear. I think I knew more about Australian history and geography then I did about the U.S. until I reached high school. Take care. Thomas R. Fasulo ( talk) 17:01, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
I did another search for info on Jock McLaren. And found some interesting stuff that I added to the External Links section:
The bit about the appendix also is mentioned in the book. The radio show can be downloaded. Did you see anything on your Australian sites about him receiving the Silver Star?
I also added to the Discussion page that he might have been born in 1898. Two 1948 newspaper articles list him as being 50 — one might have been copied from the other. This would make him older than he may have admitted, and not as young in WW I as we might have thought. Charles Parsons, from the Wendell Fertig page, also did the same thing (lied about his age) according to his son, who I corresponded with about his father. Thomas R. Fasulo ( talk) 02:12, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
I finally "completed" the Wendell Fertig article today and plan to take it for review. I finished finding all the page numbers associated with Schmidt's thesis on the guerrilla forces on Mindanao. I plan to read that again to pick up any more interesting tidbits. However, I thought you might be interested in something I did find and add to the Fertig and McLaren pages today, with the Schmidt citation.
Another ship, called The Bastard, was a 26-foot whaleboat captained by Australian Robert "Jock" McLaren, an escaped prisoner-of-war from the Sandakan POW camp on Boreno. McLaren would sail his boat into Japanese controlled ports in broad daylight, shoot up the supply vessels and piers with machine guns and a mortar, then turn tail and run.
Thomas R. Fasulo ( talk) 19:04, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi, Rupert: First off, let me thank you for taking the time to assess Confederate privateer. I think I have responded correctly, and have supplied the information you requested.
I am writing, however, because of a statement you made on the Assessment page, to the effect that MilHist guidelines require a citation at the end of every paragraph. If that really is a policy, I am not about to challenge it, but I have had reasons for putting the citations in the middle. I have had later editors of articles move sentences around, leaving the footnotes at some distance from the relevant material. (They were different articles; this one has not attracted any attention that I can discern. (Sob.)) It got so that I initiated a discussion at the Village Pump; it is still going on, if you are interested. It seems interminable, and I for one would welcome a resolution. PKKloeppel ( talk) 00:02, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for the B assessment on Battle of Melle - I notice you have looked in on the Cartagena article. Opinions have run strong on this battle, I've tried to maintain consensus and verifiability through extensive referencing. Any suggestions for bringing up to B? Tttom1 ( talk) 01:06, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
|
|
|
July's contest results, the latest awards to our members, plus an interview with Parsecboy |
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. |
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot ( talk) 21:11, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I am about to enter into discussions here about Coastal Forces of the Royal Australian Navy. In my opinion the lead is misleading at it talks about Royal Navy first? Your opinion as a "expert" would be appreciated. You may leave comments on my talkpage or User_talk:Epipelagic. Regards Newm30 ( talk) 11:26, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Ian & "Rupert": I thought you might be interested in what's been going on at Talk:John Whittle#Commonwealth armed forces ? and User talk:Abecedare#British Commonwealth. Cheers, Pdfpdf ( talk) 13:45, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! Donner60 ( talk) 06:20, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello AustralianRupert. Do you edit from any public locations or public computers? Please answer honestly, it's quite important. You can reply to me in e-mail if you'd prefer to keep your response private. Thanks. -- Deskana (talk) 10:03, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
I've added new citations where necessary. If there are any other problems with the article, please feel free to point them out. Thanks for your time,
-( Wikipedian1234 ( talk) 14:09, 22 August 2010 (UTC))
As you recommended, I have added additional citations to the article. Please take a look when you can and see if its now up to B. Thanks. Tttom1 ( talk) 04:24, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
On 23 August 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Ratsua, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
— Rlevse • Talk • 18:04, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Have taken your advice and added citations. Also expanded text. A couple new refs link to terrific maps on the siege which would look great directly in the article. Any ideas? Please take another look when you can. Thanks. Tttom1 ( talk) 06:12, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks - added Dunning now - good job someone's around to check these things. -- Jim Sweeney ( talk) 08:34, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
HI 29th/46th Battalion (Australia) looks like Keogh is missing fro the references. -- Jim Sweeney ( talk) 12:14, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Awesomeness | ||
This tasteful little barnstar is mostly for your astounding contributions to Milhist's review department with around 140 A-Class and peer reviews made in the last year and is quite separate from any official gong. But this also reflects your dozens of contributions at B-class assessments (which have gone unnoticed). Well done, Roger Davies talk 07:29, 30 August 2010 (UTC) |
The WikiChevrons | ||
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews during the period July-December 2009, I am delighted to award you the WikiChevrons. Roger Davies talk 10:37, 30 August 2010 (UTC) |
The WikiChevrons | ||
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews during the period January-June 2010, I am delighted to award you the WikiChevrons. Roger Davies talk 10:47, 30 August 2010 (UTC) |
Many thanks. I've fixed up the rather obvious errors again YellowMonkey ( new photo poll) 02:18, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
|
|
A recap of the month's new Featured and A-Class articles, including a new featured sound |
Our newest A-class medal recipients and this August's top contestants |
|
To change your delivery options for this newsletter please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot ( talk) 22:58, 7 September 2010 (UTC) |
Nice to see someone else with an eye for sub-editing! Fifelfoo ( talk) 03:00, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your assistance at Talk:Battle of Ridgefield/GA1 -- Jim Sweeney ( talk) 18:08, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Replied YellowMonkey ( new photo poll) 01:55, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. You are cordially invited to help pick fourteen new coordinators from a pool of twenty candidates. This time round, the term has increased from six to twelve months so it is doubly important that you have your say! Please cast your vote here no later than 23:59 (UTC) on Tuesday, 28 September 2010.
