![]() | This 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. |
Archive 20 | ← | Archive 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 |
Hi, Sorry to keep you waiting.
I received the official answer from Republic of Korea Marine Corps about Spartan 3000.
Please visit take page.
Thanks Footwiks ( talk) 11:19, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
"In March 2016, the KMOD announced that each regiment of the 2nd Marine Division would hold the designation of QMF (nicknamed "Spartan 3000" by [insert source] [insert source]) in rotation. The QMF was tasked with [whatever the task was, quote most authoritative source]. In [month] [year] the Quick Maneuver Force gained an official ROKMC nickname, the Jeseung Unit (제승부대) ("Guarantee Victory") Unit."[ref] Buckshot06 (talk) 05:25, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
Buckshot06 (talk) 20:54, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
Anyways, I owed you a lot until 11 June and I promised you. So ASAP, I'll complete the Structure of the ROK Army.
But through this disuccussion, I deeply disappointed about English Wikipedia.
English Wikipedia prefer to old secandary source that newst South Korean Government Official Statement. I felt that there is a Western supremacy in English Wikipedia.
Even though I created the article about South Korean military, In the near future, Article will have wrong information by Western secondary sources with false information and translation error.
Do you know this User:Gasiseda This use is also South Korean with expertise of South Korean military. Please check out his user introduction.
He also pointed out the problem of western sources about South Korean Military.
I really thank you for your interest in South Korean Military. And I really collaborate to work with you about South Korean Military,
But I don't want to waste my precious time and also I hope to you don't waste your precious time due to South Korean military article in English Wikipedia.
Thank you for everything you've done for me. Good bye. Footwiks ( talk) 01:55, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for your advice on talkpage at List of special force units and DRN.
But I have something to tell you. Honestly, I'm very embarrassed. Since 12 June, You suddenly apologize to wolf due to my trivial mistake about DRN procedure and You begin to support wolf's opinion.
When I showed the ROKMC official answer, You strongly adviced VPT process and You said to me - there is nothing Wolf can do whatsoever if VRT deems that your letter from the ROKMC is genuine. I would urge you to focus on the VRT process, and wait for that outcome.
But now, You mentioned that secondary sources win out on DRN.
Maybe 2~3 weeks later, We can see ROKMC Official Answer at Public Bulletin Board in the South Korean Government Petition/Question Website, In other words, Verifiability issue will be solved.
4 western secondary sources about 'Spartan 3000' were published in 2016 and 2017. As you know the truth, 'Spartan 3000' was just used in March 2016.
Most South Korean Military Units are not notable, I created the 1st Special Forces Brigade (South Korea). But some user attached the deletion template due to notibility.
I mean, There are few western secondary sources about South Korean Military Units. But Most of the few western secondary sources have wrong informations or translation errors.
We can't find the secondary sources including follow sentences. "'Spartan 3000' is not a Special Force Unit or ROKMC QUICK MANEUVER FORCE is not a Special Force Unit.
Because,
Have you seen the below sentences in secondary sources about United States Navy SEALs, Delta Force, Green Berets,
In the news article, Upper descriptions are very awkward. Every reportes don't use these descriptions. I hope that you understand what I mean.
In this situation, How do I find the secondary sources including below sentence?
"'Spartan 3000' is not a Special Force Unit or ROKMC QUICK MANEUVER FORCE is not a Special Force Unit.
Therefore, In order to correct wrong information, I in person inquired and received official answer from Republic of Korea Marine Corps.
In this situation, Single primary source issue is not a problem.
By the way, Let's think about Wolf's compromise?
Entry on the list, Name change - Spartan 3000 => ROKMC QUICK MANEUVER FORCE.
I have a question. Why do we only include only ROKMC's Rapid reaction force / Rapid deployment force?
Do you agree that all Rapid reaction force / Rapid deployment force, such as ROK 2nd Quick Response Division, US Marine expeditionary unit and so on include on list of the Special Force Unit?
In conclusion, Task of Rapid reaction force is considered to be a special operation in English Wikipedia.
Buckshot06~~ You do not support my opinion any more, It's OK. I'll accept that But I hope that you try to stay neutral. Until 11 June, You absolutely support that Spartan 3000 or ROKMC QUICK MANEUVER FORCE have to be removed on the list. Becuase they are not unit. they are just rotational tasking.
Honesltly, I don't understand why you modifid your opinion.
Anyways, Well, I've enjoyed working with you. Thanks for your support until 11 June. Footwiks ( talk) 02:37, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
Published | Sources | Flaws | Citation |
---|---|---|---|
2016-03-21 | Telegraph | Translation error or intentional journalistic exaggeration |
Original South Korean source from Yonhap News Agency (연합뉴스) (2016-03-20) |
2016-03-24 | The Diplomat | Translation error or intentional journalistic exaggeration |
Original South Korean source from Yonhap News Agency (연합뉴스) (2016-03-20) |
2017-09-12 | New York Times | Not about "Spartan 3000" This source was about ROK Army 13rd Special Forces Brigade / Decapitation Unit (참수부대) |
Original South Korean source from Yonhap News Agenc (연합뉴스) (2017-09-04) |
2017-09-13 | Nzherald | Reporter mistook "Spartan 3000" for "Decapitation Unit (참수부대)" then blended "Spartan 3000" and "Decapitation Unit (참수부대)" together in the article. |
Telegraph and New York Times. |
Mate, sorry, you have sucked up a lot of my spare time in the last few days. I have explained all this in the fewest number of words I could manage at WP:DRN - you will see it there. I took your text and made it flow a bit more. Buckshot06 (talk) 04:00, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
Hi, I thoroughly checked out rules of Verifiability
(1)
Do not reject reliable sources just because they are difficult or costly to access. Some reliable sources are not easily accessible. For example, an online source may require payment, and a print-only source may be available only through libraries. Rare historical sources may even be available only in special museum collections and archives. If you have trouble accessing a source, others may be able to do so on your behalf (see WikiProject Resource Exchange).
