![]() | 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. |
Hi Rupert, just following up, really appreciated your comment on the article; did you feel you could do the GAN too? No pressure, just wanted to check before I ask anywhere else... :-) Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 03:23, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Content Review Medal of Merit | |
For completing 11 reviews during April–June 2015, on behalf of the Wikiproject Military History coordinators, I hereby award you the Content Review Medal of Merit. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 09:58, 8 July 2015 (UTC) |
Hey, Sturmvogel 66 suggested that Peacemaker67 and yourself may be to aid in a terminology discussion taking place here. Would you care to take a glance, and offer an opinion? EnigmaMcmxc ( talk) 21:11, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
22:34, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Congrats mate, another successful co-nom... :-) Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 09:54, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
32nd Battalion (Australia) you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
23:40, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
2/1st Machine Gun Battalion (Australia) you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
23:41, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for your review of Sieges of Taunton at A-class review. I've now listed the article at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sieges of Taunton/archive1 as a Featured article candidate. If you had any more critical comments, then your further input would be more than welcome. Harrias talk 14:44, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello,
When you have a chance, would you be so kind to look at Charles Schroeter (Medal of Honor)?
My primary goal is to get the article to B class. No doubt I have missed some grammar and such.
Thank you! Jrcrin001 ( talk) 19:28, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello AustralianRupert,
Dropping by to tell you that I've nominated Battle of Malvern Hill for FAC here: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Battle of Malvern Hill/archive2. You commented at the MILHIST review, I thought you might be interested in dropping a line there. Cheers, -- ceradon ( talk • edits) 20:44, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
The article
32nd Battalion (Australia) you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:32nd Battalion (Australia) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
11:41, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
The article
2/1st Machine Gun Battalion (Australia) you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:2/1st Machine Gun Battalion (Australia) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
12:01, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Anotherclown (
talk)
05:21, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Gordon Bennett (general) you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
07:00, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
The article
Gordon Bennett (general) you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Gordon Bennett (general) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
00:41, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi Rupert, this article that you recently reviewed at ACR is now at FAC. I'm heading away at the end of the month so if (and only if!) you did want to comment there, it'd be great if I could action any concerns in the coming week or so. Thanks/cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 01:22, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
11:45, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
My apologies. I overwrote some of your work while I was trying to fix Wead's flimography,-- Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 02:16, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
And thanks for your ongoing help. My eyeballs are getting tired. I couldn't even find a decent obit for Wead, let alone a bio. The one bio -- which I can't find on line -- by Beigan(?) is referred to elsewhere as being inaccurate. I'm beginning to think this page belongs to the drama and literature squad.-- Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 00:28, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi AustralianRupert, just wanted to say many thanks for your help with tidying up the article and huge appreciation for voting with those who wanted to keep it when the "fashionable furniture and sea shells expert" nominated it for deletion. I'm currently doing a series on fighter aces who had great achievements but received little publicity - many due to their less publicized theatres of war (or less glamourous aircraft) and also doing articles on the participants in the Great Escape in 1944. I only got active on Wikipedia this month and it's a steep learning curve. Thanks mate ! Researcher1944 ( talk) 08:36, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Sorry - second message, I just added a new article and I hope I got the TALK tag right - I copied it. Espelid was a Norwegian flying with the RAF so I wasn't quite sure. Thanks R44 Researcher1944 ( talk) 09:47, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks AustralianRupert, I've just added some more to Espelid and will try to track down the 2 other sources requested. I don't know how to source the Spitfire Op Training Unit one though, he couldn't have joined a Spit squadron without coming through a Spit OTU. I'll have a dig around the Spitfire website and see what I can find. Many thanks R44 Researcher1944 ( talk) 12:31, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
I have pinched this patch from Commons and rotated to use as the 5th Battalion. Just FYI Unit Colour Patch edits. Enderwigginau ( talk) 12:26, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
I see some parallel here with the issue of units that has concerned me wrt Buna-Gona. In the Sinai section 9.3 mi (15 km). Without physically checking the reference, this comes from a contemporary Australian reference, quoting distances in metric that would have been sourced in imperial. I would be surprised if the original source for this reference did not say: "Dueidar, about 9 mi away" - which has been converted, with an appropriate precision, to 15 km. It is hardly appropriate to say about 9.3 mi. This is very specific.
Significant figures is a detailed discussion but here is a simple explanation (I hope). Consider the casualty radius of a grenade at 30 yds. This might convert to 27 m. I would say that with an appropriate precision, this should be 30 m. Does the extra 3 m mean you are going to be safe? Consider a metric and an imperial soldier reporting a target indication. If they were equally good at judging distance, the same target would be at 200 m and 200 yds. It would be the same for map distances - 900 m or 1000 yds (not 980 yds). BTW, not meaning to tell you how to suck eggs!
Another example in the Palestine section is just this - across a 980 yd (900 m). There are many more examples in the 12 LH article (almost every conversion). Do hope this helps. In Buna-Gona, conversions were done manually with appropriate precision but then (with good intentions), the convert template was added without considering the precision. I have been putting of backtracking these changes. Anyhow, Regards. Cinderella157 ( talk) 10:12, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi Australian Rupert, I have supplied the sources which you requested on James Catanach. cheers R44 Researcher1944 ( talk) 13:56, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi, 23 Squadron opperated the F-111C "Pig" for a number of years. My father was the executive officer for a number of years. So please leave my changes. Regards, MilitaryHistoryGuru — Preceding unsigned comment added by Militaryhistoryguru ( talk • contribs) 04:54, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for asking. Damn acid reflux, but I think it's healed up for now. - Dank ( push to talk) 12:12, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, it was just a quick drive-by. Keith-264 ( talk) 07:35, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the excellent review. It will take a little time to go through but I'll begin making the changes this weekend. Thanks again! Capitalismojo ( talk) 16:41, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
05:08, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 29 September. Yours, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:20, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello again, thank you for the courtesy of a peer review at Wikipedia:Peer review/American Civil War/archive4. I've worked with you before at Bombardment of Cherbourg and Siege of Fort Pulaski on the articles I took from stubs, but I've not cracked the code for successful article advancement. I would like to advance a wider narrative in military-related articles to include naval and joint services operations there, and also in my contributions to the American Civil War article, which you have been kind enough to peer review, and which I would like to address.
The principle objection to the ACW article causing a delisting revolved not around citation conventions, but the treatment of slavery as a cause of the conflict. In editing down the related passages by consensus on the Talk page, several references were made extraneous. There now appears in the article code, "The following references appeared in the reflist but were not used in the prior text. Please return them to the reflist once they have been correctly cited in the main article." To the best of my knowledge, there is no reason to reimpose those references, nor to re-extend the narrative on Causes.
You kindly referenced two links which I am not sure how to use: "harv errors", and "duplicate link checker tool", both of which promise to be very useful in pinpointing links which should be made current. Do I simply copy-paste the code at the top of the article, then save? Are errors then highlighted in red for me to address by finding working links or deleting the references as links?
The actual expert contributor to this article is Rjensen, a published university professor. Another peer reviewer wondered about the inclusiveness of the historiography section. I would defer to Rjensen for an answer. Although much of the disruption to the article is in the form of anachronistic Lost Cause and modern neo-Confederate interpretation which are not born out in reliable sources...
Another editor noted instances of US instead of U.S., and those six stylistic errors are corrected. I likewise clicked on edit and searched for &ndash and &mdash and found no examples, so I can scan the article for hyphens in the narrative and replace those I find... Oh, btw, in this process, at the very least, is the American Civil War article a B-class article rather than a C-class? A-class does not seem to have the MOS requirements of either GA or FA...is that an easier status for an article to achieve? Thanks in advance. TheVirginiaHistorian ( talk) 18:13, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
In recognition of your successful election as a co-ordinator of the Military History Project for the next year, I hereby present you with these co-ord stars. I wish you luck in the coming year. TomStar81 ( Talk) 00:42, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
A question, also for User:Anotherclown: do you think it would be possible to reproduce at PR what we've been doing at A-class? I have a lot of thoughts about this, but the main one is the obvious one: I've been happy to help maintain A-class for years, on the theory that sooner or later new regular reviewers would come along. It hasn't happened, and judging from the lack of response to the current thread at WT:MHC, there's no one around who is interested in stepping in to review every article for a month, much less for a year. PR has some disadvantages, but I believe there may be ways to deal with the disadvantages that we haven't tried yet, and it has three big advantages: it works with partial reviews, it works with less than three reviewers, and (historically) it has drawn in new reviewers from time to time, sometimes from other wikiprojects, who wind up hanging around, unlike A-class. There's arguably a fourth advantage: the lack of any sort of promotion at the end of the process may provide a greater incentive for nominators to move on to GAN or FAC. Thoughts? - Dank ( push to talk) 13:10, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi AustralianRupert, thanks for your help on formatting the photo. Please can you do the same on Philip Hunter (RAF officer), thanks, R44 Researcher1944 ( talk) 12:44, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Many thanks guys, I appreciate the help. R44 Researcher1944 ( talk) 16:36, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Could you please revisit your prior comments from A-class review at Veterans benefits for post-traumatic stress disorder in the United States?
I think the article Veterans benefits for post-traumatic stress disorder in the United States still has some major issues = it reads more like a manual or guide and not encyclopedic, doesn't read like a descriptive encyclopedic article.
And I think the issues you already mentioned at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Veterans benefits for post-traumatic stress disorder in the United States of:
I think these above issues are still the most obvious glaring areas where there could be significant improvements made.
Maybe you could leave some more specific comments about that, at Talk:Veterans benefits for post-traumatic stress disorder in the United States/GA1 ?
