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 15 | ← | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | Archive 23 | → | Archive 25 |
|
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)
12:40, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
My first support on my first featured article nomination, thank you. I truly do appreciate how thorough you are and how enjoyable you make improving an article. It really does take a village to make articles be the best that they can be, as we all incorporate our own proclivities in the process. SusunW ( talk) 14:01, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
Editor of the Week | ||
Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week in recognition of your outstanding and continuing work. Thank you for the great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project) |
User:Gog the Mild submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:
You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:
{{User:UBX/EoTWBox}}
Lead Coordinator of Military History Project |
Peacemaker67 |
Editor of the Week for the week beginning October 13, 2019 |
Created 148 articles and 7 templates. A prolific and helpful article reviewer. Lead coordinator of the Military History Project. Offers sage and calm advice. |
Recognized for |
participating in two United Nations-led peacekeeping missions |
Submit a nomination |
Thanks again for your efforts! ― Buster7 ☎ 16:17, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
Hi Peacemaker. I know that I seem to be taking up a lot of your time lately, but I wonder if I could beg some advice? When Battle of Cape Ecnomus was at ACR I removed its map because it wasn't accurate. One of your parting comments was " I recommend a new map be obtained before this goes to FAC, as that would greatly aid understanding" Thanks to User:Amitchell125's hard work one has how been generated and inserted. It is, in my entirely biased opinion, the best map ever generated to illustrate this battle. Which is not to say that Andrew may not be persuaded to tweak any issues you can see with it. The advice I would like is as to which of the following I should do - regarding the map - before nominating the article for FAC.
I am inclined towards 2, with 4 a close second. but would value your opinion on this. Thanks. Gog the Mild ( talk) 14:15, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
I have a official service sheet of 296th and it indicates serving in Korea before the date you published. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.145.82.229 ( talk) 14:09, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
The Military history A-Class medal with diamonds | ||
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the A-Class medal with Diamonds for Schichau-class torpedo boat, 2/10th Battalion (Australia), and SMS Niobe. Gog the Mild ( talk) via MilHistBot ( talk) 00:30, 20 October 2019 (UTC) |
Hello. This article is too long, need to omit some unnecessary paragraphs, help summarize this article (copy edit and add source). Thanks you. 117.4.107.199 ( talk) 02:45, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
Hi, You reverted my edit on this article because of lack of sources. But the column i added comes from the existing source already mentioned "Niehorster, Leo (2013f). "Balkan Operations Order of Battle 3rd Hungarian Army April 1941". Regards Filiep ( talk) 06:12, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
Hey Peacemaker. I noticed that you had a heavy hand in editing and writing | Operation Alfa article. I think it is worthy of becoming a Featured Article. What say you? I'm interested in nominating the article for DoYouKnow? as well.
Also, do you have any advice on creating articles? There are some significant WWII massacres that took place that have no articles for them that I would considered writing for. Such as Kninsko Polje massacre, Kamešnica-Mosor valley massacre, Drakulić massacre and Dotršćina executions. OyMosby ( talk) 16:14, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
Amendment request: German war effort, which you were a party to, has been declined by the arbitration committee. The request has been archived to Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/German war effort#Amendment request: German war effort (October 2019). – bradv 🍁 15:54, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
Sorry to trouble you. If you have a moment, could you please help with this: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#A-class reassessment of Cold War, but something screwed up. Thank you for your time and trouble. ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 00:02, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
This is to let you know that Yugoslav torpedo boat T7 has been scheduled as WP:TFA for 23 November 2019. Please check that the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/November 23, 2019. Thanks! Ealdgyth - Talk 15:35, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
If so I would like to request some help with a big dump of badly-translated articles about the French Foreign Legion and the colonial wars in Algeria, which were posted at PNT. The English should at this point be OK-ish as I have worked quite a bit on them but they aren't really anything to be proud of, and while my interest in French military history is non-zero, it does have limits. In any event, the help of willing editors would be gratefully accepted. Thanks Elinruby ( talk) 04:59, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
The ACR of Basil II doesn't seem to be going anywhere. What is the procedure in such cases? Gog the Mild ( talk) 21:14, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2019).
Interface administrator changes
|
|
Cookies! | ||
Sun Creator has given you some cookies! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else some cookies, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thank you for the edit on Arthur Blackburn. Regards, Sun Creator( talk) 13:43, 8 November 2019 (UTC) To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{ subst:Cookies}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{ subst:munch}}! |
hey. I'm really sorry to bother you, but Cold War was finally delisted from GA and so needs a MILHIST A-review. I promise I would do it myself, but last time I bollixed it all up. Ummm. May I ask... would you please do the honors of starting it? I am sorry to throw it off on you. I will !vote delist after it is started. Tks ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 07:50, 10 November 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)
21:44, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Hello!
The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate in a recent consultation that followed a community discussion you’ve been part of.
Please fill out this short survey to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.
The privacy policy for this survey is here. This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic.
Thank you for your participation, Kbrown (WMF) 10:45, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
The Military history A-Class medal with diamonds | ||
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the A-Class medal with Diamonds for Arthur Blackburn, Yugoslav destroyer Ljubljana, and 1st Army Group (Kingdom of Yugoslavia). Gog the Mild ( talk) via MilHistBot ( talk) 00:30, 14 November 2019 (UTC) |
A serious well done for this; that's an awful lot of hard work. Gog the Mild ( talk) 00:33, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
I think the comment you left at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment#Clarification_request:_Antisemitism_in_Poland was meant for the Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment#Clarification_request:_Antisemitism_in_Poland_(2) (the latter is the one I meant to link from MILHIST; it was initially named identically to the first section and later renamed). I assume you followed my link and ended at the first, rather than second, section. Both are related as they concern the same remedy, but the issues raised are a bit different. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:02, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2019).
Interface administrator changes
will no longer use partial or temporary Office Action bans... until and unless community consensus that they are of value or Board directive.
The Writer's Barnstar | ||
On behalf of the Milhist coordinators, I hereby award you the Writer's Barnstar, for placing second in the November 2019 Military History Article Writing Contest, achieving 35 points from four articles. Congratulations, Gog the Mild ( talk) 18:14, 2 December 2019 (UTC) |
Following earlier discussions, this is to let you know that the Gottlob Berger article has been scheduled as today's featured article for January 6, 2020, the anniversary of his indictment. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 6, 2020, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.
For Featured Articles promoted on or after October 1, 2018, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.
We suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:39, 9 December 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)
12:48, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
"You call his views "funny" regarding Croats having needed Serbs to free themselves? I guess you know better this issues than Tesla, that is really genious! I will not even dare to think about it, but it just passes trough my mind how denegrating your though is regarding all Croatian heroes that bravely struggled to mantain or expand their authonomic rights for the none less then 1000 years which Croatia spent without independence. Meantime, Serbs had medieval kingdoms, even an empire, kicked Ottomans out, started Balkan wars, First World War, won Austro-Hungary, all this by loosing a third or half its overall male population in each war, that´s just coincidence. Luck."
This was said by a user FkpCascais. An example of so many ridiculous statements made on that page. Is this guy really an active editor on Balkan articles? Jesus.... That whole page about Tesla's ethnicity and birthplace is mess of anti-Croat and anti-Serb nationalist tripe. Is it not in violation of Wiki rules?
For the record. Tesla was an Ethnic Serb born in what was The Austrian Empire Military Frontier, now today Croatia. I agree with the infobox as is and Croatian Nationalists are wasting their time.
Talk:Nikola_Tesla/Nationality_and_ethnicity#Semi-protected_edit_request_on_25_June_2019
So much of this page violates WP:NPA. How would I go about reporting it
Here is the link to the page. 74.101.190.2 ( talk) 23:17, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
Peace is a state of balance and understanding in yourself and between others, where respect is gained by the acceptance of differences, tolerance persists, conflicts are resolved through dialog, peoples rights are respected and their voices are heard, and everyone is at their highest point of serenity without social tension. Happy Holidays to you and yours. ― Buster7 ☎ 17:49, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
There is a discussion going on at the Easter Rising talk page about whether the rising should be considered part of the Great War in the infobox because it was significantly influenced by it. Can you please contribute? 98.221.136.220 ( talk) 20:43, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Io, Saturnalia! | ||
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:35, 20 December 2019 (UTC) |
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2020! | |
Hello Peacemaker67, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this
seasonal occasion. Spread the
WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas and a
Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2020. Spread the love by adding {{ subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
Hello Peacemaker67: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Donner60 ( talk) 08:18, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
Again and again: there is organized group who want to falsify history of brutal dictator Josip Broz Tito and related sources! I made just a correction but entire article is not neutral: can you look at that article? Regards-- Forza bruta ( talk) 14:45, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
Can you please provide sources if you have for asat testing of india called as Mission Shakti. I want to improve that article. Thank you 😊. Mahusha ( talk) 05:01, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
Peacemaker67,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Eddie891
Talk
Work
17:22, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Happy New Year, Happy New Decade and Happy New WikiCup! The competition begins today and all article creators, expanders and improvers are welcome to take part. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. We are relaxing the rule that only content on which you have completed significant work during 2020 will count; now to be eligible for points in the competition, you must have completed significant work on the content at some time! Any questions on the rules or on anything else connected to the Cup should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. Good luck! The judges for the WikiCup are Sturmvogel 66 ( talk · contribs · email), Godot13 ( talk · contribs · email), Vanamonde93 ( talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth ( talk). -- Hanberke ( talk) 18:04, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2019).
|
|
the entire set of articles whose topic relates to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly interpretedrather than
reasonably construed.
Thank you today for Gottlob Berger, "one of Heinrich Himmler's key aides, who was responsible to a significant extent for the expansion of the Waffen-SS from a supposedly "racially pure" organisation to one which made a mockery of Hitler and Himmler's racial ideas by recruiting from almost all of the countries occupied by Nazi Germany during WWII. Berger was arrested and tried for war crimes after the war, but got off pretty lightly in the end, despite his responsibility for several significant crimes."! - Still, happy 2020! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:16, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
Peacemaker67, I wasn't sure whether you'd seen that CPA-5 responded that they'd addressed the issues you raised in your review a couple of weeks ago. Please stop by when you get the chance. Many thanks. BlueMoonset ( talk) 02:22, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
hi. I just came across your user page, after coming here from the Mil History project. I really like your page!! by the way, how would I view the underlying information for your various service awards? (in other words, the specific works or activities that they are each for)? just curious. thanks!! -- Sm8900 ( talk) 19:49, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
The WikiChevrons | ||
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the WikiChevrons for participating in 46 reviews between October and December 2019. Gog the Mild ( talk) via MilHistBot ( talk) 00:31, 11 January 2020 (UTC) |
hi! I just posted the following request for volunteers, on your project talk page. Please feel free to let me know what you think. thanks!! -- Sm8900 ( talk) 20:35, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
Hi. I have revised my own role at Wikipedia:WikiProject History. I have added a note at the talk page to reflect this. Just wanted to let you know. thanks!!! -- Sm8900 ( talk) 16:55, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
This your old edit is not neutral because the sentence reports an opinion of single obscure historian and not reports opposite opinions of all others important historians. I know several sources of historians who report Broz Tito as criminal dictator: this point was discussed in related talk page by many users and I hope in your neutral approach to the topic because I have no intention to start an argument or new dispute with third opinion regarding that bad dictator; you can see Talk:Josip Broz Tito/Archive 11#Formulation currently used in the lead. You can read some sources of Broz Tito's crimes in user:Forza bruta/sandbox. Regards-- Forza bruta ( talk) 16:16, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
Hi Peacemaker67. it's been nice making your acquaintance here over the last day. I wanted to let you know about a bit of news. i am a new coordinator at WikiProject History. I took that role simply by volunteering for it. at this point, none of the other past coordinators are active there at all any more. I have over ten years' experience here, and I have a lot of interest in history topics. I figured that since you are the lead coordinator on one of the WikiProjects that is most active, and one of the most similar in focus to our on project, I would give you a heads-up. I would like to start getting people involved in WikiProject History. a whole lot of people signed up to say they are members there. However, I haven't gotten a lot of replies to my posts recently, asking people to just write back and let me know what their interests are, what they'd like to do, whether they'd like to be available, etc etc.
If you'd like to be involved there, we would welcome that. Alternately, i welcome any input you may have. if there is anything we can do for you, feel free to let me know. but please let me know any suggestions you may have, eg on ways to get things up and running, things we should be doing, ways to get people involved, etc.
By the way, I am already thinking of you as a quasi-coordinator for WikiProject History. Congratulations, you've been volunteered! lol all kidding aside though, given your experience here at Wikipedia and with running a great project, I'd be glad to have your input any time. and any role you wish to take at WikiProject History, you are welcome to do so. I'd be glad to hear your comments or thoughts on this. Feel free to be in touch. thanks!!! -- Sm8900 ( talk) 15:15, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
I consider you as honest admin but if you remove valid source, my actions for improve articles are complicated operation. For every single source and every simple correction, new section needed in talk page? Regards-- Forza bruta ( talk) 13:56, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hey Peacemaker. Thank you for taking the time to edit the Chetnik page pertaining to the MacDonal quote. It has been a quote used many times by people to deny the genocide Chetniks pursued during WWII. However there are still editors who actively on Wikipedia deny the genocide, even using that quote as an argument despite me presenting a number of reputable sources saying otherwise. Ironic as MacDonald denies the Serbian Genocide. Editors such as Sadko who seems to be an apologist as far as Chetniks are concerned and puts forward points that seem hostile towards Croats or Bosnians. Nolanfranyeri Is another editor that appears to deny the genocide as well. I’ve seen too much to still think it was good intentions and just mistakes. As I had a debate with Sadko on my page. If Tomasevich is not a valid source than who is? It seems to me that their is an agenda by some editors. And I suspect that the person who first introduced that MacDonald quote, in which MacDonald was arguing a totally different subject matter, had ill intentions to mislead readers. It really disturbs me to see editors with such aims. How have you dealt with these sort of problems? People pushing povs even extreme ones? Wikipedia is not supposed to be a political platform but a neutral wealth of information. 74.101.190.2 ( talk) 22:32, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
UTC)
References
Hi Peacemaker67. I aprpeciate your help and input recently. I wanted to write to ask if you might be willing to comment at WikiProject Council? I am trying to get that page to be active again. I really need some help and input. many people there have been highly supportive, but one or two recent commenters are questioning the whole effort. I could really use some help input from you and from some of your other coordinators, in other words from people who have xtensive and active involvement in active Wikiprojects. could you please let me know if that's okay? thanks. -- Sm8900 ( talk) 03:22, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
Hello!