(2)
Sometimes, the use of an offline source will be challenged. Be sure to assume good faith for the user who cited the offline source. They might even be able to provide you a scan or an excerpt from that source. Consider visiting your local library to obtain a copy. Even if the library doesn't have that particular book or journal article, it might be available through interlibrary loan. Also consider posting an inquiry on the relevant WikiProject, because some interested editors might have a copy of that source. The volunteers at WikiProject Resource Exchange might be able to help you coordinate your search.
(3)
This is especially important when using the off-line source to support a fact that might be controversial or is likely to be challenged. Providing identifiers such as an ISBN, OCLC number, Open Library number or similar can help others locate physical copies, as cataloguing data can often vary from one library to another.
(4)
Through this board, Anyone can receive my original ROKMC document and ROKMC official answer have Identifier (document registration number)
Identifier (document registration number) can verify that fact - authentic document or counterfeit document.
I can present Identifier (document registration number) to other users.
(5)
Reliable sources must be able to be verified. This does not mean that any particular person at any given moment must be capable of verifying them.
The costs or difficulties of verifying a source do not impact its reliability, so long as it is possible for someone to verify it within a reasonable time.
Where a source is difficult to verify, or in a language other than English, many editors appreciate the courtesy of supplying the relevant paragraph and ensuring it can be read by English language readers. When sources of equal quality are available, the ease of access may be preferred. But if sources of higher quality are difficult to verify, that difficulty alone is not a reason to disregard such sources or replace them with lower-quality ones.
Where a source is difficult to verify, and legal to duplicate or duplicate portions of, produce impressions of, or otherwise make a recording that will allow other editors to verify off the copy, it is a reasonable expectation, but not mandatory, that this be done to assist other Wikipedia editors in verification.
(5) Question
Of course, I requested and My ROKMC official answer is moving into South Korean Government - Open public board in the Question/Petition and Answer Website
But I think that Screenshhot of ROKMC official answer don't have any problems in terms of WP rules of Verifiability.
I don't think that I have the burden of proof to show that screenshot of offcial answer is not a forgery. All scan, photo sources in Wikipedia have a possiblity of forgery. But Why do only I have burden of proof?
I think that wolf has the burden of proof to show that screenshot of official answer is a forgery. Because he suspect my ROKMC official answer.
In conclusion, So far, I didn't violate any WP rules about Primary, secondary and tertiary source, Verifiability and so on.
I didn't know the details about rules and I just intimidated on wolf's knowledge about WP rules.
What do you think of my opinion?
(6)
If we go to RSN, we will win.
The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material,
To add "Spartan 3000" on the list, Wolf has the burden to demonstrate verifiability. But Wolf's all 4 secondary sources have flaws, Wolf have to present new reliable source. But I can't find any reliable sources about Spartan 3000.
Honestly, I was very embarrassed in this discussion. Because In the diccsusion of Korean WP, Most important thing is show to official notice, answer and so on. Because, as you said before, an official response to an information request supersedes everything in Korean WP discussion. Screenshot is not matter. If anyone suspicious the forgery, that person have a burden of proof to show a forgery
If this discussion occured in Korean WP, When I presented the screenshot of ROKMC official answer, discussion will be end.
Anyway, From now on, I'll study rules of English WP thoroughly.
Thank you all the time. Footwiks ( talk) 05:45, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
The article is from 2023, mentions two marines brigades, with almost 8,000 people, called a "Rapid Task Force" (there is no mention of a "Quick Maneuver Force")- Original South Korean source
Footwiks ( talk) 10:25, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for your advice.
Robert said.
There are at least six ways forward for the editors. First, they can go on their own to the Wikipedia:reliable source noticeboard If so, they should be aware that the volunteers there probably do not want to wade through Source Annexes, or overly lengthy discussions of exchanges on the Internet. Second, one of them can prepare a Request for Comments. We have to go to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard.
(1) Preparation
According to your advice, I will create 13th Special Mission Brigade (South Korea)
(2) Strategy. I originally planed to use Strategy-2. But I founded that wolf's 4 western sources have critical flaws. So I'll forcus on using Strategy-1 in RSN.
To verify that "Spartan 3000" is not a "Special Force Unit" by using my analysis of 4 Western sources attached by Thewolfchild in RSN.
To verify that "Spartan 3000" is a "Quick Maneuver Force" by using my sources in RSN.
This was draft.
Thanks, Have a nice weekend. Footwiks ( talk) 00:37, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
Footwiks ( talk) 01:59, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
I created Structure of the Republic of Korea Army.
The hierarchy consists of "직할부대" and "예하부대" But I don't know the exact English term about "직할부대" and "예하부대"
Meaning is as belows.
