This Military history WikiProject page is an archive, log collection, or currently inactive page; it is kept primarily for historical interest. |
This page 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. |
I noticed some inconsistency in casus belli (CB) listed across WP articles. Is CB: a) the initial act of war committed in the ensuing conflict, or b) the justification (as insolent as can be) for the initial act of war? In some warboxes CB field is empty: Invasion of Poland (1939), Operation Barbarossa (shouldn't they say Lebensraum?), Anglo-Iraqi War, Iran-Iraq War, etc. Some articles interpret CB as (a), e.g. the Falklands War lists "Argentine occupation of the Falkland Islands and South Georgia" rather than Argentinian claims, while others as (b), e.g. Yom Kippur War's CB line was recently changed to "Israel's retention of territory taken from Egypt and Syria in Six-Day War". What do reliable sources say? TIA. ← Humus sapiens ну ? 11:53, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
The A-Class review for Russian-Circassian War is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 17:43, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
I was hoping that wikipedia may be able to make a section for Holocaust & Genocide as either a project or portal. I thought that it might be part of the Military project of the History section. Looking for assistance with this. Thanks. I would appreciate comments & assistance to be left on my talk page [ [1]]. I hope to hear from you soon. Eric Rodrigues.
Article: British anti-invasion preparations of World War II, has been put forward as a featured article candidate. If you would like to comment on this article's nomination, please see here. All opinions will be most welcome. Gaius Cornelius 17:34, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
The A-Class review for Royal Wiltshire Yeomanry is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 17:51, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
The A-Class review for Tupolev TB-3 is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 03:35, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Para Commandos currently goes to an article on India’s Para Commandos. As Belgium also has Para Commandos, should Para Commandos be a disambiguation page, with...
If people agree, I'm happy to do this. Regards Chwyatt 08:50, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
A few more editors are needed to complete the A-Class review for Russian-Circassian War; please stop by and help review the article! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 18:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi,
I'm not a member of this wikiproject. Recently, due to the popularity of the movie 300, the Battle of Thermopylae rec'd a high number of visits...
John Woo is making or gonna make a movie about the Battle of Red Cliffs. I'm expecting a similar surge in popularity. I'm thinking it might be proactive if y'all started a collaboration to improve that article, and perhaps a few closely related ones.... just a thought. :-)
Later! -- Ling.Nut 02:31, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
I expanded the nickname part of the infobox and added redirects and also dealed with the nagging "half the intro is the motto" problem a short while ago. -- Pupster21 Talk To Me 19:16, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, I was going to request that User:RM Gillespie expand the Vietnam War section, but other than that nothing really.-- Pupster21 Talk To Me 17:23, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
A few more editors are needed to complete the A-Class review for Tupolev TB-3; please stop by and help review the article! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 21:29, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
The A-Class review for Benjamin Franklin Tilley is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 17:10, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Does anyone here have this page on their watchlist? Would appreciate help in looking out for bad edits --- there is some anon in Stockton, California with a variety of IPs who repeatedly reinserts Vietnam-related items to this page about immigrants or refugees, rather than instances of military incursions (e.g. Koreans in Vietnam). Made a request for semi-protection of the page but it was refused. Thanks, cab 07:53, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
I found the one guilty of tagging this list:
Revision as of 05:02, 12 February 2006
({{WikiProject Military history}})
Kirill, yoa wanna maintain this article, thou included within thy scope, or shalt we throw it into the electronic purgatory? Wandalstouring 17:02, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
A few more editors are needed to complete the A-Class review for Benjamin Franklin Tilley; please stop by and help review the article! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 17:14, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
The current title for the page on the conflict between the United States and Mexico, 1846-1848, is the Mexican-American War. However, it is argued ("Talk Page: Misnomer" and "Talk Page: Name of War = Title of Article") that the "Mexican War" is actually the most common name used to refer to that event. Kraken7 19:55, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
The article Treaty of Craiova apparently is within the scope of this WikiProject, so I will bring this up here: according to the article ( Treaty of Craiova), the Treaty was imposed on Romania by Nazi Germany. Why was this? What did Nazi Germany stand to gain with this Treaty? Were they interested in maintaining some sort of peace in the area, or was this in the interest of relations with Bulgaria? Is any information about this available? And if so, could someone with access to that information add it to the article? A ecis Brievenbus 23:10, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Help is needed to monitor Bay of Pigs Invasion, which at present is in very poor shape, and seems to be in freefall due to numerous spurious anon edits over a long period. I have just restored the lead and infobox after they were absent for days due to anon removals.-- Zleitzen (talk) 00:08, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi there. I've got a peer review request open at Wikipedia:Peer review/Battle of the Plains of Abraham/archive1 for an article that I feel has a pretty good shot at FA in the near future, but it's gotten no traffic from WP:PR. Might I ask that any folks here who might be interested drop by and offer some suggestions? Much appreciated. Cheers! Tony Fox (arf!) 04:58, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
The article is pretty bad, overall. It seems to be biased (example: hated Austro-Hungarians , hated Bulgarians ) and presents the entire front only through the Entante POV, without giving any detailed information on the Central Power's armies (unit number and strenght, morale, disposition, casualties) and their overall strategic situation and problems (etc. lack of resources, homefront anti-war opposition). The article stresses the importance of Greece entering the war, but doesn't give much info on its army's strenght and disposition, apart from being able to gather 9 divions. The fighting in Albania is also lacking in detail. The Battles of Doiran and Dobro pole seem to be mixed up, both being fought around the 18th of September. Dobro pole was major Allied victory, which led to the breaktrough of the Bulgarian front (and consequently to the Solder Rebellion, which should also be covered), while Doiran was decisive victory for the Bulgarians and was used in the diplomatic negotiations to protect the country from occupation. Hope the article will be revised with more datailed accounts from both sides. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.238.215.65 ( talk) 07:57, 26 April 2007 (UTC).
