This user may have left Wikipedia. Wandalstouring has not edited Wikipedia since 19 June 2011. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

₪

See User talk:Wandalstouring/Archive 1 or User talk:Wandalstouring/Archive 2 or User talk:Wandalstouring/Archive 3 or User talk:Wandalstouring/Archive 4 or User talk:Wandalstouring/Archive 5 User talk:Wandalstouring/archive 6 or User talk:Wandalstouring/archive 7 for older edits

Some useful links:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page.

Private link

Voting in the Military history WikiProject coordinator election has now started. The aim is to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on 26 September!
For the coordinators,   Roger Davies ^talk 22:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC) reply

hi, wht about maps ? did u tried inkscape ?

الله أكبر Mohammad Adil 06:53, 22 September 2009 (UTC) reply

The September 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot ( talk) 16:24, 3 October 2009 (UTC) reply

Hey, I saw this article on the GAN list with no reviewer listed, so I started the review page...then I noticed your comment on the talk page. Are you reviewing the article? If so, please let me know, and maybe add a note at GAN. Thanks, Nikkimaria ( talk) 21:16, 17 October 2009 (UTC) reply

I'd be glad to help, if you like. How should we divide it, by section or by criteria? Nikkimaria ( talk) 18:22, 18 October 2009 (UTC) reply

Other than the dab links and the one remaining instance of "we", I'd say my concerns are pretty much dealt with. Cheers, Nikkimaria ( talk) 14:53, 9 November 2009 (UTC) reply

In response to the above message, I've removed that last 'we'. Incidentally, one of the remaining dab links is deliberate, so I'm not removing it; I'll try and remove the other one, although I was having trouble finding were it is. MinisterForBadTimes ( talk) 07:54, 13 November 2009 (UTC) reply

Regarding how quickly I can finish making the required edits; not this week. I am really, really busy in the real world until the 23rd November. I will try and make edits to the article during the period until then, to show that I am committed to getting it up to standard, but I won't be able to actually finish it. After the 23rd, I will try to finish it as soon as possible. I hope that this is OK! Thanks again, MinisterForBadTimes ( talk) 07:54, 13 November 2009 (UTC) reply

I've done the arms & armour bit now. I think this means that there are only two points left to address, which I will try and get finished ASAP. MinisterForBadTimes ( talk) 11:33, 29 November 2009 (UTC) reply

I think I've finished now. I've added the Sparabara, the Greek light infantry and a citation of the Battle of Mycale. I've also addressed the other issues, about the minor authors and about Demaratus's message. MinisterForBadTimes ( talk) 15:54, 29 November 2009 (UTC) reply

I'm not convinced that missile troops were important in Greek warfare before the Greco-Persian Wars. As far as I'm aware, the Hoplites were absolutely dominant in battle between the city-states previous to that period. Obviously, by the time of the Peloponnesian War skirmishers were very important, but before the Greco-Persian Wars...? For instance, there is no mention of lightly armed troops at the battle of Marathon. I am happy to be proved wrong though; do you have any references which state the importance of skirmishers in Greek armies before the GPW? If not, then I don't think we should particularly emphasise the role of skirmishers in the Warfare paragraph. MinisterForBadTimes ( talk) 22:51, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply

I've added the short intro paragraph; I'll try and find a citation for it tomorrow. MinisterForBadTimes ( talk) 22:58, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply

Thanks for finalising the review. It took me a long time to get there, so thanks for your patience! MinisterForBadTimes ( talk) 22:27, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply

I've responded to the issues that you raised on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Inner German border/archive1 - please leave some feedback when you've got a moment! -- ChrisO ( talk) 22:46, 19 October 2009 (UTC) reply

Inner German border has recently undergone some major restructuring to improve the article and reduce its size. If you have any comments on the revised version of the article, please post them at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Inner German border/archive1#Article size update. -- ChrisO ( talk) 08:40, 26 October 2009 (UTC) reply

As a member of the Military history WikiProject or World War I task force, you may be interested in competing in the Henry Allingham International Contest! The contest aims to improve article quality and member participation within the World War I task force. It will also be a step in preparing for Operation Great War Centennial, the project's commemorative effort for the World War I centenary.

If you would like to participate, please sign up by 11 November 2009, 00:00, when the first round is scheduled to begin! You can sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot ( talk) 20:59, 8 November 2009 (UTC) reply

The October 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot ( talk) 20:59, 8 November 2009 (UTC) reply

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Battles of macrohistorical importance involving invasions of Europe. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and " What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battles of macrohistorical importance involving invasions of Europe (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. -- Erwin85Bot ( talk) 01:12, 14 November 2009 (UTC) reply

Regarding this message, I made two edits to the template so that Arrow (missile) would have no alt problems at FAC: the first had an edit summary in which I tried to explain the purpose of the blank alts and links, and the second had pretty much none but was meant to continue the first.