Thank you for your time,
— Cirt ( talk) 22:17, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
2/33rd Battalion (Australia) you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
09:00, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The WikiChevrons | |
On behalf of the WikiProject Military history coordinators, I hereby award you the WikiChevrons for an awesome 43 FA, A-Class, Peer and GA reviews during the period July to September 2015. Well done! Peacemaker67 ( crack... thump) 10:24, 5 October 2015 (UTC) |
An article that you have been involved in editing— 4th Bombay Grenadiers —has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Hamish59 ( talk) 11:51, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
21:46, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
![]() | Here is a semihemidemibarnstar for Your edits to Gerald W. Johnson |
I've always thought an extra set of eyes on the problem were just what was needed. Thanks for your help in spotting things that I have gone over at least a dozen times. And I thought it was ready for prime time...silly me! Cheers, mate... Cuprum17 ( talk) 00:17, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Civility Barnstar | |
For your comment made on the Assessment Request page at 09:24, 26 October 2015 (UTC). Thank you. You provide true leadership for the Project, and it shows. Cuprum17 ( talk) 13:53, 26 October 2015 (UTC) |
Thanks for doing those Rupert. Adamdaley ( talk) 22:53, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
AustralianRupert,
With what has been going on since yesterday (27th October, 2015) with PeaceMaker67 (and others) and today (28th October, 2015) on my talkpage. I have decided to finish the current article I am working on and then quitting Wikipedia. I'll then focus my all my time on my website that I registered earlier this year. Adamdaley ( talk) 07:13, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
Should this article be in the biography section? Chief of Staff of the French Air Force. Adamdaley ( talk) 06:42, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
There are several images that would be suitable for the article available from the Alexander Turnbull Library in NZ, but they need permissions. Would those qualify for fair use?-- Kges1901 ( talk) 20:38, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
What improvements should I make to raise the article for a GA nomination? Kges1901 ( talk) 09:03, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi AustralianRupert, having a look at the New Guinea Force page atm, so it'll be ugly for a little while as I load it up with info. If you get a chance to have a quick look now and then it would be appreciated. Feel free to just leave pointers and I'll do my best to adjust rather than just making changes yourself - I'll never learn otherwise hehehe Enderwigginau ( talk) 11:53, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Australian Army brigades, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Saijo, Hiroshima. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 13:58, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
|
The Military history A-Class medal | |
On behalf of the coordinators of the Military History Wikiproject, I am pleased to award you the A-Class Medal for your great work on 2/1st Machine Gun Battalion (Australia), 12th Light Horse Regiment (Australia), and 2/3rd Battalion (Australia). Well done! Regards, Peacemaker67 ( crack... thump) 01:24, 15 November 2015 (UTC) |
Hi AR,
I've written this article RAF Bomber Command Aircrew of World War II over the last few weeks to the best of my current ability, I don't know if its ready for peer review or whatever - I'm a newbie and still don't understand the various classes of articles or review system, I'd appreciate any guidance, thoughts or advice on what needs doing with it, I'm not even sure about the title which is configured based on the fact that the aircrew flew for RAF Bomber Command to match with an article of that title in Wikipedia - but I feel it should better reflect the diversity of the origins of the chaps themselves ???? thanks R44 Researcher1944 ( talk) 16:35, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Thanks AR, I will get onto the remaining citations/source refs. Your advice is appreciated. R44 Researcher1944 ( talk) 10:24, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
03:25, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
14:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
14:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Would like your input to the ongoing talks about what should be in and what should not be in the article of Rudolf Abel article. As Trekphiler has already taken out roughly 4,000 to 5,000 bytes of the article which he finds questionable that should be in other articles. Of course you can see on my page here User:Adamdaley/Draft of Article 2 I am doing Reino Häyhänen, Rudolf Abel's assistant which should have been done a while ago, but is still being done. I'll reply to Trekphiler in the next few hours on the article talkpage of Rudolf Abel. Would you be kind enough to have your input on the talkpage? Adamdaley ( talk) 06:35, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm kind of bummed out if the truth be known. First of all, I want to make it very clear to you that I appreciate all the help you have given me in the past. I can think of very few individuals on Wikipedia that have given me more encouragement than yourself. You are a class-act. I told myself when I removed the content from the A class review that I was done with Wikipedia and especially the Military History Project... However, you reached out and more or less jerked me out of my funk. I really enjoy the editing that I do on articles relating to military history, but I don't enjoy the frustrations of the review process. I was told when the subject article finished its GA review (by Zawed, if memory serves) that it was ready for ACR. Apparently it wasn't; dozens of changes had to be made by you, others, and myself to shape the article up to the expected criteria. I guess I was kind of disappointed that it wasn't a better effort. I appreciate your edits and suggestions to make it a better article and the same thing goes for Anotherclown. He was the other A class reviewer. I understand each and every reason I was asked to make a change...and agree that for the most part the changes made helped make it a better, more encyclopedic article. I am disappointed by the image reviewer, I attempted to answer the concerns made, but didn't receive any response, even after a ping. Finally, the lack of a third review is kind of a slap in the face. The article sat untouched for two weeks by anyone except for one individual who wanted someone else to offer up an opinion before they would. That is real encouraging for someone who is submitting their first ACR. If the Project is to survive, the members of that project must encourage each other and mentor the beginner. I have been on Wikipedia for over eight years and thought I was comfortable with most aspects of the Military History Project outside of the ACR. With the ACR, I am a total noob, and I guess I figured that if I needed help with the image problem that someone would step up and point me in the right direction. It was also my understanding that the whole process of the ACR was to be completed before 28 days or the ACR was a fail.
I don't know what to do. I put a lot of effort in the article over the course of two years and I really wanted it to be an A class article. I know that some can develop an article through A class in less than a month or so, but I only have so much time to devote to Wikipedia. What do you advise? If you think that someone will eventually come forth with another review, I suppose I would like to see the process through. I don't know if I will ever take another article much farther than B class in the future, but I would like to see this one article as an A class article not for myself, but for the 3,000 Coast Guardsmen that served in the unit in Vietnam; it is probably the closest to a unit history that will ever be written that the general public would ever see.
I need some guidance, mate. What say you? Thank you for your past support and friendship. Cheers Cuprum17 ( talk) 22:09, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
On behalf of the Military history WikiProject's Coordinators, we would like to extend an invitation to nominate deserving editors for the 2015 Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards. The nomination period will run from 7 December to 23:59 13 December, with the election phase running from 14 December to 23:59 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 05:05, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
2/2nd Machine Gun Battalion (Australia) you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
10:41, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
Iwane Matsui, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. CurtisNaito ( talk) 16:51, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
To You and Yours!
FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 15:04, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! | ![]() |
|
A very Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you and all your loved ones, and a joyous and prosperous 2016.
|
![]() |
The Golden Wiki | |
For "writing a number of GA, A, and FA articles this year, continuing to review more articles than nearly anyone else, not to mention helping out as a co-ord, providing well-regarded advice to new and established editors alike, contributing to The Bugle, helping out with drives, and assessing articles (among other things)," I have the honor of awarding you this Golden Wiki for coming first place in this year's Military Historian of the Year vote. Congratulations! For the Military history WikiProject, TomStar81 ( Talk) 02:07, 22 December 2015 (UTC) |
User:Keith-264/sandbox5 I'm reworking material that I added a few years ago and being better-versed in Wikipolicy, fear that much of the section "Edmonds" after the third paragraph will have to go as it's OR by yours truly (as is much of the following Travers and Green sections). Could you suggest an editor who specialises in POV matters to look at it please. (I had hoped that I could relate it to something in print by now but even Green and Sheffield make the same mistake as Edmonds about Gough, Haig and 31 July.) Regards Keith-264 ( talk) 19:48, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
05:06, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
To You and Yours!
Your help to this Newbie has been greatly appreciated. R44 Researcher1944 ( talk) 09:59, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Merry Chrismas! Thanks for your kind encouragement and assistance during the past year. May the coming year be an easy one for you and yours, mate...