I would like to ask why my supplement in Infobox of destroyer Dubrovnik (Premuda part) was deleted?
This is proof for PU hull symbol on Premuda during service in Regia Marine -
here. --
Андрејевић (
talk)
13:14, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
From before the interruption......On page 747 in his book War and Revolution in Yugoslavia: 1941 - 1945 , he states that the use of "widespread genocide" was the reason for high amount of human loss in Yugoslavia and that it was also used in revenge. He then goes on about how 'Serbs perished at the hands of the Ustashe" and that "Croats and Muslims perished at the hands of Chetniks". He clearly is painting both as acts of genocide. He claims that Italians up to September 1943 and Germans thought the war assisted in this genocide. Partly independently and partly through puppet regimes. Also saying Italians used the Chetniks, for example, to assist in killing of the Croatian population in parts of territory under Italian control (conflict with MacDonald). As for Redzic, sorry I gave the wrong page, page 155 is the one. Here he details how "after 3 year long Chetnik campaign against the Croats and Muslims, conducted int he form of ethnic cleansing and genocide, to form an ethnically homogeneous territory for ther expansionist Serbian state" the order to incorporate Croats and Muslims into the Yugoslav army was "too late" and "unrealistic" as Chetniks became "desperate" for additional fighting power against Partisans. I am trying to get access to the page for Parson's. Will get back to you. Also, the wiki pages for list of massacres that were carried out in WWII Yugoslavia, there were a number of large scale massacres carried out by Chetniks against Croats specifically. 74.101.190.2 ( talk) 02:42, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Peacemaker67, I apologize for intruding on your talk page but since I was called on by 74.101.190.2 and Sadkσ in the thread above before I had a chance to reply, I thought it'd be fitting if I replied here.
I'm not interested in getting into an argument or an edit-war over this issue so I'm only going to be making one statement.
IP editor, you claim that I deny the genocide done by the Chetniks. Okay, first of all, it states that some historians contend that genocide was committed against Muslims. Though, even that is a little muddled since it's a quote from a scholar describing what others claim but he doesn't specifically name names. From what I can gather on the Chetnik articles, it's mainly from ethnic scholars from the Balkans who may have their own biases, but as long as they can be considered WP:RS I'm fine with it. Still, it's a minority view but I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt if that statement is accurate.
Now, I have seen no RS that state that genocide was committed specifically against Croats. I don't question the fact that the Chetniks killed a lot of Croats, and simply because they were Croats. However, you need to have RS that state that the Chetniks perpetrated a genocide against Croats during World War Two. Personal feelings, interpretations and opinions are irrelevant to this issue. That's now how Wikipedia works.
Yes, plenty of books talk about the Chetniks and the 20 December 1941 memorandum. I don't dispute that it calls for a "cleansing of national minorities" and a "Greater Serbia". The memorandum itself however, is not what we (certainly not Wikipedia editors) use to determine whether or not specifically genocide against a group of people happened. I don't even deny that the Chetniks perhaps tried to commit genocide or at the very least, ethnic cleansing, based on that. The question is, whether or not they actually did. That's why we rely on reliable historians on this subject before making such claims. Our own interpretation don't matter.
I should also note that the authenticity of the directive is disputed and whether or not it actually came from Mihailović. The memorandum should also be looked at within the context of the situation which is not something that's often done. By December 1941, the Ustashe had already set up concentration camps in the NDH and committed a large number of massacres against Serbs, by then already having likely killed many tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands. So, the desire to ethnically clean areas held by the Ustashe and others by that point need to be put into perspective. But that is beside the point.
There's also a difference between ethnic cleansing and genocide. Often people confuse the two or think the two are the same. By legal definitions, they are different, though ethnic cleansing certainly is a component of genocide. Ethnic cleansing is mainly the expulsion of a population. But various ethnic groups immediately think that whenever atrocities are done against their group, that it automatically makes it genocide. In fact, genocide is hard to prove. That's why when we do see an example of it, it usually receives wide coverage and recognition in scholarship.
From the editing you've been doing, you seem intent on trying to find ways to downplay or excuse the Ustashe crimes while trying to elevate Chetnik crimes. So it's clear there's a bias going on. I don't say that as a personal attack, that's just what looks like to me. And there's nothing necessarily wrong with that if there's reliable sourcing to advance those beliefs. I admit that I am biased as well, but I always try to edit and present arguments based on sources and information that is available and refraining from inserting my own opinions. I don't make edits based on feelings.
The reason I changed your recent edit to the Genocide template, is because you added "Genocide of Croats and Bosniaks" as the title to the article link. Having it phrased that way is problematic because as I stated above, there are no sources that explicitly state that genocide was committed against Croats. Also, atrocities against Muslims were far greater in volume than against Croats, which is the reason why I suspect some are deeming it as genocide but not over Croats. Yet, you are even adamant about having Croats listed before Bosniaks, despite the fact that it's not in proportion to the crimes or even alphabetical for that matter.
I am somewhat sympathetic to ethnic POV editors because it often comes from a place of feeling like they've been wronged and some injustice has to be corrected, but I'm sorry that's not what Wikipedia is based on. I am actually opposed to having the Chetniks listed at all there to be honest, because as I see it, the genocide template is there to list the most egregious and clear-cut examples of genocide, not for listing cases that are dubious or held by a small minority of scholars. I copy-edited the title to "Chetnik crimes against Bosniaks and Croats" because the article that's linked talks about.. World War Two crimes by the Chetniks, mainly against Bosniaks and Croats. Notice how even the other listings above regarding the Nazis don't state "Nazi genocide against Poles" or "Nazi genocide against Soviet POWs", and they were killed in the millions.
I should add the Chetnik War Crimes, particularly the Genocidal crimes section is problematic. It's essentially a bunch of quotes, cherry-picked and mainly sourced to Croatian websites.
You were also reverted, not just by me, but by two other editors on the Mass Killing/Genocide denial page because in your fervor, you again wrote "Genocide of Croats and Bosniaks" while linking to a page that doesn't explicitly mention the denial of mass killings.
Hope that helps clear things up. I'm glad to discuss things further on my talk page. -- Nolanfranyeri ( talk) 07:22, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
What reliable sources state that the Chetniks specifically committed genocide against Croats during World War Two? I looked at the sources given in the genocide template talk page but it's unclear. You mentioned to the IP editor in a previous discussion on your TP that you were uncomfortable using Redžić for a claim of genocide against the Croats because of his ideological alignment with the Partisans and their propaganda against the Chetniks. Tomasevich doesn't explicitly state that the Chetniks committed Genocide against Croats. He doesn't even say it in his 1975 book about the Chetniks. Hoare's book seems to be more about the Bosnian Muslims. There's no quote or preview for the book available so hard to know. He is heavily pro-Muslim and his focus on the Balkans are the Bosniaks. IP editor continues to push for the wording of "Genocide of Bosniaks and Croats" when genocide against Croats has not been established by multiple RS. This is why I advocate for a less controversial wording which is inclusive. -- Nolanfranyeri ( talk) 01:16, 16 March 2020 (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)
12:56, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
Sorry for asking this, but could you please change Category:Fascist organizations in the Ustase article to Category:Fascist parties, which was the original one? -- 191.33.124.106 ( talk) 23:34, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
Since you are a coordinator of the WikiProject Military history I though I would ask you this question.
In the case of the Afghan-Sikh Wars, is a source needed for the result to display either Afghan or Sikh victory? Or can the result be taken from the fact that one side won all the battles in the war?
If you are interested, this is the discussion, under the section Source misrepresentation. In all honesty, I could care less who won this war, I am only concerned with Wikipedia:Verifiability and avoiding personal interpretations. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 21:14, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
Hi I'm very impressed by your knowledge of facts regarding former Yugoslavia. Thank you for being objective and honest. Facts are facts and you are the only author I've come across who actually knows what hes talking about. I thank you for all that you do and would love to have an opportunity to meet you one day. Borislav Vucinovic
Borisdalj@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.181.69.251 ( talk) 19:11, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
I'm not very familiar with navigating through the wiki page but I do have plenty of knowledge to add. Can we communicate via email instead? I would also like to stay anonymous but will provide you all the necessary documents to verify facts. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.181.69.251 ( talk) 03:35, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2020).
|
Interface administrator changes
|
wide-spread support for an alternative desysoping procedure based on community input. No proposed process received consensus.
that checkuser and oversight blocks must not be reversed or modified without prior consultation with the checkuser or oversighter who placed the block, the respective functionary team, or the Arbitration Committee.
Hi PeaceMaker, I am still working on sources as we discussed before. But could you weigh in on editing disagreement on Genocide of Serbs page which I thought we all agreed in few weeks ago? Als on the Chetnik page where I am being reverted with no explanation? An IP made unexplained edits removing mention of “reprisals”. Thank you. 74.101.190.2 ( talk) 03:56, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi. I would like to create some kind of collaborative workspace where coordinators or members of various WikiProjects would gather and provide updates and information on what is going on at each wikiproject, i.e. regarding their latest efforts, projects, and where interested editors can get involved.
You are a coordinator at one of the most active WikiProkjects, so I wanted to get your brief input on whether you'd be interested in helping me to make this happen. I see a few possible options for making this happen, so I would like to get your input and feedback on this. which of the options below would you prefer? also, please reply to the brief questions below.
Please feel free to let me know what you think of this idea, and please let me know your preference, regarding the options above. if you do not see any need for this idea, that is totally fine. However, I think that the majority of editors lack awareness of where the truly active editing is taking place and at which WikiProjects, and I would like to do whatever I can to help make people more aware of where the activity is, what they can do to help, and also which areas of Wikipedia offer ideas and efforts that might help them in their own editing activities. Please feel free to let me know.-- Sm8900 ( talk) 05:09, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
Peacemaker,
Thanks for the welcome because I joined the Military His. Wikiproject. I'm excited to be a part of it.
Thank you,
-- Mikeduke324 ( talk) 15:04, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
I knew that you'd notice this; thanks for fixing it, although I can't see any difference between how I tried it and how you've got it now for the life of me.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 00:06, 13 February 2020 (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)
13:04, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
G'day, PM, I hope you are well and having a good weekend. Per the current conversation on the MILHIST co-ord talk page, the Battle of Greece article (currently a featured article) needs a couple of citations. I've marked these with citation needed tags in the hope that someone will be able to supply the required references. Unfortunately, this isn't really a battle I know much about, so I haven't been able to find any suitable refs; I wonder if you or @ Hawkeye7: might have better luck? Thanks for your time. Regards, AustralianRupert ( talk) 05:35, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
Hello PM. A few IPs have recently made changes to the article's lead. Do you think that the lead should be changed or do you think that the IPs should be reverted and, if they persist, a semi protection needs to be requested? Ktrimi991 ( talk) 22:14, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
G'day all, March Madness 2020 is about to get underway, and there is bling aplenty for those who want to get stuck into the backlog by way of tagging, assessing, updating, adding or improving resources and creating articles. If you haven't already signed up to participate, why not? The more the merrier! Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 08:19, 29 February 2020 (UTC) for the coord team
Hey Peacemaker, once the Francesco Caracciolo-class battleship FAC is done, Sturm and I will have a gap in our joint FAC schedule (mostly because neither of us was paying attention that we were out of joint projects) and I was thinking this would be a good time for you and I to run SMS Niobe - how does that sound to you? Parsecboy ( talk) 19:08, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2020).
|
must notundo or alter CheckUser or Oversight blocks, rather than
should not.
This is to let you know that the Operation Retribution (1941) article has been scheduled as today's featured article for April 6, 2020. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 6, 2020, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.
For Featured Articles promoted in recent years, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.
We suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:56, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
Adelaide Meetup Next: 6 March 2020 Last: 19 May 2018 |
WikiProject Adelaide Meetup 22 has been hastily arranged, spread the word!
DATE: Friday 6 March 2020
TIME: 5.00–6.30 pm
VENUE: Cafe Amore, 162-170 Pulteney St, Adelaide
Celebrate the long weekend with a meet-up and discuss what you'd like to see in the world of Wikimedia in 2020. Sign-up and RSVP here.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Adelaide at 22:16, 5 March 2020 (UTC). You received this message because your user page is in Category:Wikipedians in South Australia. If you do not wish to receive future notifications, please advise Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Adelaide.
Good day! Why is a Field Marshal epaulettes Petar Bojović unneeded, but German, French, Polish and American Field Marshals have epaulettes/stars? August von Mackensen, Paul von Hindenburg, Fedor von Bock, Gerd von Rundstedt, Erwin Rommel, Wilhelm Ritter von Leeb, Ferdinand Foch, Hubert Lyautey, Philippe Leclerc de Hauteclocque, Marie-Pierre Kœnig, Józef Piłsudski, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Douglas MacArthur, Omar Bradley etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Андрејевић ( talk • contribs) 10:52, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
G'Day Peacemaker, I had another dig for material on the different occupation zones in NDH prior to 1943. I found a few more maps that look more accurate (all secondary sources though) and I also found this document. It is a translation into Croat of orders issued by the occupying Italian forces. It includes textual descriptions of the German-Italian demarcation line and the boundary of the Croat demilitarised zone (Zone II/III boundary). The descriptions are lists of towns/features. For the German-Italian one the listed points seem to be the ones on the German side (so Banja Luka, Jajce, Sarajevo). For the de-militarised zone they seem to lie on the line. Anyway I think I can now make a stab at something based on them and the various maps. Will keep you posted. XrysD TALK 23:03, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
Brilliant, you are a champion! Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 21:01, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
Hi PM. It seems that there are disagreements between some editors on whether crimes committed by Chetniks should be included in the template or not [3]. Since you have relevant experience and knowledge, you might want to take a look. Cheers, Ktrimi991 ( talk) 17:26, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
Eight years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:19, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
Hi Peacemaker. I came across Operation Storax in Hawkeye's bot assessed sandbox. Would you say that it was a list or an article? Thanks.