Purely decorative images should have specified blank alt text and a specified blank link, or they get read by readers who can't see the image and waste their time (and wasting a reader's time is never good). I made the edits precisely because the icons were decorative (as Thumperward noted when undoing your revert), not despite of it. I hope I've clarified the intent there. -- an odd name 17:26, 27 November 2009 (UTC) reply

Hey, Wandalstouring.

I noticed that, on 15 November, you signed up to review the article I nominated for GA status, Philip the Arab and Christianity. Based on your recent contributions, you seem to be occupied with other matters at the moment, like the GA nomination for the Greco-Persian Wars and the recent FAC for Castle. I do not mind the delay, but could you give me an ETA on your expected review of Philip, so that I can schedule my wiki-checkups accordingly?

Regards, Geuiwogbil ( Talk) 02:07, 4 December 2009 (UTC) reply

I have no viable way to access those sources. The English-language work is obscenely expensive. I have no local library. And, as I mentioned before, I can neither read nor speak German. If you could extract the meaningful information from these works, I would be much obliged. (Your continued use of the word "scientific" strikes me as very odd. I don't believe the word means the same thing to you as it does to me. Could you define the term for me, and describe what works you would call "scientific" or "unscientific"?) I am still working on the article, and would not like you to fail it.

P.S.: Actually, Wandal, I have a blister on my right index finger. It pains me to use it, and I've not yet found a way to type without it. Could we delay the process until it heals? Geuiwogbil ( Talk) 03:01, 12 December 2009 (UTC) reply

Hmm? I give a description of each and every one of my edits. "re" is a reply, "e" is a content edit. Every time I make a significant edit to a page I am unfamiliar with, I give a lengthier description, like "delinking" or "fmt." Every time I make a controversial edit, or an edit which is in direct response to a previous edit, I also give a description, like "we prefer to have portraits aligned so that their subjects are staring into the page, rather than out of it". I see no need to provide lengthy descriptions to pages on which I am the only editor. It is a waste of my time. If you want to check progress, see my replies beneath your comments on the GA page. This is standard process. Geuiwogbil ( Talk) 19:09, 14 December 2009 (UTC) reply

I cannot make progress on the article if you do not follow up on my GA comments. Your comments are not uncomplex, and cannot be followed with a simple "done". They require discussion. Your unwillingness to participate in discussion is unfortunate, and your inclination to fail the article does not reflect either the status of the article or my participation in the review process. Geuiwogbil ( Talk) 16:44, 15 December 2009 (UTC) reply

Wandal, you noted on Christophore and Chimakwa's talk pages that you could possibly send the two sources you listed on my talk page as PDFs. Could I get a copy of those PDFs if that is at all possible? I would very much appreciate it. Also: Christophore has not edited Wikipedia since 14 May 2008; Chimakawa has not edited Wikipedia since 10 December 2008. I appreciate the fact that you have made additional efforts to improve the article outside of the review process, but since these two are not active contributors, it does not seem like they can help. It might be better to leave a notice on the talk pages of relevant Wikiprojects, like Wikiproject Religion, Wikiproject Classical Greece and Rome, or Wikiproject Christianity. Geuiwogbil ( Talk) 00:05, 16 December 2009 (UTC) reply

I can read the English-language material. Geuiwogbil ( Talk) 17:25, 16 December 2009 (UTC) reply

I really do not know what you are looking for. Nor do I understand what I would have to do to move the article to the point where you would feel willing to send me the PDF. If you could clarify these matters for me, I would be much obliged. Geuiwogbil ( Talk) 18:29, 16 December 2009 (UTC) reply

Wandal, I would like you to fail the article. Geuiwogbil ( Talk) 04:44, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply

Alright then. I will wait. Geuiwogbil ( Talk) 09:12, 19 December 2009 (UTC) reply

Okay, I think everything I brought up is fixed now. Cheers, Nikkimaria ( talk)

Could I ask why you deleted the material on representations of Cicero in popular culture? You don't seem to be a regular contributor either to that article, or to other articles on subjects pertaining to the Roman Republic, so I was wondering what principle you were operating on. Cynwolfe ( talk) 18:49, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply

Robert Harris's books (a series) are worth a sentence or two. They are substantial in terms of their historical research; I believe he's pals with Mary Beard, a rock star of the classics world, and Harris's political perceptions are taken seriously enough that when the first book in the projected trilogy came out, the New York Times gave him a coveted op-ed space to talk about parallels between, of all things, the Lex Gabinia of 67 BC and Bush's war on terror (view it here). The late Roman Republic is my main area of interest (as evidenced here), and I didn't think the section was frivolous. Underdeveloped and inadequately framed, yes. But you have to start somewhere. For instance, a properly done section on cinematic portrayals, using published reviews, can tell us a great deal about what we think of Cicero today: a British friend of mine remarked that in Rome Cicero came off like a vicar. Which may be fair, come to think of it. Cynwolfe ( talk) 13:42, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply

I don't understand the message you left me: "show me a FA of a historical person with an in popular culture section who was not an artist." I sense we are communicating across an unbridgeable abyss, so let's just leave it. Cynwolfe ( talk) 18:35, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply

bibliography link

Hi Wandalstouring! I noticed on your user page that you speak French (even if at an intermediate level), and I was wondering if you would be able to help me with something? I currently have the article Cleveland Bay up for FAC at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Cleveland Bay/archive1. There is a question on one image, originally uploaded to the French WP by a French-speaking editor and then transferred to Commons. The image does not definitively list the uploader as the author, or give a source (which should be "self" if the uploader is the author) and so may not be usable in a FA. Would you be able to drop a note to the French user about whether this image is their work? I don't speak French, which is a definite drawback in this scenario. Thanks in advance for your help :) Dana boomer ( talk) 00:22, 13 December 2009 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your help, and the fast response. Not exactly the result I was hoping for, but at least I had more information thanks to you. Dana boomer ( talk) 02:50, 14 December 2009 (UTC) reply

I don't like leaving articles in such an untidy state. But since you put forward the hypothesis, I guess we could leave it that way for a week or two to see if anyone actually makes the effort to restore the deleted material with sources. Gatoclass ( talk) 12:29, 13 December 2009 (UTC) reply

The November 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot ( talk) 20:11, 21 December 2009 (UTC) reply

I'm on vacation at the moment, but I'd be glad to take a look if no one else has reviewed by the time I return on Monday. Cheers, Nikkimaria ( talk) 22:59, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply

The December 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot ( talk) 04:52, 3 January 2010 (UTC) reply

It has been noted you are reviewing the Ulysses S. Grant presidential administration scandals. Do you know when you will expect to be done with the review? Regards. { Cmguy777 ( talk) 21:24, 6 January 2010 (UTC)} reply

Are you able to review this article? { Cmguy777 ( talk) 04:43, 13 January 2010 (UTC)} reply

Thanks. I appreciate your time to review the article. { Cmguy777 ( talk) 16:54, 13 January 2010 (UTC)} reply

Why is there a GA review on WW II in the Ulysses S. Grant article discussion page? { Cmguy777 ( talk) 20:55, 16 January 2010 (UTC)} reply

There's not; he removed all of the content from the GA review page for WWII, and I suspect he got to the wrong page somehow and got confused. I've reverted and left a note at his talk about that. Cheers, Nikkimaria ( talk) 03:30, 17 January 2010 (UTC) reply

And by the way, it's not me who did that. Wandalstouring ( talk) 09:58, 17 January 2010 (UTC) reply

Oh, I know, it was Cmguy777; the message was addressed to you. Sorry for the confusion. Cheers, Nikkimaria ( talk) 19:20, 17 January 2010 (UTC) reply

I removed the content because the GA review for the WWII article is in the Ulysses S. Grant presidential administration scandals article. Where is the GA review for the Ulysses S. Grant article? { Cmguy777 ( talk) 03:23, 18 January 2010 (UTC)} reply

Thanks for the move. I read the GA review. I am working on the issues. { Cmguy777 ( talk) 18:22, 18 January 2010 (UTC)} reply

I have looked through the sources. Many are from books. I used the Wikipedia format for citing books. The links go directly to the book quotes. Can you specifically say what sites you are having issues with? { Cmguy777 ( talk) 18:27, 18 January 2010 (UTC)} reply

I found some cites that are not Wikipedia format for books. I am making changes to these. Many of these authors are very reliable. { Cmguy777 ( talk) 18:55, 18 January 2010 (UTC)} reply

I made the requested edits. What else can be done to the article? { Cmguy777 ( talk) 22:06, 22 January 2010 (UTC)} reply

I appreciate your initial review of the article. Could you please proceed with more evaluation of the article?{ Cmguy777 ( talk) 21:15, 26 January 2010 (UTC)} reply

Do you have any time estimates on reviewing this article? { Cmguy777 ( talk) 03:03, 29 January 2010 (UTC)} reply

Thanks for the update on the review. { Cmguy777 ( talk) 16:36, 29 January 2010 (UTC)} reply

I am attempting to get all the book sources to have page numbers. I have made changes to the articles. I am trying to get rid of any web sources and just find a book source. { Cmguy777 ( talk) 04:17, 5 February 2010 (UTC)} Here are examples: reply

• Bunting III, Josiah (2001). A. M. Schlesinger Junior. ed. Ulysses S. Grant. Times Books, Henry Holt and Company, LCC. pp. 96–98

• McFeely, William S. (1981). Grant. pp. 429-430.