"직할부대" - Units Under Direct Control from higher command or unit / "예하부대" - Attached units, Subordinate units
Please review and polish article. I’d appreciate some feedback on the article.
Best Regards, Footwiks ( talk) 17:39, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
Hi,
I created 1st Special Forces Brigade (South Korea), but some user proposed deletion due to notability
If you have spare time, Can you participate in discussion
Thanks Footwiks ( talk) 16:16, 26 June 2023 (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)
19:57, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Templates for mechanized brigades of Ukraine indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 01:16, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello Buckshot06. I have a remark regarding the change in category you just made for the article. Since EPIGN was disestablished in 2007, "Defunct airborne units and formations of France" is the right category for the article (the French gendarmerie, just like many other armed forces does not "rename" units. It disestablishes them and creates new ones). So, unless you plan to consolidate current and former units in a single "Airborne units and formations of France" category the change you made doesn't make sense to me. Do you agree ? Rgds, Domenjod ( talk) 07:15, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
Hi, Buckshot06~ Haw are you doing? recently, I created articles about Korean War
But some user want to delete these articles. If you have the spare time, please participate in the discussion.
Take care! Footwiks ( talk) 12:17, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that
this edit performed by you, on the page
1060th Centre for Material-Technical Support, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 02:43, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
Some user reported me to Administrator Notice Board and pointed out my actions in the discussion of Spartan 3000. Administrator Notice Board
If you have a spare time, Please participate in the ANB.
Thanks
Regards, Footwiks ( talk) 08:07, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 57, May – June 2023
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- 11:22, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for your advice on my talk page. I think that you need not to participate in discussions involved me.
If I blocked, Let's meet up someday in Wikipedia.
You are the best user with smart talent and good personality when I met in the Wikipedia. It was a pleasure working with you.
Thank you for everything you have done for me agian.
Best regards, Take care! Footwiks ( talk) 09:43, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Brigades of the Bulgarian Land Forces indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 05:54, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Soviet Forces in Mongolia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Enkhbayar.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:03, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
Please improve changes for the manual of style in the Russian Navy article, by arrange in order of article elements, and removing flags from infoboxes (except colors).
The proper way to use {{
lang-ru}}
template, prevent
overlinking to
Russian language, and
romanization of Russian, which renders:
Also, that would affect Russian Ground Forces for an improvement to MOS. 2001:4451:824F:B700:D5D3:2171:B3EF:E335 ( talk) 22:40, 20 July 2023 (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)
11:28, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
Hi!
I’m sure that, as a pretty experienced editor, you can figure out why your most recent edit to 55th Naval Infantry Division was a POV violation so wanton as to be almost vandalistic, apart from being in the wrong article (although they should probably be merged like we often do with divisions that were reduced to brigades).
Please don’t do it again in article namespace. If you feel the understandable urge to tell it like you see (or view) it, you can always “experiment” in your sandbox.
Keep calm and keep editing, RadioactiveBoulevardier ( talk) 10:53, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
I appreciate very much your Barnstar for my Armed Forces of Italian Empire in "Africa Orientale italiana". 48ol ( talk) 14:39, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
Dear Wreck Smurfy ( talk · contribs) I believe in view of events since February 23, 2022, that we should discontinue all use of the term "Great Patriotic War" with immediate effect. I have started changing that term to Second World War. This is by agreement with Kges1901 ( talk · contribs). What are your thoughts on the matter? Buckshot06 (talk) 00:52, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mechanized infantry, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Marder.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:04, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election have opened. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:04, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 291st Infantry Regiment (United States), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Active Component.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 05:56, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
Consolidated in 1985 and active for another 8 years. Description of the service of the 41st Bomb Sq in the reserve is totally wrong (as I ranted about on its talk page). I can't find that the squadron has ever been activated as an expeditionary unit, so I think going with the current name is appropriate. Lineagegeek ( talk) 21:36, 6 September 2023 (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)
21:35, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
Hey, Buckshot06. Could you please do the honors of adding a link to this division's article in the template Divisions of the Soviet Union 1945–1957? I'm unable to figure out how to edit this template. Thanks. Wreck Smurfy ( talk) 02:28, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
The redirect
Chief of Armed Forces has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 12 § Chief of Armed Forces until a consensus is reached.
Utopes (
talk /
cont)
00:24, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 58, July – August 2023
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- 14:26, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
![]() |
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. |
![]() |
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. |
![]() |
Military history reviewers' award | |
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the The Milhist reviewing award (1 stripe) for participating in 1 review between April and June 2023.
