![]() | 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 |
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] 22:15, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
You made an excellent point in your created section on the talk page. I have somewhat merged your comments with a current edit conflict about the length and content of the Background section in yet another section. Please join in with some thoughts. Cheers, Jonas Vinther • ( speak to me!) 21:51, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
Battle for Russia, 1996 actually does support this claim, "Though the Stavka was alarmed by reports about German troops approaching the border and had, at 00:30 am, warned the border troops that war was imminent, only a small number of units were alerted in time", so not sure why you added a cn tag to the sentence. Anyways, I've removed the tag and added back Russia 1996. Cheers, Jonas Vinther • ( speak to me!) 21:47, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Ah, that explains the confusion. I guess you skimmed too quickly through most of my earlier replies. Anyways, quickly check them out again and tell me what you think should be the better way to fix the inconsistency between the passage and its cited source, because I've identified a lot other instances, so this should give me a sense of what fix would be deemed favourable by other editors. EyeTruth ( talk) 00:40, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
Finally found a source to support Stavka reports section here. HUZZA! Jonas Vinther • ( speak to me!) 10:21, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Million Award | |
For your contributions to bring Operation Barbarossa (estimated annual readership: 967,437) to Good Article status, I hereby present you the Half Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers! Bobnorwal ( talk) 15:36, 20 May 2015 (UTC) |
Have you restored the revert? Keith-264 ( talk) 23:36, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Coming to America may have broken the
syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 13:10, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Started a new section in relation to the recently discussed failed documentary verification problems. Jonas Vinther • ( speak to me!) 14:43, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
As you are an active editor of the article, you might want to participate in the review and offer some helpful suggestions. Best, Jonas Vinther • ( speak to me!) 08:10, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
Would appreciate your vote or suggestions for improvement! Best, Jonas Vinther • ( speak to me!) 18:11, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Million Award | |
For your contributions to bring Battle of Kursk (estimated annual readership: 500,000) to Good Article status, I hereby present you the Half Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers! Jonas Vinther • ( Click here to collect your price!) 08:13, 4 July 2015 (UTC) |
![]() |
Kursk Barnstar |
For all your hard work in getting Battle of Kursk to GA. Thanks! GeneralizationsAreBad ( talk) 12:14, 4 July 2015 (UTC) |
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Battle of Kursk, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Southwestern Front. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:07, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is 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, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:26, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
I think the article meets the FA-criteria by now or is at least very close. That being said, the "Historical significance" section needs expanding. I got a few ideas myself I will try to implement later today, I'll get back to you when I'm finished. Jonas Vinther • ( Click here to collect your price!) 13:47, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
If you haven't already, click here or here for some wunderbar entertainment. :) Jonas Vinther • ( Click here to collect your price!) 22:48, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
I've just removed an edit you made in March 2013. [1] I don't see how it is backed in the sources (and see the website as failing WP:RS despite its author). For peer reviewed papers, it's usually best to stick with the conclusions, summaries, etc. Maybe you could go to the article's talk page and explain it if you still think it belongs. Thanks. Doug Weller ( talk) 13:11, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
I have replied to your comment on my talkpage, although I think you should have raised the issue not there but on the article's talkpage.