• Smith, Jean Edward (2001). Grant. Simon & Shuster. pp. 481–490 { Cmguy777 ( talk) 04:24, 5 February 2010 (UTC)} reply

I made edits to the articles. Can you define pier review, in terms of this article? I am not sure how to involve science with a historical article. Eight sources have Ph. D.'s. { Cmguy777 ( talk) 00:33, 9 February 2010 (UTC)} reply

I got rid of the Miller Center source. I have attempted to change the article according to your recommendations. Can you review the article again? { Cmguy777 ( talk) 19:04, 9 February 2010 (UTC)} reply

I believe you want the source name and page number in the Notes section: [Hinsdale, p. 212]. Is this true? { 74.38.18.61 ( talk) 16:56, 11 February 2010 (UTC)} reply

Are there any other issues or concerns with the article? I have not heard from you in awhile. I appreciate any feedback. { 74.38.29.47 ( talk) 21:09, 27 February 2010 (UTC)} reply

User:Wandalstouring has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, and therefore, I've officially declared today as Wandalstouring's day! For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian, enjoy being the Star of the day, dear Wandalstouring! Peace, Rlevse 00:51, 7 January 2010 (UTC) reply A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:51, 7 January 2010 (UTC) reply

The theories (actually there is a mix up even there), which IS backed by a minority of scholars nowadays, that the Macedonians of the old did not speak Greek / were not of Greek stock / were (considered) barbarians / willfully entered the Greek world sometime in the 5th or 6th century / bribed their way into the Greek world through Hellanicus, Herodot etc exist, BUT are not prevalent nowadays as can be very easily proven (by just studying the position on this of the major academic institutes and museums). This controversy, as many others is given in the appropriate articles and has no place in the lead of an article of a man who according to Draganparis himself (claimed to be of "Hellenic origins"). Part of the scholars who are skeptical about the Greekness of the Macedonians even support that while the Greeks held the Macedonians as something else (barbarians / not full or civilized enough to be Greeks, like the Ambracians or the Epirots), they did accept the Greekness of the Argead line (which is also a misconception, since this also extended on the Argead tribe of Macedonia). Anyways. I have never said that there is no such position. BUT we cover this position in the appropriate articles. Alexander the Great is universally considered a Greek king and this is academic consensus and has been Wikipedia consensus for much time. Alternative theories should NOT be buried but discussed (as they are) in the respective articles (Ancient Macedonians / Macedon / Ancient Macedonian language / Ancient Greek dialects etc). As for Alexander...he self identified as a Greek, he was called a Greek by everyone (even the Athenian orators of his time), is portrayed as Greek by most modern scholars too and has no place in the "Graecomacedonian" controversy. I simply restored the article to its former stable state, before becoming a part of this little "Macedonian" attack on Wikipedia. Is it a coincidence that at the same time this (for the millionth time) started multiple other articles were attacked as well? I do not think so. Anyways... we should not make academic allowances because some people find it offensive to even read the work "Greek" (for God's sake he even disputed the usage of the word "Greek" instead of "Hellenic"!). I know that you are a person who likes (sometimes fanatically if I remember our first exchange of posts..lol..) looking up bibliography and sources. Even if you do not take my word for granted (quite understandably so), you can easily see for yourself what the academic consensus is (and I am not talking about unanimity of course). GK1973 ( talk) 14:12, 24 January 2010 (UTC) reply

Oh.. and take a look in his other "dispute" regarding...Saints Cyril and Methodius... his argument against established history is that they knew too good Slavonic to have been Greeks... This man is really something... GK1973 ( talk) 14:18, 24 January 2010 (UTC) reply

Please look up Cyril and Methodius for yourself and you will understand. by the way, your disagree with my proposal, Sir? Fine, this is kind of Royal decision. Interestingly, Alexander would in a similar circumstances give grounds for his decision to his generals... And this sounds also just fine. At least number of GoogWicks will applaud. O.K. Do these changes please. Even "Geek Argead dynasty" would be O.K. (with or without stating doubts about this which Hammond and particularly Borza expressed). But to state just "Geek king" is false. Draganparis ( talk) 08:45, 25 January 2010 (UTC) reply

I posted this below to our friend GK1973 on his talk, but he hides it (!?). Y here it is again, you can use it and store in your Ancient History archive or - erase, of course.

Philotas story. This is very well known story from Rufus which, how interesting, the GoogWiks apparently "do not know". Strange?

Here are Latin and English versions of Rufus, the sections that deal with Philotas Problem. Please tell me now how do you interpret the text. I think that there is no doubt that Macedonian and Greek speakers could not understand each other at all and needed interpreters. (But, as it is often the case, I could be wrong.) Indeed, the readers will be now able to decide. Draganparis ( talk) 21:01, 25 January 2010 (UTC) reply

The History of Alexander Curtius Rufus

Latin (from http://www.thelatinlibrary.com/curtius/curtius6.shtml)

6.9.35 and 36 Tum Philotas: "Praeter Macedonas", inquit, "plerique adsunt, quos facilius quae dicam percepturos arbitror, si eadem lingua fuero usus qua tu egisti, non ob aliud, credo, quam ut oratio tua intellegi posset a pluribus." Tum rex: "Ecquid videtis, adeo etiam sermonis patrii Philotan taedere? solus quippe fastidit eum discere. Sed dicat sane, utcumque ei cordi est, dum memineritis aeque illum a nostro more quam a sermone abhorrere." Atque ita contione excessit.