Peacemaker67 (
talk) via
MilHistBot (
talk)
06:14, 3 October 2023 (UTC) Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste {{
WPMILHIST Review alerts}} to your user space
|
|
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)
19:24, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Buckshot06. Thank you for your work on 1060th Centre for Material-Technical Support. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Thank you for writing the article on Wikipedia! I genuinely appreciate your efforts in creating the article on Wikipedia and expanding the sum of human knowledge in Wikipedia. Wishing you and your family a great day!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}
. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~
. (Message delivered via the
Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 03:46, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited North Caucasus Military District, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ordzhonikidze.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:02, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Migalovo (air base), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page IL-28.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:07, 31 October 2023 (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)
18:17, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that
this edit performed by you, on the page
Chkalovsky Air Base, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 03:08, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Krasnodar Higher Military Aviation School of Pilots, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Balashov.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:07, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 59, September – October 2023
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- 16:15, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
00:30, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Border Service of the Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Border Troops.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:06, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Eastern Border District, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Soviet Republic.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:00, 8 December 2023 (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)
23:59, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
Did you mean to add this to the article instead of the talk page? - ZLEA T\ C 13:48, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2023! The the top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki . Cast your votes vote here and here respectively. Voting closes at 23:59 on 30 December 2023. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. Hawkeye7 ( talk · contribs) via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 23:55, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lists of military installations, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Airborne Warning and Control System.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 05:59, 5 January 2024 (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)
18:31, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 60, November – December 2023
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- 13:36, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Strategic Air Command command and control systems indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 04:01, 3 February 2024 (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)
19:08, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Military installations established in 1968 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗ plicit 14:52, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 142nd Wing, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eastern Seaboard.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:02, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello Buckshot06!
Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around!
MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 15:20, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:NATO Command Structure as at 3 June 2021.pdf. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:
{{
Di-replaceable non-free use disputed|<your reason>}}
below the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing <your reason>
with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 10:00, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
You're not going to keep undoing my edits and get away with it, I will revert your edits, sign up and contact a higher mod, at the very least. I have responded in the article you reverted, your revert was a waste of everyone's time. Things have changed so get with the times and live in the real world. 148.252.146.215 ( talk) 01:19, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
The Armed Forces of Liberia uses the flag that I added to the page. This can be seen in multiple sources.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sU30jUhNfzo
https://www.dvidshub.net/image/7056635/color-guard-liberian-armed-forces-day
https://twitter.com/embassygermany/status/1359824673266167811
Please do not modify or remove information if you're unsure of it's accuracy. Thank you.
Goldenraystudios ( talk) 23:08, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 61, January – February 2024
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- 16:32, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Bombing squadrons of the United States Navy indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 01:08, 6 March 2024 (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)
22:56, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 82nd (West Africa) Division, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eastern Army.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 18:06, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Units and formations of the United States Marine Corps in World War II indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 00:34, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kenya Army Infantry, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page North Eastern Province.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:04, 6 April 2024 (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)
23:08, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
The article No. 675 (The Rifles) Squadron AAC has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Lack of references provided to prove notability
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
PercyPigUK (
talk)
23:56, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello,
I wish to move No's 668 - 673 RAF squadron's to the Army Air Corps equivalent and i wanted your opinion on the move before i did anything. The RAF squadrons were active near the end of the Second World War within India, never went operational and only existed for about 2 years. Whereas the AAC equivalents have been active for some years such as No. 672 Squadron AAC which was active for 19 years between 2 different phases.
Also, what's your opinion of moving the above 675, 677, 678 squadrons and merging them all into 6 Regiment Army Air Corps?
Gavbadger ( talk) 18:31, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 62, March – April 2024
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- 11:02, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Hi,
What's your view on moving No. 652-666 Squadron's RAF to AAC equivalent such as 652, 654, 656, 657, 658, 659, 660, 661, 662, 664 and 666. The current RAF articles are ex AOP squadrons and under 10k size. Most already have a equivalent AAC article. I'll leave 663 alone as it's Polish and 665 as it's Canadian. 651, 653, 655, 667, 668, 669, 670, 671, 672 & 673 have already been done.
I wanted your opinion before proposing at WP:Military History talkpage.
Gavbadger ( talk) 19:36, 23 April 2024 (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)
20:19, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/No. 675 (The Rifles) Squadron AAC until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.PercyPigUK ( talk) 13:36, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of United States Navy aircraft wings, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Battle of Santa Cruz.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 17:53, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
I have suggested returning Talk:441st Air Expeditionary Squadron to 441st Bombardment Squadron. With the moves of the 441st and its companions of the 320th Bombardment Group to provisional status some time ago, the pages were moved to air expeditionary units on the "most current name" status. I believe now this was probably a mistake at the time, as there was then no expeditionary notability but information has since leaked that these squadrons operated bases in Syria (now Russian bases), which does give them notability they didn't have on their move, so I'm ambiguous about their location. However, in addition to the WW II and B47 operations, the 441st was one of the first two B-52 squadrons (along with the one at Columbus) to deploy for Arc Light mission, as it was the only squadron of the wing to fly B-52s. No lobbying, but I invite you to share your opinion of the talk pages, and you might take a look at the 441s 443d and 444th. Lineagegeek ( talk) 23:38, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
(Edited) me no grammar good tonight. Lineagegeek ( talk) 12:19, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions to Zhaslyk (airfield). Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.
Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Chaotic Enby ( talk · contribs) 17:08, 1 June 2024 (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)
09:42, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Combat Aviation Brigade, 10th Mountain Division has been nominated for a 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. Hog Farm Talk 13:45, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 4th Battalion, 42nd Field Artillery Regiment (United States), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 4th Infantry Division.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:14, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
Hi - Many thanks for adding additional material to this article. I have expanded it quite a bit and added plenty of references (the original rational for deletion was that it had not been edited in 3 years and only contains two independent sources). It would be great if you felt able throw your weight behind retention. Best wishes. Dormskirk ( talk) 09:56, 28 June 2024 (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)
12:07, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This 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. |
Archive 20 | ← | Archive 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 |
Hi, Sorry to keep you waiting.