Let me remind of of WP:EDITWAR. Do not try to enforce your edit. Especially since it was made without prior discussion. Read WP:BRD carefully. Debresser ( talk) 21:48, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
You actually did break WP:3RR. You carried out 4 reversions (even with counting the one you did in two steps as one): 1, 2, 3, 4. One more reversion and I would have joined you in breaking it too. So it is very ironic that you're now the one trying to pull the edit-warring card. EyeTruth ( talk) 07:37, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
@ EyeTruth: I see you helped promote Battle of Prokhorovka to featured article status. I have come across people saying it was the biggest tank battle in history, and then other sources saying it was the Battle of Kursk or the Battle of Brody. I was a bit Confused with situation Since I have gotten Very different answers? Jack90s15 ( talk) 20:41, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
In the month of September, Wikiproject Military history is running a project-wide edit-a-thon, Backlog Banzai. There are heaps of different areas you can work on, for which you claim points, and at the end of the month all sorts of whiz-bang awards will be handed out. Every player wins a prize! There is even a bit of friendly competition built in for those that like that sort of thing. Sign up now at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/September 2019 Backlog Banzai to take part. For the coordinators, Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 08:18, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next 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 doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Cheers, Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 02:38, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
G'day everyone, voting for the 2019 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 03:37, 15 September 2019 (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 |
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] 22:15, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
You made an excellent point in your created section on the talk page. I have somewhat merged your comments with a current edit conflict about the length and content of the Background section in yet another section. Please join in with some thoughts. Cheers, Jonas Vinther • ( speak to me!) 21:51, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
Battle for Russia, 1996 actually does support this claim, "Though the Stavka was alarmed by reports about German troops approaching the border and had, at 00:30 am, warned the border troops that war was imminent, only a small number of units were alerted in time", so not sure why you added a cn tag to the sentence. Anyways, I've removed the tag and added back Russia 1996. Cheers, Jonas Vinther • ( speak to me!) 21:47, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Ah, that explains the confusion. I guess you skimmed too quickly through most of my earlier replies. Anyways, quickly check them out again and tell me what you think should be the better way to fix the inconsistency between the passage and its cited source, because I've identified a lot other instances, so this should give me a sense of what fix would be deemed favourable by other editors. EyeTruth ( talk) 00:40, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
Finally found a source to support Stavka reports section here. HUZZA! Jonas Vinther • ( speak to me!) 10:21, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Million Award | |
For your contributions to bring Operation Barbarossa (estimated annual readership: 967,437) to Good Article status, I hereby present you the Half Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers! Bobnorwal ( talk) 15:36, 20 May 2015 (UTC) |
Have you restored the revert? Keith-264 ( talk) 23:36, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Coming to America may have broken the
syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 13:10, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Started a new section in relation to the recently discussed failed documentary verification problems. Jonas Vinther • ( speak to me!) 14:43, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
As you are an active editor of the article, you might want to participate in the review and offer some helpful suggestions. Best, Jonas Vinther • ( speak to me!) 08:10, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
Would appreciate your vote or suggestions for improvement! Best, Jonas Vinther • ( speak to me!) 18:11, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Million Award | |
For your contributions to bring Battle of Kursk (estimated annual readership: 500,000) to Good Article status, I hereby present you the Half Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers! Jonas Vinther • ( Click here to collect your price!) 08:13, 4 July 2015 (UTC) |
![]() |
Kursk Barnstar |
For all your hard work in getting Battle of Kursk to GA. Thanks! GeneralizationsAreBad ( talk) 12:14, 4 July 2015 (UTC) |
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Battle of Kursk, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Southwestern Front. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:07, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is 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, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:26, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
I think the article meets the FA-criteria by now or is at least very close. That being said, the "Historical significance" section needs expanding. I got a few ideas myself I will try to implement later today, I'll get back to you when I'm finished. Jonas Vinther • ( Click here to collect your price!) 13:47, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
If you haven't already, click here or here for some wunderbar entertainment. :) Jonas Vinther • ( Click here to collect your price!) 22:48, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
I've just removed an edit you made in March 2013. [1] I don't see how it is backed in the sources (and see the website as failing WP:RS despite its author). For peer reviewed papers, it's usually best to stick with the conclusions, summaries, etc. Maybe you could go to the article's talk page and explain it if you still think it belongs. Thanks. Doug Weller ( talk) 13:11, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
I have replied to your comment on my talkpage, although I think you should have raised the issue not there but on the article's talkpage.
Let me remind of of WP:EDITWAR. Do not try to enforce your edit. Especially since it was made without prior discussion. Read WP:BRD carefully. Debresser ( talk) 21:48, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
You actually did break WP:3RR. You carried out 4 reversions (even with counting the one you did in two steps as one): 1, 2, 3, 4. One more reversion and I would have joined you in breaking it too. So it is very ironic that you're now the one trying to pull the edit-warring card. EyeTruth ( talk) 07:37, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
@ EyeTruth: I see you helped promote Battle of Prokhorovka to featured article status. I have come across people saying it was the biggest tank battle in history, and then other sources saying it was the Battle of Kursk or the Battle of Brody. I was a bit Confused with situation Since I have gotten Very different answers? Jack90s15 ( talk) 20:41, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
In the month of September, Wikiproject Military history is running a project-wide edit-a-thon, Backlog Banzai. There are heaps of different areas you can work on, for which you claim points, and at the end of the month all sorts of whiz-bang awards will be handed out. Every player wins a prize! There is even a bit of friendly competition built in for those that like that sort of thing. Sign up now at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/September 2019 Backlog Banzai to take part. For the coordinators, Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 08:18, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next 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 doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Cheers, Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 02:38, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
G'day everyone, voting for the 2019 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 03:37, 15 September 2019 (UTC)