With many thanks in advance for your participation from the coordinator team, Roger Davies talk 21:20, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I would like to add some orders of battle to the Egyptian Expeditionary Force article but because they are long lists of units and sub units, with indents to make sense of them, the editing in Wikipedia is beyond me. Can you give me some advice? Is there such a thing as a template for an order of battle? :) -- Rskp ( talk) 07:04, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
Happy to help. I'd suggest adding in a footnote (such as in I ANZAC Corps) stating that it uncertain, rather than a question mark as it looks a bit "cleaner" that. In regards to the AFC units, it sounds like they might have been "independent" divisional assets, so maybe just include this beside them in brackets, e.g. "(divisional asset)" so something like that? AustralianRupert ( talk) 06:03, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for that. I set myself a target of 50, just over half way there. -- Jim Sweeney ( talk) 08:29, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
Thankyou for your help about the army, although i stopped it yesterday, some guy from the federal police told me that it was illegal for me to attempt to gather classified material so i stopped it but thx, i really dont like how someone can actually trac me to my home from wiki -- Gargabook ( talk) 13:30, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Congrats on your election as Coordinator of the Military history Project! In honor of your achievement, I present you with these stars. TomStar81 ( Talk) 19:31, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
The WikiProject Barnstar | ||
In gratitude of your service as coordinator for the Military history Project from March 2010 to September 2010, I hereby award you this WikiProject Barnstar. — TomStar81 ( Talk) 23:19, 29 September 2010 (UTC) |
I've come across an issue with your recent archival of No. 4 Commando, the oldid and date is not that of the last edit to the review, it is for the time you archive the review and the condition the article is in. I've fixed this one, but there may be others if you've archived some reviews that way. - MBK 004 06:00, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
The WikiChevrons | ||
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews for the period 1 April-30 September 2010, I am delighted to award you the WikiChevrons. Roger Davies talk 07:58, 7 October 2010 (UTC) |
Hi there did I say congratulations ? Would you mind looking at Attacker class escort carrier its still a work in progress but you know how I have problems with images and white space if you could check everything is ok with this one. Thanks -- Jim Sweeney ( talk) 15:22, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
Yes for the lead. I've put up Nguyen Chanh Thi for FAC too YellowMonkey ( new photo poll) 05:55, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Why is a citation like this [1] replacing plain English citations in edit mode in the Battle of Rafa article? Having just gone 'show preview' you can't see the meaninglessness of the typing unless you are in edit mode which is where its useful to have the source so it can be read and checked. Why is this alphabetic system being imposed? -- Rskp ( talk) 06:59, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
I have visited many of the main battlefields in Europe (WW1 & WW2) and North Africa (WW2). I want to do a trip to Volgograd (ex-Stalingrad), Kharkov, Orel, Kursk, Belgorod, Smolensk and then Moscow in early summer 2011 (possibly renting a vehicle and driving - which may force the exclusion of Kharkov (Ukraine)). My wife has made it clear to me that she is just so totally not interested in the trip.... thus, what better travelling company than some editors from the MilHist forum who have an interest in WW2 Eastern Front, particularly with the inclusion of one or more Russian editors who speak English. Now, the question - is it acceptable practice to post something like this on a more regularly viewed MilHist forum / page, and if so - where do you recommend the right place to be? Please let me know your views. Rgds. Farawayman ( talk) 13:18, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
I am keen to incorporate photos from the AWM and Library of Congress photo collections into Wikipedia articles. There are photos from both these institutions already in Wikipedia -
eg. File:Australian 11th Battalion group photo - First Australian Imperial Force subsection of Military history of Australia during World War 1 article
eg. File:The camel corps at Beersheba2 - 1915 January - March subsection of Middle Eastern theatre of World War 1 article
Can you please tell me how this is done? -- Rskp ( talk) 01:59, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
I just came across this page 'User:RoslynSKP/Egyptian labour corps' which is now redundant, I think. Can I delete it?-- Rskp ( talk) 01:49, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
(I'm really procrastinating over First Gaza) Regarding the Battle of Magdhaba article, its still got a March 2007 note regarding need for citations. Can it be reevaluated? -- Rskp ( talk) 02:43, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
I've added some suggestions to the article's talk page. Please take a look if you get a chance. Cheers. AustralianRupert ( talk) 11:18, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
Hey mate, I had a look and it looks quite good (re the B class criteria IMO). For completeness could you possibly add a sentence about the battalion not being reraised after the abandonment of the Pentropic organisation (in 1965 I think). As I assume this is what transpired. Anyway just a suggestion. Cheers. Anotherclown ( talk) 07:46, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I saw some wiki articles you have contributed too and noticed you were apart of the Military history WikiProject. I'm new to editing on Wikipedia, I've recently been writing an article about Sidney Mashbir and I was wondering if you could help me review it and give me some pointers on how to develop it further, I have stacks of information relating to Col. Sidney Mashbir and the US/AUS Allied Translator and Interpreter Section {which is another article I would like to write soon} but I am unsure as to whether I'm on the right track or not. Cheers - Aeonx ( talk) 04:01, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi From your work on this subject can you cay if a fighter ace qualifies as notable? Jim Sweeney ( talk) 20:59, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
|
The results of September's coordinator elections, plus ongoing project discussions and proposals |
|
|
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot ( talk) 21:03, 21 October 2010 (UTC) |
Thank you for your assessment, I am currently working on the issues. Bobby122 Contact Me (C) 16:42, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for your comments and attention to the Mississippi class battleship article and the A-class evaluation. I was substantialy gone from WP for a couple weeks, absorbed in producing a regatta for our yacht club, and just got back to the Mississippi project yesterday. I noticed that you closed the discussion based on elapsed time, but my sense is that my absense was not really a factor, as other contributions were waning. This evaluation process is a first for me and I want to learn from it. My observation is that the level of expectations and the opinions on what is the "right" solution vary significantly. My main objective here is to determine the proper format for US battleship articles and apply that format to the other U.S. pre-dreadnought articles. The first in the series, Indiana class battleship has FA status, but most of the others are a mess. Is my scope appropriate? Is the level of detail adequate? I've tried to make this an informative stand-alone article without digressing too far afield -- is this the right approach? Should the other articles include this level of discussion? Cheers! -- Kevin Murray ( talk) 17:33, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
Yes, I fixed Hammond. Thanks YellowMonkey ( new photo poll) 01:17, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
Please assist..... Having completed the peer review for 6 Armd Div (S Afr) I followed the instructions to archive the peer review.