6.10.23 (Philotas, complainin abou charges made agenst him.) Mihi quidem obicitur quod societatem patrii sermonis asperner, quod Macedonum mores fastidiam: sic ego imperio, quod dedignor, immineo. Iam pridem nativus ille sermo commercio aliarum gentium exolevit: tum victoribus quam victis peregrina lingua discenda est.

6.11.4 (Bolon’s accusations of Philotas) Ludibrio ei fuisse rusticos homines Phrygasque et Paphlagonas appellatos, qui non erubesceret, Macedo natus, homines linguae suae per interpretem audire.

Now from my book, which has Latin original version that is slightly different from one from the Internet (!?), and French translation. Sorry, I just can not type also the French translation. If you want to have it - vous pouvez me demander et je veux vous le recopier avec plaisir. The reference is: Quinte-Curce, De la vie et des actions d’Alexandre le Grand, de la traduction de monsieur de Vaugalas, avec le supplemants de Jean Freinshemius sur Quinte- Cource. Traduits par fcu Monsieur du RYER. Tome second. A Lille, 1712.

Latin (original) version

6.9.35 and 36 Tum Philotas: praeter Macedonas, inquit, plerique adsunt, quos facilius, quae dicam, percepturos arbitror, si eadem lingua fuero usus, qua tu egisti: non ob aliud, credo, quam ut oratio tua intelligi posset a pluribus. Tum rex: ecquid videtis, odeo etiam sermonis patrii Philotan teneri? solus quippe fastidit eum dicere. Sed dicat sane, utcumque cordi est, dum memineritis, aeque illum a nostro more, atqe sermone abhorrere. Atque ita conciene excessit.

6.10.23 Mihi quidem objicitur, quod societatem patrii sermonis asperner; quod Macedonum mores fastidiam; sic ego imperio, quod dedignor, immineo? Jam pridem nativus ille sermo commercio aliarum gentium exolevit; tum victoribus quam victis peregrina lingua discenda est.

6.11.4 Ludibrio ei fuisse rusticos hominess, Phrygasque & Paphlagonas appellatos; qui non erubesceret, Macedo natus, homines linguae suae per interpretem audire.

English translation. I retyped it from my copy of the book (John Yardley’s translation , 1984 of the History of Alexander, Penguin Books 2004.). But you can find it also on Google books too.

6.9. [35]“besides the Macedonians”, replied Philotas, “there are many present who, I think, will find what I am going to say easier to understand if I use the language you yourself have been using, your purpose. I believe, being only to enable more people to understand you.” [36] Then the king said: “Do you see how offensive Philotas finds even his native language? He alone feels an aversion to learning it. But let him speak as he pleases – only remember that he is as contemptuous of our way of life as he is of our language.” So saying, Alexander left the meeting.

6.10. [23] “One charge made against me is that I disdain to communicate in my native language, that I have no respect for Macedonian custom (which means I have designs on an empire I despise!). That native language of ours has long been rendered obsolete through our dealings with other nations, and conquerors and conquered alike must learn a foreign tongue.

6.11. [4] Philotas had ridiculed man from the country, he continued, calling them Phrygians an Paphlagonians, -this from a man who Macedonian born, was not ashamed to use an interpreter to listen to man who spoke his own language. Draganparis ( talk) 21:01, 25 January 2010 (UTC) reply

Thanks for uploading File:Czn-sg1.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{ non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. IngerAlHaosului ( talk) 19:04, 24 January 2010 (UTC) reply

Thanks for uploading File:Fft-t1.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{ non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. IngerAlHaosului ( talk) 19:17, 24 January 2010 (UTC) reply

The January 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot ( talk) 05:03, 5 February 2010 (UTC) reply

This article has been marked as wanting a second opinion since 16 December. You have had 3 second opinions. Surely it is time to close the review one way or the other? Jezhotwells ( talk) 09:23, 18 February 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi Wandal, need your miitary expertise. See User:Montanabw/Sandbox2. I am working on a translation of a biography from German wiki, and I have a German speaker who isn't super confident in his English helping me (it's at his request, actually) but neither of us have the military background nor the translation skills to figure out a couple of things. Specifically, can you pop over there and tell us what the term that Google wanted to translate as "the Imperial "Marstall" in Vienna" means...? Just pop a note or wikilink or whatever in there at the relevant point, we can take it from that. And if you see other disasterous translation errors, just leave us a note at the bottom. Any help much appreciated. I'd like to get this live in another day or so because there is another article in the queue waiting... Montanabw ^(talk) 00:24, 25 February 2010 (UTC) reply

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 8 March 2010! More information on coordinatorship may be found on the coordinator academy course and in the responsibilities section on the coordinator page.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot ( talk) 22:42, 1 March 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi, I wondered what is happening about the GAN review. You don't seem to have edited the review for six weeks? Jezhotwells ( talk) 02:35, 2 March 2010 (UTC) reply

The February 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot ( talk) 23:30, 4 March 2010 (UTC) reply

Hey, Wandalstouring. I know you aren't there, but I thought I'd leave this message all the same. I've brought Philip the Arab and Christianity to GAR. The page is here. G.W. ( Talk) 14:51, 11 March 2010 (UTC) reply