The A-Class review for Battle of Arras (1917) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 21:20, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
I've created Israel-United States military relations partly as a merge of an earlier article, partly as a content fork of Israel-United States relations (which it's intended to parallel) and partly as a chunk of new content sourced largely from Jane's. The format is intended to be usable as a standard framework for multiple articles of this type - see the explanation on Talk:Israel-United States military relations. I see it as a possible prototype for a series of articles on bilateral military relations. I'd be grateful if people could take a look and let me know what you think. -- ChrisO 23:40, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Template:Military-Insignia has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Megapixie 02:41, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Folks, there's currently a proposal to merge Washington's crossing of the Delaware with Battle of Trenton at Talk:Washington's crossing of the Delaware#Merge with Battle of Trenton. I personally oppose merger, but I'm soliciting more views from the Military History WikiProject. Wl219 21:12, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
I notice that you have added the following guideline since I was last here: "Depictions of military history in cultural art forms, such as painting, sculpture, music, film, poetry, and prose." I was wondering if this would extended to TV shows like Moder Marvels which cover the topic of the show from its orgins to the present, but do not nessicarily focus exclusively on Military Hardware. Would shows of this nature come under this projects umbrella? 129.108.204.3 22:24, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
The A-Class review for Pontiac's Rebellion is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 22:36, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
We have a young Wikipedia contributer named User:Shark kid, who has been adding a lot of material to many military articles. He means well, but he seems to have no idea what is appropriate and what is not. I have already deleted too much of his material, and I don't want to stalk him. If editors in this project see fit, please edit or delete his additions, and leave a note in his user page. He may grow up to be a good historian someday. — Aetheling 18:32, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
The A-Class review for Zveno project is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 08:29, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Warsaw Uprising has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. LuciferMorgan 15:22, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
I would like to ask two questions about current policy about flag icons posted in articles and templates:
I've looked on talk history but there was no detailed guidelines and it was last discussion about flag icons found by me. Regards, Piotr Mikołajski 10:49, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
The crucial points are how the flag icons are being used. (1) Are they accurate or are they misleading? (2) Do they help readers visually distinguish items? (3) Do they distract from the text? (4) Does the accompanying text make it obvious to the reader what the flag is for? If they would learn more from clicking on the text link than the flag, then get rid of the flag and put the flag in the article about (say) the Regia Marina or the Imperial Japanese Navy. I suppose it all depends on whether you want to represent the participant in a conflict as the navy or the country. Carcharoth 13:47, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
I think that Templates should stick to one type of flags. You either use war flags for all coutnries who have them or you do not use them at all on that template. Problem is, that not all war flags are very well known(like , or ) so I think that WW II template should stick to state flags.-- Staberinde 14:57, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm clearly in favour of using the icons, and would be in favour of the more correct war flags. — Nightst a llion (?) 17:01, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry Staberinde, but I disagree with you. This is an encyclopedia. The purpose of an encyclopedia is to teach, inform, and make available ALL relevant information on any given scholarly topic. Therefore, the argument that we should not use war flags because people would not be able to atrribute them to the proper country is nonsensical. Keep them there, and perhaps readers would look those flags up; the readers might even be able to figure out who the flags belong to by using deductive reasoning, or just by reading the article. That's my opinion.-- MKnight9989 13:03, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
The A-Class review for B-52 aircraft crash at Fairchild Air Force Base is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 10:55, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject Japan is working on incorporating several smaller related wikiprojects as task forces, and since you guys are so very good at this, I'm wondering if one of you might be willing to help me incorporate that into our project banner. I've done a little bit, but I'm not that good at the coding in the banners, so I don't know how well I've done it. Any help would be appreciated. The banner is here: {{ WikiProject Japan}}. Thanks! ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihon joe 02:01, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
A few more editors are needed to complete the A-Class review for Zveno project; please stop by and help review the article! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 12:03, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
The editor who first created the proposal for the Cold War History project has not edited since early January. It has had roughly 8 members since March. I figured this project, given the amount of overlap, would probably be the best one to contact about possibly setting the project up. Thank you for your time. John Carter 18:33, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
There's a survey over whether we should move Battle of Lawrence to Lawrence Massacre (or another name). Talk:Battle of Lawrence#Requested move. - Will Beback · † · 20:03, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello,
I just joined the American Civil War task force.
