![]() | 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 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
Hi, would you mind if I nominated Action of 4 September 1782 for DYK? Thanks, Mat ty. 007 14:40, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
At Action of 15 February 1783. S.G.(GH) ping! 22:38, 13 October 2013 (UTC) |
![]() | On 23 October 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Action of 4 September 1782, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that on 4 September 1782, the Royal Navy ship HMS Rainbow was responsible for capturing the 360 men aboard a French Navy frigate with the first proper use of a carronade? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Action of 4 September 1782. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
— Crisco 1492 ( talk) 16:03, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
![]() | On 27 October 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Action of 15 February 1783, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that on 15 February 1783, the British captured a Concorde from the French? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Action of 15 February 1783. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
— Crisco 1492 ( talk) 16:04, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for creating Battle of Flores (1592), ChristiaandeWet!
Wikipedia editor Sulfurboy just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
excellent work.
To reply, leave a comment on Sulfurboy's talk page.
Learn more about page curation.
![]() |
The Editor's Barnstar |
You have bounced back magnificently from a difficult start, creating numerous articles of an extremely high standard, well done! Mat ty. 007 20:23, 29 October 2013 (UTC) |
Hi, if you haven't already, you should consider signing up for WikiCup 2014. Cheers, -- Sp33dyphil © hat ontributions 02:57, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for creating Siege of Middelburg (1572-1574), ChristiaandeWet!
Wikipedia editor Daniel Cavallari just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
Very interesting!
To reply, leave a comment on Daniel Cavallari's talk page.
Learn more about page curation.
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Flores (1592) 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
Typing General --
Typing General (
talk)
14:52, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Siege of Steenwijk (1580–1581) 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
Sturmvogel 66 --
Sturmvogel 66 (
talk)
23:12, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello. Are you busy? Great article, but it does have some problems. Could you check the talk page?-- Khanate General ☪ talk project mongol conquests 01:30, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of the Narrow Seas 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
Chris troutman --
Chris troutman (
talk)
01:02, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Siege of Middelburg (1572–1574) 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
ChrisGualtieri --
ChrisGualtieri (
talk)
05:33, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
The article
Siege of Middelburg (1572–1574) you nominated as a
good article has been placed on hold
. The article is close to meeting the
good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See
Talk:Siege of Middelburg (1572–1574) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
ChrisGualtieri --
ChrisGualtieri (
talk)
05:32, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
I've already begun commenting on the GA review page, although I'm still digging up the source material. Please address these issues as you are able. I hope to complete my review by next weekend. Chris Troutman ( talk) 00:58, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
The article
Battle of the Narrow Seas you nominated as a
good article has been placed on hold
. The article is close to meeting the
good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See
Talk:Battle of the Narrow Seas for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Chris troutman --
Chris troutman (
talk)
04:42, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
The article
Battle of the Narrow Seas you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of the Narrow Seas for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Chris troutman --
Chris troutman (
talk)
06:12, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
The article
Siege of Middelburg (1572–1574) you nominated as a
good article has failed
; see
Talk:Siege of Middelburg (1572–1574) for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
ChrisGualtieri --
ChrisGualtieri (
talk)
20:22, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
The article
Siege of Steenwijk (1580–1581) you nominated as a
good article has failed
; see
Talk:Siege of Steenwijk (1580–1581) for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Sturmvogel 66 --
Sturmvogel 66 (
talk)
22:13, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi ChrstiaandeWet, do you want some help with your DYK nom? Thanks, Mat ty. 007 18:59, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Hello, here is a new one which I ave created. What do you think? Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Flores (1592) 14:36, 5 March 2014 (UTC) ChrisWet ( talk)
The article
Battle of Flores (1592) you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of Flores (1592) for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Typing General --
Typing General (
talk)
05:41, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
Battle of Flores (1592) at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
EagerToddler39 (
talk)
23:57, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
![]() | On 11 March 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Flores (1592), which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the riches from the capture of the Madre de Deus at the Battle of Flores were nearly half the wealth of England's treasury? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Flores (1592). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, 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. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 10:37, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
In 2013, you made these additions to the Spanish Armada article. In them you reference a book by Hansen, and in one provide a quote. You used short form citations to a book: "Hansen pg 563". Unfortunately, there are no other references on the page to any book by Hansen. After much looking around, reling mostly on searching for "Hansen", I have come to realize that you probably intended these to be "Hanson", not Hansen. However, a search for part of the quote you used returns a result to a different book. I am reluctant to change the citation, particularly given that it contains a quote. I was wondering if you could correct these so that a reference is available on the page to the book in which the quote appears. Thanks. — Makyen ( talk) 20:33, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
![]() | On 9 April 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of the Sittang Bend, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Battle of the Sittang Bend was the last significant land battle of the Western allied powers in the Second World War? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of the Sittang Bend. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, 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. |
Thanks from → Call me Hahc 21) 16:03, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
Hey, I am canvassing active MILHIST members who have stated they are interested in French military history during the Second World War.