Apologies!!!! Farawayman ( talk) 10:05, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
On 25 October 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 30th Battalion (Australia), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
— Rlevse • Talk • 12:03, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
Hey, I think I've fixed all your concerns on List of battlecruisers of Japan. Cam ( Chat)( Prof) 15:26, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar | |
On behalf of the coordinators, I'm pleased to award you this barnstar for reviewing articles in our October 2010 Contest-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 18:35, 1 November 2010 (UTC) |
Would you mind reviewing Arkansas Militia in the Civil War for me? It is the first step in breaking up the larger Arkansas Army National Guard Article. I am using the template as an outline to break up the article. Let me know what you think, thanks. Aleutian06 22:09, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I would like to create a link from the mention of Nekhl in the Magdhaba article to the subsection 'Raid on Nekhl' in the Sinai and Palestine Campaign article. Is this possible? -- Rskp ( talk) 07:09, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
G'day Rupert, back in May, I posted a message on the Military Biography task force talk page about unreferenced BLPs. I've also posted a similar message on the Milhist talk page twice since then. Back then there were 237 UBLPs assigned to the Military Bio task force. Today, six months on, there are 227. For a project that is the leader in so many areas, this is a pretty poor effort. There are also 177 on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Unreferenced BLPs list (which are probably mainly duplicated on both lists). Do you have any ideas on how the military project can be motivated into clearing out this list? As a comparison, working mainly by myself (little bit of help from some NRL guys) cleared out the 200 remaining WP:Australia UBLPs during October, so 227 should be a couple of weeks work for a big project like the Miltary one. We have another group at WP:URBLPR clearing them out month by month, rather than by topic, and doing between 30 and 50 per day. But how do you rally the troops into paying attention to the bottom end of the article tree, not just FAs, GAs and DYKs? The-Pope ( talk) 14:13, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
Greetings! I am sorry but I was unable to address earlier your recommendations in the peer review for Ivan Vladislav. I am grateful for the review and you can see the responses to your notes there. Best, -- Gligan ( talk) 13:15, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the help on my History of the Arkansas National Guard Series. I hope to have the split of the Arkansas Army National Guard Article done in the next week. Appreciate you comments! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Damon.cluck ( talk • contribs) 20:25, 6 November 2010
Hi
Thanks for reviewing both of my lists List of Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross with Oak Leaves recipients: 1940–1941 and List of Knight's Cross with Oak Leaves recipients: 1942 at FLC review. You just gave your approval for the first list. Can I safely assume that the generic elements pertaining to both lists are now okay from your point of view? Thanks MisterBee1966 ( talk) 16:32, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed User:Mad_Man_American has listed a bunch of articles to be assessed, is it ok if I assess these articles? I think I have a reasonable understanding of the Stub, Start and B-Class criteria for the Militory History project and for wikipedia articles in general. If there are any articles I have worked on, or I think may be more than stub/start I will leave for another more experienced reviewer. Is this ok?
Regards, Aeonx ( talk) 02:34, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
I thought its time to say thanks to all the editors who have assisted me in the articles I have been working on; so I took a look at toolserver.org and it shows that you have done 23,619 edits. I think you not only deserve, but are entitled to the below award in accordance with the award criteria. I know that one is supposed to award this medal to yourself, but we never do, so I am doing it on behalf of you! Thanks for all your help. Farawayman ( talk) 14:16, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
The Great Arkansas Barnstar | ||
I award you this Great Arkansas Barnstar for your guidance and oversight of the Arkansas Army National Guard Articles. Thanks! Aleutian06 16:23, 11 November 2010 (UTC) |
A month ago I edited Chauvel's article but the changes were undone - the editor saying he 'prefers original version'. Having corresponded with the editor without a satisfactory outcome, I'm wondering if there are any other options. -- Rskp ( talk) 02:52, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the review - I wasn't quite finished, as guests arrived for the afternoon. I'll finish up this evening. Your help and suggestions are greatly appreciated. Acroterion (talk) 20:33, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi. It's not just the Royal Dublin Fusiliers, check out some of the revisions at Frederick Roberts, 1st Earl Roberts pushing the line that Robert's ancestors were English invaders of Ireland. I'm not totally unsympathetic to that viewpoint but it's not relevant, IMO, to an article about someone 300 years later. Sadly I'm worried that we're straying into the very contentious world of viewpoints on Irish history which are polarised and lacking in common ground. NtheP ( talk) 23:02, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the welcome to the Military History Wikiproject. However, when I went to improve the citations in the massive backlog, I found that sections "Design" and onward on M79 grenade launcher appear to be a copyvio of this webpage. How do I know whether they copied Wikipedia or whether the Wikipedia article is a copyvio? If it is, what should I do about it? Reaper Eternal ( talk) 02:03, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi, Would you mind peer reviewing sword? I'll appreciate your input on ways to improve the article. thx-- 84.229.106.220 ( talk) 12:13, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
AustralianRupert,
You may know me from editing and contributing to the Z Special Unit Wikipedia article. In the last 30 minutes I've come across two Z Special Unit personnel Jock McLaren and Robert Kerr McLaren. I have noticed that they have similar information on their article such as their lives, military and civilian information, while some information is on one but not the other or slightly different to the other. I also noticed if you try and edit Jock McLaren's WP Biography banner on his talkpage, it's listed him as "Jacob Brown". They are also listed in the Z Special Unit Personnel category. Would appreciate feedback. Adamdaley ( talk) 06:06, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot ( talk) 21:56, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
I just saw this - congratulations! Nick-D ( talk) 11:28, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
Have you noticed the Sperrbrecher has reached Class B? Anything I could help you with that is on the english wikipedia, I would certainly look at it and give my thoughts and opinions on it. Just leave a message on my talkpage. Appreciate your help and hope we can create or improve more articles together! Adamdaley ( talk) 23:56, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I'm sorry to bother you but I put this photo up and the file seems ok but it looks like I've missed a step because its not linked to the Mughar Ridge article. Could you have a look at it, please? :) -- Rskp ( talk) 01:37, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
Once again I've come for a little advice concerning the Walter Wolfrum article. It states that he joined the Luftwaffe in 1943 til the end of the war. I would like to point out the years of service in the article and then compare them to the years served in his infobox (1939 - 1945). To me it is only a minor mistake by someone. Adamdaley ( talk) 06:13, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
No, please, feel free to make any spelling to grammatical changes you feel are necessary. If you have any content suggestions, let me know; I did think it may be a tad long at first. bahamut0013 words deeds 12:59, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Hey mate. Good additions on the engineer stuff for this article, great to see it now fully referenced because it is a very interesting and obscure unit. Unfortuantly I think there is a bit of a discrepncy which has now been unintentionally introduced though. Specifically you mention Lt Col John Overall in one paragraph (forming in early March 1943) and then the next para below the original text has Maj John Overall being appointed CO in Sept 1943. This is probably just the way its written and not that the refs are incorrect so hopefully you wont need to go back to SLQ... frustrating I know! Anotherclown ( talk) 20:43, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your valuable suggestions - your interest is very much appreciated. I put it up in rather a rush but will now spend some time, because it would be really great to get GA or A. Re the peer review - I think its just that people have not looked at this area of the war because there is quite a lot of mythmaking running through the sources. And the campaigns have been subjected to simplification - starting with the Battles Nomenclature Committee in 1922! I hope Wikipedia can be the vehicle which changes all that. -- Rskp ( talk) 00:46, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi mate, as you and I tend to be the main guys administering the contest, thought I'd get a reality check... Pls see this and let me know your thoughts, i.e. let it stand and count for this month's or treat them as unassessed and let them count to next month's, or something else again... Ed17 seems to have done the same thing on one of his entries... Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 03:19, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
Once again, I've come back for a little help. This time for the Erwin Ding-Schuler article. The category banner at the bottom containing Births, Deaths etc, the Births 1913 should be changed to Births 1912 for Erwin Ding-Schuler. How do I change it? Adamdaley ( talk) 07:20, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Thanks Rupert. Look forward to your evaluation. Try not to be too harsh! Cheers. Dapi89 ( talk) 13:06, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
I have left a comment on the Battle of Magdhaba talkpage to see if the British should be added to the Countries that were involved. You can read my comment on the article talkpage. Adamdaley ( talk) 15:08, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Tom and I have recently put together a guide on closing milhist ACRs. I've used a review of yours as an example. I probably should have asked for your permission first, but it's only just occurred to me - please accept my apologies for the omission, and if you have any objections just let me know and I'll rewrite the page content. Best, EyeSerene talk 17:07, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
I got a negative reply back from the History Division. They didn't have anything on hand, which in my mind clinches the notability argument, because they tend to have records on just about everyone. They suggested I try the
Military Personnel Records Center, but without a serial number, there's not much to go on. In any case, I don't really think that records like that make for verifiable sources, since they are so hard to find copies of.