I received the official answer from Republic of Korea Marine Corps about Spartan 3000.
Please visit take page.
Thanks Footwiks ( talk) 11:19, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
"In March 2016, the KMOD announced that each regiment of the 2nd Marine Division would hold the designation of QMF (nicknamed "Spartan 3000" by [insert source] [insert source]) in rotation. The QMF was tasked with [whatever the task was, quote most authoritative source]. In [month] [year] the Quick Maneuver Force gained an official ROKMC nickname, the Jeseung Unit (제승부대) ("Guarantee Victory") Unit."[ref] Buckshot06 (talk) 05:25, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
Buckshot06 (talk) 20:54, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
Anyways, I owed you a lot until 11 June and I promised you. So ASAP, I'll complete the Structure of the ROK Army.
But through this disuccussion, I deeply disappointed about English Wikipedia.
English Wikipedia prefer to old secandary source that newst South Korean Government Official Statement. I felt that there is a Western supremacy in English Wikipedia.
Even though I created the article about South Korean military, In the near future, Article will have wrong information by Western secondary sources with false information and translation error.
Do you know this User:Gasiseda This use is also South Korean with expertise of South Korean military. Please check out his user introduction.
He also pointed out the problem of western sources about South Korean Military.
I really thank you for your interest in South Korean Military. And I really collaborate to work with you about South Korean Military,
But I don't want to waste my precious time and also I hope to you don't waste your precious time due to South Korean military article in English Wikipedia.
Thank you for everything you've done for me. Good bye. Footwiks ( talk) 01:55, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for your advice on talkpage at List of special force units and DRN.
But I have something to tell you. Honestly, I'm very embarrassed. Since 12 June, You suddenly apologize to wolf due to my trivial mistake about DRN procedure and You begin to support wolf's opinion.
When I showed the ROKMC official answer, You strongly adviced VPT process and You said to me - there is nothing Wolf can do whatsoever if VRT deems that your letter from the ROKMC is genuine. I would urge you to focus on the VRT process, and wait for that outcome.
But now, You mentioned that secondary sources win out on DRN.
Maybe 2~3 weeks later, We can see ROKMC Official Answer at Public Bulletin Board in the South Korean Government Petition/Question Website, In other words, Verifiability issue will be solved.
4 western secondary sources about 'Spartan 3000' were published in 2016 and 2017. As you know the truth, 'Spartan 3000' was just used in March 2016.
Most South Korean Military Units are not notable, I created the 1st Special Forces Brigade (South Korea). But some user attached the deletion template due to notibility.
I mean, There are few western secondary sources about South Korean Military Units. But Most of the few western secondary sources have wrong informations or translation errors.
We can't find the secondary sources including follow sentences. "'Spartan 3000' is not a Special Force Unit or ROKMC QUICK MANEUVER FORCE is not a Special Force Unit.
Because,
Have you seen the below sentences in secondary sources about United States Navy SEALs, Delta Force, Green Berets,
In the news article, Upper descriptions are very awkward. Every reportes don't use these descriptions. I hope that you understand what I mean.
In this situation, How do I find the secondary sources including below sentence?
"'Spartan 3000' is not a Special Force Unit or ROKMC QUICK MANEUVER FORCE is not a Special Force Unit.
Therefore, In order to correct wrong information, I in person inquired and received official answer from Republic of Korea Marine Corps.
In this situation, Single primary source issue is not a problem.
By the way, Let's think about Wolf's compromise?
Entry on the list, Name change - Spartan 3000 => ROKMC QUICK MANEUVER FORCE.
I have a question. Why do we only include only ROKMC's Rapid reaction force / Rapid deployment force?
Do you agree that all Rapid reaction force / Rapid deployment force, such as ROK 2nd Quick Response Division, US Marine expeditionary unit and so on include on list of the Special Force Unit?
In conclusion, Task of Rapid reaction force is considered to be a special operation in English Wikipedia.
Buckshot06~~ You do not support my opinion any more, It's OK. I'll accept that But I hope that you try to stay neutral. Until 11 June, You absolutely support that Spartan 3000 or ROKMC QUICK MANEUVER FORCE have to be removed on the list. Becuase they are not unit. they are just rotational tasking.
Honesltly, I don't understand why you modifid your opinion.
Anyways, Well, I've enjoyed working with you. Thanks for your support until 11 June. Footwiks ( talk) 02:37, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
Published | Sources | Flaws | Citation |
---|---|---|---|
2016-03-21 | Telegraph | Translation error or intentional journalistic exaggeration |
Original South Korean source from Yonhap News Agency (연합뉴스) (2016-03-20) |
2016-03-24 | The Diplomat | Translation error or intentional journalistic exaggeration |
Original South Korean source from Yonhap News Agency (연합뉴스) (2016-03-20) |
2017-09-12 | New York Times | Not about "Spartan 3000" This source was about ROK Army 13rd Special Forces Brigade / Decapitation Unit (참수부대) |
Original South Korean source from Yonhap News Agenc (연합뉴스) (2017-09-04) |
2017-09-13 | Nzherald | Reporter mistook "Spartan 3000" for "Decapitation Unit (참수부대)" then blended "Spartan 3000" and "Decapitation Unit (참수부대)" together in the article. |
Telegraph and New York Times. |
Mate, sorry, you have sucked up a lot of my spare time in the last few days. I have explained all this in the fewest number of words I could manage at WP:DRN - you will see it there. I took your text and made it flow a bit more. Buckshot06 (talk) 04:00, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
Hi, I thoroughly checked out rules of Verifiability
(1)
Do not reject reliable sources just because they are difficult or costly to access. Some reliable sources are not easily accessible. For example, an online source may require payment, and a print-only source may be available only through libraries. Rare historical sources may even be available only in special museum collections and archives. If you have trouble accessing a source, others may be able to do so on your behalf (see WikiProject Resource Exchange).