II am wondering if you can help, I am trying to improve the quality of the Italian invasion of France article. I have checked the limited sources I can access regarding the Army of the Alps, and nothing seems to add up. Some sources state that on 20 June, when the Italian main attack was launched against the Alpine Line, that the army had 3-4 divisions and others state it was as high as 7. Do you have any information that can clarify what the state of this army was?
Regards, EnigmaMcmxc ( talk) 03:38, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
Battle of Rio Nuevo (1658) at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
78.26 (
I'm no IP, talk to me!)
13:58, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello! I don't know if you're aware but there is a wikimedia meet up in Leeds this Saturday (14 June) if you're interested. Hopefully you can make it. Regards IJA ( talk) 17:47, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for creating Action of 30 September 1780, Lord Eastfarthing!
Wikipedia editor Missionedit just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
Thanks!
To reply, leave a comment on Missionedit's talk page.
Learn more about page curation.
Hello Lord Eastfarthing! Thanks for helping in the article Spanish invasion of Portugal. It’s always a pleasure to meet a person who -like my self- loves so much Military History. Putting a picture inside the Military Box (Count Lippe) was an excellent idea since the Box was indecent ("topless"). However, I think the image of Campbell is not appropriated because it doesn’t match in the chapter (a people in arms). A picture with guerrilleros, preferentially in the mountains, would be perfect, but it’s difficult to find. As for the previous image of Burgoyne| Battle of Saratoga, i can see you are a Patriot. I understand and respect your feelings. I would like to offer you my help and ask yours, -when necessary-, a kind of Anglo-Portuguese Alliance. Greetings 85.241.243.210 ( talk) 21:07, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, i forgot to log in in the previous message. Hispanicultur ( talk) 21:10, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:06, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for creating Battle off Ist, Lord Eastfarthing!
Wikipedia editor George.Edward.C just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
Pretty good article, definately notable. Well done!
To reply, leave a comment on George.Edward.C's talk page.
Learn more about page curation.
![]() |
The Original Barnstar |
For creating Battle off Ist. It's just the sort of obscure minor destroyer action I like reading about. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 01:06, 10 November 2014 (UTC) |
The Military history Wikiproject has opened nominations for the Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year. Nominations will be accepted until 13 December at 23:59 GMT, with voting to begin at 0:00 GMT 14 December. The voting will conclude on 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 08:41, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
This message was accidentally sent using an incorrect mailing list, therefore this message is being resent using the correct list. As a result, some users may get this message twice; if so please discard. We apologize for the inconvenience.