Since I don't think there's anything more I can do, let me know if you want to pursue the records.
bahamut0013
words
deeds
23:26, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot ( talk) 21:59, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Is it possible to stop this process as its questioning place names as if they are people! And I think the meaning is being changed - e.g. 'On 12 November, while General Allenby prepared for battle by ordering the 52nd (Lowland) Infantry Division to attack the Ottoman Armys right flank, the Australian Mounted Division was reinforced by two additional brigades. After advancing towards Tel es Safi they encountered a determined and substantial Ottoman counterattack.' who is advancing and encountering the Ottoman counterattack - it could be the 52nd and/or the AMD!! when it was just the AMD with 2 additional brigades. :)-- Rskp ( talk) 06:32, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Generally a lead doesn't need to be cited so long as everything is cited in the body. There are exceptions, though, for instance where a direct quote is used in the lead, a citation should be provided, also where something might be considered controversial then it is best to cite. Ultimately though, whether to cite a lead or not is determined on a case by case basis and there is no strict rule in this regard. The relevant policy link is WP:LEADCITE. Regards, AustralianRupert ( talk) 02:43, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
I would like to see if you are able to rate its class for the following article Paul Colin (journalist). I will also be sending the same message to the following users User:1ForTheMoney and User:The Bushranger. If you can help with this I'll appreciate it. Adamdaley ( talk) 23:39, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Hello AustralianRupert - I'd like to start updating the "Air Forces Memorial" page and as far as images are concerned have previously placed these directly on the page concerned, but I'm advised this may contravene the wiki self-promotion policy. However if I wait for approval (especially as this is a stub and others may not happen along frequently) the update may take a long-time. I've placed some example images on the discussion page. Is this a case where I could update the page and then have it examined for potential contravention of policy? Better to get approval for such action first rather than after the fact! Thanks for ant help WyrdLight ( talk) 19:18, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
PS: Until recently and for some time the wiki page also carried a link to my single topic web page about the memorial - I'm not so concerned about the possibility of adding this back in although that would I believe add to the wiki page (definitely for others to determine) but you'll see its generally the source of the material I'm proposing to place on wiki & has been of direct interest to families abroad with commemorated relatives.
Hey there - Regarding the page on the IJA 18th Infantry Regiment, if you really think an infobox is sufficient for "supporting materials" at this stage, would you do the honors and change the assessment in the Military History box on the Talk page? I feel like if I do it, without having done something to the article, then it might look inappropriate or self-serving or something related to impropriety. Thanks! -- Boneyard90 ( talk) 22:34, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I am very confused about editing the Battle of Jerusalem (1917) page. It looks like I did a complete re-edit of the page at 1100 wiki time but I was not aware of it! Can you help sort this out?-- Rskp ( talk) 23:30, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
I have made a Peer Request for Josef Fitzthum since information has been fixed up, added and a picture of "Josef Fitzthum" was included recently. Was wondering if you could re-assess and give feedback on the article. Adamdaley ( talk) 01:25, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Hey mate. I was just thinking that the main thing this article appears to be missing still is a final concluding paragraph in the aftermath section that details casualties of the beligerants etc. As far as I can tell (from a skim read only) this info is really only included in the infobox. Maybe you might consider including a paragraph on this? I could do it myself but given that you're the main contributor to the article you probably have a bit more knowledge about it (and where to find the info) etc (plus I'm really lazy at the moment). Anyway just a thought. Anotherclown ( talk) 08:48, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Hello there! There is an article called " Argentina-Brazil War", it's about an international conflict that occurred between 1825 and 1828 between the Empire of Brazil and the United Provinces of South America over the possession of the Brazilian province of Cisplatina (which had a mixed Portuguese and Spanish population). The problem is that is was never called "Argentina-Brazil War". An editor probably created this name for it.
Thus, I proposed the name to be changed for "Cisplatine War" because it is "the name which is most commonly used to refer to the subject of the article in English-language reliable sources" ( WP:COMMONNAME). A few examples: [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], [32], [33], [34], [35], [36], [37], [38], [39], [40], etc...