PS. Things seem quiet on the coordination front. Is there anything I am missing which I could or should be doing? Gog the Mild ( talk) 15:59, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
The Military history A-Class medal with diamonds | ||
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the A-Class medal with Diamonds for Arthur Sullivan (Australian soldier), Ba Congress, and Yugoslav destroyer Zagreb. CPA-5 ( talk) via MilHistBot ( talk) 00:30, 14 March 2020 (UTC) |
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
01:51, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Hi Peacemaker67, I see you participated before on the talk page and wondered if you could look into a topic I brought up on the talk page. Thanks. OyMosby ( talk) 20:29, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
Thank you today for First Battle of Dernancourt, "about a joint British/Australian defensive battle on 28 March 1918 which played a small part in stemming the tide of the German Spring Offensive of WWI. A Tasmanian sergeant, Stanley McDougall, was instrumental in defeating the only real German breakthrough of the defences, and was subsequently awarded the Victoria Cross for his actions."! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:26, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
Hey Peacemaker67,
I was wondering if you would be willing to take a look at my FAC nominee, Marcian ( FAC page). It has been going on for some time but is lacking in reviewers. Thank you very much! -- Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 19:12, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2020).
|
Arbcom RfC regarding on-wiki harassment. A draft RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC (Draft) and not open to comments from the community yet. Interested editors can comment on the RfC itself on its talk page.
Military history service award | ||
For scoring 322 points in the WikiProject Military history 2020 edit-a-thon March Madness, I am pleased to award you this token of appreciation from the Project. Thank you, and well done. Gog the Mild ( talk) 12:09, 2 April 2020 (UTC) |
The WikiChevrons | ||
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the WikiChevrons for participating in 26 reviews between January and March 2020. Hawkeye7 ( talk) via MilHistBot ( talk) 00:30, 3 April 2020 (UTC) |
Hi Peacemaker, and thanks for all the bling. Now I'm starting to feel like a North Korean general. I recently reverted this edit. The editor who made seems, on a skim, to be making a number of near random changes to infoboxes. A number of topic areas seem up your street. Possibly some sort of intervention would be useful, but I have no idea what, so I hope that you don't mind me kicking it upstairs to you? Thanks. Gog the Mild ( talk) 20:41, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | ||
For you many contributions to military history articles, to the Wikproject Military History and for your 100th ARC. Donner60 ( talk) 04:54, 4 April 2020 (UTC) |
Hey mate, I hope you're well like me. It's awhile when we've seen each other for last and sadly I couldn't participate for the March Madness. Anyway I just wanna say congratulation with passing your 100th ARC. Cheers. CPA-5 ( talk) 21:51, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
Thank you today for Operation Retribution (1941), "about the German bombing of Belgrade which heralded the Axis invasion of Yugoslavia in April 1941. Over two days, damage was caused to about one quarter of the city, up to 4,000 were killed, and Yugoslav military command and control was paralysed, contributing to the swift defeat of the Royal Yugoslav Army over the following fortnight. The principal Luftwaffe commander, Alexander Löhr, was executed after the war for his part in Operation Retribution."! - "Finster", - what is that in English? "dark" (what my tranlate gives me) seems not dark enough. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:28, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
Checked it against B class and found it lacking a page number so redn to C. Keith-264 ( talk) 12:38, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for the warm welcome to MilHist! I am very new to Wikipedia (10 days). I was wondering how MilHist membership works? Is there a reputation system? Do I just signup to get into departments or taskforces? How do I submit articles for review? Also, is this really how people on Wikipedia converse or is there a messaging system?
Thank you for your time! SanLeone ( talk) 05:13, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
Is Jadovno.com an RS? It looks almost like a blog. I have seen a number of edits added to the Ustashe and Jasenovac and Jadovno pages and some of the sources I am not sure if RS or not. Some direct quotes and witness account quotes. Could you verify? Thank you. OyMosby ( talk) 01:20, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi Peacemaker67. I think File:Tito's cabin at Drvar.jpg is PD in the US, so I re-licensed it accordingly. Please let me know if there is something that I am missing. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 06:56, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
05:21, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi Peacemaker, you were mentioned in the Ustase Talk page. Also your revert was reverted on the article edits. Thought you might want to know. OyMosby ( talk) 01:04, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi Peacemaker, I am having an issue with editors removing relevant content from Rescuers of Jews during the Holocaust. Given your experience with WWII articles, could you take a look? Thanks. OyMosby ( talk) 18:46, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi, I can agree that the two first books I mentioned are somewhat old, but the last one if relatively new, I am also viewing its PDF version. Will that book suffice?
As for changing most to many/some, I mentioned in the talk page why I did this. Will it be if I restore the references that I added, but only with a single, namely the third book? Nbanic ( talk) 06:24, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi Peacemaker, I agree with your edit that Aloysius Stepinac‘s nationality is Yugoslavian. So shouldn’t Ante Pavlić’s nationality be the same? Croatia as a true country didn’t exist during either of their times. When I attempted to edit I simply got reverted with little explanation. OyMosby ( talk) 02:58, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
Just to be clear, I am not arguing about the Stepinac Page. I am using Stepinac as an example for the Pavlic page. But the Nationality section for Pavlic has him as “Croatian” which doesn't seem correct. Also should the lead not say “Yugoslav Croat” and Nationality section say “Yugoslavian”? Putting “Croatian” as a nationality seems pov to say that NDH and modern Croatia are the same. His nationality is missing from the intro. He was born in, became a lawyer and politician in, Yugoslavia.
To put it short. Is it fair to say Pavlic’s ethnicity was Croat and nationality Yugoslavian? His infobox Nationality is set to “Croatian” which seems incorrect. Hope I am being more clear. Cheers OyMosby ( talk) 15:25, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi Peacemaker67,
I hope all is well on your end, due to the current situation our country finds itself. As i am unable to attend ANZAC day commemorations today and tell the veterans in person, you were in my thoughts and i just wanted say, thank you for your past military service to keep the peace in the Balkans. Much appreciated. Resnjari ( talk) 22:16, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
HI, I did not remove sourced content from the article. It was duplicated in the article so I removed it from the lead. It was/is also in this section: Evaluation As you can see the lead is too long. The content that you are restoring was added by a sock puppet user. I reverted the edits made by a sock puppet. Here you can see what I am talking about: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nbanic. User Nbanic was blocked for a 48 hour period and not long after that he created a sock puppet account. That kind of behavior only shows that user Nbanic is not interested in improving Wikipedia, but on the contrary, only interested in abusing Wikipedia. That kind of behavior by user Nbanic makes Wikipedia less enjoyable for everyone. The view that some consider Tito to be equal to Stalin is already covered in the lead by: "...his presidency has been criticised as authoritarian[4][5] and concerns about the repression of political opponents have been raised...". We should at least discuss this and not engage in repetitive reverting, and also take into account the disruptive editing and behavior of user who started all this. Thanks -- Tuvixer ( talk) 08:15, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi, I apologize for the "factory workers". After you reverted my revert, I tried again to Google differently and it really turns out that by adding efforts results in "efforts on factory workers" have a lot of results, while "efforts on the factory workers" has only one result. Thanks! Nbanic ( talk) 09:48, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
I see you put a temporary lock on the page. However there seems to be a particular user pushing a lot of information on the page, bloating sections, editing sentences that no longer match source or adding content not needed in the article. Some edits seem pov. Another user tried to cut down the bloat as well but the original users just adds it back. Can you take a look? Cheers. OyMosby ( talk) 22:29, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
Half the Russian justifications for intervening in Ukraine reference the far-right groups that fought with the GErmans. You will note that the WP:SIGNPOST reports now a campaign by the Ukr Govt to add data to Wikipedia. Things are going to hot up on those pages. I know you've done excellently with similar fraught pages regarding the Balkans; can you sweep through, at least, the Ukrainian pages? If you need help, please ask, especially Noclador, who will rally to the cause, Nick-D, and I.. Buckshot06 (talk) 08:02, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
Please, when You are undoing.. check whether someone raised issue on talk page first. -- Bojan Talk 17:03, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi, today one of my earlier sourced content contributions on the article Socialist Republic of Croatia was reverted by user Tuvixer [4]. In the description of the reversion it is stated that references like that need to have pages. I have the page numbers of course and I checked on Google Books whether they are publicly verifiable - they are. I am now going to put this content back with better the same references reinforced with the page numbers since this was the only requirement stated in the reversion description. I am saying this in advance because it seems to me that some of user Tuvixer's recent behavior in directed at denigrating every thing that I do including stuff as simple as grammar edits with no change of content meaning. So in short - should any accusation fall again, I am editing simply in accordance with the complaint that the references that were there earlier need to have pages - I put the page numbers now and they are verifiable. It seems to me that this should not be a problem. Nbanic ( talk) 17:59, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
Hello, you seem like an admin who deals with Yugoslav War articles. Am I in the wrong here on Glina, Croatia? A editors asked for better sources and I gave them. Then suddenly another editor came with different criteria and accused me of edit warring and wants to lock the article fully to have their way.... PortalTwo ( talk) 23:28, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Peacemaker67. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " 1 Signal Regiment".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia
mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}
, {{db-draft}}
, or {{db-g13}}
code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! JMHamo ( talk) 11:44, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
What is your feeling about the following sentences added to the Genocide of a Serbs Page? I believe you are a part of the discussion there on the talk page.
As Misha Glenny noted, in the 1830s Croatian nationalism began an oscillation between Pan-Slavic, pro-Austrian and anti-Serb orientations. [1] Many scholars interpreted Croatian national identity as the product of an aggressive nationalism informed by the political interests of social elites. [1]
Cited Source: Bellamy, Alex J (2003). The Formation of Croatian National Identity: A Centuries-old Dream. Manchester University Press
Firstly, Croatian national identity has been documented through old history such as the Kingdoms of Croatia that existed since before 9th century. Also on the same page of the source states that multiple scholars say that Croatian national identity can be traced into antiquity.
Seems the editor who incorporated this source was not being balanced in its use. Painting a slanted picture. There is no mention of Serbian national identity history in the Wilipedia page. Seems unbalanced breaking Wiki rules. It seems to be misused in my opinion to push a skewed narrative. There has been discussion about this ongoing on the article talk page too.
What is your view of the source and its use? Thank you for your time. OyMosby ( talk) 16:35, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
References
Hi Peacemaker, and I hope you are well. Could I ask your (and anyone else who may see this) opinion on how to best improve Presidency of the United Nations Security Council I have two main questions:
Any comments you may have would be greatly appreciated! Eddie891 Talk Work 00:59, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
Hi, I wish you had looked more closely at this edit, which only moved the sourced quotes to the relevant section of the article. Is the redundant "However, some claim the trial against A. Stepinac was "carried out with proper legal procedure". [1]" something that really needs reinstating? Sparafucil ( talk) 05:43, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2020).
Hello Peacemaker67. Please take a look at:
I am guessing that you follow this Genocide article because you semiprotected it recently. Do you want to comment on the AN3 complaint, or perhaps close it yourself? The simplest close would be to mark it stale due to the age of the reverts, but if it is treated as a long-term warring case the result could be different. Perhaps there is some overlap between this dispute and the general complaint at WP:ANI#Disruptive editing and POV pushing/point-scoring in a contentious area. Neither of the two AN3 editors has yet been alerted to the DS. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 01:18, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
This is to let you know that Waterloo Bay massacre has been scheduled as WP:TFA for 2 May 2020. Please check that the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 2, 2020. Thanks! Ealdgyth ( talk) 15:05, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi Peacemaker, yes I was originally blocked for accusations of sockpuppeting. However I had it cleared. As I did not use my accounts in tandem in edit wars or on the same page. The only ever instance was on one talk page when I didn’t realized I switched between two accounts. Not wanting people to associate the two I played it off as separate people. But I made one post with one of the two accounts. I did not show any attempt to skew the talk page with them. Aside from that instance I used the accounts on separate pages to avoid some users stalking my edits. So I was unblocked. Will be sticking with one account to avoid such messes again. Never intended to break the rules. Do my comments on the talk page remain striked out? Cheers. OyMosby ( talk) 02:39, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
I expect that you've done more with AWM images on Commons than I have so I'm hoping that you can clarify the US copyright for me for this picture: [5]. Taken in 1915, there's no publication data or author given. The AWM says that it's out of copyright, so I think that I can use a US PD-1996 tag, but I'm not certain since I'm not sure if it was ever actually published. What do you think?-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 18:38, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
The Reviewer Barnstar | ||
Thanks for providing thorough reviews for FOUR! of my GANs. Hog Farm ( talk) 23:17, 6 May 2020 (UTC) |
Does this article Bookocide in Croatia seem legitimately formatted to you? Not familiar with the term “bookocide” and a search only turns up this article. First I heard of the term. Are you familiar with it? I couldn’t find any non-Serbian books on this being a “bookocide” that took place. I don’t doubt that book burnings happen. The background, terminology and pov style seems like an issue though. Given you work with new Balkan articles in the past, thought maybe you’d have a chance to look. Thanks. OyMosby ( talk) 02:07, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
blind? Talk:Milovan_Đilas#Leftist_errors? -- Bojan Talk 03:31, 13 May 2020 (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)
15:03, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
Hi - I am advising I have started a vote on your suggestion to remove all the guff from the infobox and replace with a link to the relevant section. Deathlibrarian ( talk) 11:59, 19 May 2020 (UTC). Just thought I would let you know: Talk:War_of_1812#Edit_Break_-_Vote_on_Peacemaker67's_proposal
Hi, the user: Векочел (not sure if tagging alerts him so I didn't) keeps editing Roman Emperor's articles so that their whole name appears first in the lead. [7] [8] (and on all the other Judio-Claudian Emperors as well as the year of the 4 emperors one – you can see them on his contribution page) While he cites WP:FULLNAME, the precedent seems to have been set by Augustus in FA, who is the only FA Roman Emperor (to the best of my knowledge) and has his full name in the parenthesis rather than as the first couple words. (At the moment he does not due to Векочел's edits) Additionally after scrolling through 10 other Roman Emperor articles this precedent seems commonplace. Altering it would surely require consensus and then the changing of 71 emperors! I had already reverted some of his edits but he has simply re added the information so I came here because I'm not trying to get in an edit war. Am I in the right on this? – Aza24 ( talk) 05:33, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
Hi Peacemaker. While yest there was a cited source, what is to be done when it is in the minority? Given that Nazi killings of Jews began in June 1941 and Ustashe killings began later that year? Unless the Ustashe did need begin killings first? OyMosby ( talk) 02:35, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
I took it that joint control/running of the camp and joint guarding are meant one in the same. The guards running the camp? Hence when the source said guarding as full role I took that as full duty of running the camp. My mistake if this was incorrect. OyMosby ( talk) 23:08, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for the welcome to the MilHist project, Peacemaker67! Looking forward to adding content in coordination with project members. Siddsg ( talk) 06:55, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2020).