(2)
Sometimes, the use of an offline source will be challenged. Be sure to assume good faith for the user who cited the offline source. They might even be able to provide you a scan or an excerpt from that source. Consider visiting your local library to obtain a copy. Even if the library doesn't have that particular book or journal article, it might be available through interlibrary loan. Also consider posting an inquiry on the relevant WikiProject, because some interested editors might have a copy of that source. The volunteers at WikiProject Resource Exchange might be able to help you coordinate your search.
(3)
This is especially important when using the off-line source to support a fact that might be controversial or is likely to be challenged. Providing identifiers such as an ISBN, OCLC number, Open Library number or similar can help others locate physical copies, as cataloguing data can often vary from one library to another.
(4)
Through this board, Anyone can receive my original ROKMC document and ROKMC official answer have Identifier (document registration number)
Identifier (document registration number) can verify that fact - authentic document or counterfeit document.
I can present Identifier (document registration number) to other users.
(5)
Reliable sources must be able to be verified. This does not mean that any particular person at any given moment must be capable of verifying them.
The costs or difficulties of verifying a source do not impact its reliability, so long as it is possible for someone to verify it within a reasonable time.
Where a source is difficult to verify, or in a language other than English, many editors appreciate the courtesy of supplying the relevant paragraph and ensuring it can be read by English language readers. When sources of equal quality are available, the ease of access may be preferred. But if sources of higher quality are difficult to verify, that difficulty alone is not a reason to disregard such sources or replace them with lower-quality ones.
Where a source is difficult to verify, and legal to duplicate or duplicate portions of, produce impressions of, or otherwise make a recording that will allow other editors to verify off the copy, it is a reasonable expectation, but not mandatory, that this be done to assist other Wikipedia editors in verification.
(5) Question
Of course, I requested and My ROKMC official answer is moving into South Korean Government - Open public board in the Question/Petition and Answer Website
But I think that Screenshhot of ROKMC official answer don't have any problems in terms of WP rules of Verifiability.
I don't think that I have the burden of proof to show that screenshot of offcial answer is not a forgery. All scan, photo sources in Wikipedia have a possiblity of forgery. But Why do only I have burden of proof?
I think that wolf has the burden of proof to show that screenshot of official answer is a forgery. Because he suspect my ROKMC official answer.
In conclusion, So far, I didn't violate any WP rules about Primary, secondary and tertiary source, Verifiability and so on.
I didn't know the details about rules and I just intimidated on wolf's knowledge about WP rules.
What do you think of my opinion?
(6)
If we go to RSN, we will win.
The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material,
To add "Spartan 3000" on the list, Wolf has the burden to demonstrate verifiability. But Wolf's all 4 secondary sources have flaws, Wolf have to present new reliable source. But I can't find any reliable sources about Spartan 3000.
Honestly, I was very embarrassed in this discussion. Because In the diccsusion of Korean WP, Most important thing is show to official notice, answer and so on. Because, as you said before, an official response to an information request supersedes everything in Korean WP discussion. Screenshot is not matter. If anyone suspicious the forgery, that person have a burden of proof to show a forgery
If this discussion occured in Korean WP, When I presented the screenshot of ROKMC official answer, discussion will be end.
Anyway, From now on, I'll study rules of English WP thoroughly.
Thank you all the time. Footwiks ( talk) 05:45, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
The article is from 2023, mentions two marines brigades, with almost 8,000 people, called a "Rapid Task Force" (there is no mention of a "Quick Maneuver Force")- Original South Korean source
Footwiks ( talk) 10:25, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for your advice.
Robert said.
There are at least six ways forward for the editors. First, they can go on their own to the Wikipedia:reliable source noticeboard If so, they should be aware that the volunteers there probably do not want to wade through Source Annexes, or overly lengthy discussions of exchanges on the Internet. Second, one of them can prepare a Request for Comments. We have to go to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard.
(1) Preparation
According to your advice, I will create 13th Special Mission Brigade (South Korea)
(2) Strategy. I originally planed to use Strategy-2. But I founded that wolf's 4 western sources have critical flaws. So I'll forcus on using Strategy-1 in RSN.
To verify that "Spartan 3000" is not a "Special Force Unit" by using my analysis of 4 Western sources attached by Thewolfchild in RSN.
To verify that "Spartan 3000" is a "Quick Maneuver Force" by using my sources in RSN.
This was draft.
Thanks, Have a nice weekend. Footwiks ( talk) 00:37, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
Footwiks ( talk) 01:59, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
I created Structure of the Republic of Korea Army.
The hierarchy consists of "직할부대" and "예하부대" But I don't know the exact English term about "직할부대" and "예하부대"
Meaning is as belows.