...and congrats on the The Golden Wiki... Cuprum17 ( talk) 18:29, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
2/17th Battalion (Australia) you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
00:01, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
Warmest Wishes for Health, Wealth and Wisdom through the Holidays and the Coming Year! Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 01:11, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
For writing the 2/13th Battalion (Australia) article with "six beers under my belt"! Best wishes for Christmas to you and your family as well. Nick-D ( talk) 01:22, 25 December 2015 (UTC) |
I'm not that sure whether to ask the question at the the project's talkpage, the help page, or here. I'm just wondering if you should merge redirect talkpage said to their actual pages or keep the project tag. This has been causing problems with the lack of task forces. An example of this would be here. Also have a Happy New Year and congrats on winning the Golden Wiki! Thanks, Tomandjerry211 (alt) ( talk) 23:49, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi Rupert, I've been building some articles from biog stubs, should I adjust any part of their TALK pages or the footers on the articles after I've finished ? I have sometimes done one or the other but I'm not sure what it the right thing to do ? Thanks for any advice. Best wishes for the New Year. R44 Researcher1944 ( talk) 18:46, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
AustralianRupert,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:39, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
G'day Rupert, I have left a message asking Noclador to have a look at the cup idea, but haven't had a response yet. It is a pretty quiet time of the year, so it might be a while, even if he's happy to help out. We should probably do the due diligence and find out how many points Pb got across the year. He'd figure in nearly every Bugle, so I might start there. Cheers, Peacemaker67 ( crack... thump) 04:40, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Australian Rupert -- I'm glad you added that note explaining the "2/" at the beginning of 2/14th Battalion (Australia). I was wondering what that meant. However, reading the note, I didn't know what the Militias were. Can you link that to an article that would explain the term? Corinne ( talk) 01:48, 9 January 2016 (UTC) I mean, I know what they mean, generally, but does the term as you used it refer to something in particular? Corinne ( talk) 01:49, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The WikiChevrons | |
On behalf of the WikiProject Military history coordinators, I hereby award you this for your contribution of 26 FA, A-Class, Peer and/or GA reviews during the period October to December 2015. Thank you for your efforts!-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 03:20, 9 January 2016 (UTC) |
![]() |
The WikiChevrons | |
On behalf of the WikiProject Military history coordinators, I hereby award you this for your 26 FA, A-Class, Peer and/or GA reviews during the period October to December 2015. Thank you for your excellent efforts! Nikkimaria ( talk) 03:21, 9 January 2016 (UTC) |
Hi mate. The following might help with a stub for this one. From Maitland, The Second World War and its Australian Army Battle Honours, pp. 72-74:
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
2/5th Battalion (Australia) you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
01:00, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi mate, just improving page for Thomas White, one of the original Australian Flying Corps trainees and operational pilots. His ADB page says he served in the "5th Australian Regiment" in 1911. I'd like to link it but at a bit of a loss as to just which 5th Regiment it might be given I understood we had such numbers for infantry, light horse, artillery, and so on. His full service record is not digitised and the only clue I've spotted at the NAA is at the top of page 83 here, where it says he was 2LT in what looks like "5th AIR", which I guess could be 5th Australian Infantry Regiment if that's a valid abbreviation... Any thoughts/clues? Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 03:20, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
The article
2/5th Battalion (Australia) you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:2/5th Battalion (Australia) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
10:22, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
I had for some years intended to expand the Landing at Lae, but am not much good with battles. I was wondering whether you would be interested in collaborating on it in a similar manner to the Battle of Milne Bay, with me writing the sections on strategy, operations and logistics, and you filling in the muddy boots stuff. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 23:14, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
11:23, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Are there any other improvements that need to be made to the Divisional Cavalry Regiment article? If not, I will list it at WP:GAN. Kges1901 ( talk) 00:59, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2/17th Battalion (Australia), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Western Desert. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:12, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
Okay, I think the Battle of Dumpu is is reasonable shape now. It was not much of a "battle" - more of a long walk in the tall grass. But it might give readers a better idea of what it was like than a higher-level article. See what you think. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 06:58, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Writer's Barnstar | |
On behalf of the Wikiproject Military History coordinators, I hereby award you the Writer's Barnstar for placing second in the January 2016 Milhist article writing contest with 73 points from 15 articles. Congratulations! -- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 14:02, 1 February 2016 (UTC) |
![]() |
Hawkeye7 RfA Appreciation award |
Thank you for participating in and supporting my RfA. It was very much appreciated. I am pleased that the Battle of Dumpu meets your standards. Regards Hawkeye7 ( talk) 19:59, 1 February 2016 (UTC) |
![]() |
Peacemaker67 RfA Appreciation award |
Thank you for participating and supporting at my RfA. It was very much appreciated, and I am humbled that the community saw fit to trust me with the tools. Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 03:15, 6 February 2016 (UTC) |
No worries, thanks for volunteering for this kind of work. All the best. Regards, AustralianRupert ( talk) 04:20, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
Every now and then you find an article that is, well kinda weird. Such is Merian C. Cooper. Hope the work on Landing at Lae meets your approval. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 12:09, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
![]() | Hello, AustralianRupert.
Landing at Lae, an article you either created or significantly contributed to, has been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's
Main Page as part of
Did you know
![]() |
Hi AustralianRupert. I just changed the redirect on XVI Army (Japan) to Sixteenth Army (Japan) and created XVII Army (Japan) with a redirect to Seventeenth Army (Japan) to reflect your intent. (Pesky Roman Numerals) Regards Newm30 ( talk) 23:51, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Military history A-Class medal with oak leaves | |
On behalf of the Wikiproject Military history coordinators, I'm pleased to award you the A-Class Medal with Oakleaves for your excellent work on 2/9th Battalion (Australia), 2/17th Battalion (Australia), and 2/48th Battalion (Australia) Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 11:37, 10 February 2016 (UTC) |
Western Desert Campaign some new articles have appeared and some titles have been changed. Am I right in assuming that they can be called battles because RS have it so? I fear that the term is being used indiscriminately. Keith-264 ( talk) 17:59, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
I have completed the work on the Landing at Scarlet Beach. What an effort. Please take a look over it. It covers everything up to the capture of Finschhafen on 2 October, which is the way that the sources and Dexter are organised. The Battle of Finschhafen can then cover from there to the Battle of Sattelberg in November. I suppose base development can be put there too; it started in October, although it really didn't get going until November. A major problem writing the article was that Dexter is the main secondary source, and he isn't as reliable as one would wish. I had to correct a couple of mistakes he made. Barnstars for anyone spotting these. We need to carefully check the Huon Peninsula campaign article to make sure that it agrees with Landing at Lae and Landing at Scarlet Beach. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 22:00, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
There have been several new articles including Battle of Mersa Matruh but I fear that the writers are making work for themselves. My assistance has been rejected so I wonder if you might cast a discreet eye over the articles, with a view to making the writers aware of wikipol etc on form and content? Keith-264 ( talk) 17:24, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Landing at Lae you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Nick-D --
Nick-D (
talk)
11:03, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
The article
Landing at Lae you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Landing at Lae for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Nick-D --
Nick-D (
talk)
10:02, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
![]() | On 27 February 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Landing at Lae, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the first waves of the landing at Lae were carried in four destroyer transports? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Landing at Lae. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
— Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:02, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
2/4th Machine Gun Battalion (Australia) you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
01:21, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
14:14, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
The article
2/4th Machine Gun Battalion (Australia) you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:2/4th Machine Gun Battalion (Australia) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
00:02, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Writer's Barnstar | |
On behalf of the Wikiproject Military History coordinators, I hereby award you the Writer's Barnstar for placing second in the February 2016 Milhist article writing contest with 57 points from 11 articles. Congratulations! Anotherclown ( talk) 11:50, 4 March 2016 (UTC) |
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Wareo you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
23:02, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Wareo you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of Wareo for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
11:41, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
Is there a place to report possible editors faking their identity? I saw this [6] earlier. Thanks Keith-264 ( talk) 19:18, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
( talk page stalker) You might want to ask Tryptofish for advice. – Corinne ( talk) 01:35, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
This week's article for improvement is Lunch. At present, the section Lunch#Oceania consists of one paragraph, all on lunch in Australia. I made a few copy-edits to improve the prose, but I think it still needs a lot of work and some citations. I asked Sminthopsis84 if s/he could add to, or fix, the section; s/he replied that the section was pretty inaccurate as it stood. See User talk:Sminthopsis84#Lunch in Australia. If you have time, could you look at the section in the article and make any changes you think need to be made and add any citations you can find? Thanks. – Corinne ( talk) 19:21, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Reading Brune and McAuley on Kokoda. Thought you might be able to clarify the platoon numbering used. They appear to start at 7 (1st Pl A Coy) by 3 platoons per rifle Coy through to D Coy. E Coy is the MG Coy of 3 platoons? (not 4?) . Also, 6 specialist platoons (mortars etc) in HQ Coy, Support Coy (services?) and BHQ.
Can you pls confirm or correct. Also, which are the first 6 platoons?
Regards, Cinderella157 ( talk) 02:02, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Thanks Cinderella157 ( talk) 23:36, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi mate, noticed you've been copyediting here -- I was about to claim for GAN review but will hold off if you had your eye on it. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 06:24, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
12:15, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Military history A-Class medal with oak leaves | |
On behalf of the Wikiproject Military history coordinators, I'm pleased to award you the A-Class Medal with Oakleaves for your excellent work on 2/5th Battalion (Australia), 2/2nd Machine Gun Battalion (Australia), and 2/14th Battalion (Australia). Keep up the outstanding effort! TomStar81 ( Talk) 03:09, 1 April 2016 (UTC) |
Hi, thank you for your critiques and helpful suggestions on the Paul Hausser article. Would you mind doing the same on the HIAG article? I plan to nominate it for peer review, so your input ahead of time would be greatly appreciated. The article is long, so you could just take a section, such as "Unit histories" or "Successes and outcomes". Hope this may fit into your schedule. K.e.coffman ( talk) 04:18, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi. If you're interested in expand Battle of Wide Bay article -I've created it in Spanish WP- I've found some information which may be useful. Regards,
-- Macesito ( talk) 18:16, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Tsimba Ridge you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
09:01, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Ratsua you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
09:01, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Pearl Ridge you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
06:21, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your review for the good article nomination of International Fleet Review 2016. You have notified me that it is put on hold some improvements and have granted me the 7 days time to do the same. But I request an extension of 3 days to the 7 days i.e the total become 10 days as I am having my exams going on this week. KCVelaga ☚╣✉╠☛ 14:32, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Tsimba Ridge you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of Tsimba Ridge for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
00:41, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The WikiChevrons | |
On behalf of the WikiProject Military history coordinators, I hereby award you this for your contribution of 23 FA, A-Class, Peer and/or GA reviews during the period January to March 2016. Thank you for your efforts! Anotherclown ( talk) 10:50, 19 April 2016 (UTC) |
The article
Battle of Ratsua you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of Ratsua for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
00:21, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Pearl Ridge you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of Pearl Ridge for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
10:21, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Original Barnstar | |
You have finished many of my A-class reviews. You have done a major favor for me. I didn't know what Barnstar to choose, so I chose this. Thank you, Tomandjerry211 (alt) ( talk) 00:26, 22 April 2016 (UTC) |
Hey Rupert! Than you so much for taking a look at the page. I am very new to editing and appreciate any insight you can give me. You added citation needed tags to a number of areas on the page, including to claims addressed earlier in the article and cited, e.g. the cn added to the 'Awards and Decorations' area which is supported by citation 15 in the biographical sketch that comprises most of the article. I even added an area to the Talk page with citations mentioning discrepancies in the available history concerning the full award of medals. I'd be happy to edit the article according to MILHIST standards, I think I just need further guidance about what improvements there are to be made and how best to format the page. I appreciate any insight you can offer and also the time you spent improving my article. Cheers, Finktron ( talk) 01:09, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi Rupert I was delighted to get the award last year but stopped adding new articles some months back after getting fed up with editors who lacked specialist knowledge messing with articles unnecessarily making pointless changes (in my view). I wonder if you could help on the "Tom Leigh (RAF officer)" article in my series on the "Great Escapers", I nipped into Wiki to check my watchlist and can see that somebody for some reason best known to themselves has gone into this one of the 40+ in the series and decided to remove the nationality flags which are common to the entire series, I'd continued this concept introduced by whoever had contributed the first one or two before I got going. Thanks R44 Researcher1944 ( talk) 12:17, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Kanalkampf Do you mind looking in here to quell an incipient edit war please?