Thank you so much for copyediting Ismail I of Granada, and apologies for those grammar mistakes. HaEr48 ( talk) 16:16, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
Please see Talk:Macedonia naming dispute#Time for protection. A number of fairly senior editors are reverting each other on this page. One of the users who is concerned about 'Macedonia' versus 'North Macedonia' appealed on my talk page for assistance. Since it would be tedious to take this through AE, I thought I would see if a different admin like yourself (perhaps uninvolved like me), who knows something about the Balkans, would like to provide some words of wisdom on the talk page to the disputants. The underlying problem is that WP:NCMAC is supposed to be the solution of the dispute, but that page still has some grey areas. Or at least it is puzzling enough that not everyone understands. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 23:37, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
The Admin's Barnstar | ||
This barnstar is awarded to you for your good work, careful contributions and valuable mediation in resolving the naming dispute at the Macedonia Naming Dispute quickly! Thank you, Peacemaker67! - ❖ SilentResident ❖ ( talk ✉ | contribs ✎) 09:12, 5 June 2020 (UTC) |
I am contesting your page move for Hilliard's Legion at WP:RMTR. Clarityfiend ( talk) 05:05, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for yesterday's Milorad Petrović, "about the commander of the Royal Yugoslav Army's 1st Army Group during the Axis invasion of Yugoslavia in April 1941"! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 17:07, 13 June 2020 (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)
04:22, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the Roy Inwood article has been scheduled as today's featured article for July 14, 2020. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 14, 2020, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.
For Featured Articles promoted recently, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.
We suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:17, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Seal_Team_Six. Konli17 ( talk) 13:13, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Elinruby ( talk) 07:15, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
This is not his wacko fringe theory position, though I was coming here to notify you that I started a question about that at the fringe theory noticeboard as well, so let’s consider that done. I am required to notify you. But FYI, the one at NPOV has to do with the term “Indian”, and the long quote about how untrustworthy those Indians are. Elinruby ( talk) 08:53, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
Uh, why are you renaming ("standardizing") the RI regiments and removing volunteers. Current Civil War convention uses the Volunteer to differentiate between the Volunteer regiments and the militia regiments. Instead of using the actual official title, which would be, for example, "1st Regiment, Rhode Island Volunteer Infantry," it is allowed to use "1st Rhode Island Volunteer Infantry." "Volunteer" is a crucial identifier in differentiating between militia and Continental 1st RIs. Please see Renaming Massachusetts Civil War unit pages discussion on my talk page with Historical Perspective 2 and Kges1901. Hhfjbaker ( talk) 00:42, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
The The Holocaust in Serbia article was recently changed to The Holocaust in German-occupied Serbia without any RfC or consensus. How did that happen? Doesn’t seem proper. The editor who changed it interestingly is for the The Holocaust in the Independent State of Croatia article to be changed to Croatia not German-Occupied Croatia....When the individual is confronted they claim an RfC can be made to change their edit. Bit backwards I think. Seems like a pov push case to downplay collaboration. It looks like a WP:POINT edit done in response to the Holocaust in NDH naming. A spite edit. Not to mention a number of editors do not support the change. Personally I think it should be “Holocaust in Territory of the Military Commander in Serbia”. Which is the actual name of the territory. Would I be violating a rule changing it to the name I propose? OyMosby ( talk) 00:54, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
There is no POV pushing, claiming that a rational and well-founded move (as explained above) like that new article title is "POV" is really problematic.
"to downplay collaboration" you better elaborate this part, with good arguments and diffs, or otherwise I'll have to take another way in order to protect my integrity, as I shall not have some random yankee questioning my personal views and my family's role in WW2, which cost us a lot! Was that clear?
Sadkσ
(talk is cheap)
15:19, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.
I believe that all goverment-in-exiles should have an infobox. {{ 3125A| talk}} 00:11, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2020).
RfC regarding on-wiki harassment. The RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC and is open to comments from the community.
all discussions about pharmaceutical drug prices and pricing and for edits adding, changing, or removing pharmaceutical drug prices or pricing from articles.
The WikiChevrons | ||
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the WikiChevrons for participating in 59 reviews between April and June 2020. Hawkeye7 ( talk) via MilHistBot ( talk) 00:32, 5 July 2020 (UTC) |
Thank you for all your help with my first Good Article, and for your suggestion to nominate it for A Class. Thank you for your encouragement. It means a huge amount. simongraham ( talk) 06:55, 6 July 2020 (UTC) |
The Guidance Barnstar | ||
For a particularly helpful review here (it caught my eye on the nomination page last week as I was curious what HSwMS stood for). I thought you went above and beyond in guiding the nominator through the GA process. Cheers, Zawed ( talk) 09:15, 6 July 2020 (UTC) |
Hi Peacemaker67. I see the above is at FAC. It's not within my usual area of expertise but I note that Michael Ashcroft's book (Ashcroft, Michael (2012). George Cross Heroes. Headline. ISBN 978-0-7553-6452-7.) has some additional personal details:
Some of this might be trivia and I am not sure how Ashcroft's book is considered by professional historians, but just thought I'd let you know. Also just noticed there looks to be a citation missing after the third paragraph of "World War II"? - Dumelow ( talk) 05:51, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
No: again and again; Shapiro has personal opinion and I propose to eliminate that fake in introduction! You can read my second email to you: if you insist, I will start a dispute under wiki's rules. No dossier or report are in source by unknown Shapiro! Do you understand difference beetween neutral form and tendentious form? If you don't understand, I will start a dispute under wiki's rules. Read my second email to you: I offer to you a friendly approach to the point with sources by books of Rudolph Rummel who is a master for all historians. Again and again: Shapiro is not reliable author and he is not historian. Regards-- Forza bruta ( talk) 15:34, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello Peacemaker67—Thank you very much for all your hard work with the 18th Pennsylvania Cavalry Regiment. I suspect getting a GA rating will be easy after going through all your comments, and I am sorry you had to make so many. I'm almost through your list—I'm at Shenandoah Valley. I will remove the small number of citations from Cox. It is possible that his higher number of deserters includes those from the failed 19th PA Cavalry that was moved to companies L&M of the 18th PA Cavalry. One comment on the casualty counts: I have made the changes for numbers less than 10. However my confusion is the result of what the MOS says, under the Notes and exceptions part, "Comparable values should be all spelled out or all in figures, even if one of the numbers would normally be written differently: patients' ages were five, seven, and thirty-two or ages were 5, 7 and 32, but not ages were five, seven and 32." Anyway, I want to be consistent with whatever WikiProject Military history recommends. TwoScars ( talk) 18:35, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for reviewing the article for B class. Your name change is logical, however please read on. Currently, most Missouri Union cavalry regiment articles follow the naming convention "Nth Missouri Volunteer Cavalry". The exceptions are the 1st and 4th, which have the word "Regiment" at the end, and the 8th which is different. When I created this article, I followed the pattern already used for naming the majority of Missouri Union cavalry regiments. All the "What links here" point to the original name. The infantry units follow a similar pattern and there are over 30 of them, so changing all the regiments to a new standard promises to be a tedious job that I have no desire to try. Thanks for your other edits that improved the article. Djmaschek ( talk) 03:58, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
The Patience Barnstar | ||
For cheerfully reviewing a number of my Missouri Confederate series articles, and keeping good humor the whole time, even though since I wrote one a day for a stretch, they all had the same issues over and over again. Hog Farm Bacon 04:03, 11 July 2020 (UTC) |
The Multiple Good Article Reviewer's Barnstar | ||
Thank you for completing 27 reviews in the April–May 2020 GAN Backlog drive. Your work helped us to reduce the backlog by over 60%. Regards, Harrias talk 08:31, 11 July 2020 (UTC) |
Hi PM, hope you are keeping well. I have nominated my article Manilal Dwivedi for Peer Review. See, Wikipedia:Peer review/Manilal Dwivedi/archive1. It would be great if you review it and suggest some points. Very soon, I will nominate it for FA. If you are busy, please feel free to say NO. Thanks. -- Gazal world ( talk) 05:40, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Was Operation Storm an ethnic cleansing campaign as described here? 200,000 expelled? You have done editing on the subject so figure I’d ask. OyMosby ( talk) 04:12, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
11:45, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Thank you today for Roy Inwood, who "won his VC during the Battle of Menin Road in September 1917, for eliminating a couple of German machine gun posts. He went on to serve during WWII as a military police warrant officer running detention barracks on the home front. Unlike the many Australian VCs held by the Australian War Memorial, Inwood's is displayed in the Adelaide Town Hall."! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:43, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks Peacemaker67. Sure, will ping you if I need help with more articles. Siddsg ( talk) 08:59, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
( talk page stalker) The GBooks preview I see shows p. 110 and p. 111 as being about him. When google tells me that I've reached a limit, I've found that scrolling far away from that page and then returning to it will usually reset the limit. Best, Eddie891 Talk Work 01:58, 17 July 2020 (UTC){
The Writer's Barnstar | |
For your contributions that have elevated so many articles to GA and FA status. Regards, Field Marshal ( talk) 14:46, 19 July 2020 (UTC) |
Thanks for your feedback on the use of Tucker in the 3rd and 5th Missouri Infantry Regiment articles. I personally like popular history (my interest in the ACW was actually brought on by Bruce Catton), and I have to try to make sure that the articles I work on don't turn into popular history, as I like my anecdotes and eyewitness quotes. I'll need to try to trim down the usage of Tucker in the 5th Infantry article, although the 3rd Infantry is less popular history (and isn't going anywhere beyond ACR), so I'm less concerned about that one. You've done a lot to help me learn how to write quality MILHIST articles. Hog Farm Bacon 03:59, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
Hi,
I was wondering if there's anything you can do about the latest obvious Vujkovica brdo IP address -- see the recent history of [11].
Thanks, JBL ( talk) 10:25, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello PM. You deleted two diffs on the talk page of Cetinje massacre, apparently due to a BLP violation. However, the concerning material is still visible as you did not delete that diff too. Cheers, Ktrimi991 ( talk) 12:43, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for today's John Leak, a South Australian winner of the Victoria Cross. "Leak won the VC at Pozieres soon after Australian troops joined the fighting on the Western Front in WWI by eliminating a German machine gun post that was holding up his battalion. Later in the war he was convicted of desertion, but the sentence was soon commuted and then suspended. He returned to combat and survived the war, but struggled with his war experiences for the rest of his life."! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 11:24, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for expressing your concern. I've addressed it. Are you doing a full review? 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 11:32, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
This felt like a worthwhile discussion that was moving away from the specific article at hand, so I thought I'd continue it here; I hope you don't mind. For the record, I'm pursuing it because I think it's a genuinely gray area that the community at FAC and elsewhere needs to get a better handle on, and not because I'm terribly upset over it or believe that ACR should be archived. If you've said what you had to say, just let me know. For the scenarios you outlined, I think we're broadly in agreement; subjects covered in detail need to have all the available information (at least, all that can be contained in an article of reasonable size). Subjects that aren't notable, obviously, ought not to have articles. But there's a large chunk of articles, that I am particularly aware of because I work on history in the global south, that are obviously notable (at least according to currently held notability standards) but don't have much coverage at all. As an extreme example, take Luis Arturo González López. He was President of Guatemala, albeit briefly; I don't know that we can argue he wasn't notable. But I'm quite certain I've reached the limits of what reliable internet-searchable sources have to offer. I would not submit this at GAN, even, let alone ACR. In general, subjects rendered notable by WP:GEOLAND, WP:NPOL, and WP:PROF (among others) but not by GNG will always have this problem; and González López would meet GNG as currently interpreted. How does one judge comprehensiveness for these articles? Vanamonde ( Talk) 01:02, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
This is to let you know that Commissioner Government has been scheduled as WP:TFA for 29 August 2020. Please check that the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/August 29, 2020. Thanks! Ealdgyth ( talk) 15:03, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
You criticize and don't bother fixing what you say needs fixing.
While I appreciate your research and work, it would be better if you did what you say needs to be done. Your extended critique of the claims at the DYK was no model of clarity. I was not "playing fast and loose" with anything. I tried to interpret and apply the word salad you and
User: Kges1901 composed.
WP:AGF ought to stifle your need to remonstrate.