Nominations for the military historian of the year and military newcomer of the year have now closed, and voting for the candidates has officially opened. All project members are invited to cast there votes for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year candidates before the elections close at 23:59 December 21st. For the coordinators, TomStar81
MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 00:33, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
The result was indecisive according to various recent studies about it, notably a study done by respected historian José Luis Casado Soto, with a team of dutch, english, french and spanish historians for reference: (Los barcos españoles del siglo XVI y La Gran Armada de 1588. 1988). The historians mentioned on the previous revision, with the exception of Richard Holmes, did studies previous to this one so their findings aren't as reliable. Holmes states the result was indecisive and that English propaganda touted it as a victory. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jldg89 ( talk • contribs) 20:23, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
I hope you were not offended by my reversion of your recent edits to the Template:Campaignbox Burma Campaign. However, I feel that lumping all the actions fought by "Y" Force (the Chinese National Revolutionary Army attacking from Yunnan and "X" Force (the Chinese/American Northern Combat Area Command into a single campaigning season (1942-1943) would distort the narrative, both from the point of view of timeline (the Yunnan/Burma Road campaign lasted almost as long as the entire Burma Campaign) and that of strategic impact; e.g. the capture of Myitkyina impacted on the Hump and the Chindits campaign and vice versa, the logic of which would be lost if Myitkyina was placed a season earlier. Regards, HLGallon ( talk) 23:03, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Do you have Auto Ed enabled? It tidies common errors like the space here: *{{cite book to * {{cite book and the wrong sort of dashes etc but also eliminates lines under headers, as you've noticed. Keith-264 ( talk) 10:57, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
My Dear Lord Eastfathing (any other form of address feels wrong somehow), you may have noticed that over the last few weeks I have been working in my sandboxes on a series of articles describing the East Indies campaign of the French Revolutionary Wars with the intention of turning them into a Good Topic. Other than completing the overall article the only remaining battle I want to work on is Battle of Mahé which you created back in January (actually I still have to do the invasion of South Africa, but that is going to be a pain in the arse, so I'm putting it off). I just wanted to leave a note to let you know my intentions: your article is good, but I wanted to expand it and add some more context and sources in my sandbox before merging it back with the mainspace article. Please do let me know if that'll be a problem, Thanks-- Jackyd101 ( talk) 22:19, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
I think I saw Elizabeth Bennett in your new Brimham Rocks photo. ;O) Keith-264 ( talk) 17:00, 9 July 2015 (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 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
Hi, would you mind if I nominated Action of 4 September 1782 for DYK? Thanks, Mat ty. 007 14:40, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
At Action of 15 February 1783. S.G.(GH) ping! 22:38, 13 October 2013 (UTC) |
![]() | On 23 October 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Action of 4 September 1782, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that on 4 September 1782, the Royal Navy ship HMS Rainbow was responsible for capturing the 360 men aboard a French Navy frigate with the first proper use of a carronade? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Action of 4 September 1782. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
— Crisco 1492 ( talk) 16:03, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
![]() | On 27 October 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Action of 15 February 1783, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that on 15 February 1783, the British captured a Concorde from the French? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Action of 15 February 1783. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
— Crisco 1492 ( talk) 16:04, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for creating Battle of Flores (1592), ChristiaandeWet!
Wikipedia editor Sulfurboy just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
excellent work.
To reply, leave a comment on Sulfurboy's talk page.
Learn more about page curation.
![]() |
The Editor's Barnstar |
You have bounced back magnificently from a difficult start, creating numerous articles of an extremely high standard, well done! Mat ty. 007 20:23, 29 October 2013 (UTC) |
Hi, if you haven't already, you should consider signing up for WikiCup 2014. Cheers, -- Sp33dyphil © hat ontributions 02:57, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for creating Siege of Middelburg (1572-1574), ChristiaandeWet!
Wikipedia editor Daniel Cavallari just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
Very interesting!
To reply, leave a comment on Daniel Cavallari's talk page.
Learn more about page curation.