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Slater's Knoll you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
02:00, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Slater's Knoll you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of Slater's Knoll for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
22:41, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
01:38, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your help on this page. It still needs work, but I think the fact that there is no article on this, considering how much has been written on it, is an indicator as to how Australian events are sometimes scantly addressed on Wikipedia, compared to US and Uk and other countries. Cheers! Deathlibrarian ( talk) 10:01, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
Ehhmm...for some bizarre and possibly slightly political reason, an editor has nominated this for AfD - you may want to take a look! Deathlibrarian ( talk) 13:47, 2 May 2016 (UTC) I think the other Keep nominator and I agree, not only should this be kept, more the question why this info wasn't on Wikipedia a while ago. /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Australian_Involvement_in_the_East_Timor_Invasion
Would you mind reviewing this Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Henry Hoʻolulu Pitman/archive2?-- KAVEBEAR ( talk) 14:53, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
I have previously nominated the article International Fleet Review 2016 for good article nomination two times. But it failed to pass. You have suggested to request a copy edit from GOCE and I have done so. The request is completed by User:Miniapolis. So I hereby request you to check the article article once again and want to know whether I can re-nominate it. KCVelaga ☚╣✉╠☛ 05:46, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
Best of luck with your RFA! Omni Flames let's talk about it 06:37, 21 May 2016 (UTC) |
I was just about to paste it in and managed to convince myself that I'd done it without noticing....;O)) Keith-264 ( talk) 08:37, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
My oppose vote doesn't mean that I don't think you'll do a great job, you already do from what I can see and I hope you continue to do so, no matter how any user decides to stick their flag in the ground. Unfortuntely the community as a whole doesn't seem to be aware of that concept and an army, of admittedly only those wishing you well, stepping in to argue your corner isn't a good way to start off with the mop, hence my decision. Hopefully our paths will cross on an article somewhere where we can collaborate in better times - Basement12 (T. C) 21:45, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
|
Your RFA is the most interesting RFA I have ever seen. Good luck! Peter Sam Fan 14:55, 24 May 2016 (UTC) |
I see your up at rfa for adminship. I want you to know that you have my full support, however as a result of my overzealousness some months back I sued for peace with two frequent RFA participants, and the terms of the peace (as I choose to interpret them) prohibit me from doing anything overt on the rfa pages. I just wanted to let you here that I think you will be a wonderful admin, and I wish you the best in your rfa. TomStar81 ( Talk) 19:58, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for helping an old guy out, again. I hope things in your part of he world are good. Regards! Pendright ( talk) 00:25, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diligence |
Good luck with your adminship tools I am sure you will handle the tools well. Hope you keep up the content editing the world and especially Down Under needs you!! Moxy ( talk) 20:01, 27 May 2016 (UTC) |
AustralianRupert, well done with the answers. I ran into you the first time when I had nominated my article for FA (the first first class cricket match in Australia; I will be pinging you about that again soon). So it was quite pleasant to see you answering my queries absolutely on the dot with much maturity. Will be good to see you as an administrator. Well done again! Xender Lourdes ( talk) 01:34, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
It's snowing right now (in your favor). Congrats on your RfA! PCHS-NJROTC (Messages)Growing tired of the bullshit day by day. 04:09, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Congratulations!
It is my great pleasure to inform you that
your Request for Adminship has
closed successfully and you are
now an administrator!
|
Please let me know if you have any questions. ··· 日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 06:14, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Congrats on your successful RFA, Rupert! I stand by my admonishment to please not let your content creation efforts suffer but, regardless, the mop couldn't have gone to a nicer and more conscientious guy. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 06:17, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
You're an admin! Have a kitten!
ThePlatypusofDoom
(Talk)
15:15, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Congratulations on your successful RFA! Allow me to impart the words of wisdom I received from the puppy after my RFA passed – nine long, sordid, I-really-should-have-found-a-better-hobby years ago: |
|
DISCLAIMER: This humor does not reflect the official humor of Wikipedia, the Wikimedia Foundation, or Jimbo Wales, because if it did, it would be much, much better. All rights released under GFDL. |
Well, congratulations then!
Fortuna
Imperatrix Mundi
14:28, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.
Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 21:48, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi Rupert. A couple of days ago you helped out with IP editor 49.182.82.105 who was removing sourced content. The same thing is happening again here. I'd be grateful if you could take a look. Thanks. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 11:59, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello, looking for some advice. I want to get Prince Romerson eventually to GA status and also A-Class status as well. Sometimes, I could wait for a month or so before someone decides to do a GA review. Can I nominate it for A-Class while the GA status is still out or should I wait? Also since J. R. Kealoha is still in limbo, I don't know if there is any rule to not nominating more than one A-Class review. Thanks.-- KAVEBEAR ( talk) 05:31, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
12:05, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
2/3rd Machine Gun Battalion (Australia) you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
00:01, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi, would you mind checking the GAR page? Wikipedia:Good_article_reassessment/Hyazinth_Graf_Strachwitz/1. I tried to add sub-sections because it was quite long, but I'm not sure if this is the right approach, or not. K.e.coffman ( talk) 03:18, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
2/15th Battalion (Australia) you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
01:01, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
I want some some suggestion regarding the deletion of some articles. Please see the page Vir Chakra. It is about the India's third highest wartime gallantry award. In the list of recipients I am able to observe articles of many personnel who are at notable as per WP:SOLDIER. Some of them don't even have adequate references as well. These include officers (mostly below colonel or equivalent level) and junior and non commissioned officers whose pages may be deleted. What should I do? Is there any way to propose/nominate for deletion multiple articles at a time or should I nominate them individually. Please suggest me a solution regarding this. Thank You. KCVelaga ☚╣✉╠☛ 10:48, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
I have recently put in place a merger proposal regarding Bengal Regiment, an article you have contributed to. Apart from myself, you appear to be the only other contributor to this article who is currently active on Wikipedia. If you have time, could you please take a look at my proposal to merge this article with Bengal Native Infantry on its talk page here and add your opinion about the merger?
Thanks Exemplo347 ( talk) 11:07, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
The article
2/3rd Machine Gun Battalion (Australia) you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:2/3rd Machine Gun Battalion (Australia) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
22:41, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
The article
2/15th Battalion (Australia) you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:2/15th Battalion (Australia) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
01:21, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
I have recently created an article: List of National Defence Academy alumni. I need your help regarding the footnotes of this article. In the Maha Vir Chakra and Ashok Chakra sections I have mentioned notes at the end of the tables regarding the military ranks and arrangement of the officers. The note is same for both the sections, so I want to use the same note for both instead of two as it is now. Please resolve this. And Can I propose the article for DYK? KCVelaga ☚╣✉╠☛ 03:50, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
I invite you to join the Indian military history group, an initiative of the Military history WikiProject. This group is created to deal exclusively with the topics related to Indian military. If you're interested, please add you name to the participants list. KCVelaga ☚╣✉╠☛ 12:49, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi,
Two public workshops will be hosted at the Northern Territory Library which will be held on 22 June 2016, 5.15pm and 26 June 2016, 2pm. There is also a meetup which will be held at 6pm on 25 June 2016. Bidgee ( talk) 12:55, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Please protect Antony Golec due to persistent vandalism. 2602:306:3357:BA0:3139:F738:D2F9:2EFD ( talk) 13:38, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Knowing that you either are currently or recently have been a soldier in the Australian Army, I would like to clear up some confusion in the article Desertion and I believe that you could help. They are very unclear statements made in the first paragraph here. One sentence states that the term for AWOL (Absence Without Leave) (U.S. Army terminology) in the Australian Defence Forces is Absent Without Leave (AWL). Is this correct? The way the information in the first sentence reads it is somewhat confusing. I am considering a rewrite of the first section of the article to clarify various terms used in various armed services in the several countries that use the term AWOL or variations. A cite would be helpful from Australian sources if you could find one. Periodically discussion ensues on the talk page of the article about what format is correct for a particular situation (with resultant edits to the main article, right or wrong) and if I can find correct sources for cites perhaps that would help the matter. Thank you Rupert for your forbearance. Cuprum17 ( talk) 17:39, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Information please on why this is being added to a number of talk pages. Thank you. Anthony Staunton ( talk) 14:00, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi, thank you for the comment on the AfD discussion: I think this raises an important question for the Milhist Project, though, so overall I would suggest we hold off on further nominations of these types of articles until an RFC can be held to discuss what level of the Knight's Cross is considered to be the "highest" award.
I agree that an RfC would be a good idea. What form would you envision it taking? K.e.coffman ( talk) 00:06, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
It seems that the issue is not the grade of the KC, but that many of the subjects of the articles, similar to those that I have nominated, lack notability. WP:Soldier states that "In general, an individual is presumed to be notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple verifiable independent, reliable sources. In particular, individuals will almost always have sufficient coverage to qualify if they: Were awarded their nation's highest award for valour." So the notability guide is already worded appropriately, as it appears. Getting a higher grade of a KC is not a guarantee of notability either.