Your comment in Talk:Argentina–Brazil War#Requested move would be very welcome! Kind regards, -- Lecen ( talk) 21:47, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
I'd like to hear your input on the matter, If you can add your view here it will be most appreciated, Regards--- Macarenses ( talk) 14:34, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
Recently, I have been told to stop doing the way I edit. I generally keep to myself and try not to cause any trouble on en.wikipedia.org at the same time try and become online friends with some of the contributors such as yourself. Most of the edits I did on Christmas night have been reverted back, except for a couple of them. Even one that I was trying to contribute to Vilyam Genrikhovich Fisher my whole comment and pointing out differences in the article in bullet type, was reverted to the previous. Would like you to look at the comments that have been made on my talkpage: User_talk:Adamdaley#Changing_Wikiproject_to_WP
Honestly, this has really got me down because I have learnt so much knowledge from Wikipedia and have alot of respect for the information on it even a small percentage of it maybe wrong. The en.Wikipedia.org, is the only website I really enjoy contributing too and reading about things I never knew. This situation has made me consider not to contribute to Wikipedia anymore. Even though it's the main website I go to to occupy my time and have a special interest in helping improve the information. As for my personal life, it's not perfect and nobody is considering I do have a mental illness for a number of years. Advice or feedback would be appreciated. Adamdaley ( talk) 16:29, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Douglas Bader is being reviewed for GA listing. It has been put on hold for an initial 14 days to allow issues such as prose, inline citing and detailed coverage to be addressed. SilkTork * YES! 16:51, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Dear sir, i've just read your suggestions in the "Discussion" section and i will bear them in mind. Thanks for the encouragement & have a merry christmas. Pietje96 ( talk) 11:32, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
The source you added to this unreferenced BLP in November was a Wikipedia mirror. Please be more careful when adding sources to BLPs. Fences& Windows 00:22, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
I noticed you have done the "B-Class Status" for the WikiProject Military History on the František Fajtl article. Thanks for doing that. I tend not to do that because I don't really know what to look for so I let other people who know more what to look for to do it. I appreciate you doing that it's your contribution to the article. Adamdaley ( talk) 19:55, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
On 30 December 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Sattelberg, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Tom Derrick received the Victoria Cross for his actions during the Battle of Sattelberg in November 1943? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Materialscientist ( talk) 08:05, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
On the Talk:Bar Confederation someone has suggested a merger between 2 articles. I've replied to the original comment and agreed they be merged under a different name. You can see my comment on the above talkpage. Adamdaley ( talk) 00:30, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi mate, Happy New Year... Tks for finishing off the verification -- do you want to take a break and I'll do the total/newsletter/awards or are you on a roll...? Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 12:58, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
Thanks for Invisible Barnster Award! It's appreciated. Adamdaley ( talk) 03:28, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
The WikiChevrons | ||
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews for the period Oct–Dec 2010, I am delighted to award you the WikiChevrons. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 23:00, 4 January 2011 (UTC) |
Greetings! I am grateful that you have awarded me a barnstar but I think that it is a mistake because I don't deserve it since unfortunately I haven't done a single review ever in Wikipedia. I suppose you wanted to award someone else and I am notifying you now so that you can encourage the person who deserves it :) Regards, -- Gligan ( talk) 10:57, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Thank you AustralianRupert for the award that you gave me. Regards, Kebeta ( talk) 12:18, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
The Bronze Wiki | ||
I am delighted to inform you that your extensive contributions to the Military history WikiProject have earned you 3rd place in the 2010 "Military historian of the Year" contest. We're grateful for your help, and look forward to seeing more of your excellent work in the coming year. Kirill [talk] [prof] 22:26, 6 January 2011 (UTC) |
Ed! and I are talking about whether to write "United States (US)" or just United States or US. In Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Battle of the Bowling Alley, you wrote:
Ed! says that he's sometimes been asked to write "United States (US)" at GAN. I'd rather follow Chicago 10.33, AP Stylebook (at "U.S."), and everything else I've seen over the years ... no one who reads AmEng needs to be told what "US" means. ROK and UN, sure. UK, I'd vote not to write it out, but I can see an argument (considering how geographically challenged Americans are). - Dank ( push to talk) 21:43, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
You are probably aware there is a Biography infobox for people who served in the Military. Recently, I've been putting the full parametres of this infobox. My point is when I put the "Birth date" as (example):
Mickey Mouse | |
---|---|
Birth name | Mickey Mouse |
Nickname(s) | Mickey |
Allegiance | Australia |
Service/ | Royal Australian Air Force |
Years of service | 1939 — 1945 |
Rank | Captain |
Battles/wars | World War II |
It automatically calculates the age of the person. Now, when I've done this (following the template and infobox requirements), other contributors have changed it for example not YYYY|MM|DD (as above) but as "15 October 1913" (another example) and without the parameters which is included in the template. I feel it should be the template and not human input of date. I have queried this in #wikipedia-en-help and they suggested to leave a note in the infobox that the default "Birth date" and "Death date" are the default input of dates. Adamdaley ( talk) 05:02, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Rupert. Thank you for starting a look at the Battle of Towton. I have addressed your concerns and suggestions raised at the A-Class review, and look forward to your continuing input at your pleasure. Jappalang ( talk) 00:56, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
This article has had a pretty thorough reedit resulting from the very valuable copy edit. What do you think should happen next? :) -- Rskp ( talk) 06:51, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
"This review has now run for 28 days, so it is due for closing. An uninvolved co-ordinator will do this soon (it might take a couple of days). Given that it doesn't seem to have gained the three explicit votes of support it will most likely be closed as unsuccessful. I hope this won't discourage you, though. There are probably only a few more issues to iron out before it could be successful at WP:GAN or here. I'd recommend working through the last of Anotherclown's comments after the review is closed and then requesting a peer review. After that you could take it to GAN and once successful there, an ACR shouldn't be too hard to complete successfully. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 08:31, 7 February 2011 (UTC)"
thanks for all your time and effort you have put into this. It seems one reviewer opposed it on the basis of some last minute suggestions, one of which - the citations in the lead, is debatable as I don't think its mandatory either way. It was a surprise to have two major changes suggested after working through all the style corrections. But even if all the suggestions were followed to the letter, there would still be only one vote. Relying on the opinion of one reviewer who is not an expert in the field, places a huge burden on that person. Indeed I think too much was expected from Anotherclown and its equally unfair to the article to head its discussion page with "Not approved". The implication is that it was reviewed by three editors who checked the article thoroughly and found it wanting but this did not happen. The same can be said for "No consensus to promote" this suggests there was more than one vote. Or was there? -- Rskp ( talk) 00:24, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Australian Rupert
I've came across Suitcase nuke with a merger on its Discussion page. I would like to see it has been done properly (the banner maybe even removed if it's been merged) and see if you could assess the WikiProject Military History on the Suitcase nuke against "B-Class". It would be appreciated. Anything in return, I'll have a look at. Adamdaley ( talk) 09:19, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
We will keep you and the other people in Australia in our prayers. Aleutian06 23:18, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
I see you've been trying to improve the 2/17 RNSWR page, I can find out the info for you on CO's of the unit if you wish the next time I go in. Any other info you want about 2/17 RNSWR? Let me know, Cheers. Veritas Blue ( talk) 11:15, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi mate. I had a play around and came up with this, let me know what you think. Anotherclown ( talk) 09:25, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
It looks good, but I can't seem to get it to sit right in the Sattelberg article. For some reason the text sits right up against it, instead of having a neat border of blankspace around it. AustralianRupert ( talk) 09:36, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
|
Hi! I noticed your activity as a Good Article reviewer, and wanted to let you know about the Wikipedia Ambassador Program, and specifically the role of Online Ambassador. We're looking for friendly Wikipedians who are good at reviewing articles and giving feedback to serve as mentors for students who are assigned to write for Wikipedia in their classes.
If you're interested, I encourage you to take a look at the Online Ambassador guidelines; the "mentorship process" describes roughly what will be expected of mentors in the coming term. If that's something you want to do, please apply!
You can find instructions for applying at WP:ONLINE. The main things we're looking for in Online Ambassadors are friendliness, regular activity (since mentorship is a commitment that spans several months), and the ability to give detailed, substantive feedback on articles (both short new articles, and longer, more mature ones).
