Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Soviet destroyer Silny 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 L293D -- L293D ( talk) 14:41, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
The article Soviet destroyer Silny you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Soviet destroyer Silny for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of L293D -- L293D ( talk) 01:41, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
The article No. 2 Squadron RCAF you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:No. 2 Squadron RCAF for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ed! -- Ed! ( talk) 20:41, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
I'm not exactly welcome on Peacemaker's Talk page, so I'm responding here. In re: this, I don't believe that you've ever posted to WikiProject Germany. I've gotten responses there directly as well as comments on various discussions that I linked there. Not all noticeboards are as active as MILHIST.
On the topic of votestacking, MILHIST does come across as a non-neutral canvassing board at times. For example, during the ARBGWE Request for Arbitration, the page was linked at MILHIST. This resulted in a strong showing by MILHIST coordinators, including one who referenced "Inquisition", "Salem witch trials", the "Great Purge", "Night of the Long Knives", and "Nazi book burnings", and complained about "the insertion of war crime allegations (regardless of accuracy) disrupt[ing] the chronicle" ( source). So not exactly a non-partial editor pool when it comes to how war crimes should be portrayed in the articles on military figures. -- K.e.coffman ( talk) 02:51, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
You seem to be saying that editors can't post neutral ...[2]; and now you complaining about a bit of "robust conversation"? If you wish to discuss further, you are welcome to discuss on my Talk page. K.e.coffman ( talk) 03:34, 9 February 2019 (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) 12:19, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Wow. You were busy on this. Thanks for your help, because I was frankly getting a bit bogged down on it. I've put in a note on your request for reassessment. I still have more to add from other sources, including Glantz's "Red Storm" and a couple of Soviet General Staff studies. I agree with your removal of the quote for Beltsy (it's ambiguous and Russian Wikipedia does not include it) but I also plan to re-include the quote for Bratislava. I use these in part to break up the wall of text and make the pages more readable. Wreck Smurfy ( talk) 03:03, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for your e-mails. Stub now in place at 42nd Guards Tank Division; also FYI @ Wreck Smurfy for anything you wish to add to 42nd Guards Rifle Division. Buckshot06 (talk) 02:34, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Soviet destroyer Silny 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 L293D -- L293D ( talk) 14:41, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
The article Soviet destroyer Silny you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Soviet destroyer Silny for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of L293D -- L293D ( talk) 01:41, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
The article No. 2 Squadron RCAF you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:No. 2 Squadron RCAF for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ed! -- Ed! ( talk) 20:41, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
I'm not exactly welcome on Peacemaker's Talk page, so I'm responding here. In re: this, I don't believe that you've ever posted to WikiProject Germany. I've gotten responses there directly as well as comments on various discussions that I linked there. Not all noticeboards are as active as MILHIST.
On the topic of votestacking, MILHIST does come across as a non-neutral canvassing board at times. For example, during the ARBGWE Request for Arbitration, the page was linked at MILHIST. This resulted in a strong showing by MILHIST coordinators, including one who referenced "Inquisition", "Salem witch trials", the "Great Purge", "Night of the Long Knives", and "Nazi book burnings", and complained about "the insertion of war crime allegations (regardless of accuracy) disrupt[ing] the chronicle" ( source). So not exactly a non-partial editor pool when it comes to how war crimes should be portrayed in the articles on military figures. -- K.e.coffman ( talk) 02:51, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
You seem to be saying that editors can't post neutral ...[2]; and now you complaining about a bit of "robust conversation"? If you wish to discuss further, you are welcome to discuss on my Talk page. K.e.coffman ( talk) 03:34, 9 February 2019 (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) 12:19, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Wow. You were busy on this. Thanks for your help, because I was frankly getting a bit bogged down on it. I've put in a note on your request for reassessment. I still have more to add from other sources, including Glantz's "Red Storm" and a couple of Soviet General Staff studies. I agree with your removal of the quote for Beltsy (it's ambiguous and Russian Wikipedia does not include it) but I also plan to re-include the quote for Bratislava. I use these in part to break up the wall of text and make the pages more readable. Wreck Smurfy ( talk) 03:03, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for your e-mails. Stub now in place at 42nd Guards Tank Division; also FYI @ Wreck Smurfy for anything you wish to add to 42nd Guards Rifle Division. Buckshot06 (talk) 02:34, 25 February 2019 (UTC)