7&6=thirteen (
☎)
12:09, 28 July 2020 (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 15 | ← | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | Archive 23 | → | Archive 25 |
|
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)
12:40, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
My first support on my first featured article nomination, thank you. I truly do appreciate how thorough you are and how enjoyable you make improving an article. It really does take a village to make articles be the best that they can be, as we all incorporate our own proclivities in the process. SusunW ( talk) 14:01, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
Editor of the Week | ||
Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week in recognition of your outstanding and continuing work. Thank you for the great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project) |
User:Gog the Mild submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:
You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:
{{User:UBX/EoTWBox}}
Lead Coordinator of Military History Project |
Peacemaker67 |
Editor of the Week for the week beginning October 13, 2019 |
Created 148 articles and 7 templates. A prolific and helpful article reviewer. Lead coordinator of the Military History Project. Offers sage and calm advice. |
Recognized for |
participating in two United Nations-led peacekeeping missions |
Submit a nomination |
Thanks again for your efforts! ― Buster7 ☎ 16:17, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
Hi Peacemaker. I know that I seem to be taking up a lot of your time lately, but I wonder if I could beg some advice? When Battle of Cape Ecnomus was at ACR I removed its map because it wasn't accurate. One of your parting comments was " I recommend a new map be obtained before this goes to FAC, as that would greatly aid understanding" Thanks to User:Amitchell125's hard work one has how been generated and inserted. It is, in my entirely biased opinion, the best map ever generated to illustrate this battle. Which is not to say that Andrew may not be persuaded to tweak any issues you can see with it. The advice I would like is as to which of the following I should do - regarding the map - before nominating the article for FAC.
I am inclined towards 2, with 4 a close second. but would value your opinion on this. Thanks. Gog the Mild ( talk) 14:15, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
I have a official service sheet of 296th and it indicates serving in Korea before the date you published. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.145.82.229 ( talk) 14:09, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
The Military history A-Class medal with diamonds | ||
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the A-Class medal with Diamonds for Schichau-class torpedo boat, 2/10th Battalion (Australia), and SMS Niobe. Gog the Mild ( talk) via MilHistBot ( talk) 00:30, 20 October 2019 (UTC) |
Hello. This article is too long, need to omit some unnecessary paragraphs, help summarize this article (copy edit and add source). Thanks you. 117.4.107.199 ( talk) 02:45, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
Hi, You reverted my edit on this article because of lack of sources. But the column i added comes from the existing source already mentioned "Niehorster, Leo (2013f). "Balkan Operations Order of Battle 3rd Hungarian Army April 1941". Regards Filiep ( talk) 06:12, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
Hey Peacemaker. I noticed that you had a heavy hand in editing and writing | Operation Alfa article. I think it is worthy of becoming a Featured Article. What say you? I'm interested in nominating the article for DoYouKnow? as well.
Also, do you have any advice on creating articles? There are some significant WWII massacres that took place that have no articles for them that I would considered writing for. Such as Kninsko Polje massacre, Kamešnica-Mosor valley massacre, Drakulić massacre and Dotršćina executions. OyMosby ( talk) 16:14, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
Amendment request: German war effort, which you were a party to, has been declined by the arbitration committee. The request has been archived to Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/German war effort#Amendment request: German war effort (October 2019). – bradv 🍁 15:54, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
Sorry to trouble you. If you have a moment, could you please help with this: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#A-class reassessment of Cold War, but something screwed up. Thank you for your time and trouble. ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 00:02, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
This is to let you know that Yugoslav torpedo boat T7 has been scheduled as WP:TFA for 23 November 2019. Please check that the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/November 23, 2019. Thanks! Ealdgyth - Talk 15:35, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
If so I would like to request some help with a big dump of badly-translated articles about the French Foreign Legion and the colonial wars in Algeria, which were posted at PNT. The English should at this point be OK-ish as I have worked quite a bit on them but they aren't really anything to be proud of, and while my interest in French military history is non-zero, it does have limits. In any event, the help of willing editors would be gratefully accepted. Thanks Elinruby ( talk) 04:59, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
The ACR of Basil II doesn't seem to be going anywhere. What is the procedure in such cases? Gog the Mild ( talk) 21:14, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2019).
Interface administrator changes
|
|
Cookies! | ||
Sun Creator has given you some cookies! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else some cookies, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thank you for the edit on Arthur Blackburn. Regards, Sun Creator( talk) 13:43, 8 November 2019 (UTC) To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{ subst:Cookies}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{ subst:munch}}! |
hey. I'm really sorry to bother you, but Cold War was finally delisted from GA and so needs a MILHIST A-review. I promise I would do it myself, but last time I bollixed it all up. Ummm. May I ask... would you please do the honors of starting it? I am sorry to throw it off on you. I will !vote delist after it is started. Tks ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 07:50, 10 November 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)
21:44, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Hello!
The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate in a recent consultation that followed a community discussion you’ve been part of.
Please fill out this short survey to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.
The privacy policy for this survey is here. This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic.
Thank you for your participation, Kbrown (WMF) 10:45, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
The Military history A-Class medal with diamonds | ||
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the A-Class medal with Diamonds for Arthur Blackburn, Yugoslav destroyer Ljubljana, and 1st Army Group (Kingdom of Yugoslavia). Gog the Mild ( talk) via MilHistBot ( talk) 00:30, 14 November 2019 (UTC) |
A serious well done for this; that's an awful lot of hard work. Gog the Mild ( talk) 00:33, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
I think the comment you left at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment#Clarification_request:_Antisemitism_in_Poland was meant for the Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment#Clarification_request:_Antisemitism_in_Poland_(2) (the latter is the one I meant to link from MILHIST; it was initially named identically to the first section and later renamed). I assume you followed my link and ended at the first, rather than second, section. Both are related as they concern the same remedy, but the issues raised are a bit different. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:02, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2019).
Interface administrator changes
will no longer use partial or temporary Office Action bans... until and unless community consensus that they are of value or Board directive.
The Writer's Barnstar | ||
On behalf of the Milhist coordinators, I hereby award you the Writer's Barnstar, for placing second in the November 2019 Military History Article Writing Contest, achieving 35 points from four articles. Congratulations, Gog the Mild ( talk) 18:14, 2 December 2019 (UTC) |
Following earlier discussions, this is to let you know that the Gottlob Berger article has been scheduled as today's featured article for January 6, 2020, the anniversary of his indictment. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 6, 2020, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.
For Featured Articles promoted on or after October 1, 2018, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.
We suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:39, 9 December 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)
12:48, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
"You call his views "funny" regarding Croats having needed Serbs to free themselves? I guess you know better this issues than Tesla, that is really genious! I will not even dare to think about it, but it just passes trough my mind how denegrating your though is regarding all Croatian heroes that bravely struggled to mantain or expand their authonomic rights for the none less then 1000 years which Croatia spent without independence. Meantime, Serbs had medieval kingdoms, even an empire, kicked Ottomans out, started Balkan wars, First World War, won Austro-Hungary, all this by loosing a third or half its overall male population in each war, that´s just coincidence. Luck."
This was said by a user FkpCascais. An example of so many ridiculous statements made on that page. Is this guy really an active editor on Balkan articles? Jesus.... That whole page about Tesla's ethnicity and birthplace is mess of anti-Croat and anti-Serb nationalist tripe. Is it not in violation of Wiki rules?
For the record. Tesla was an Ethnic Serb born in what was The Austrian Empire Military Frontier, now today Croatia. I agree with the infobox as is and Croatian Nationalists are wasting their time.
Talk:Nikola_Tesla/Nationality_and_ethnicity#Semi-protected_edit_request_on_25_June_2019
So much of this page violates WP:NPA. How would I go about reporting it
Here is the link to the page. 74.101.190.2 ( talk) 23:17, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
Peace is a state of balance and understanding in yourself and between others, where respect is gained by the acceptance of differences, tolerance persists, conflicts are resolved through dialog, peoples rights are respected and their voices are heard, and everyone is at their highest point of serenity without social tension. Happy Holidays to you and yours. ― Buster7 ☎ 17:49, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
There is a discussion going on at the Easter Rising talk page about whether the rising should be considered part of the Great War in the infobox because it was significantly influenced by it. Can you please contribute? 98.221.136.220 ( talk) 20:43, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Io, Saturnalia! | ||
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:35, 20 December 2019 (UTC) |
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2020! | |
Hello Peacemaker67, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this
seasonal occasion. Spread the
WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas and a
Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2020. Spread the love by adding {{ subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
Hello Peacemaker67: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Donner60 ( talk) 08:18, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
Again and again: there is organized group who want to falsify history of brutal dictator Josip Broz Tito and related sources! I made just a correction but entire article is not neutral: can you look at that article? Regards-- Forza bruta ( talk) 14:45, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
Can you please provide sources if you have for asat testing of india called as Mission Shakti. I want to improve that article. Thank you 😊. Mahusha ( talk) 05:01, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
Peacemaker67,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Eddie891
Talk
Work
17:22, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Happy New Year, Happy New Decade and Happy New WikiCup! The competition begins today and all article creators, expanders and improvers are welcome to take part. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. We are relaxing the rule that only content on which you have completed significant work during 2020 will count; now to be eligible for points in the competition, you must have completed significant work on the content at some time! Any questions on the rules or on anything else connected to the Cup should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. Good luck! The judges for the WikiCup are Sturmvogel 66 ( talk · contribs · email), Godot13 ( talk · contribs · email), Vanamonde93 ( talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth ( talk). -- Hanberke ( talk) 18:04, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2019).
|
|
the entire set of articles whose topic relates to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly interpretedrather than
reasonably construed.
Thank you today for Gottlob Berger, "one of Heinrich Himmler's key aides, who was responsible to a significant extent for the expansion of the Waffen-SS from a supposedly "racially pure" organisation to one which made a mockery of Hitler and Himmler's racial ideas by recruiting from almost all of the countries occupied by Nazi Germany during WWII. Berger was arrested and tried for war crimes after the war, but got off pretty lightly in the end, despite his responsibility for several significant crimes."! - Still, happy 2020! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:16, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
Peacemaker67, I wasn't sure whether you'd seen that CPA-5 responded that they'd addressed the issues you raised in your review a couple of weeks ago. Please stop by when you get the chance. Many thanks. BlueMoonset ( talk) 02:22, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
hi. I just came across your user page, after coming here from the Mil History project. I really like your page!! by the way, how would I view the underlying information for your various service awards? (in other words, the specific works or activities that they are each for)? just curious. thanks!! -- Sm8900 ( talk) 19:49, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
The WikiChevrons | ||
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the WikiChevrons for participating in 46 reviews between October and December 2019. Gog the Mild ( talk) via MilHistBot ( talk) 00:31, 11 January 2020 (UTC) |
hi! I just posted the following request for volunteers, on your project talk page. Please feel free to let me know what you think. thanks!! -- Sm8900 ( talk) 20:35, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
Hi. I have revised my own role at Wikipedia:WikiProject History. I have added a note at the talk page to reflect this. Just wanted to let you know. thanks!!! -- Sm8900 ( talk) 16:55, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
This your old edit is not neutral because the sentence reports an opinion of single obscure historian and not reports opposite opinions of all others important historians. I know several sources of historians who report Broz Tito as criminal dictator: this point was discussed in related talk page by many users and I hope in your neutral approach to the topic because I have no intention to start an argument or new dispute with third opinion regarding that bad dictator; you can see Talk:Josip Broz Tito/Archive 11#Formulation currently used in the lead. You can read some sources of Broz Tito's crimes in user:Forza bruta/sandbox. Regards-- Forza bruta ( talk) 16:16, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
Hi Peacemaker67. it's been nice making your acquaintance here over the last day. I wanted to let you know about a bit of news. i am a new coordinator at WikiProject History. I took that role simply by volunteering for it. at this point, none of the other past coordinators are active there at all any more. I have over ten years' experience here, and I have a lot of interest in history topics. I figured that since you are the lead coordinator on one of the WikiProjects that is most active, and one of the most similar in focus to our on project, I would give you a heads-up. I would like to start getting people involved in WikiProject History. a whole lot of people signed up to say they are members there. However, I haven't gotten a lot of replies to my posts recently, asking people to just write back and let me know what their interests are, what they'd like to do, whether they'd like to be available, etc etc.
If you'd like to be involved there, we would welcome that. Alternately, i welcome any input you may have. if there is anything we can do for you, feel free to let me know. but please let me know any suggestions you may have, eg on ways to get things up and running, things we should be doing, ways to get people involved, etc.
By the way, I am already thinking of you as a quasi-coordinator for WikiProject History. Congratulations, you've been volunteered! lol all kidding aside though, given your experience here at Wikipedia and with running a great project, I'd be glad to have your input any time. and any role you wish to take at WikiProject History, you are welcome to do so. I'd be glad to hear your comments or thoughts on this. Feel free to be in touch. thanks!!! -- Sm8900 ( talk) 15:15, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
I consider you as honest admin but if you remove valid source, my actions for improve articles are complicated operation. For every single source and every simple correction, new section needed in talk page? Regards-- Forza bruta ( talk) 13:56, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hey Peacemaker. Thank you for taking the time to edit the Chetnik page pertaining to the MacDonal quote. It has been a quote used many times by people to deny the genocide Chetniks pursued during WWII. However there are still editors who actively on Wikipedia deny the genocide, even using that quote as an argument despite me presenting a number of reputable sources saying otherwise. Ironic as MacDonald denies the Serbian Genocide. Editors such as Sadko who seems to be an apologist as far as Chetniks are concerned and puts forward points that seem hostile towards Croats or Bosnians. Nolanfranyeri Is another editor that appears to deny the genocide as well. I’ve seen too much to still think it was good intentions and just mistakes. As I had a debate with Sadko on my page. If Tomasevich is not a valid source than who is? It seems to me that their is an agenda by some editors. And I suspect that the person who first introduced that MacDonald quote, in which MacDonald was arguing a totally different subject matter, had ill intentions to mislead readers. It really disturbs me to see editors with such aims. How have you dealt with these sort of problems? People pushing povs even extreme ones? Wikipedia is not supposed to be a political platform but a neutral wealth of information. 74.101.190.2 ( talk) 22:32, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
UTC)
References
Hi Peacemaker67. I aprpeciate your help and input recently. I wanted to write to ask if you might be willing to comment at WikiProject Council? I am trying to get that page to be active again. I really need some help and input. many people there have been highly supportive, but one or two recent commenters are questioning the whole effort. I could really use some help input from you and from some of your other coordinators, in other words from people who have xtensive and active involvement in active Wikiprojects. could you please let me know if that's okay? thanks. -- Sm8900 ( talk) 03:22, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
Hello!