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Flores (1592) 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
Typing General --
Typing General (
talk)
14:52, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Siege of Steenwijk (1580–1581) 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
Sturmvogel 66 --
Sturmvogel 66 (
talk)
23:12, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello. Are you busy? Great article, but it does have some problems. Could you check the talk page?-- Khanate General ☪ talk project mongol conquests 01:30, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of the Narrow Seas 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
Chris troutman --
Chris troutman (
talk)
01:02, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Siege of Middelburg (1572–1574) 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
ChrisGualtieri --
ChrisGualtieri (
talk)
05:33, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
The article
Siege of Middelburg (1572–1574) you nominated as a
good article has been placed on hold
. The article is close to meeting the
good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See
Talk:Siege of Middelburg (1572–1574) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
ChrisGualtieri --
ChrisGualtieri (
talk)
05:32, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
I've already begun commenting on the GA review page, although I'm still digging up the source material. Please address these issues as you are able. I hope to complete my review by next weekend. Chris Troutman ( talk) 00:58, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
The article
Battle of the Narrow Seas you nominated as a
good article has been placed on hold
. The article is close to meeting the
good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See
Talk:Battle of the Narrow Seas for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Chris troutman --
Chris troutman (
talk)
04:42, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
The article
Battle of the Narrow Seas you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of the Narrow Seas for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Chris troutman --
Chris troutman (
talk)
06:12, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
The article
Siege of Middelburg (1572–1574) you nominated as a
good article has failed
; see
Talk:Siege of Middelburg (1572–1574) for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
ChrisGualtieri --
ChrisGualtieri (
talk)
20:22, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
The article
Siege of Steenwijk (1580–1581) you nominated as a
good article has failed
; see
Talk:Siege of Steenwijk (1580–1581) for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Sturmvogel 66 --
Sturmvogel 66 (
talk)
22:13, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi ChrstiaandeWet, do you want some help with your DYK nom? Thanks, Mat ty. 007 18:59, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Hello, here is a new one which I ave created. What do you think? Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Flores (1592) 14:36, 5 March 2014 (UTC) ChrisWet ( talk)
The article
Battle of Flores (1592) you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of Flores (1592) for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Typing General --
Typing General (
talk)
05:41, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
Battle of Flores (1592) at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
EagerToddler39 (
talk)
23:57, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
![]() | On 11 March 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Flores (1592), which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the riches from the capture of the Madre de Deus at the Battle of Flores were nearly half the wealth of England's treasury? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Flores (1592). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, 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. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 10:37, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
In 2013, you made these additions to the Spanish Armada article. In them you reference a book by Hansen, and in one provide a quote. You used short form citations to a book: "Hansen pg 563". Unfortunately, there are no other references on the page to any book by Hansen. After much looking around, reling mostly on searching for "Hansen", I have come to realize that you probably intended these to be "Hanson", not Hansen. However, a search for part of the quote you used returns a result to a different book. I am reluctant to change the citation, particularly given that it contains a quote. I was wondering if you could correct these so that a reference is available on the page to the book in which the quote appears. Thanks. — Makyen ( talk) 20:33, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
![]() | On 9 April 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of the Sittang Bend, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Battle of the Sittang Bend was the last significant land battle of the Western allied powers in the Second World War? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of the Sittang Bend. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, 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. |
Thanks from → Call me Hahc 21) 16:03, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
Hey, I am canvassing active MILHIST members who have stated they are interested in French military history during the Second World War.
II am wondering if you can help, I am trying to improve the quality of the Italian invasion of France article. I have checked the limited sources I can access regarding the Army of the Alps, and nothing seems to add up. Some sources state that on 20 June, when the Italian main attack was launched against the Alpine Line, that the army had 3-4 divisions and others state it was as high as 7. Do you have any information that can clarify what the state of this army was?
Regards, EnigmaMcmxc ( talk) 03:38, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
Battle of Rio Nuevo (1658) at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
78.26 (
I'm no IP, talk to me!)
13:58, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello! I don't know if you're aware but there is a wikimedia meet up in Leeds this Saturday (14 June) if you're interested. Hopefully you can make it. Regards IJA ( talk) 17:47, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for creating Action of 30 September 1780, Lord Eastfarthing!
Wikipedia editor Missionedit just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
Thanks!
To reply, leave a comment on Missionedit's talk page.
Learn more about page curation.