Hey, long time no hear. Check out my new Raeti offering. Also I am trying to bring some order to the Roman army articles. Check out the completely revamped Roman army article, now serving as a portal, with new subsidiary articles (still being constructed). Cheers EraNavigator ( talk) 12:25, 17 March 2010 (UTC) reply

Voting for the Military history WikiProject coordinator elections has opened; all users are encouraged to participate in the elections. Voting will conclude 23:59 (UTC) on 28 March 2010.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot ( talk) 22:28, 18 March 2010 (UTC) reply

The March 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot ( talk) 22:50, 7 April 2010 (UTC) reply

The April 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot ( talk) 20:12, 5 May 2010 (UTC) reply

Template:Cite LacusCurtius has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. RL0919 ( talk) 21:39, 10 May 2010 (UTC) reply

The May 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot ( talk) 21:50, 5 June 2010 (UTC) reply

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LII (June 2010) Front page Project news Articles Members Editorial

Project news Catch up with our project's activities over the last month, including the new Recruitment working group and Strategy think tank	Articles Milhist's newest featured and A-Class content
Members June's contest results plus the latest awards to our members	Editorial LeonidasSpartan shares his thoughts on how, as individual editors, we can deal with frustration and disappointment in our group endeavour
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot ( talk) 19:49, 6 July 2010 (UTC) reply

An article that you have been involved in editing, List of battles by casualties, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of battles by casualties. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Rubikonchik ( talk) 11:19, 4 August 2010 (UTC) reply

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LIII (July 2010) Front page Project news Articles Members Editorial

Project news New parameter for military conflict infobox introduced; Preliminary information on the September coordinator elections	Articles Milhist's newest featured and A-Class content
Members July's contest results, the latest awards to our members, plus an interview with Parsecboy	Editorial Opportunities for new military history articles
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot ( talk) 22:07, 18 August 2010 (UTC) reply

		The Content Review Medal of Merit
		By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted work on the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews during the period July-December 2009, I am delighted to award you this Content Review Medal. TomStar81 ( Talk) 01:44, 1 September 2010 (UTC) reply

		The Content Review Medal of Merit
		By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted work on the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews for the period Jan-Jun 2010, I am delighted to award you this Content Review Medal. Ian Rose ( talk) 08:55, 1 September 2010 (UTC) reply

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LIV (August 2010) Front page Project news Articles Members Editorial

Project news The return of reviewer awards, task force discussions, and more information on the upcoming coordinator election	Articles A recap of the month's new Featured and A-Class articles, including a new featured sound
Members Our newest A-class medal recipients and this August's top contestants	Editorial In the first of a two-part series, Moonriddengirl discusses the problems caused by copyright violations
To change your delivery options for this newsletter please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot ( talk) 23:57, 7 September 2010 (UTC) reply

You are receiving this because you have commented on either Autogynephilia, Homosexual transsexual, or Blanchard, Bailey, and Lawrence theory in the past two years; all such commenters have received this notice. It has been proposed to merge these three articles to eliminate WP:Redundancy, WP:UNDUE, WP:POV, and to keep the focus on the specific Blanchardian theory of M2F transsexuality (in contrast to Transsexual sexuality, which would be to focus on the subject in general). Please feel free to comment on the proposal at Talk:Autogynephilia#Merger proposal. -- 70.57.222.103 ( talk) 20:04, 8 September 2010 (UTC) reply

The actively interested editors of the pages on Autogynephilia, homosexual transsexual, and BBL theory have been discussing a merger. You are an editor that was deeply interested and involved in the past. straw Poll on the merger proposals. I am notifying you of this poll as a courtesy. -- Hfarmer ( talk) 00:44, 11 September 2010 (UTC) reply

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. You are cordially invited to help pick fourteen new coordinators from a pool of twenty candidates. This time round, the term has increased from six to twelve months so it is doubly important that you have your say! Please cast your vote here no later than 23:59 (UTC) on Tuesday, 28 September 2010.

With many thanks in advance for your participation from the coordinator team,   Roger Davies ^talk 19:47, 17 September 2010 (UTC) reply

http://www.google.com/search?q=history+of+beriberi+Chinese&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=CmV&rls=org.mozilla:de:official&tbs=tl:1&tbo=u&ei=yPydTM3bBZOoONyqmcEL&sa=X&oi=timeline_result&ct=title&resnum=11&ved=0CEMQ5wIwCg

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LV (September 2010) Front page Project news Articles Members Editorial

Project news The results of September's coordinator elections, plus ongoing project discussions and proposals	Articles A recap of the month's new Featured and A-Class articles
Members Our newest A-class medal recipients, this September's top contestants, plus the reviewers' Roll of Honour (Apr-Sep 2010)	Editorial In the final part of our series on copyright, Moonriddengirl describes how to deal with copyright infringements on Wikipedia
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot ( talk) 20:45, 23 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Your Military history Newsletter Project News: Editors for the newsletter, GAN backlog reduction drive Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: EyeSerene sums up our "Five years of military history"