It appears that many of the articles were created by a user "Jim Sweeney" who is no longer active. Please see for example:
Please note that the citations used in these initial articles were all non-RS and highly dubious (i.e. waffen-ss.no, frontjkemper, etc), and these articles should not have been created or approved in the first place. In the intervening 8 years the notability of their subjects has not been established either, as the AfDs demonstrated. So the question is -- what to do with the mass of similar articles that cover non-notable subjects? If you could share your thoughts on this, that would be great. K.e.coffman ( talk) 01:34, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your time with the review of this one. Alexikoua ( talk) 20:25, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
![]() | 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. |
Hi Rupert, just following up, really appreciated your comment on the article; did you feel you could do the GAN too? No pressure, just wanted to check before I ask anywhere else... :-) Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 03:23, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Content Review Medal of Merit | |
For completing 11 reviews during April–June 2015, on behalf of the Wikiproject Military History coordinators, I hereby award you the Content Review Medal of Merit. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 09:58, 8 July 2015 (UTC) |
Hey, Sturmvogel 66 suggested that Peacemaker67 and yourself may be to aid in a terminology discussion taking place here. Would you care to take a glance, and offer an opinion? EnigmaMcmxc ( talk) 21:11, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
22:34, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Congrats mate, another successful co-nom... :-) Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 09:54, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
32nd Battalion (Australia) you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
23:40, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
2/1st Machine Gun Battalion (Australia) you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
23:41, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for your review of Sieges of Taunton at A-class review. I've now listed the article at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sieges of Taunton/archive1 as a Featured article candidate. If you had any more critical comments, then your further input would be more than welcome. Harrias talk 14:44, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello,
When you have a chance, would you be so kind to look at Charles Schroeter (Medal of Honor)?
My primary goal is to get the article to B class. No doubt I have missed some grammar and such.
Thank you! Jrcrin001 ( talk) 19:28, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello AustralianRupert,
Dropping by to tell you that I've nominated Battle of Malvern Hill for FAC here: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Battle of Malvern Hill/archive2. You commented at the MILHIST review, I thought you might be interested in dropping a line there. Cheers, -- ceradon ( talk • edits) 20:44, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
The article
32nd Battalion (Australia) you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:32nd Battalion (Australia) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
11:41, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
The article
2/1st Machine Gun Battalion (Australia) you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:2/1st Machine Gun Battalion (Australia) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
12:01, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Anotherclown (
talk)
05:21, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Gordon Bennett (general) you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
07:00, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
The article
Gordon Bennett (general) you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Gordon Bennett (general) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
00:41, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi Rupert, this article that you recently reviewed at ACR is now at FAC. I'm heading away at the end of the month so if (and only if!) you did want to comment there, it'd be great if I could action any concerns in the coming week or so. Thanks/cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 01:22, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
11:45, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
My apologies. I overwrote some of your work while I was trying to fix Wead's flimography,-- Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 02:16, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
And thanks for your ongoing help. My eyeballs are getting tired. I couldn't even find a decent obit for Wead, let alone a bio. The one bio -- which I can't find on line -- by Beigan(?) is referred to elsewhere as being inaccurate. I'm beginning to think this page belongs to the drama and literature squad.-- Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 00:28, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi AustralianRupert, just wanted to say many thanks for your help with tidying up the article and huge appreciation for voting with those who wanted to keep it when the "fashionable furniture and sea shells expert" nominated it for deletion. I'm currently doing a series on fighter aces who had great achievements but received little publicity - many due to their less publicized theatres of war (or less glamourous aircraft) and also doing articles on the participants in the Great Escape in 1944. I only got active on Wikipedia this month and it's a steep learning curve. Thanks mate ! Researcher1944 ( talk) 08:36, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Sorry - second message, I just added a new article and I hope I got the TALK tag right - I copied it. Espelid was a Norwegian flying with the RAF so I wasn't quite sure. Thanks R44 Researcher1944 ( talk) 09:47, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks AustralianRupert, I've just added some more to Espelid and will try to track down the 2 other sources requested. I don't know how to source the Spitfire Op Training Unit one though, he couldn't have joined a Spit squadron without coming through a Spit OTU. I'll have a dig around the Spitfire website and see what I can find. Many thanks R44 Researcher1944 ( talk) 12:31, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
I have pinched this patch from Commons and rotated to use as the 5th Battalion. Just FYI Unit Colour Patch edits. Enderwigginau ( talk) 12:26, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
I see some parallel here with the issue of units that has concerned me wrt Buna-Gona. In the Sinai section 9.3 mi (15 km). Without physically checking the reference, this comes from a contemporary Australian reference, quoting distances in metric that would have been sourced in imperial. I would be surprised if the original source for this reference did not say: "Dueidar, about 9 mi away" - which has been converted, with an appropriate precision, to 15 km. It is hardly appropriate to say about 9.3 mi. This is very specific.
Significant figures is a detailed discussion but here is a simple explanation (I hope). Consider the casualty radius of a grenade at 30 yds. This might convert to 27 m. I would say that with an appropriate precision, this should be 30 m. Does the extra 3 m mean you are going to be safe? Consider a metric and an imperial soldier reporting a target indication. If they were equally good at judging distance, the same target would be at 200 m and 200 yds. It would be the same for map distances - 900 m or 1000 yds (not 980 yds). BTW, not meaning to tell you how to suck eggs!
Another example in the Palestine section is just this - across a 980 yd (900 m). There are many more examples in the 12 LH article (almost every conversion). Do hope this helps. In Buna-Gona, conversions were done manually with appropriate precision but then (with good intentions), the convert template was added without considering the precision. I have been putting of backtracking these changes. Anyhow, Regards. Cinderella157 ( talk) 10:12, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi Australian Rupert, I have supplied the sources which you requested on James Catanach. cheers R44 Researcher1944 ( talk) 13:56, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi, 23 Squadron opperated the F-111C "Pig" for a number of years. My father was the executive officer for a number of years. So please leave my changes. Regards, MilitaryHistoryGuru — Preceding unsigned comment added by Militaryhistoryguru ( talk • contribs) 04:54, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for asking. Damn acid reflux, but I think it's healed up for now. - Dank ( push to talk) 12:12, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, it was just a quick drive-by. Keith-264 ( talk) 07:35, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the excellent review. It will take a little time to go through but I'll begin making the changes this weekend. Thanks again! Capitalismojo ( talk) 16:41, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
05:08, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 29 September. Yours, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:20, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello again, thank you for the courtesy of a peer review at Wikipedia:Peer review/American Civil War/archive4. I've worked with you before at Bombardment of Cherbourg and Siege of Fort Pulaski on the articles I took from stubs, but I've not cracked the code for successful article advancement. I would like to advance a wider narrative in military-related articles to include naval and joint services operations there, and also in my contributions to the American Civil War article, which you have been kind enough to peer review, and which I would like to address.
The principle objection to the ACW article causing a delisting revolved not around citation conventions, but the treatment of slavery as a cause of the conflict. In editing down the related passages by consensus on the Talk page, several references were made extraneous. There now appears in the article code, "The following references appeared in the reflist but were not used in the prior text. Please return them to the reflist once they have been correctly cited in the main article." To the best of my knowledge, there is no reason to reimpose those references, nor to re-extend the narrative on Causes.
You kindly referenced two links which I am not sure how to use: "harv errors", and "duplicate link checker tool", both of which promise to be very useful in pinpointing links which should be made current. Do I simply copy-paste the code at the top of the article, then save? Are errors then highlighted in red for me to address by finding working links or deleting the references as links?
The actual expert contributor to this article is Rjensen, a published university professor. Another peer reviewer wondered about the inclusiveness of the historiography section. I would defer to Rjensen for an answer. Although much of the disruption to the article is in the form of anachronistic Lost Cause and modern neo-Confederate interpretation which are not born out in reliable sources...
Another editor noted instances of US instead of U.S., and those six stylistic errors are corrected. I likewise clicked on edit and searched for &ndash and &mdash and found no examples, so I can scan the article for hyphens in the narrative and replace those I find... Oh, btw, in this process, at the very least, is the American Civil War article a B-class article rather than a C-class? A-class does not seem to have the MOS requirements of either GA or FA...is that an easier status for an article to achieve? Thanks in advance. TheVirginiaHistorian ( talk) 18:13, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
In recognition of your successful election as a co-ordinator of the Military History Project for the next year, I hereby present you with these co-ord stars. I wish you luck in the coming year. TomStar81 ( Talk) 00:42, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
A question, also for User:Anotherclown: do you think it would be possible to reproduce at PR what we've been doing at A-class? I have a lot of thoughts about this, but the main one is the obvious one: I've been happy to help maintain A-class for years, on the theory that sooner or later new regular reviewers would come along. It hasn't happened, and judging from the lack of response to the current thread at WT:MHC, there's no one around who is interested in stepping in to review every article for a month, much less for a year. PR has some disadvantages, but I believe there may be ways to deal with the disadvantages that we haven't tried yet, and it has three big advantages: it works with partial reviews, it works with less than three reviewers, and (historically) it has drawn in new reviewers from time to time, sometimes from other wikiprojects, who wind up hanging around, unlike A-class. There's arguably a fourth advantage: the lack of any sort of promotion at the end of the process may provide a greater incentive for nominators to move on to GAN or FAC. Thoughts? - Dank ( push to talk) 13:10, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi AustralianRupert, thanks for your help on formatting the photo. Please can you do the same on Philip Hunter (RAF officer), thanks, R44 Researcher1944 ( talk) 12:44, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Many thanks guys, I appreciate the help. R44 Researcher1944 ( talk) 16:36, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Could you please revisit your prior comments from A-class review at Veterans benefits for post-traumatic stress disorder in the United States?
I think the article Veterans benefits for post-traumatic stress disorder in the United States still has some major issues = it reads more like a manual or guide and not encyclopedic, doesn't read like a descriptive encyclopedic article.
And I think the issues you already mentioned at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Veterans benefits for post-traumatic stress disorder in the United States of:
I think these above issues are still the most obvious glaring areas where there could be significant improvements made.
Maybe you could leave some more specific comments about that, at Talk:Veterans benefits for post-traumatic stress disorder in the United States/GA1 ?