"직할부대" - Units Under Direct Control from higher command or unit / "예하부대" - Attached units, Subordinate units
Please review and polish article. I’d appreciate some feedback on the article.
Best Regards, Footwiks ( talk) 17:39, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
Hi,
I created 1st Special Forces Brigade (South Korea), but some user proposed deletion due to notability
If you have spare time, Can you participate in discussion
Thanks Footwiks ( talk) 16:16, 26 June 2023 (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)
19:57, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Templates for mechanized brigades of Ukraine indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 01:16, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello Buckshot06. I have a remark regarding the change in category you just made for the article. Since EPIGN was disestablished in 2007, "Defunct airborne units and formations of France" is the right category for the article (the French gendarmerie, just like many other armed forces does not "rename" units. It disestablishes them and creates new ones). So, unless you plan to consolidate current and former units in a single "Airborne units and formations of France" category the change you made doesn't make sense to me. Do you agree ? Rgds, Domenjod ( talk) 07:15, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
Hi, Buckshot06~ Haw are you doing? recently, I created articles about Korean War
But some user want to delete these articles. If you have the spare time, please participate in the discussion.
Take care! Footwiks ( talk) 12:17, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that
this edit performed by you, on the page
1060th Centre for Material-Technical Support, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 02:43, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
Some user reported me to Administrator Notice Board and pointed out my actions in the discussion of Spartan 3000. Administrator Notice Board
If you have a spare time, Please participate in the ANB.
Thanks
Regards, Footwiks ( talk) 08:07, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 57, May – June 2023
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- 11:22, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for your advice on my talk page. I think that you need not to participate in discussions involved me.
If I blocked, Let's meet up someday in Wikipedia.
You are the best user with smart talent and good personality when I met in the Wikipedia. It was a pleasure working with you.
Thank you for everything you have done for me agian.
Best regards, Take care! Footwiks ( talk) 09:43, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Brigades of the Bulgarian Land Forces indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 05:54, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Soviet Forces in Mongolia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Enkhbayar.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:03, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
Please improve changes for the manual of style in the Russian Navy article, by arrange in order of article elements, and removing flags from infoboxes (except colors).
The proper way to use {{
lang-ru}}
template, prevent
overlinking to
Russian language, and
romanization of Russian, which renders:
Also, that would affect Russian Ground Forces for an improvement to MOS. 2001:4451:824F:B700:D5D3:2171:B3EF:E335 ( talk) 22:40, 20 July 2023 (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)
11:28, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
Hi!
I’m sure that, as a pretty experienced editor, you can figure out why your most recent edit to 55th Naval Infantry Division was a POV violation so wanton as to be almost vandalistic, apart from being in the wrong article (although they should probably be merged like we often do with divisions that were reduced to brigades).
Please don’t do it again in article namespace. If you feel the understandable urge to tell it like you see (or view) it, you can always “experiment” in your sandbox.
Keep calm and keep editing, RadioactiveBoulevardier ( talk) 10:53, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
I appreciate very much your Barnstar for my Armed Forces of Italian Empire in "Africa Orientale italiana". 48ol ( talk) 14:39, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
Dear Wreck Smurfy ( talk · contribs) I believe in view of events since February 23, 2022, that we should discontinue all use of the term "Great Patriotic War" with immediate effect. I have started changing that term to Second World War. This is by agreement with Kges1901 ( talk · contribs). What are your thoughts on the matter? Buckshot06 (talk) 00:52, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mechanized infantry, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Marder.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:04, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election have opened. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:04, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 291st Infantry Regiment (United States), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Active Component.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 05:56, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
Consolidated in 1985 and active for another 8 years. Description of the service of the 41st Bomb Sq in the reserve is totally wrong (as I ranted about on its talk page). I can't find that the squadron has ever been activated as an expeditionary unit, so I think going with the current name is appropriate. Lineagegeek ( talk) 21:36, 6 September 2023 (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)
21:35, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
Hey, Buckshot06. Could you please do the honors of adding a link to this division's article in the template Divisions of the Soviet Union 1945–1957? I'm unable to figure out how to edit this template. Thanks. Wreck Smurfy ( talk) 02:28, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
The redirect
Chief of Armed Forces has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 12 § Chief of Armed Forces until a consensus is reached.
Utopes (
talk /
cont)
00:24, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 58, July – August 2023
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- 14:26, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
![]() |
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. |
![]() |
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. |
![]() |
Military history reviewers' award | |
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the The Milhist reviewing award (1 stripe) for participating in 1 review between April and June 2023.