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot ( talk) 23:11, 22 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors, "Military Historian of the Year", New Incubator, Black Project Report Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: bahamut guides us through "Nominating military biographies for deletion"

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot ( talk) 23:33, 8 December 2010 (UTC) reply

Thanks for uploading File:Testudo lg.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{ OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{ non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 22:01, 24 December 2010 (UTC) reply

Your military history newsletter – Volume LVIII, December 2010 From the editors • "Military Historian of the Year" • Discussions • The month's new featured and A-class content • Review awards Contest results • A-class medal recipients • bahamut teaches us proper usage of "Jargon and acronyms" To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here. BrownBot ( talk) 21:57, 18 January 2011 (UTC) reply

Your Military history Newsletter Project News: From the editors Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: EyeSerene discusses "Writing neutrally for Wikipedia"

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot ( talk) 17:00, 21 February 2011 (UTC) reply

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: Ed talks about real-world collaborations and how you can help

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot ( talk) 23:00, 17 March 2011 (UTC) reply

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: Dank helps you see what article writers want from reviewers

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot ( talk) 05:01, 1 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: Buggie111 discusses neutral point of view

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot ( talk) 23:58, 17 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors – Contest results, A-class medal recipients Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Editorial: Hawkeye's thoughts on the article writing process

To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot ( talk) 23:45, 4 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Greetings Wandalstouring-

My name is Randall Livingstone, and I am a doctoral student at the University of Oregon, studying digital media and online community. I am posting to invite you to participate in my research study exploring the work of Wikipedia editors who are members of WikiProject: Countering Systemic Bias. The online survey should take 20 to 25 minutes to complete and can be found here:

https://oregon.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_cSHzuwaQovaZ6ss

Your responses will help online communication researchers like me to better understand the collaborations, challenges, and purposeful work of Wikipedia editors like you. In addition, at the end of the survey you will have the opportunity to express your interest in a follow-up online interview with the researcher.

This research project has been reviewed and approved by the Wikimedia Research Committee as well as the Office for Protection of Human Subjects at the University of Oregon. For a detailed description of the project, please visit its Meta page. This survey is voluntary, and your confidentiality will be protected. You will have the choice of using your Wikipedia User Name during the research or creating a unique pseudonym. You may skip any question you choose, and you may withdraw at any time. By completing the survey, you are providing consent to participate in the research.

If you have any questions about the study, please contact me via my Talk Page (UOJComm) or via email. My faculty advisor is Dr. Ryan Light. If you have any questions regarding your rights as a research participant, please contact the Office for Protection of Human Subjects at the University of Oregon.

Thank you very much.

Sincerely,

Randall Livingstone School of Journalism & Communication University of Oregon UOJComm ( talk) 18:45, 22 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Finland and Spitfires Op-ed: Fifelfoo and hunting for plagiarism

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot ( talk) 00:21, 17 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Nice eyes, brain and political leaning. +1 admirer! prat ( talk) 03:23, 27 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Zeebrugee and Afghanistan Op-ed: WereSpielChequers examines RfA

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot ( talk) 23:24, 14 August 2011 (UTC) reply

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Carthage and Australia in Palestine Op-ed: Remembering 9/11

Template:Hcref has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. -—  Gadget850 (Ed)  ^talk 15:21, 21 September 2011 (UTC) reply

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D and Ian Rose look at Australian air power Op-ed: Buggie111 ruminates about WikiLife and WikiDeath

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D analyzes three books from Osprey Publishing Review essay: Nick-D reviews the new Bundeswehr Military History Museum

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors – MHotY coming; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at the Congolese Wars Review essay: Ian Rose goes to El Alamein Op-ed: DCI's call to revitalize WikiProject History

Nominations for the " Military Historian of the Year" for 2011 are now open. If you would like to nominate an editor for this award, please do so here. Voting will open on 22 January and run for seven days. Thanks! On behalf of the coordinators, Nick-D ( talk) and Ed  ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 00:48, 16 January 2012 (UTC) You were sent this message because you are a listed as a member of the Military history WikiProject. reply

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D Nick-D looks into two recent Milhist books Review essay: Kirill Lokshin, the first coordinator Op-ed: Hchc's English Castles

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks into two recent Milhist books Op-ed: Ian Rose discusses article assessments

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks into two recent Milhist books Op-ed: Hawkeye on Wikipedia collaborating with the AWM

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Bomzibar on Subhas Chandra Bose; Hawkeye on corps commanders; Nick-D on American special forces Op-ed: The Land on commemorating World War I

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Bomzibar on Chiang Kai-shek; Nick-D on the Falklands War Interview: Article writers discuss biographies Op-ed: Nick-D examines using news articles as sources

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D on the Chaco War and the Bougainville Campaign Op-ed: Remembering conflict

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors: Wikimania 2012; special projects note Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D on the Australian 25th Battalion Interview: Article writers discuss buildings and fortifications Op-ed: Hawkeye7 reports on a weekend workshop