Hello Lord Eastfarthing! Thanks for helping in the article Spanish invasion of Portugal. It’s always a pleasure to meet a person who -like my self- loves so much Military History. Putting a picture inside the Military Box (Count Lippe) was an excellent idea since the Box was indecent ("topless"). However, I think the image of Campbell is not appropriated because it doesn’t match in the chapter (a people in arms). A picture with guerrilleros, preferentially in the mountains, would be perfect, but it’s difficult to find. As for the previous image of Burgoyne| Battle of Saratoga, i can see you are a Patriot. I understand and respect your feelings. I would like to offer you my help and ask yours, -when necessary-, a kind of Anglo-Portuguese Alliance. Greetings 85.241.243.210 ( talk) 21:07, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, i forgot to log in in the previous message. Hispanicultur ( talk) 21:10, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:06, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for creating Battle off Ist, Lord Eastfarthing!
Wikipedia editor George.Edward.C just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
Pretty good article, definately notable. Well done!
To reply, leave a comment on George.Edward.C's talk page.
Learn more about page curation.
![]() |
The Original Barnstar |
For creating Battle off Ist. It's just the sort of obscure minor destroyer action I like reading about. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 01:06, 10 November 2014 (UTC) |
The Military history Wikiproject has opened nominations for the Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year. Nominations will be accepted until 13 December at 23:59 GMT, with voting to begin at 0:00 GMT 14 December. The voting will conclude on 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 08:41, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
This message was accidentally sent using an incorrect mailing list, therefore this message is being resent using the correct list. As a result, some users may get this message twice; if so please discard. We apologize for the inconvenience.
Nominations for the military historian of the year and military newcomer of the year have now closed, and voting for the candidates has officially opened. All project members are invited to cast there votes for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year candidates before the elections close at 23:59 December 21st. For the coordinators, TomStar81
MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 00:33, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
The result was indecisive according to various recent studies about it, notably a study done by respected historian José Luis Casado Soto, with a team of dutch, english, french and spanish historians for reference: (Los barcos españoles del siglo XVI y La Gran Armada de 1588. 1988). The historians mentioned on the previous revision, with the exception of Richard Holmes, did studies previous to this one so their findings aren't as reliable. Holmes states the result was indecisive and that English propaganda touted it as a victory. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jldg89 ( talk • contribs) 20:23, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
I hope you were not offended by my reversion of your recent edits to the Template:Campaignbox Burma Campaign. However, I feel that lumping all the actions fought by "Y" Force (the Chinese National Revolutionary Army attacking from Yunnan and "X" Force (the Chinese/American Northern Combat Area Command into a single campaigning season (1942-1943) would distort the narrative, both from the point of view of timeline (the Yunnan/Burma Road campaign lasted almost as long as the entire Burma Campaign) and that of strategic impact; e.g. the capture of Myitkyina impacted on the Hump and the Chindits campaign and vice versa, the logic of which would be lost if Myitkyina was placed a season earlier. Regards, HLGallon ( talk) 23:03, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Do you have Auto Ed enabled? It tidies common errors like the space here: *{{cite book to * {{cite book and the wrong sort of dashes etc but also eliminates lines under headers, as you've noticed. Keith-264 ( talk) 10:57, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
My Dear Lord Eastfathing (any other form of address feels wrong somehow), you may have noticed that over the last few weeks I have been working in my sandboxes on a series of articles describing the East Indies campaign of the French Revolutionary Wars with the intention of turning them into a Good Topic. Other than completing the overall article the only remaining battle I want to work on is Battle of Mahé which you created back in January (actually I still have to do the invasion of South Africa, but that is going to be a pain in the arse, so I'm putting it off). I just wanted to leave a note to let you know my intentions: your article is good, but I wanted to expand it and add some more context and sources in my sandbox before merging it back with the mainspace article. Please do let me know if that'll be a problem, Thanks-- Jackyd101 ( talk) 22:19, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
I think I saw Elizabeth Bennett in your new Brimham Rocks photo. ;O) Keith-264 ( talk) 17:00, 9 July 2015 (UTC)