Thank you for your time,
— Cirt ( talk) 22:17, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
2/33rd Battalion (Australia) you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
09:00, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The WikiChevrons | |
On behalf of the WikiProject Military history coordinators, I hereby award you the WikiChevrons for an awesome 43 FA, A-Class, Peer and GA reviews during the period July to September 2015. Well done! Peacemaker67 ( crack... thump) 10:24, 5 October 2015 (UTC) |
An article that you have been involved in editing— 4th Bombay Grenadiers —has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Hamish59 ( talk) 11:51, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
21:46, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
![]() | Here is a semihemidemibarnstar for Your edits to Gerald W. Johnson |
I've always thought an extra set of eyes on the problem were just what was needed. Thanks for your help in spotting things that I have gone over at least a dozen times. And I thought it was ready for prime time...silly me! Cheers, mate... Cuprum17 ( talk) 00:17, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Civility Barnstar | |
For your comment made on the Assessment Request page at 09:24, 26 October 2015 (UTC). Thank you. You provide true leadership for the Project, and it shows. Cuprum17 ( talk) 13:53, 26 October 2015 (UTC) |
Thanks for doing those Rupert. Adamdaley ( talk) 22:53, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
AustralianRupert,
With what has been going on since yesterday (27th October, 2015) with PeaceMaker67 (and others) and today (28th October, 2015) on my talkpage. I have decided to finish the current article I am working on and then quitting Wikipedia. I'll then focus my all my time on my website that I registered earlier this year. Adamdaley ( talk) 07:13, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
Should this article be in the biography section? Chief of Staff of the French Air Force. Adamdaley ( talk) 06:42, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
There are several images that would be suitable for the article available from the Alexander Turnbull Library in NZ, but they need permissions. Would those qualify for fair use?-- Kges1901 ( talk) 20:38, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
What improvements should I make to raise the article for a GA nomination? Kges1901 ( talk) 09:03, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi AustralianRupert, having a look at the New Guinea Force page atm, so it'll be ugly for a little while as I load it up with info. If you get a chance to have a quick look now and then it would be appreciated. Feel free to just leave pointers and I'll do my best to adjust rather than just making changes yourself - I'll never learn otherwise hehehe Enderwigginau ( talk) 11:53, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Australian Army brigades, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Saijo, Hiroshima. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 13:58, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
|
The Military history A-Class medal | |
On behalf of the coordinators of the Military History Wikiproject, I am pleased to award you the A-Class Medal for your great work on 2/1st Machine Gun Battalion (Australia), 12th Light Horse Regiment (Australia), and 2/3rd Battalion (Australia). Well done! Regards, Peacemaker67 ( crack... thump) 01:24, 15 November 2015 (UTC) |
Hi AR,
I've written this article RAF Bomber Command Aircrew of World War II over the last few weeks to the best of my current ability, I don't know if its ready for peer review or whatever - I'm a newbie and still don't understand the various classes of articles or review system, I'd appreciate any guidance, thoughts or advice on what needs doing with it, I'm not even sure about the title which is configured based on the fact that the aircrew flew for RAF Bomber Command to match with an article of that title in Wikipedia - but I feel it should better reflect the diversity of the origins of the chaps themselves ???? thanks R44 Researcher1944 ( talk) 16:35, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Thanks AR, I will get onto the remaining citations/source refs. Your advice is appreciated. R44 Researcher1944 ( talk) 10:24, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
03:25, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
14:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
14:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Would like your input to the ongoing talks about what should be in and what should not be in the article of Rudolf Abel article. As Trekphiler has already taken out roughly 4,000 to 5,000 bytes of the article which he finds questionable that should be in other articles. Of course you can see on my page here User:Adamdaley/Draft of Article 2 I am doing Reino Häyhänen, Rudolf Abel's assistant which should have been done a while ago, but is still being done. I'll reply to Trekphiler in the next few hours on the article talkpage of Rudolf Abel. Would you be kind enough to have your input on the talkpage? Adamdaley ( talk) 06:35, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm kind of bummed out if the truth be known. First of all, I want to make it very clear to you that I appreciate all the help you have given me in the past. I can think of very few individuals on Wikipedia that have given me more encouragement than yourself. You are a class-act. I told myself when I removed the content from the A class review that I was done with Wikipedia and especially the Military History Project... However, you reached out and more or less jerked me out of my funk. I really enjoy the editing that I do on articles relating to military history, but I don't enjoy the frustrations of the review process. I was told when the subject article finished its GA review (by Zawed, if memory serves) that it was ready for ACR. Apparently it wasn't; dozens of changes had to be made by you, others, and myself to shape the article up to the expected criteria. I guess I was kind of disappointed that it wasn't a better effort. I appreciate your edits and suggestions to make it a better article and the same thing goes for Anotherclown. He was the other A class reviewer. I understand each and every reason I was asked to make a change...and agree that for the most part the changes made helped make it a better, more encyclopedic article. I am disappointed by the image reviewer, I attempted to answer the concerns made, but didn't receive any response, even after a ping. Finally, the lack of a third review is kind of a slap in the face. The article sat untouched for two weeks by anyone except for one individual who wanted someone else to offer up an opinion before they would. That is real encouraging for someone who is submitting their first ACR. If the Project is to survive, the members of that project must encourage each other and mentor the beginner. I have been on Wikipedia for over eight years and thought I was comfortable with most aspects of the Military History Project outside of the ACR. With the ACR, I am a total noob, and I guess I figured that if I needed help with the image problem that someone would step up and point me in the right direction. It was also my understanding that the whole process of the ACR was to be completed before 28 days or the ACR was a fail.
I don't know what to do. I put a lot of effort in the article over the course of two years and I really wanted it to be an A class article. I know that some can develop an article through A class in less than a month or so, but I only have so much time to devote to Wikipedia. What do you advise? If you think that someone will eventually come forth with another review, I suppose I would like to see the process through. I don't know if I will ever take another article much farther than B class in the future, but I would like to see this one article as an A class article not for myself, but for the 3,000 Coast Guardsmen that served in the unit in Vietnam; it is probably the closest to a unit history that will ever be written that the general public would ever see.
I need some guidance, mate. What say you? Thank you for your past support and friendship. Cheers Cuprum17 ( talk) 22:09, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
On behalf of the Military history WikiProject's Coordinators, we would like to extend an invitation to nominate deserving editors for the 2015 Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards. The nomination period will run from 7 December to 23:59 13 December, with the election phase running from 14 December to 23:59 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 05:05, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
2/2nd Machine Gun Battalion (Australia) you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
10:41, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
Iwane Matsui, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. CurtisNaito ( talk) 16:51, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
To You and Yours!
FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 15:04, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! | ![]() |
|
A very Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you and all your loved ones, and a joyous and prosperous 2016.
|
![]() |
The Golden Wiki | |
For "writing a number of GA, A, and FA articles this year, continuing to review more articles than nearly anyone else, not to mention helping out as a co-ord, providing well-regarded advice to new and established editors alike, contributing to The Bugle, helping out with drives, and assessing articles (among other things)," I have the honor of awarding you this Golden Wiki for coming first place in this year's Military Historian of the Year vote. Congratulations! For the Military history WikiProject, TomStar81 ( Talk) 02:07, 22 December 2015 (UTC) |
User:Keith-264/sandbox5 I'm reworking material that I added a few years ago and being better-versed in Wikipolicy, fear that much of the section "Edmonds" after the third paragraph will have to go as it's OR by yours truly (as is much of the following Travers and Green sections). Could you suggest an editor who specialises in POV matters to look at it please. (I had hoped that I could relate it to something in print by now but even Green and Sheffield make the same mistake as Edmonds about Gough, Haig and 31 July.) Regards Keith-264 ( talk) 19:48, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
05:06, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
To You and Yours!
Your help to this Newbie has been greatly appreciated. R44 Researcher1944 ( talk) 09:59, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Merry Chrismas! Thanks for your kind encouragement and assistance during the past year. May the coming year be an easy one for you and yours, mate...