I would like to ask why my supplement in Infobox of destroyer Dubrovnik (Premuda part) was deleted?
This is proof for PU hull symbol on Premuda during service in Regia Marine -
here. --
Андрејевић (
talk)
13:14, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
From before the interruption......On page 747 in his book War and Revolution in Yugoslavia: 1941 - 1945 , he states that the use of "widespread genocide" was the reason for high amount of human loss in Yugoslavia and that it was also used in revenge. He then goes on about how 'Serbs perished at the hands of the Ustashe" and that "Croats and Muslims perished at the hands of Chetniks". He clearly is painting both as acts of genocide. He claims that Italians up to September 1943 and Germans thought the war assisted in this genocide. Partly independently and partly through puppet regimes. Also saying Italians used the Chetniks, for example, to assist in killing of the Croatian population in parts of territory under Italian control (conflict with MacDonald). As for Redzic, sorry I gave the wrong page, page 155 is the one. Here he details how "after 3 year long Chetnik campaign against the Croats and Muslims, conducted int he form of ethnic cleansing and genocide, to form an ethnically homogeneous territory for ther expansionist Serbian state" the order to incorporate Croats and Muslims into the Yugoslav army was "too late" and "unrealistic" as Chetniks became "desperate" for additional fighting power against Partisans. I am trying to get access to the page for Parson's. Will get back to you. Also, the wiki pages for list of massacres that were carried out in WWII Yugoslavia, there were a number of large scale massacres carried out by Chetniks against Croats specifically. 74.101.190.2 ( talk) 02:42, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Peacemaker67, I apologize for intruding on your talk page but since I was called on by 74.101.190.2 and Sadkσ in the thread above before I had a chance to reply, I thought it'd be fitting if I replied here.
I'm not interested in getting into an argument or an edit-war over this issue so I'm only going to be making one statement.
IP editor, you claim that I deny the genocide done by the Chetniks. Okay, first of all, it states that some historians contend that genocide was committed against Muslims. Though, even that is a little muddled since it's a quote from a scholar describing what others claim but he doesn't specifically name names. From what I can gather on the Chetnik articles, it's mainly from ethnic scholars from the Balkans who may have their own biases, but as long as they can be considered WP:RS I'm fine with it. Still, it's a minority view but I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt if that statement is accurate.
Now, I have seen no RS that state that genocide was committed specifically against Croats. I don't question the fact that the Chetniks killed a lot of Croats, and simply because they were Croats. However, you need to have RS that state that the Chetniks perpetrated a genocide against Croats during World War Two. Personal feelings, interpretations and opinions are irrelevant to this issue. That's now how Wikipedia works.
Yes, plenty of books talk about the Chetniks and the 20 December 1941 memorandum. I don't dispute that it calls for a "cleansing of national minorities" and a "Greater Serbia". The memorandum itself however, is not what we (certainly not Wikipedia editors) use to determine whether or not specifically genocide against a group of people happened. I don't even deny that the Chetniks perhaps tried to commit genocide or at the very least, ethnic cleansing, based on that. The question is, whether or not they actually did. That's why we rely on reliable historians on this subject before making such claims. Our own interpretation don't matter.
I should also note that the authenticity of the directive is disputed and whether or not it actually came from Mihailović. The memorandum should also be looked at within the context of the situation which is not something that's often done. By December 1941, the Ustashe had already set up concentration camps in the NDH and committed a large number of massacres against Serbs, by then already having likely killed many tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands. So, the desire to ethnically clean areas held by the Ustashe and others by that point need to be put into perspective. But that is beside the point.
There's also a difference between ethnic cleansing and genocide. Often people confuse the two or think the two are the same. By legal definitions, they are different, though ethnic cleansing certainly is a component of genocide. Ethnic cleansing is mainly the expulsion of a population. But various ethnic groups immediately think that whenever atrocities are done against their group, that it automatically makes it genocide. In fact, genocide is hard to prove. That's why when we do see an example of it, it usually receives wide coverage and recognition in scholarship.
From the editing you've been doing, you seem intent on trying to find ways to downplay or excuse the Ustashe crimes while trying to elevate Chetnik crimes. So it's clear there's a bias going on. I don't say that as a personal attack, that's just what looks like to me. And there's nothing necessarily wrong with that if there's reliable sourcing to advance those beliefs. I admit that I am biased as well, but I always try to edit and present arguments based on sources and information that is available and refraining from inserting my own opinions. I don't make edits based on feelings.
The reason I changed your recent edit to the Genocide template, is because you added "Genocide of Croats and Bosniaks" as the title to the article link. Having it phrased that way is problematic because as I stated above, there are no sources that explicitly state that genocide was committed against Croats. Also, atrocities against Muslims were far greater in volume than against Croats, which is the reason why I suspect some are deeming it as genocide but not over Croats. Yet, you are even adamant about having Croats listed before Bosniaks, despite the fact that it's not in proportion to the crimes or even alphabetical for that matter.
I am somewhat sympathetic to ethnic POV editors because it often comes from a place of feeling like they've been wronged and some injustice has to be corrected, but I'm sorry that's not what Wikipedia is based on. I am actually opposed to having the Chetniks listed at all there to be honest, because as I see it, the genocide template is there to list the most egregious and clear-cut examples of genocide, not for listing cases that are dubious or held by a small minority of scholars. I copy-edited the title to "Chetnik crimes against Bosniaks and Croats" because the article that's linked talks about.. World War Two crimes by the Chetniks, mainly against Bosniaks and Croats. Notice how even the other listings above regarding the Nazis don't state "Nazi genocide against Poles" or "Nazi genocide against Soviet POWs", and they were killed in the millions.
I should add the Chetnik War Crimes, particularly the Genocidal crimes section is problematic. It's essentially a bunch of quotes, cherry-picked and mainly sourced to Croatian websites.
You were also reverted, not just by me, but by two other editors on the Mass Killing/Genocide denial page because in your fervor, you again wrote "Genocide of Croats and Bosniaks" while linking to a page that doesn't explicitly mention the denial of mass killings.
Hope that helps clear things up. I'm glad to discuss things further on my talk page. -- Nolanfranyeri ( talk) 07:22, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
What reliable sources state that the Chetniks specifically committed genocide against Croats during World War Two? I looked at the sources given in the genocide template talk page but it's unclear. You mentioned to the IP editor in a previous discussion on your TP that you were uncomfortable using Redžić for a claim of genocide against the Croats because of his ideological alignment with the Partisans and their propaganda against the Chetniks. Tomasevich doesn't explicitly state that the Chetniks committed Genocide against Croats. He doesn't even say it in his 1975 book about the Chetniks. Hoare's book seems to be more about the Bosnian Muslims. There's no quote or preview for the book available so hard to know. He is heavily pro-Muslim and his focus on the Balkans are the Bosniaks. IP editor continues to push for the wording of "Genocide of Bosniaks and Croats" when genocide against Croats has not been established by multiple RS. This is why I advocate for a less controversial wording which is inclusive. -- Nolanfranyeri ( talk) 01:16, 16 March 2020 (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)
12:56, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
Sorry for asking this, but could you please change Category:Fascist organizations in the Ustase article to Category:Fascist parties, which was the original one? -- 191.33.124.106 ( talk) 23:34, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
Since you are a coordinator of the WikiProject Military history I though I would ask you this question.
In the case of the Afghan-Sikh Wars, is a source needed for the result to display either Afghan or Sikh victory? Or can the result be taken from the fact that one side won all the battles in the war?
If you are interested, this is the discussion, under the section Source misrepresentation. In all honesty, I could care less who won this war, I am only concerned with Wikipedia:Verifiability and avoiding personal interpretations. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 21:14, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
Hi I'm very impressed by your knowledge of facts regarding former Yugoslavia. Thank you for being objective and honest. Facts are facts and you are the only author I've come across who actually knows what hes talking about. I thank you for all that you do and would love to have an opportunity to meet you one day. Borislav Vucinovic
Borisdalj@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.181.69.251 ( talk) 19:11, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
I'm not very familiar with navigating through the wiki page but I do have plenty of knowledge to add. Can we communicate via email instead? I would also like to stay anonymous but will provide you all the necessary documents to verify facts. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.181.69.251 ( talk) 03:35, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2020).
|
Interface administrator changes
|
wide-spread support for an alternative desysoping procedure based on community input. No proposed process received consensus.
that checkuser and oversight blocks must not be reversed or modified without prior consultation with the checkuser or oversighter who placed the block, the respective functionary team, or the Arbitration Committee.
Hi PeaceMaker, I am still working on sources as we discussed before. But could you weigh in on editing disagreement on Genocide of Serbs page which I thought we all agreed in few weeks ago? Als on the Chetnik page where I am being reverted with no explanation? An IP made unexplained edits removing mention of “reprisals”. Thank you. 74.101.190.2 ( talk) 03:56, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi. I would like to create some kind of collaborative workspace where coordinators or members of various WikiProjects would gather and provide updates and information on what is going on at each wikiproject, i.e. regarding their latest efforts, projects, and where interested editors can get involved.
You are a coordinator at one of the most active WikiProkjects, so I wanted to get your brief input on whether you'd be interested in helping me to make this happen. I see a few possible options for making this happen, so I would like to get your input and feedback on this. which of the options below would you prefer? also, please reply to the brief questions below.
Please feel free to let me know what you think of this idea, and please let me know your preference, regarding the options above. if you do not see any need for this idea, that is totally fine. However, I think that the majority of editors lack awareness of where the truly active editing is taking place and at which WikiProjects, and I would like to do whatever I can to help make people more aware of where the activity is, what they can do to help, and also which areas of Wikipedia offer ideas and efforts that might help them in their own editing activities. Please feel free to let me know.-- Sm8900 ( talk) 05:09, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
Peacemaker,
Thanks for the welcome because I joined the Military His. Wikiproject. I'm excited to be a part of it.
Thank you,
-- Mikeduke324 ( talk) 15:04, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
I knew that you'd notice this; thanks for fixing it, although I can't see any difference between how I tried it and how you've got it now for the life of me.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 00:06, 13 February 2020 (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)
13:04, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
G'day, PM, I hope you are well and having a good weekend. Per the current conversation on the MILHIST co-ord talk page, the Battle of Greece article (currently a featured article) needs a couple of citations. I've marked these with citation needed tags in the hope that someone will be able to supply the required references. Unfortunately, this isn't really a battle I know much about, so I haven't been able to find any suitable refs; I wonder if you or @ Hawkeye7: might have better luck? Thanks for your time. Regards, AustralianRupert ( talk) 05:35, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
Hello PM. A few IPs have recently made changes to the article's lead. Do you think that the lead should be changed or do you think that the IPs should be reverted and, if they persist, a semi protection needs to be requested? Ktrimi991 ( talk) 22:14, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
G'day all, March Madness 2020 is about to get underway, and there is bling aplenty for those who want to get stuck into the backlog by way of tagging, assessing, updating, adding or improving resources and creating articles. If you haven't already signed up to participate, why not? The more the merrier! Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 08:19, 29 February 2020 (UTC) for the coord team
Hey Peacemaker, once the Francesco Caracciolo-class battleship FAC is done, Sturm and I will have a gap in our joint FAC schedule (mostly because neither of us was paying attention that we were out of joint projects) and I was thinking this would be a good time for you and I to run SMS Niobe - how does that sound to you? Parsecboy ( talk) 19:08, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2020).
|
must notundo or alter CheckUser or Oversight blocks, rather than
should not.
This is to let you know that the Operation Retribution (1941) article has been scheduled as today's featured article for April 6, 2020. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 6, 2020, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.
For Featured Articles promoted in recent years, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.
We suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:56, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
Adelaide Meetup Next: 6 March 2020 Last: 19 May 2018 |
WikiProject Adelaide Meetup 22 has been hastily arranged, spread the word!
DATE: Friday 6 March 2020
TIME: 5.00–6.30 pm
VENUE: Cafe Amore, 162-170 Pulteney St, Adelaide
Celebrate the long weekend with a meet-up and discuss what you'd like to see in the world of Wikimedia in 2020. Sign-up and RSVP here.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Adelaide at 22:16, 5 March 2020 (UTC). You received this message because your user page is in Category:Wikipedians in South Australia. If you do not wish to receive future notifications, please advise Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Adelaide.
Good day! Why is a Field Marshal epaulettes Petar Bojović unneeded, but German, French, Polish and American Field Marshals have epaulettes/stars? August von Mackensen, Paul von Hindenburg, Fedor von Bock, Gerd von Rundstedt, Erwin Rommel, Wilhelm Ritter von Leeb, Ferdinand Foch, Hubert Lyautey, Philippe Leclerc de Hauteclocque, Marie-Pierre Kœnig, Józef Piłsudski, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Douglas MacArthur, Omar Bradley etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Андрејевић ( talk • contribs) 10:52, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
G'Day Peacemaker, I had another dig for material on the different occupation zones in NDH prior to 1943. I found a few more maps that look more accurate (all secondary sources though) and I also found this document. It is a translation into Croat of orders issued by the occupying Italian forces. It includes textual descriptions of the German-Italian demarcation line and the boundary of the Croat demilitarised zone (Zone II/III boundary). The descriptions are lists of towns/features. For the German-Italian one the listed points seem to be the ones on the German side (so Banja Luka, Jajce, Sarajevo). For the de-militarised zone they seem to lie on the line. Anyway I think I can now make a stab at something based on them and the various maps. Will keep you posted. XrysD TALK 23:03, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
Brilliant, you are a champion! Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 21:01, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
Hi PM. It seems that there are disagreements between some editors on whether crimes committed by Chetniks should be included in the template or not [3]. Since you have relevant experience and knowledge, you might want to take a look. Cheers, Ktrimi991 ( talk) 17:26, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
Eight years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:19, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
Hi Peacemaker. I came across Operation Storax in Hawkeye's bot assessed sandbox. Would you say that it was a list or an article? Thanks.