Peacemaker67 (
talk) via
MilHistBot (
talk)
06:14, 3 October 2023 (UTC) Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste {{
WPMILHIST Review alerts}} to your user space
|
|
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)
19:24, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Buckshot06. Thank you for your work on 1060th Centre for Material-Technical Support. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Thank you for writing the article on Wikipedia! I genuinely appreciate your efforts in creating the article on Wikipedia and expanding the sum of human knowledge in Wikipedia. Wishing you and your family a great day!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}
. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~
. (Message delivered via the
Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 03:46, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited North Caucasus Military District, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ordzhonikidze.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:02, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Migalovo (air base), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page IL-28.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:07, 31 October 2023 (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)
18:17, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that
this edit performed by you, on the page
Chkalovsky Air Base, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 03:08, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Krasnodar Higher Military Aviation School of Pilots, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Balashov.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:07, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 59, September – October 2023
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- 16:15, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
00:30, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Border Service of the Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Border Troops.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:06, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Eastern Border District, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Soviet Republic.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:00, 8 December 2023 (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)
23:59, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
Did you mean to add this to the article instead of the talk page? - ZLEA T\ C 13:48, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2023! The the top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki . Cast your votes vote here and here respectively. Voting closes at 23:59 on 30 December 2023. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. Hawkeye7 ( talk · contribs) via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 23:55, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lists of military installations, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Airborne Warning and Control System.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 05:59, 5 January 2024 (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)
18:31, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 60, November – December 2023
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- 13:36, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Strategic Air Command command and control systems indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 04:01, 3 February 2024 (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)
19:08, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Military installations established in 1968 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗ plicit 14:52, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 142nd Wing, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eastern Seaboard.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:02, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello Buckshot06!
Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around!
MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 15:20, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:NATO Command Structure as at 3 June 2021.pdf. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:
{{
Di-replaceable non-free use disputed|<your reason>}}
below the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing <your reason>
with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 10:00, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
You're not going to keep undoing my edits and get away with it, I will revert your edits, sign up and contact a higher mod, at the very least. I have responded in the article you reverted, your revert was a waste of everyone's time. Things have changed so get with the times and live in the real world. 148.252.146.215 ( talk) 01:19, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
The Armed Forces of Liberia uses the flag that I added to the page. This can be seen in multiple sources.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sU30jUhNfzo
https://www.dvidshub.net/image/7056635/color-guard-liberian-armed-forces-day
https://twitter.com/embassygermany/status/1359824673266167811
Please do not modify or remove information if you're unsure of it's accuracy. Thank you.
Goldenraystudios ( talk) 23:08, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 61, January – February 2024
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- 16:32, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Bombing squadrons of the United States Navy indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 01:08, 6 March 2024 (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)
22:56, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 82nd (West Africa) Division, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eastern Army.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 18:06, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Units and formations of the United States Marine Corps in World War II indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 00:34, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kenya Army Infantry, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page North Eastern Province.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:04, 6 April 2024 (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)
23:08, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
The article No. 675 (The Rifles) Squadron AAC has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Lack of references provided to prove notability
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
PercyPigUK (
talk)
23:56, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello,
I wish to move No's 668 - 673 RAF squadron's to the Army Air Corps equivalent and i wanted your opinion on the move before i did anything. The RAF squadrons were active near the end of the Second World War within India, never went operational and only existed for about 2 years. Whereas the AAC equivalents have been active for some years such as No. 672 Squadron AAC which was active for 19 years between 2 different phases.
Also, what's your opinion of moving the above 675, 677, 678 squadrons and merging them all into 6 Regiment Army Air Corps?
Gavbadger ( talk) 18:31, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 62, March – April 2024
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- 11:02, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Hi,
What's your view on moving No. 652-666 Squadron's RAF to AAC equivalent such as 652, 654, 656, 657, 658, 659, 660, 661, 662, 664 and 666. The current RAF articles are ex AOP squadrons and under 10k size. Most already have a equivalent AAC article. I'll leave 663 alone as it's Polish and 665 as it's Canadian. 651, 653, 655, 667, 668, 669, 670, 671, 672 & 673 have already been done.
I wanted your opinion before proposing at WP:Military History talkpage.
Gavbadger ( talk) 19:36, 23 April 2024 (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)
20:19, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/No. 675 (The Rifles) Squadron AAC until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.PercyPigUK ( talk) 13:36, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of United States Navy aircraft wings, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Battle of Santa Cruz.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 17:53, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
I have suggested returning Talk:441st Air Expeditionary Squadron to 441st Bombardment Squadron. With the moves of the 441st and its companions of the 320th Bombardment Group to provisional status some time ago, the pages were moved to air expeditionary units on the "most current name" status. I believe now this was probably a mistake at the time, as there was then no expeditionary notability but information has since leaked that these squadrons operated bases in Syria (now Russian bases), which does give them notability they didn't have on their move, so I'm ambiguous about their location. However, in addition to the WW II and B47 operations, the 441st was one of the first two B-52 squadrons (along with the one at Columbus) to deploy for Arc Light mission, as it was the only squadron of the wing to fly B-52s. No lobbying, but I invite you to share your opinion of the talk pages, and you might take a look at the 441s 443d and 444th. Lineagegeek ( talk) 23:38, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
(Edited) me no grammar good tonight. Lineagegeek ( talk) 12:19, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions to Zhaslyk (airfield). Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.
Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Chaotic Enby ( talk · contribs) 17:08, 1 June 2024 (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)
09:42, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Combat Aviation Brigade, 10th Mountain Division has been nominated for a 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. Hog Farm Talk 13:45, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 4th Battalion, 42nd Field Artillery Regiment (United States), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 4th Infantry Division.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:14, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
Hi - Many thanks for adding additional material to this article. I have expanded it quite a bit and added plenty of references (the original rational for deletion was that it had not been edited in 3 years and only contains two independent sources). It would be great if you felt able throw your weight behind retention. Best wishes. Dormskirk ( talk) 09:56, 28 June 2024 (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)
12:07, 13 July 2024 (UTC)