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D on the legacy of World War II Op-ed: Bomzibar on German military history

The Military history WikiProject has started its 2012 project coordinator election process, where we will select a team of coordinators to organize the project over the coming year. If you would like to be considered as a candidate, please submit your nomination by 14 September. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact one of the current coordinators on their talk page. This message was delivered here because you are a member of the Military history WikiProject. – Military history coordinators ( about the project • what coordinators do) 10:07, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: AustralianRupert on artillery in South Australia, and Nick-D on Venice's empire Op-ed: Nick-D on the "Kokoda: Beyond the Legend" conference

Hello! Now, some of you might have already received a similar message a little while ago regarding the Recruitment Centre, so if you have, there is no need to read the rest of this. This message is directed to users who have reviewed over 15 Good article nominations and are not part of WikiProject Good articles (the first message I sent out went to only WikiProject members). So for those who haven't heard about the Recruitment Centre yet, you may be wondering why there is a Good article icon with a bunch of stars around it (to the right). The answer? WikiProject Good articles will be launching a Recruitment Centre very soon! The centre will allow all users to be taught how to review Good article nominations by experts just like you! However, in order for the Recruitment Centre to open in the first place, we need some volunteers: Recruiters: The main task of a recruiter is to teach users that have never reviewed a Good article nomination how to review one. To become a recruiter, all you have to do is meet this criteria. If we don't get at least 5-10 recruiters to start off with (at the time this message was sent out, 2 recruiters have volunteered), the Recruitment Centre will not open. If interested, make sure you meet the criteria, read the process and add your name to the list of recruiters. (One of the great things about being a recruiter is that there is no set requirement of what must be taught and when. Instead, all the content found in the process section is a guideline of the main points that should be addressed during a recruitment session...you can also take an entire different approach if you wish!) If you think you will not have the time to recruit any users at this time but are still interested in becoming a recruiter, you can still add your name to the list of recruiters but just fill in the "Status" parameter with "Not Available". Co-Director: The current Director for the centre is me (Dom497). Another user that would be willing to help with some of the tasks would be helpful. Tasks include making sure recruiters are doing what they should be (teaching!), making sure all recruitments are archived correctly, updating pages as needed, answering any questions, and distributing the feedback form. If interested, please contact me (Dom497). Nominators, please read this: If you are not interested in becoming a recruiter, you can still help. In some cases a nominator may have an issue with an "inexperienced" editor (the recruitee) reviewing one of their nominations. To minimize the chances of this happening, if you are fine with a recruitee reviewing one of your nominations under the supervision of the recruiter, please add your name to the list at the bottom of this page. By adding your name to this list, chances are that your nomination will be reviewed more quickly as the recruitee will be asked to choose a nomination from the list of nominators that are OK with them reviewing the article. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. I look forward to seeing this program bring new reviewers to the Good article community and all the positive things it will bring along. A message will be sent out to all recruiters regarding the date when the Recruitment Centre will open when it is determined. The message will also contain some further details to clarify things that may be a bit confusing.-- Dom497 ( talk) This message was sent out by -- EdwardsBot ( talk) 14:52, 9 June 2013 (UTC) reply

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Ed  ^{[talk]  [majestic titan]} 22:16, 23 September 2014 (UTC) reply

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 29 September. Yours, Ed  ^{[talk]  [majestic titan]} 05:22, 25 September 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 13:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC) reply

I nominated subj for deletion @commons for an invalid license. You were the original uploader and added an except from a letter, so I assume you may have a connection to the author. Could you ask them to amend their permission to what commons:Licensing requires? — Vano 20:36, 25 November 2015 (UTC) reply

Greetings,

"Military history" is one of the most important subjects when speak of sum of all human knowledge. To support contributors interested in the area over various language Wikipedias, we intend to form a user group. It also provides a platform to share the best practices between military historians, and various military related projects on Wikipedias. An initial discussion was has been done between the coordinators and members of WikiProject Military History on English Wikipedia. Now this discussion has been taken to Meta-Wiki. Contributors intrested in the area of military history are requested to share their feedback and give suggestions at Talk:Discussion to incubate a user group for Wikipedia Military Historians.

MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 11:29, 21 December 2017 (UTC) reply

Dear Wandalstouring and other interested editors of the Wiki community. Wondering around Wikipedia I stumbled upon some contributions of Wandalstouring. I discovered that the user has been inactive since 2011, according to the user contributions page. I have placed Template:User longterm inactive at the top of this page, as well as added the username to the list of Wikipedia:Missing Wikipedians with the note "Early wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons editor, who made over 14,000 edits between May 2006 and June 2011.". Wandalstouring, thank you for contributions to Wikipedia! ( talk) user:Al83tito 15:45, 15 November 2018 (UTC) reply

Awesome

Ten years!

-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 04:17, 7 January 2020 (UTC) reply

I have nominated War against Nabis for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm _Talk 00:34, 20 March 2021 (UTC) reply

Hispanics in the United States Marine Corps has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 19:23, 13 February 2024 (UTC) reply