PS. Things seem quiet on the coordination front. Is there anything I am missing which I could or should be doing? Gog the Mild ( talk) 15:59, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
The Military history A-Class medal with diamonds | ||
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the A-Class medal with Diamonds for Arthur Sullivan (Australian soldier), Ba Congress, and Yugoslav destroyer Zagreb. CPA-5 ( talk) via MilHistBot ( talk) 00:30, 14 March 2020 (UTC) |
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
01:51, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Hi Peacemaker67, I see you participated before on the talk page and wondered if you could look into a topic I brought up on the talk page. Thanks. OyMosby ( talk) 20:29, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
Thank you today for First Battle of Dernancourt, "about a joint British/Australian defensive battle on 28 March 1918 which played a small part in stemming the tide of the German Spring Offensive of WWI. A Tasmanian sergeant, Stanley McDougall, was instrumental in defeating the only real German breakthrough of the defences, and was subsequently awarded the Victoria Cross for his actions."! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:26, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
Hey Peacemaker67,
I was wondering if you would be willing to take a look at my FAC nominee, Marcian ( FAC page). It has been going on for some time but is lacking in reviewers. Thank you very much! -- Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 19:12, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2020).
|
Arbcom RfC regarding on-wiki harassment. A draft RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC (Draft) and not open to comments from the community yet. Interested editors can comment on the RfC itself on its talk page.
Military history service award | ||
For scoring 322 points in the WikiProject Military history 2020 edit-a-thon March Madness, I am pleased to award you this token of appreciation from the Project. Thank you, and well done. Gog the Mild ( talk) 12:09, 2 April 2020 (UTC) |
The WikiChevrons | ||
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the WikiChevrons for participating in 26 reviews between January and March 2020. Hawkeye7 ( talk) via MilHistBot ( talk) 00:30, 3 April 2020 (UTC) |
Hi Peacemaker, and thanks for all the bling. Now I'm starting to feel like a North Korean general. I recently reverted this edit. The editor who made seems, on a skim, to be making a number of near random changes to infoboxes. A number of topic areas seem up your street. Possibly some sort of intervention would be useful, but I have no idea what, so I hope that you don't mind me kicking it upstairs to you? Thanks. Gog the Mild ( talk) 20:41, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | ||
For you many contributions to military history articles, to the Wikproject Military History and for your 100th ARC. Donner60 ( talk) 04:54, 4 April 2020 (UTC) |
Hey mate, I hope you're well like me. It's awhile when we've seen each other for last and sadly I couldn't participate for the March Madness. Anyway I just wanna say congratulation with passing your 100th ARC. Cheers. CPA-5 ( talk) 21:51, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
Thank you today for Operation Retribution (1941), "about the German bombing of Belgrade which heralded the Axis invasion of Yugoslavia in April 1941. Over two days, damage was caused to about one quarter of the city, up to 4,000 were killed, and Yugoslav military command and control was paralysed, contributing to the swift defeat of the Royal Yugoslav Army over the following fortnight. The principal Luftwaffe commander, Alexander Löhr, was executed after the war for his part in Operation Retribution."! - "Finster", - what is that in English? "dark" (what my tranlate gives me) seems not dark enough. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:28, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
Checked it against B class and found it lacking a page number so redn to C. Keith-264 ( talk) 12:38, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for the warm welcome to MilHist! I am very new to Wikipedia (10 days). I was wondering how MilHist membership works? Is there a reputation system? Do I just signup to get into departments or taskforces? How do I submit articles for review? Also, is this really how people on Wikipedia converse or is there a messaging system?
Thank you for your time! SanLeone ( talk) 05:13, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
Is Jadovno.com an RS? It looks almost like a blog. I have seen a number of edits added to the Ustashe and Jasenovac and Jadovno pages and some of the sources I am not sure if RS or not. Some direct quotes and witness account quotes. Could you verify? Thank you. OyMosby ( talk) 01:20, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi Peacemaker67. I think File:Tito's cabin at Drvar.jpg is PD in the US, so I re-licensed it accordingly. Please let me know if there is something that I am missing. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 06:56, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
05:21, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi Peacemaker, you were mentioned in the Ustase Talk page. Also your revert was reverted on the article edits. Thought you might want to know. OyMosby ( talk) 01:04, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi Peacemaker, I am having an issue with editors removing relevant content from Rescuers of Jews during the Holocaust. Given your experience with WWII articles, could you take a look? Thanks. OyMosby ( talk) 18:46, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi, I can agree that the two first books I mentioned are somewhat old, but the last one if relatively new, I am also viewing its PDF version. Will that book suffice?
As for changing most to many/some, I mentioned in the talk page why I did this. Will it be if I restore the references that I added, but only with a single, namely the third book? Nbanic ( talk) 06:24, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi Peacemaker, I agree with your edit that Aloysius Stepinac‘s nationality is Yugoslavian. So shouldn’t Ante Pavlić’s nationality be the same? Croatia as a true country didn’t exist during either of their times. When I attempted to edit I simply got reverted with little explanation. OyMosby ( talk) 02:58, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
Just to be clear, I am not arguing about the Stepinac Page. I am using Stepinac as an example for the Pavlic page. But the Nationality section for Pavlic has him as “Croatian” which doesn't seem correct. Also should the lead not say “Yugoslav Croat” and Nationality section say “Yugoslavian”? Putting “Croatian” as a nationality seems pov to say that NDH and modern Croatia are the same. His nationality is missing from the intro. He was born in, became a lawyer and politician in, Yugoslavia.
To put it short. Is it fair to say Pavlic’s ethnicity was Croat and nationality Yugoslavian? His infobox Nationality is set to “Croatian” which seems incorrect. Hope I am being more clear. Cheers OyMosby ( talk) 15:25, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi Peacemaker67,
I hope all is well on your end, due to the current situation our country finds itself. As i am unable to attend ANZAC day commemorations today and tell the veterans in person, you were in my thoughts and i just wanted say, thank you for your past military service to keep the peace in the Balkans. Much appreciated. Resnjari ( talk) 22:16, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
HI, I did not remove sourced content from the article. It was duplicated in the article so I removed it from the lead. It was/is also in this section: Evaluation As you can see the lead is too long. The content that you are restoring was added by a sock puppet user. I reverted the edits made by a sock puppet. Here you can see what I am talking about: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nbanic. User Nbanic was blocked for a 48 hour period and not long after that he created a sock puppet account. That kind of behavior only shows that user Nbanic is not interested in improving Wikipedia, but on the contrary, only interested in abusing Wikipedia. That kind of behavior by user Nbanic makes Wikipedia less enjoyable for everyone. The view that some consider Tito to be equal to Stalin is already covered in the lead by: "...his presidency has been criticised as authoritarian[4][5] and concerns about the repression of political opponents have been raised...". We should at least discuss this and not engage in repetitive reverting, and also take into account the disruptive editing and behavior of user who started all this. Thanks -- Tuvixer ( talk) 08:15, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi, I apologize for the "factory workers". After you reverted my revert, I tried again to Google differently and it really turns out that by adding efforts results in "efforts on factory workers" have a lot of results, while "efforts on the factory workers" has only one result. Thanks! Nbanic ( talk) 09:48, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
I see you put a temporary lock on the page. However there seems to be a particular user pushing a lot of information on the page, bloating sections, editing sentences that no longer match source or adding content not needed in the article. Some edits seem pov. Another user tried to cut down the bloat as well but the original users just adds it back. Can you take a look? Cheers. OyMosby ( talk) 22:29, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
Half the Russian justifications for intervening in Ukraine reference the far-right groups that fought with the GErmans. You will note that the WP:SIGNPOST reports now a campaign by the Ukr Govt to add data to Wikipedia. Things are going to hot up on those pages. I know you've done excellently with similar fraught pages regarding the Balkans; can you sweep through, at least, the Ukrainian pages? If you need help, please ask, especially Noclador, who will rally to the cause, Nick-D, and I.. Buckshot06 (talk) 08:02, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
Please, when You are undoing.. check whether someone raised issue on talk page first. -- Bojan Talk 17:03, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi, today one of my earlier sourced content contributions on the article Socialist Republic of Croatia was reverted by user Tuvixer [4]. In the description of the reversion it is stated that references like that need to have pages. I have the page numbers of course and I checked on Google Books whether they are publicly verifiable - they are. I am now going to put this content back with better the same references reinforced with the page numbers since this was the only requirement stated in the reversion description. I am saying this in advance because it seems to me that some of user Tuvixer's recent behavior in directed at denigrating every thing that I do including stuff as simple as grammar edits with no change of content meaning. So in short - should any accusation fall again, I am editing simply in accordance with the complaint that the references that were there earlier need to have pages - I put the page numbers now and they are verifiable. It seems to me that this should not be a problem. Nbanic ( talk) 17:59, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
Hello, you seem like an admin who deals with Yugoslav War articles. Am I in the wrong here on Glina, Croatia? A editors asked for better sources and I gave them. Then suddenly another editor came with different criteria and accused me of edit warring and wants to lock the article fully to have their way.... PortalTwo ( talk) 23:28, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Peacemaker67. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " 1 Signal Regiment".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia
mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}
, {{db-draft}}
, or {{db-g13}}
code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! JMHamo ( talk) 11:44, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
What is your feeling about the following sentences added to the Genocide of a Serbs Page? I believe you are a part of the discussion there on the talk page.
As Misha Glenny noted, in the 1830s Croatian nationalism began an oscillation between Pan-Slavic, pro-Austrian and anti-Serb orientations. [1] Many scholars interpreted Croatian national identity as the product of an aggressive nationalism informed by the political interests of social elites. [1]
Cited Source: Bellamy, Alex J (2003). The Formation of Croatian National Identity: A Centuries-old Dream. Manchester University Press
Firstly, Croatian national identity has been documented through old history such as the Kingdoms of Croatia that existed since before 9th century. Also on the same page of the source states that multiple scholars say that Croatian national identity can be traced into antiquity.
Seems the editor who incorporated this source was not being balanced in its use. Painting a slanted picture. There is no mention of Serbian national identity history in the Wilipedia page. Seems unbalanced breaking Wiki rules. It seems to be misused in my opinion to push a skewed narrative. There has been discussion about this ongoing on the article talk page too.
What is your view of the source and its use? Thank you for your time. OyMosby ( talk) 16:35, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
References
Hi Peacemaker, and I hope you are well. Could I ask your (and anyone else who may see this) opinion on how to best improve Presidency of the United Nations Security Council I have two main questions:
Any comments you may have would be greatly appreciated! Eddie891 Talk Work 00:59, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
Hi, I wish you had looked more closely at this edit, which only moved the sourced quotes to the relevant section of the article. Is the redundant "However, some claim the trial against A. Stepinac was "carried out with proper legal procedure". [1]" something that really needs reinstating? Sparafucil ( talk) 05:43, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2020).
Hello Peacemaker67. Please take a look at:
I am guessing that you follow this Genocide article because you semiprotected it recently. Do you want to comment on the AN3 complaint, or perhaps close it yourself? The simplest close would be to mark it stale due to the age of the reverts, but if it is treated as a long-term warring case the result could be different. Perhaps there is some overlap between this dispute and the general complaint at WP:ANI#Disruptive editing and POV pushing/point-scoring in a contentious area. Neither of the two AN3 editors has yet been alerted to the DS. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 01:18, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
This is to let you know that Waterloo Bay massacre has been scheduled as WP:TFA for 2 May 2020. Please check that the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 2, 2020. Thanks! Ealdgyth ( talk) 15:05, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi Peacemaker, yes I was originally blocked for accusations of sockpuppeting. However I had it cleared. As I did not use my accounts in tandem in edit wars or on the same page. The only ever instance was on one talk page when I didn’t realized I switched between two accounts. Not wanting people to associate the two I played it off as separate people. But I made one post with one of the two accounts. I did not show any attempt to skew the talk page with them. Aside from that instance I used the accounts on separate pages to avoid some users stalking my edits. So I was unblocked. Will be sticking with one account to avoid such messes again. Never intended to break the rules. Do my comments on the talk page remain striked out? Cheers. OyMosby ( talk) 02:39, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
I expect that you've done more with AWM images on Commons than I have so I'm hoping that you can clarify the US copyright for me for this picture: [5]. Taken in 1915, there's no publication data or author given. The AWM says that it's out of copyright, so I think that I can use a US PD-1996 tag, but I'm not certain since I'm not sure if it was ever actually published. What do you think?-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 18:38, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
The Reviewer Barnstar | ||
Thanks for providing thorough reviews for FOUR! of my GANs. Hog Farm ( talk) 23:17, 6 May 2020 (UTC) |
Does this article Bookocide in Croatia seem legitimately formatted to you? Not familiar with the term “bookocide” and a search only turns up this article. First I heard of the term. Are you familiar with it? I couldn’t find any non-Serbian books on this being a “bookocide” that took place. I don’t doubt that book burnings happen. The background, terminology and pov style seems like an issue though. Given you work with new Balkan articles in the past, thought maybe you’d have a chance to look. Thanks. OyMosby ( talk) 02:07, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
blind? Talk:Milovan_Đilas#Leftist_errors? -- Bojan Talk 03:31, 13 May 2020 (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)
15:03, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
Hi - I am advising I have started a vote on your suggestion to remove all the guff from the infobox and replace with a link to the relevant section. Deathlibrarian ( talk) 11:59, 19 May 2020 (UTC). Just thought I would let you know: Talk:War_of_1812#Edit_Break_-_Vote_on_Peacemaker67's_proposal
Hi, the user: Векочел (not sure if tagging alerts him so I didn't) keeps editing Roman Emperor's articles so that their whole name appears first in the lead. [7] [8] (and on all the other Judio-Claudian Emperors as well as the year of the 4 emperors one – you can see them on his contribution page) While he cites WP:FULLNAME, the precedent seems to have been set by Augustus in FA, who is the only FA Roman Emperor (to the best of my knowledge) and has his full name in the parenthesis rather than as the first couple words. (At the moment he does not due to Векочел's edits) Additionally after scrolling through 10 other Roman Emperor articles this precedent seems commonplace. Altering it would surely require consensus and then the changing of 71 emperors! I had already reverted some of his edits but he has simply re added the information so I came here because I'm not trying to get in an edit war. Am I in the right on this? – Aza24 ( talk) 05:33, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
Hi Peacemaker. While yest there was a cited source, what is to be done when it is in the minority? Given that Nazi killings of Jews began in June 1941 and Ustashe killings began later that year? Unless the Ustashe did need begin killings first? OyMosby ( talk) 02:35, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
I took it that joint control/running of the camp and joint guarding are meant one in the same. The guards running the camp? Hence when the source said guarding as full role I took that as full duty of running the camp. My mistake if this was incorrect. OyMosby ( talk) 23:08, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for the welcome to the MilHist project, Peacemaker67! Looking forward to adding content in coordination with project members. Siddsg ( talk) 06:55, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2020).