I hope to hear from you soon.-- Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation ( talk) 20:20, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
I'm here to ask where would I be able to find article sizes based on their size so I can assess them right? For example I was told that from another WikiProject anything over 3000 bytes (I guess) in size would be assessed as "Start" on their WikiProject. How about on WikiProject Military History that covers all of the sub-categories of Military History such as regions, periods, wars etc? Adamdaley ( talk) 00:49, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
FYI: Your opinion is solicited at Talk:List of Australian Victoria Cross recipients#OzVC2. Cheers, Pdfpdf ( talk) 04:44, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
I hope things are getting back to normal for you. When you have an opportunity, like when you’re not rescuing yourself from flooding! Would you take another look at Arkansas Militia in the Civil War. I have added many secondary sources and addressed most of the “to do” list that you left me the last time you looked. I have asked someone from the Copy Editor Guild to take a look at it, but they are on a big drive to clear up their backlog right now. Thanks.Aleutian06 23:25, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
Article: Balquhain Castle
I am trying figure out which period or timeline that this castle was built, the war it was involved in. It's not my area. I thought I'd give it an assessment it, but no idea on the years it was in use. If you take a look at it, and know when or roughly when it was then it would be appreciated. It is a very very short article 5 lines at the most with a picture. Because I can change it once I get feedback. Adamdaley ( talk) 06:40, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
Wow! She can't put a foot wrong, can she! (Even when she does, cf Kovco, it looks like water off a duck's back!)
I can't see them making a female Chief of Army, or CJOPS. Nor VCDF, for that matter. CCDG however - that's not impossible. I predict they'll make her CCDG some time in the next 5 years.
What do you think? Cheers, Pdfpdf ( talk) 11:01, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi! Since you started an A-class review of the Croatian War of Independence, I would like you to take a look at Talk:Croatian War of Independence#Infobox as that section contains some concerns I have about the infobox there. Since the article is edited by a number of editors I posted those there to see if any consensus could be found on those, but I would also like to hear opinions of other editors. All suggestions are welcome. Thanks!-- Tomobe03 ( talk) 19:15, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Can you let it rest for another day or two? The ed17 has hidden comments in the article body, and I would like the chance to round all those up and add them in my section so I can work on addressing them. Also, I would like to leave a message for the other editors inviting them to make one last pass through and add anything they feel is still outstanding before this goes to archive. TomStar81 ( Talk) 23:41, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
Article: Blanche Charlet
I've come across an unassessed article who was an SOE Agent during World War II. I've found a source that has her born five years earlier (in 1893 not 1898) than stated on the article located here: Special Forces. While trying to confirm her birth, I am also trying to confirm her death (if she has already died, possibly in 1985 as it states in the article) or any other year. Adamdaley ( talk) 04:02, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi mate, tell me when you get tired and I'll do the rest of the verification and/or totalling/awards/newsletter.... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 01:41, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Regarding the assessment - I was originally going to ask for B-class, but then realised there were other sources out there I needed to pick through first (Clay Blair's second volume, for instance), so I left it as Start, but forgot to change the template. I've done that now, hopefully it's OK. :) - The Bushranger One ping only 02:07, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
Article: Edwin A. Loberg
I've completed an infobox for Edwin A. Loberg and assessed the WikiProjects. In his infobox, I have put him in as "United States Air Force", while when I look at the Wiki-page of ranks it states Colonel in the Army. Are you able to fix this? It's probably a little mistake, but I'm confused about it. It would be appreciated if you looked at it. Adamdaley ( talk) 02:47, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Your welcome. I had to do something, the disaster area that currently is El Paso has kept me home most of the week, so I'm finding the internet and the wiki a nice escape for my frustrations over our response to the blizzard. TomStar81 ( Talk) 02:51, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
Having laughed myself silly for a couple of minutes over this, I soon discovered that WP is a very rich source on this topic! Pdfpdf ( talk) 13:37, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
The Wars of the Roses Barnstar | ||
Thank you for your comments and suggestions on the Battle of Towton. They have really helped to improve the article and be recognised as a Featured Article. Jappalang ( talk) 22:01, 9 February 2011 (UTC) |
Thank you very much for taking the time to fix my appalling grammar! Also your copy-editing on the King George V article helped get it to GA class. So once again thank you so much! Thurgate ( talk) 17:31, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
Article: 145th Armored Regiment (United States)
I would like to bring to your attention that viewing the above article with Internet Explorer 8 it leaves a BIG gap between the first paragraph at the top of the article to the next paragraph near the bottom of the Infoboxes. I have viewed it with Mozilla Firefox 3.6.13 and it looks the way an article should appear on wikipedia with minor tweaks. I will also let User:Ian Rose know. Adamdaley ( talk) 03:53, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Would you mind reviewing Pulaski Light Artillerywhen you have an oppertunity?Aleutian06 22:26, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
Article: 542nd Parachute Infantry Regiment (United States)
I feel that this article needs a picture and a Military Unit Infobox. I am able to do the Infobox without the picture and the number of people who were in the unit during World War II. It could possibly improve the article greatly but I am concerned about the "orphan" tag (from 2009) at the time. To me there is enough links in the article to remove it. I'll also send this message to User:Ian Rose. Any feedback would be appreciated. Adamdaley ( talk) 00:07, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
Article: 192nd Tank Battalion
I would like to suggest that an Military Unit Infobox be included in this article, have the US tank as main picture in the Infobox. I am able to do the infobox, but I feel I should leave the template tag at the topic of the article until someone can add more information to the beginning of the article then it can be removed. User:Ian Rose will also get this message. Feedback be appreciated. Adamdaley ( talk) 01:46, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I would like to note my appreciation for being one of the people that helped to raise the quality of the Manhattan Project article.
This user helped promote Manhattan Project to good article status. |
-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 19:47, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi Australian Rupert, The following message appears at the very bottom of the User:RoslynSKP/First Transjordan attack on Amman (1918) after the Bibliography - In Red "Cite error: There are ref tages on this page, but the references will not show without a Reflist|group=Notes template or a references group="Notes" tag; see the help page." This is weird because there are reflists and notes and they seem to be all showing ok as well as the citations. Can you let me know what is wrong, please? Regards, -- Rskp ( talk) 03:31, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Article: Maginot Line
Over the past few days there has been a discussion between an administrator (on en.wikipedia.org) as well as Tim PF and myself concerning the English version to use on this particular article. So far we have agreed to go with "British English" and have done distance conversions where appropriate. I suggested the following people may help the three of us that has started the conversation to improve the article or have suggestions. The following users have been named by myself who could be of some assistance:
Hope you can join the conversation on the Maginot Line Discussion page. Feedback would be appreciated. Adamdaley ( talk) 01:29, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot ( talk) 15:13, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
NOTICE: I wrote these messages on Ian Rose's talkpage and he hasn't replied to them. That is maybe why they sound a little confusing.