...and congrats on the The Golden Wiki... Cuprum17 ( talk) 18:29, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
2/17th Battalion (Australia) you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
00:01, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
Warmest Wishes for Health, Wealth and Wisdom through the Holidays and the Coming Year! Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 01:11, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
For writing the 2/13th Battalion (Australia) article with "six beers under my belt"! Best wishes for Christmas to you and your family as well. Nick-D ( talk) 01:22, 25 December 2015 (UTC) |
I'm not that sure whether to ask the question at the the project's talkpage, the help page, or here. I'm just wondering if you should merge redirect talkpage said to their actual pages or keep the project tag. This has been causing problems with the lack of task forces. An example of this would be here. Also have a Happy New Year and congrats on winning the Golden Wiki! Thanks, Tomandjerry211 (alt) ( talk) 23:49, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi Rupert, I've been building some articles from biog stubs, should I adjust any part of their TALK pages or the footers on the articles after I've finished ? I have sometimes done one or the other but I'm not sure what it the right thing to do ? Thanks for any advice. Best wishes for the New Year. R44 Researcher1944 ( talk) 18:46, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
AustralianRupert,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:39, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
G'day Rupert, I have left a message asking Noclador to have a look at the cup idea, but haven't had a response yet. It is a pretty quiet time of the year, so it might be a while, even if he's happy to help out. We should probably do the due diligence and find out how many points Pb got across the year. He'd figure in nearly every Bugle, so I might start there. Cheers, Peacemaker67 ( crack... thump) 04:40, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Australian Rupert -- I'm glad you added that note explaining the "2/" at the beginning of 2/14th Battalion (Australia). I was wondering what that meant. However, reading the note, I didn't know what the Militias were. Can you link that to an article that would explain the term? Corinne ( talk) 01:48, 9 January 2016 (UTC) I mean, I know what they mean, generally, but does the term as you used it refer to something in particular? Corinne ( talk) 01:49, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The WikiChevrons | |
On behalf of the WikiProject Military history coordinators, I hereby award you this for your contribution of 26 FA, A-Class, Peer and/or GA reviews during the period October to December 2015. Thank you for your efforts!-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 03:20, 9 January 2016 (UTC) |
![]() |
The WikiChevrons | |
On behalf of the WikiProject Military history coordinators, I hereby award you this for your 26 FA, A-Class, Peer and/or GA reviews during the period October to December 2015. Thank you for your excellent efforts! Nikkimaria ( talk) 03:21, 9 January 2016 (UTC) |
Hi mate. The following might help with a stub for this one. From Maitland, The Second World War and its Australian Army Battle Honours, pp. 72-74:
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
2/5th Battalion (Australia) you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
01:00, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi mate, just improving page for Thomas White, one of the original Australian Flying Corps trainees and operational pilots. His ADB page says he served in the "5th Australian Regiment" in 1911. I'd like to link it but at a bit of a loss as to just which 5th Regiment it might be given I understood we had such numbers for infantry, light horse, artillery, and so on. His full service record is not digitised and the only clue I've spotted at the NAA is at the top of page 83 here, where it says he was 2LT in what looks like "5th AIR", which I guess could be 5th Australian Infantry Regiment if that's a valid abbreviation... Any thoughts/clues? Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 03:20, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
The article
2/5th Battalion (Australia) you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:2/5th Battalion (Australia) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
10:22, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
I had for some years intended to expand the Landing at Lae, but am not much good with battles. I was wondering whether you would be interested in collaborating on it in a similar manner to the Battle of Milne Bay, with me writing the sections on strategy, operations and logistics, and you filling in the muddy boots stuff. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 23:14, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
11:23, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Are there any other improvements that need to be made to the Divisional Cavalry Regiment article? If not, I will list it at WP:GAN. Kges1901 ( talk) 00:59, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2/17th Battalion (Australia), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Western Desert. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:12, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
Okay, I think the Battle of Dumpu is is reasonable shape now. It was not much of a "battle" - more of a long walk in the tall grass. But it might give readers a better idea of what it was like than a higher-level article. See what you think. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 06:58, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Writer's Barnstar | |
On behalf of the Wikiproject Military History coordinators, I hereby award you the Writer's Barnstar for placing second in the January 2016 Milhist article writing contest with 73 points from 15 articles. Congratulations! -- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 14:02, 1 February 2016 (UTC) |
![]() |
Hawkeye7 RfA Appreciation award |
Thank you for participating in and supporting my RfA. It was very much appreciated. I am pleased that the Battle of Dumpu meets your standards. Regards Hawkeye7 ( talk) 19:59, 1 February 2016 (UTC) |
![]() |
Peacemaker67 RfA Appreciation award |
Thank you for participating and supporting at my RfA. It was very much appreciated, and I am humbled that the community saw fit to trust me with the tools. Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 03:15, 6 February 2016 (UTC) |
No worries, thanks for volunteering for this kind of work. All the best. Regards, AustralianRupert ( talk) 04:20, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
Every now and then you find an article that is, well kinda weird. Such is Merian C. Cooper. Hope the work on Landing at Lae meets your approval. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 12:09, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
![]() | Hello, AustralianRupert.
Landing at Lae, an article you either created or significantly contributed to, has been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's
Main Page as part of
Did you know
![]() |
Hi AustralianRupert. I just changed the redirect on XVI Army (Japan) to Sixteenth Army (Japan) and created XVII Army (Japan) with a redirect to Seventeenth Army (Japan) to reflect your intent. (Pesky Roman Numerals) Regards Newm30 ( talk) 23:51, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Military history A-Class medal with oak leaves | |
On behalf of the Wikiproject Military history coordinators, I'm pleased to award you the A-Class Medal with Oakleaves for your excellent work on 2/9th Battalion (Australia), 2/17th Battalion (Australia), and 2/48th Battalion (Australia) Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 11:37, 10 February 2016 (UTC) |
Western Desert Campaign some new articles have appeared and some titles have been changed. Am I right in assuming that they can be called battles because RS have it so? I fear that the term is being used indiscriminately. Keith-264 ( talk) 17:59, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
I have completed the work on the Landing at Scarlet Beach. What an effort. Please take a look over it. It covers everything up to the capture of Finschhafen on 2 October, which is the way that the sources and Dexter are organised. The Battle of Finschhafen can then cover from there to the Battle of Sattelberg in November. I suppose base development can be put there too; it started in October, although it really didn't get going until November. A major problem writing the article was that Dexter is the main secondary source, and he isn't as reliable as one would wish. I had to correct a couple of mistakes he made. Barnstars for anyone spotting these. We need to carefully check the Huon Peninsula campaign article to make sure that it agrees with Landing at Lae and Landing at Scarlet Beach. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 22:00, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
There have been several new articles including Battle of Mersa Matruh but I fear that the writers are making work for themselves. My assistance has been rejected so I wonder if you might cast a discreet eye over the articles, with a view to making the writers aware of wikipol etc on form and content? Keith-264 ( talk) 17:24, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Landing at Lae you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Nick-D --
Nick-D (
talk)
11:03, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
The article
Landing at Lae you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Landing at Lae for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Nick-D --
Nick-D (
talk)
10:02, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
![]() | On 27 February 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Landing at Lae, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the first waves of the landing at Lae were carried in four destroyer transports? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Landing at Lae. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
— Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:02, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
2/4th Machine Gun Battalion (Australia) you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
01:21, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
14:14, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
The article
2/4th Machine Gun Battalion (Australia) you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:2/4th Machine Gun Battalion (Australia) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
00:02, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Writer's Barnstar | |
On behalf of the Wikiproject Military History coordinators, I hereby award you the Writer's Barnstar for placing second in the February 2016 Milhist article writing contest with 57 points from 11 articles. Congratulations! Anotherclown ( talk) 11:50, 4 March 2016 (UTC) |
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Wareo you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
23:02, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Wareo you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of Wareo for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
11:41, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
Is there a place to report possible editors faking their identity? I saw this [6] earlier. Thanks Keith-264 ( talk) 19:18, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
( talk page stalker) You might want to ask Tryptofish for advice. – Corinne ( talk) 01:35, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
This week's article for improvement is Lunch. At present, the section Lunch#Oceania consists of one paragraph, all on lunch in Australia. I made a few copy-edits to improve the prose, but I think it still needs a lot of work and some citations. I asked Sminthopsis84 if s/he could add to, or fix, the section; s/he replied that the section was pretty inaccurate as it stood. See User talk:Sminthopsis84#Lunch in Australia. If you have time, could you look at the section in the article and make any changes you think need to be made and add any citations you can find? Thanks. – Corinne ( talk) 19:21, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Reading Brune and McAuley on Kokoda. Thought you might be able to clarify the platoon numbering used. They appear to start at 7 (1st Pl A Coy) by 3 platoons per rifle Coy through to D Coy. E Coy is the MG Coy of 3 platoons? (not 4?) . Also, 6 specialist platoons (mortars etc) in HQ Coy, Support Coy (services?) and BHQ.
Can you pls confirm or correct. Also, which are the first 6 platoons?
Regards, Cinderella157 ( talk) 02:02, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Thanks Cinderella157 ( talk) 23:36, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi mate, noticed you've been copyediting here -- I was about to claim for GAN review but will hold off if you had your eye on it. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 06:24, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
12:15, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Military history A-Class medal with oak leaves | |
On behalf of the Wikiproject Military history coordinators, I'm pleased to award you the A-Class Medal with Oakleaves for your excellent work on 2/5th Battalion (Australia), 2/2nd Machine Gun Battalion (Australia), and 2/14th Battalion (Australia). Keep up the outstanding effort! TomStar81 ( Talk) 03:09, 1 April 2016 (UTC) |
Hi, thank you for your critiques and helpful suggestions on the Paul Hausser article. Would you mind doing the same on the HIAG article? I plan to nominate it for peer review, so your input ahead of time would be greatly appreciated. The article is long, so you could just take a section, such as "Unit histories" or "Successes and outcomes". Hope this may fit into your schedule. K.e.coffman ( talk) 04:18, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi. If you're interested in expand Battle of Wide Bay article -I've created it in Spanish WP- I've found some information which may be useful. Regards,
-- Macesito ( talk) 18:16, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Tsimba Ridge you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
09:01, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Ratsua you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
09:01, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Pearl Ridge you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
06:21, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your review for the good article nomination of International Fleet Review 2016. You have notified me that it is put on hold some improvements and have granted me the 7 days time to do the same. But I request an extension of 3 days to the 7 days i.e the total become 10 days as I am having my exams going on this week. KCVelaga ☚╣✉╠☛ 14:32, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Tsimba Ridge you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of Tsimba Ridge for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
00:41, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The WikiChevrons | |
On behalf of the WikiProject Military history coordinators, I hereby award you this for your contribution of 23 FA, A-Class, Peer and/or GA reviews during the period January to March 2016. Thank you for your efforts! Anotherclown ( talk) 10:50, 19 April 2016 (UTC) |
The article
Battle of Ratsua you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of Ratsua for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
00:21, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Pearl Ridge you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of Pearl Ridge for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
10:21, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Original Barnstar | |
You have finished many of my A-class reviews. You have done a major favor for me. I didn't know what Barnstar to choose, so I chose this. Thank you, Tomandjerry211 (alt) ( talk) 00:26, 22 April 2016 (UTC) |
Hey Rupert! Than you so much for taking a look at the page. I am very new to editing and appreciate any insight you can give me. You added citation needed tags to a number of areas on the page, including to claims addressed earlier in the article and cited, e.g. the cn added to the 'Awards and Decorations' area which is supported by citation 15 in the biographical sketch that comprises most of the article. I even added an area to the Talk page with citations mentioning discrepancies in the available history concerning the full award of medals. I'd be happy to edit the article according to MILHIST standards, I think I just need further guidance about what improvements there are to be made and how best to format the page. I appreciate any insight you can offer and also the time you spent improving my article. Cheers, Finktron ( talk) 01:09, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi Rupert I was delighted to get the award last year but stopped adding new articles some months back after getting fed up with editors who lacked specialist knowledge messing with articles unnecessarily making pointless changes (in my view). I wonder if you could help on the "Tom Leigh (RAF officer)" article in my series on the "Great Escapers", I nipped into Wiki to check my watchlist and can see that somebody for some reason best known to themselves has gone into this one of the 40+ in the series and decided to remove the nationality flags which are common to the entire series, I'd continued this concept introduced by whoever had contributed the first one or two before I got going. Thanks R44 Researcher1944 ( talk) 12:17, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Kanalkampf Do you mind looking in here to quell an incipient edit war please?