Thank you so much for copyediting Ismail I of Granada, and apologies for those grammar mistakes. HaEr48 ( talk) 16:16, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
Please see Talk:Macedonia naming dispute#Time for protection. A number of fairly senior editors are reverting each other on this page. One of the users who is concerned about 'Macedonia' versus 'North Macedonia' appealed on my talk page for assistance. Since it would be tedious to take this through AE, I thought I would see if a different admin like yourself (perhaps uninvolved like me), who knows something about the Balkans, would like to provide some words of wisdom on the talk page to the disputants. The underlying problem is that WP:NCMAC is supposed to be the solution of the dispute, but that page still has some grey areas. Or at least it is puzzling enough that not everyone understands. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 23:37, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
The Admin's Barnstar | ||
This barnstar is awarded to you for your good work, careful contributions and valuable mediation in resolving the naming dispute at the Macedonia Naming Dispute quickly! Thank you, Peacemaker67! - ❖ SilentResident ❖ ( talk ✉ | contribs ✎) 09:12, 5 June 2020 (UTC) |
I am contesting your page move for Hilliard's Legion at WP:RMTR. Clarityfiend ( talk) 05:05, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for yesterday's Milorad Petrović, "about the commander of the Royal Yugoslav Army's 1st Army Group during the Axis invasion of Yugoslavia in April 1941"! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 17:07, 13 June 2020 (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)
04:22, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the Roy Inwood article has been scheduled as today's featured article for July 14, 2020. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 14, 2020, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.
For Featured Articles promoted recently, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.
We suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:17, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Seal_Team_Six. Konli17 ( talk) 13:13, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Elinruby ( talk) 07:15, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
This is not his wacko fringe theory position, though I was coming here to notify you that I started a question about that at the fringe theory noticeboard as well, so let’s consider that done. I am required to notify you. But FYI, the one at NPOV has to do with the term “Indian”, and the long quote about how untrustworthy those Indians are. Elinruby ( talk) 08:53, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
Uh, why are you renaming ("standardizing") the RI regiments and removing volunteers. Current Civil War convention uses the Volunteer to differentiate between the Volunteer regiments and the militia regiments. Instead of using the actual official title, which would be, for example, "1st Regiment, Rhode Island Volunteer Infantry," it is allowed to use "1st Rhode Island Volunteer Infantry." "Volunteer" is a crucial identifier in differentiating between militia and Continental 1st RIs. Please see Renaming Massachusetts Civil War unit pages discussion on my talk page with Historical Perspective 2 and Kges1901. Hhfjbaker ( talk) 00:42, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
The The Holocaust in Serbia article was recently changed to The Holocaust in German-occupied Serbia without any RfC or consensus. How did that happen? Doesn’t seem proper. The editor who changed it interestingly is for the The Holocaust in the Independent State of Croatia article to be changed to Croatia not German-Occupied Croatia....When the individual is confronted they claim an RfC can be made to change their edit. Bit backwards I think. Seems like a pov push case to downplay collaboration. It looks like a WP:POINT edit done in response to the Holocaust in NDH naming. A spite edit. Not to mention a number of editors do not support the change. Personally I think it should be “Holocaust in Territory of the Military Commander in Serbia”. Which is the actual name of the territory. Would I be violating a rule changing it to the name I propose? OyMosby ( talk) 00:54, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
There is no POV pushing, claiming that a rational and well-founded move (as explained above) like that new article title is "POV" is really problematic.
"to downplay collaboration" you better elaborate this part, with good arguments and diffs, or otherwise I'll have to take another way in order to protect my integrity, as I shall not have some random yankee questioning my personal views and my family's role in WW2, which cost us a lot! Was that clear?
Sadkσ
(talk is cheap)
15:19, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.
I believe that all goverment-in-exiles should have an infobox. {{ 3125A| talk}} 00:11, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2020).
RfC regarding on-wiki harassment. The RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC and is open to comments from the community.
all discussions about pharmaceutical drug prices and pricing and for edits adding, changing, or removing pharmaceutical drug prices or pricing from articles.
The WikiChevrons | ||
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the WikiChevrons for participating in 59 reviews between April and June 2020. Hawkeye7 ( talk) via MilHistBot ( talk) 00:32, 5 July 2020 (UTC) |
Thank you for all your help with my first Good Article, and for your suggestion to nominate it for A Class. Thank you for your encouragement. It means a huge amount. simongraham ( talk) 06:55, 6 July 2020 (UTC) |
The Guidance Barnstar | ||
For a particularly helpful review here (it caught my eye on the nomination page last week as I was curious what HSwMS stood for). I thought you went above and beyond in guiding the nominator through the GA process. Cheers, Zawed ( talk) 09:15, 6 July 2020 (UTC) |
Hi Peacemaker67. I see the above is at FAC. It's not within my usual area of expertise but I note that Michael Ashcroft's book (Ashcroft, Michael (2012). George Cross Heroes. Headline. ISBN 978-0-7553-6452-7.) has some additional personal details:
Some of this might be trivia and I am not sure how Ashcroft's book is considered by professional historians, but just thought I'd let you know. Also just noticed there looks to be a citation missing after the third paragraph of "World War II"? - Dumelow ( talk) 05:51, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
No: again and again; Shapiro has personal opinion and I propose to eliminate that fake in introduction! You can read my second email to you: if you insist, I will start a dispute under wiki's rules. No dossier or report are in source by unknown Shapiro! Do you understand difference beetween neutral form and tendentious form? If you don't understand, I will start a dispute under wiki's rules. Read my second email to you: I offer to you a friendly approach to the point with sources by books of Rudolph Rummel who is a master for all historians. Again and again: Shapiro is not reliable author and he is not historian. Regards-- Forza bruta ( talk) 15:34, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello Peacemaker67—Thank you very much for all your hard work with the 18th Pennsylvania Cavalry Regiment. I suspect getting a GA rating will be easy after going through all your comments, and I am sorry you had to make so many. I'm almost through your list—I'm at Shenandoah Valley. I will remove the small number of citations from Cox. It is possible that his higher number of deserters includes those from the failed 19th PA Cavalry that was moved to companies L&M of the 18th PA Cavalry. One comment on the casualty counts: I have made the changes for numbers less than 10. However my confusion is the result of what the MOS says, under the Notes and exceptions part, "Comparable values should be all spelled out or all in figures, even if one of the numbers would normally be written differently: patients' ages were five, seven, and thirty-two or ages were 5, 7 and 32, but not ages were five, seven and 32." Anyway, I want to be consistent with whatever WikiProject Military history recommends. TwoScars ( talk) 18:35, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for reviewing the article for B class. Your name change is logical, however please read on. Currently, most Missouri Union cavalry regiment articles follow the naming convention "Nth Missouri Volunteer Cavalry". The exceptions are the 1st and 4th, which have the word "Regiment" at the end, and the 8th which is different. When I created this article, I followed the pattern already used for naming the majority of Missouri Union cavalry regiments. All the "What links here" point to the original name. The infantry units follow a similar pattern and there are over 30 of them, so changing all the regiments to a new standard promises to be a tedious job that I have no desire to try. Thanks for your other edits that improved the article. Djmaschek ( talk) 03:58, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
The Patience Barnstar | ||
For cheerfully reviewing a number of my Missouri Confederate series articles, and keeping good humor the whole time, even though since I wrote one a day for a stretch, they all had the same issues over and over again. Hog Farm Bacon 04:03, 11 July 2020 (UTC) |
The Multiple Good Article Reviewer's Barnstar | ||
Thank you for completing 27 reviews in the April–May 2020 GAN Backlog drive. Your work helped us to reduce the backlog by over 60%. Regards, Harrias talk 08:31, 11 July 2020 (UTC) |
Hi PM, hope you are keeping well. I have nominated my article Manilal Dwivedi for Peer Review. See, Wikipedia:Peer review/Manilal Dwivedi/archive1. It would be great if you review it and suggest some points. Very soon, I will nominate it for FA. If you are busy, please feel free to say NO. Thanks. -- Gazal world ( talk) 05:40, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Was Operation Storm an ethnic cleansing campaign as described here? 200,000 expelled? You have done editing on the subject so figure I’d ask. OyMosby ( talk) 04:12, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
11:45, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Thank you today for Roy Inwood, who "won his VC during the Battle of Menin Road in September 1917, for eliminating a couple of German machine gun posts. He went on to serve during WWII as a military police warrant officer running detention barracks on the home front. Unlike the many Australian VCs held by the Australian War Memorial, Inwood's is displayed in the Adelaide Town Hall."! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:43, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks Peacemaker67. Sure, will ping you if I need help with more articles. Siddsg ( talk) 08:59, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
( talk page stalker) The GBooks preview I see shows p. 110 and p. 111 as being about him. When google tells me that I've reached a limit, I've found that scrolling far away from that page and then returning to it will usually reset the limit. Best, Eddie891 Talk Work 01:58, 17 July 2020 (UTC){
The Writer's Barnstar | |
For your contributions that have elevated so many articles to GA and FA status. Regards, Field Marshal ( talk) 14:46, 19 July 2020 (UTC) |
Thanks for your feedback on the use of Tucker in the 3rd and 5th Missouri Infantry Regiment articles. I personally like popular history (my interest in the ACW was actually brought on by Bruce Catton), and I have to try to make sure that the articles I work on don't turn into popular history, as I like my anecdotes and eyewitness quotes. I'll need to try to trim down the usage of Tucker in the 5th Infantry article, although the 3rd Infantry is less popular history (and isn't going anywhere beyond ACR), so I'm less concerned about that one. You've done a lot to help me learn how to write quality MILHIST articles. Hog Farm Bacon 03:59, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
Hi,
I was wondering if there's anything you can do about the latest obvious Vujkovica brdo IP address -- see the recent history of [11].
Thanks, JBL ( talk) 10:25, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello PM. You deleted two diffs on the talk page of Cetinje massacre, apparently due to a BLP violation. However, the concerning material is still visible as you did not delete that diff too. Cheers, Ktrimi991 ( talk) 12:43, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for today's John Leak, a South Australian winner of the Victoria Cross. "Leak won the VC at Pozieres soon after Australian troops joined the fighting on the Western Front in WWI by eliminating a German machine gun post that was holding up his battalion. Later in the war he was convicted of desertion, but the sentence was soon commuted and then suspended. He returned to combat and survived the war, but struggled with his war experiences for the rest of his life."! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 11:24, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for expressing your concern. I've addressed it. Are you doing a full review? 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 11:32, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
This felt like a worthwhile discussion that was moving away from the specific article at hand, so I thought I'd continue it here; I hope you don't mind. For the record, I'm pursuing it because I think it's a genuinely gray area that the community at FAC and elsewhere needs to get a better handle on, and not because I'm terribly upset over it or believe that ACR should be archived. If you've said what you had to say, just let me know. For the scenarios you outlined, I think we're broadly in agreement; subjects covered in detail need to have all the available information (at least, all that can be contained in an article of reasonable size). Subjects that aren't notable, obviously, ought not to have articles. But there's a large chunk of articles, that I am particularly aware of because I work on history in the global south, that are obviously notable (at least according to currently held notability standards) but don't have much coverage at all. As an extreme example, take Luis Arturo González López. He was President of Guatemala, albeit briefly; I don't know that we can argue he wasn't notable. But I'm quite certain I've reached the limits of what reliable internet-searchable sources have to offer. I would not submit this at GAN, even, let alone ACR. In general, subjects rendered notable by WP:GEOLAND, WP:NPOL, and WP:PROF (among others) but not by GNG will always have this problem; and González López would meet GNG as currently interpreted. How does one judge comprehensiveness for these articles? Vanamonde ( Talk) 01:02, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
This is to let you know that Commissioner Government has been scheduled as WP:TFA for 29 August 2020. Please check that the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/August 29, 2020. Thanks! Ealdgyth ( talk) 15:03, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
You criticize and don't bother fixing what you say needs fixing.
While I appreciate your research and work, it would be better if you did what you say needs to be done. Your extended critique of the claims at the DYK was no model of clarity. I was not "playing fast and loose" with anything. I tried to interpret and apply the word salad you and
User: Kges1901 composed.
WP:AGF ought to stifle your need to remonstrate.
7&6=thirteen (
☎)
12:09, 28 July 2020 (UTC)