Australian Rupert,
Article: Ernst Voß
While reading Ernst Voß's article. I noticed at the very bottom of his Infobox that his later work was a Police Officer. But have a look when he was killed? Would that have been in between World War I and World War II? It certainly could not have been after World War II. Maybe an error by the original author? Maybe need's a reference to when he was a Police Officer? Adamdaley ( talk) 02:28, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Australian Rupert,
Article: Ernst-August Fricke
Once again I am back. I am still uncertain if AustralianRupert is back to normal with Wikipedia. As the article above Ernst Voß I have added "citation needed" to him (meaning Ernst Voß) for being a Police Officer (inbetween World War I and World War II). Another article is Ernst-August Fricke am I correct to put a citation needed for reference for being an officer because it doesn't say in the article that "after World War II he went onto being a Police Officer" (I added a line in Ernst Voß that he was a Police Officer and you can look at his talkpage. I feel there needs to be a citation needed or a source or something to confirm when or roughly when he was a Police Officer. Adamdaley ( talk) 11:08, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
I've just responded to all your comments in this review. Thanks, Nick-D ( talk) 09:39, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Dear AustralianRupert,
I have some photos (about 40) taken by my uncle Les, who was a member of this regiment. If you can use some of them for the article on the 9th Division Cavalry Regiment. I don't have the skills to add them and you are obviously a wikipedia expert. Please email me mailto:ian@cossor.com.au
I am the publisher/editor of the book http://itunes.apple.com/au/book/albury-to-el-alamein-and-back/id420214936#. The original hard cover was printed 2004 and has been out of print since 2006. I have just been successful in publishing it as an iBook. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grumpyoldman1959 ( talk • contribs) 22:37, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
When you have an oppertunity, could you review Arkansas Militia and the War with Mexico? Thanks! Aleutian06 ( talk) 03:31, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
FYI, have a look at User talk:Pdfpdf#"Hidden" not working? Cheers, Pdfpdf ( talk) 12:31, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
Article: Edward Innes Pocock
I am trying to work out what war/battle Edward Innes Pocock was in. To properly fill out the WikiProject Military History template on his talk page. Would like to say I have some privileges using "Twinkle" for Wikipedia usernames. Adamdaley ( talk) 03:20, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi mate, tks for tidying up there -- I saw in WPMILHIST Announcements that there was an apparently active PR as well as a new ACR and started the archive process, before noticing the Article History had already been updated in the article talk page -- but I forgot to remove it from Reviews when I removed it from Announcements... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 07:58, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
John, King of England is currently at FAC but not tagged by Milhist. Heads of state during wartime qualify, right? To tag something, should I just add the {{ MILHIST}} tag and wait for someone or some bot to add parameters? And ... I've got a general sense of which articles to tag, but is there something I can read that will help me with close calls? - Dank ( push to talk) 00:15, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
You know I'm planning on expanding the 6th Division (Australia) article some time. I've already got a biography on someone who was in the 6th Division, and someone in the 6th Division Signal's wrote a book during the world when he had time. Today, I managed to pick up two copies (1949 and 1954) of "SIGNALS - Story of the Australian Corps of Signals". It has some 6th Division in it as well 6th Division Signals in it among other Divisions. Thought I'd let you know. Adamdaley ( talk) 08:08, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Article: Royal Australian Corps of Signals
I was wondering if there should be a section on signals being used in World war II. Since I have two Signals books 1949 and 1954. Also, would it be appropriate if these books were put under "Bibliography" section? It's mostly about the Australian Signals during World War II. Adamdaley ( talk) 22:49, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot ( talk) 21:12, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for reviewing the article, the Dover patrol commander was Sir Reginald Bacon who actually wrote one of the sources i used. Ive added him into the text of the article. XavierGreen ( talk) 20:14, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your review of USCGC Point Gammon (WPB-82328). A fresh set of eyes on an article always helps catch those things that could use a bit of polish. Point Gammon had about the least remarkable tour of any of the Point class cutters that served in Vietnam and I'm somewhat disappointed to find so little on her service history. After I finish two more of her sister cutters, I will have completed all of the 26 that served in Coast Guard Squadron One. That is the title of the article that is in my user space sandbox that is about half written. I would be flattered if you would peek at it in your limited spare time and let me know if I'm headed the right direction. User:Cuprum17/ Coast Guard Squadron One Cheers! Cuprum17 ( talk) 14:05, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks very much for your review. I believe I've addressed all but one (which I've queried) of your concerns. I'd appreciate it if you could take a second look when you get a minute. Cheers, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:50, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the review, I replied there. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 17:09, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi, just wondering whether with your expertise whether you could make the New Guinea campaign template box autocollapse in the Battle of Wau article, as it is always expanded and leaves whitespace when viewing on a 19in screen. Regards Newm30 ( talk) 02:34, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi mate, I'll be away for the w/e starting this afternoon so given Storm's responsbile for about half the entries (!), I've asked him if he'd mind taking my place this month re. initialising for April and verifying/tallying/awarding for March... Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 23:25, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
The WikiChevrons | ||
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer, A-Class and Featured Article reviews for the period January–March 2011, I am delighted to award you the WikiChevrons. - Dank ( push to talk) 11:07, 3 April 2011 (UTC) |
Rupert, thanks for taking care of all the recent contest awards and everything, but I really don't think that I deserve one each of all the awards for the backlog contest. Usually it's just the highest one and the placement award.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 18:55, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
Hey Aussie, I think these are the ones you get; if I missed any, please let me know. Thanks for all your work during the drive! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:41, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
Military history service award | ||
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your contributions to the WikiProject's March 2011 backlog reduction drive, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject award. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:41, 5 April 2011 (UTC) |
Military history service award | ||
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your contributions to the WikiProject's March 2011 backlog reduction drive, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject award. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:41, 5 April 2011 (UTC) |
Military history service award | ||
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your contributions to the WikiProject's March 2011 backlog reduction drive, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject award. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:41, 5 April 2011 (UTC) |
March 2011 backlog reduction drive | ||
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your placing third in the March 2011 backlog reduction drive, I award you this Bronze Wiki. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:41, 5 April 2011 (UTC) |