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Slater's Knoll you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
02:00, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Slater's Knoll you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of Slater's Knoll for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
22:41, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
01:38, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your help on this page. It still needs work, but I think the fact that there is no article on this, considering how much has been written on it, is an indicator as to how Australian events are sometimes scantly addressed on Wikipedia, compared to US and Uk and other countries. Cheers! Deathlibrarian ( talk) 10:01, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
Ehhmm...for some bizarre and possibly slightly political reason, an editor has nominated this for AfD - you may want to take a look! Deathlibrarian ( talk) 13:47, 2 May 2016 (UTC) I think the other Keep nominator and I agree, not only should this be kept, more the question why this info wasn't on Wikipedia a while ago. /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Australian_Involvement_in_the_East_Timor_Invasion
Would you mind reviewing this Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Henry Hoʻolulu Pitman/archive2?-- KAVEBEAR ( talk) 14:53, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
I have previously nominated the article International Fleet Review 2016 for good article nomination two times. But it failed to pass. You have suggested to request a copy edit from GOCE and I have done so. The request is completed by User:Miniapolis. So I hereby request you to check the article article once again and want to know whether I can re-nominate it. KCVelaga ☚╣✉╠☛ 05:46, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
Best of luck with your RFA! Omni Flames let's talk about it 06:37, 21 May 2016 (UTC) |
I was just about to paste it in and managed to convince myself that I'd done it without noticing....;O)) Keith-264 ( talk) 08:37, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
My oppose vote doesn't mean that I don't think you'll do a great job, you already do from what I can see and I hope you continue to do so, no matter how any user decides to stick their flag in the ground. Unfortuntely the community as a whole doesn't seem to be aware of that concept and an army, of admittedly only those wishing you well, stepping in to argue your corner isn't a good way to start off with the mop, hence my decision. Hopefully our paths will cross on an article somewhere where we can collaborate in better times - Basement12 (T. C) 21:45, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
|
Your RFA is the most interesting RFA I have ever seen. Good luck! Peter Sam Fan 14:55, 24 May 2016 (UTC) |
I see your up at rfa for adminship. I want you to know that you have my full support, however as a result of my overzealousness some months back I sued for peace with two frequent RFA participants, and the terms of the peace (as I choose to interpret them) prohibit me from doing anything overt on the rfa pages. I just wanted to let you here that I think you will be a wonderful admin, and I wish you the best in your rfa. TomStar81 ( Talk) 19:58, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for helping an old guy out, again. I hope things in your part of he world are good. Regards! Pendright ( talk) 00:25, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diligence |
Good luck with your adminship tools I am sure you will handle the tools well. Hope you keep up the content editing the world and especially Down Under needs you!! Moxy ( talk) 20:01, 27 May 2016 (UTC) |
AustralianRupert, well done with the answers. I ran into you the first time when I had nominated my article for FA (the first first class cricket match in Australia; I will be pinging you about that again soon). So it was quite pleasant to see you answering my queries absolutely on the dot with much maturity. Will be good to see you as an administrator. Well done again! Xender Lourdes ( talk) 01:34, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
It's snowing right now (in your favor). Congrats on your RfA! PCHS-NJROTC (Messages)Growing tired of the bullshit day by day. 04:09, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Congratulations!
It is my great pleasure to inform you that
your Request for Adminship has
closed successfully and you are
now an administrator!
|
Please let me know if you have any questions. ··· 日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 06:14, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Congrats on your successful RFA, Rupert! I stand by my admonishment to please not let your content creation efforts suffer but, regardless, the mop couldn't have gone to a nicer and more conscientious guy. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 06:17, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
You're an admin! Have a kitten!
ThePlatypusofDoom
(Talk)
15:15, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Congratulations on your successful RFA! Allow me to impart the words of wisdom I received from the puppy after my RFA passed – nine long, sordid, I-really-should-have-found-a-better-hobby years ago: |
|
DISCLAIMER: This humor does not reflect the official humor of Wikipedia, the Wikimedia Foundation, or Jimbo Wales, because if it did, it would be much, much better. All rights released under GFDL. |
Well, congratulations then!
Fortuna
Imperatrix Mundi
14:28, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.
Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 21:48, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi Rupert. A couple of days ago you helped out with IP editor 49.182.82.105 who was removing sourced content. The same thing is happening again here. I'd be grateful if you could take a look. Thanks. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 11:59, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello, looking for some advice. I want to get Prince Romerson eventually to GA status and also A-Class status as well. Sometimes, I could wait for a month or so before someone decides to do a GA review. Can I nominate it for A-Class while the GA status is still out or should I wait? Also since J. R. Kealoha is still in limbo, I don't know if there is any rule to not nominating more than one A-Class review. Thanks.-- KAVEBEAR ( talk) 05:31, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
12:05, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
2/3rd Machine Gun Battalion (Australia) you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
00:01, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi, would you mind checking the GAR page? Wikipedia:Good_article_reassessment/Hyazinth_Graf_Strachwitz/1. I tried to add sub-sections because it was quite long, but I'm not sure if this is the right approach, or not. K.e.coffman ( talk) 03:18, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
2/15th Battalion (Australia) you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
01:01, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
I want some some suggestion regarding the deletion of some articles. Please see the page Vir Chakra. It is about the India's third highest wartime gallantry award. In the list of recipients I am able to observe articles of many personnel who are at notable as per WP:SOLDIER. Some of them don't even have adequate references as well. These include officers (mostly below colonel or equivalent level) and junior and non commissioned officers whose pages may be deleted. What should I do? Is there any way to propose/nominate for deletion multiple articles at a time or should I nominate them individually. Please suggest me a solution regarding this. Thank You. KCVelaga ☚╣✉╠☛ 10:48, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
I have recently put in place a merger proposal regarding Bengal Regiment, an article you have contributed to. Apart from myself, you appear to be the only other contributor to this article who is currently active on Wikipedia. If you have time, could you please take a look at my proposal to merge this article with Bengal Native Infantry on its talk page here and add your opinion about the merger?
Thanks Exemplo347 ( talk) 11:07, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
The article
2/3rd Machine Gun Battalion (Australia) you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:2/3rd Machine Gun Battalion (Australia) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
22:41, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
The article
2/15th Battalion (Australia) you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:2/15th Battalion (Australia) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
01:21, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
I have recently created an article: List of National Defence Academy alumni. I need your help regarding the footnotes of this article. In the Maha Vir Chakra and Ashok Chakra sections I have mentioned notes at the end of the tables regarding the military ranks and arrangement of the officers. The note is same for both the sections, so I want to use the same note for both instead of two as it is now. Please resolve this. And Can I propose the article for DYK? KCVelaga ☚╣✉╠☛ 03:50, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
I invite you to join the Indian military history group, an initiative of the Military history WikiProject. This group is created to deal exclusively with the topics related to Indian military. If you're interested, please add you name to the participants list. KCVelaga ☚╣✉╠☛ 12:49, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi,
Two public workshops will be hosted at the Northern Territory Library which will be held on 22 June 2016, 5.15pm and 26 June 2016, 2pm. There is also a meetup which will be held at 6pm on 25 June 2016. Bidgee ( talk) 12:55, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Please protect Antony Golec due to persistent vandalism. 2602:306:3357:BA0:3139:F738:D2F9:2EFD ( talk) 13:38, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Knowing that you either are currently or recently have been a soldier in the Australian Army, I would like to clear up some confusion in the article Desertion and I believe that you could help. They are very unclear statements made in the first paragraph here. One sentence states that the term for AWOL (Absence Without Leave) (U.S. Army terminology) in the Australian Defence Forces is Absent Without Leave (AWL). Is this correct? The way the information in the first sentence reads it is somewhat confusing. I am considering a rewrite of the first section of the article to clarify various terms used in various armed services in the several countries that use the term AWOL or variations. A cite would be helpful from Australian sources if you could find one. Periodically discussion ensues on the talk page of the article about what format is correct for a particular situation (with resultant edits to the main article, right or wrong) and if I can find correct sources for cites perhaps that would help the matter. Thank you Rupert for your forbearance. Cuprum17 ( talk) 17:39, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Information please on why this is being added to a number of talk pages. Thank you. Anthony Staunton ( talk) 14:00, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi, thank you for the comment on the AfD discussion: I think this raises an important question for the Milhist Project, though, so overall I would suggest we hold off on further nominations of these types of articles until an RFC can be held to discuss what level of the Knight's Cross is considered to be the "highest" award.
I agree that an RfC would be a good idea. What form would you envision it taking? K.e.coffman ( talk) 00:06, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
It seems that the issue is not the grade of the KC, but that many of the subjects of the articles, similar to those that I have nominated, lack notability. WP:Soldier states that "In general, an individual is presumed to be notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple verifiable independent, reliable sources. In particular, individuals will almost always have sufficient coverage to qualify if they: Were awarded their nation's highest award for valour." So the notability guide is already worded appropriately, as it appears. Getting a higher grade of a KC is not a guarantee of notability either.
It appears that many of the articles were created by a user "Jim Sweeney" who is no longer active. Please see for example:
Please note that the citations used in these initial articles were all non-RS and highly dubious (i.e. waffen-ss.no, frontjkemper, etc), and these articles should not have been created or approved in the first place. In the intervening 8 years the notability of their subjects has not been established either, as the AfDs demonstrated. So the question is -- what to do with the mass of similar articles that cover non-notable subjects? If you could share your thoughts on this, that would be great. K.e.coffman ( talk) 01:34, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your time with the review of this one. Alexikoua ( talk) 20:25, 29 June 2016 (UTC)