Not to pressure you or anything but you are aware that a vote, whether support or oppose, with no comment as you did, here, is not considered a vote at all so I am just suggesting that you add a comment and I would like to encourage you to vote in Rehman's election. Thanks and cheers. maucho eagle 02:10, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the invaluable suggestions. I will try to improve the article accordingly. As you mentioned in one of your suggestion, I would like to create a map for this battle and Lahore front but I am unaware of how to create maps on or for wikipedia. Are they created using some wikipedia tool of some seperate software?? Please provide some guidance or links to tools, if any. Thanks.-- UplinkAnsh ( talk) 06:14, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Hey, could you review the article once again. I think I have found most of the reliable sources that could be found and I think the article gives the best view it could ever give with the amount of reliable sources available.Thanks.-- UplinkAnsh ( talk) 13:51, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
I've ordered and received three images from the Australian War Memorial. All three images are in the public domain and the copyright has expired. I am allowed to publish these images on Wikimedia within 30 days. What is the best "lisence" to use for these images on Wikimedia? The help channel was unhelpful, so I've come to you for advice. Adamdaley ( talk) 07:29, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
AustralianRupert - I have uploaded the three images to Wikimedia. They are named:
Adamdaley ( talk) 08:28, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
Hey Rupert! I've gone over Russian battleship Sevastopol (1895) and fixed the A-Class review, and I'd like you to just quickly look over it. If you think it's fine, I'll put it up again. Buggie111 ( talk) 18:19, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Do you think that 16th Brigade (Australia) and 16th Aviation Brigade (Australia) should be merged? (ie, do you know if the new 16th Brigade inherit the lineage of the first one?). Cheers, Nick-D ( talk) 08:59, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
We'd like to put a column in the Bugle encouraging people review at FAC, or at least to assist the frequent FAC reviewers. Is there anything that new reviewers could do at FAC that you would find particularly helpful? (Watching) - Dank ( push to talk) 19:01, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
I read on the Australian SAS article Vietnam war. It says," Australian and New Zealand SAS killed at least 492 and as many as 598 and losing only two men killed in action and three fatalities from friendly fire." Can anybody tell where does this battle take place? Was if three friendly fire from Australian SAS or new Zealand? 67.164.105.159 ( talk) 07:36, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Howdy! I've been looking for informative sources. So far, this is the only one I've found.
Cadet Instructor's Handbook 2006 section 1.26 on the 11th of the 104 pages.
(Actually, I found pretty-much all of Chapter 1 interesting. And Chapters 2&3 ... (I know, I need to get a life.))
I must admit, I'm puzzled why Australia made the moves in 1921 & 1929, when the British made them in 1922 & 1928. As yet, I haven't found anything to say when the Australian rank insignia changed - the British insignia changed in 1928. Your thoughts & comments? Cheers, Pdfpdf ( talk) 15:01, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the ACM, Rupert, but I've declined the nom. Could I please be nominated when I actually have a third A-class article? Buggie111 ( talk) 00:03, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Would like to inform you I'll be going on holidays from May 2nd till July 12th, 2011 (Roughly 70 days). Give me a couple days to get over flying back from the Philippines and I'll continue with Wikipedia. I'll have free Internet access while I am over there, so I can check for any messages on here. Just leave them on my talkpage, if you would like me to look at an article or leave a message or something. I also plan on taking images for Wikipedia on articles on here so expect alot of images from me when I get back! Regards, Adamdaley ( talk) 12:50, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot ( talk) 01:14, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
I would like to thank you for having reviewed and fixed many mistakes at Armed Forces of the Empire of Brazil. I really appreciate your effort, even more since you did it without no one having asked you to. Good to see this kind of editors around. Regards, -- Lecen ( talk) 13:10, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi, your opinion would be greatly appreciated at the same heading at User_talk:Anotherclown. Regards Newm30 ( talk) 00:21, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
There was this guy name wee curry monster and he kept putting that one that killled three paratroopers on Operation Crimp on friendly fire article. Someone asked wee to change it back to January 3rd yet he simply refused to due stockings. 170.91.194.9 ( talk) 16:38, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
AustralianRupert, I wonder if you have seen the article Woomera, South Australia? The tone of the article concerns me as it contains words and phrases suggestive of editoralising, puffery or even propaganda. Examples are legendary, passionate forward thinking, nationalistic visionaries, very professional interpretive gallery, famous national historic site. The author appears to promote the size advantage of the range several times, and there is other duplication. If you can spare a couple of your valuable minutes, I would appreciate your opinion. As I am a new editor (March 2011) I am reluctant to tag the article, however if you thought it was warranted, I would be prepared to do some work on it. Regards Summerdrought ( talk) 02:32, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot ( talk) 21:53, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Wanted to drop by to see how things were going. Of course I am in the Philippines now and can stay till June 30 with my Visa, have to pay more money for the 12 days in July. I do check wikipedia when the internet isn't slow and do have a list of images to take, just need a few days to get around and take them! Adamdaley ( talk) 11:55, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! Much appreciated MisterBee1966 ( talk) 14:16, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
HJ Mitchell |
Penny for your thoughts? has extended an
olive branch of peace.
I do hope you didn't take my comments about the Harrier ACR as being critical of you (or even of your close). I was only using it for illustrative purposes and no criticism was intended. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:11, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi mate, just FYI, I was going to move Buggie's to June rather than score them zero, on the assumption he'll re-nom them... Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 11:55, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
|
To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot ( talk) 22:05, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi thanks for you copy edits on the parachute brigade/battalion articles, they are very much appreciated. Jim Sweeney ( talk) 08:11, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. (Good work.)
Unless someone requests me to do otherwise, I won't add anything until after the IP has stated something. Cheers,
Pdfpdf (
talk)
09:53, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
Woud you check Arkansas Territorial Militia against the B-Class Criteria for me when you have time? Thanks. Aleutian06 ( talk) 21:36, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
Thank you. Dapi89 ( talk) 19:55, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
When some editors group duplicate citations they replace readable references with autogenerated arbitrary numerals which bear no relationship to the work cited. This is not an issue for anyone reading articles but virtually amounts to vandalism in edit mode as there is no way of knowing the name of the source. These autogenerated citations seem to have been added to the Sinai and Palestine Campaign page some time this year. Is it possible to identify when it was done and undo it? -- Rskp ( talk) 05:17, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
When I realised what had been done to the Jerusalem article, twice I requested an explanation or that the edits to the citations be undone. Not only was there no reply but my messages on delta's talk page were deleted. Delta does not appear to have any other interest in the articles except to insert these citations.
As I found in the Jerusalem article, replacing these citations by hand is very time consuming and mistakes could easily creep in. Is there any way delta's autogenerated citations in the Sinai and Palestine campaign article can be undone automatically? Or is it possible for the Military History WikiProject to protect articles from this kind of attack? -- Rskp ( talk) 02:13, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
autogenerated1
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).