Before I joined this task force, I already made some articles about Civil War soldiers and the wives.
Here they are:
Soldiers
Wives
Unfortunately, many of these articles are only stubs. Any additional information in these articles would be appreciated.
Thanks!
Psdubow 22:36, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
P.S. - Please leave replies on my talkpage.
I nominated Category:Sixty Years' War for deletion. I could be wrong. Please visit the nomination page to determine if I have any idea what I'm talking about. Thanks! — Kevin Myers 18:34, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Preliminary research for my overhaul of USS Iowa has turned up enough information to spin the 1989 turret 2 explosion into its own article, but I am not sure what to call it. I thought about 1989 Gun Turret Explosion aboard USS Iowa or 1989 Explosion in Turret #2, but figured I would ask here before doing anything definitive with this. Any other suggestions for a name? TomStar81 ( Talk) 02:25, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
A Seminole War related article that you may have been involved in editing, Alexander George Arbuthnot, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alexander George Arbuthnot. Thank you. Kittybrewster (talk) 13:23, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that we've made a Middle Eastern Military History Task Force [I'm in it] and I think that's great. However, there's one other task force I'm wondering why we don't have.
We have military history task forces for all the big countries [Canadian Military History, British Military History, etc.]. Should we have an Israeli Military History Task force, because even though their military has only really been around for sixty some odd years, they've had an extremely lively history in that time period.
Just a thought..
If this would fall under the juristiction of the Middle Eastern Military History Task force, then I'll be fine, but I'm just thinking that it might be good to have a task force entirely devoted to the IDF history [an extremely busy one, mind you].
Just a thought....
Cam 03:28, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Cam 02:25, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
The A-Class review for First Command Financial Planning, Inc. is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 18:35, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
The following articles are those that I have started, but cannot finish alone do to a lack of expertise:
PLEASE HELP -- MKnight9989 12:56, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks alot. I was trying to make it a column before, but I couldn't figure out how. I put it in column form when I edited it, but when I saved it was not in column form. Would you mind telling me how to list things in column form? (like you did) -- MKnight9989 13:45, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Thank you!-- MKnight9989 14:08, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
It doesn't need to be done urgently, I just thought I'd put those articles out there because I'm sure there are wikiusers with far more knowledge on those topics than I. The only reason I created the cavalry sabre article was because it was on a list of articles needing attention; there was no article for it, so I had to create one.-- MKnight9989 12:22, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
We do have quite a lot of active editors who create a bulk of information without being member of a specific task force. My idea is to collect information about recognized editors and keep them in a maintained (by the coordinators) list on display.
The nomination process would be the same as with our awards, but we may cut it to a support by two coordinators plus the nominee has to accept and clarify for what subjects he wants to be "contact" for. The title of the so awarded is "contact". S/He receives a nice userbox and some obligations: answer direct questions and peer reviews on his subject. In return he has the great honor to be listed as one of our contacts underneath our taskforces(this list is likely a mixture between our categories and our task forces). The coordinators do maintain the contactship and can denominate or send on vacation if there are problems with a contact or s/he can't be sufficiently active any more. Wandalstouring 17:44, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
The A-Class review for Sino-Indian War is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 07:32, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
I have noticed what I think is a missuse of the battle categories. For example the Category:Battles of the Western Front (World War I) contains not only battles but also Iron harvest, Hartmannswillerkopf, National War Memorial, Islandbridge, Polygon Wood, Zonnebeke etc. I have nothing against this articles but there aren't battles and shouldn't be in that category. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Carl Logan ( talk • contribs) 18:24, 9 May 2007 (UTC).
In the past couple of months a motivated individual has transformed this article from one focusing on the military force in Iraq to an essay on topics only tangentially related to the subject. Could someone who has worked on more military focused articles please step in and help refocus it on the forces, rather than the casualities and the politics? Thanks! Kyaa the Catlord 15:54, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
User:The Rambling Man and I are pushing this toward FA. Please help. Thanks. -- Dweller 18:30, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
An article about a General who was Commander in chief of the Madras Army, namely Charles George Arbuthnot, has been listed by ElimintorJR for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles George Arbuthnot. Thank you. - Kittybrewster (talk) 02:42, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
An article about a General namely Charles George James Arbuthnot, has been listed by ElimintorJR for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles George James Arbuthnot. Thank you. - Kittybrewster (talk) 02:42, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Having done a fair amount of categorising over the last couple of days, I've been struck by how complicated the WWI sub-categories are. Firstly, they're a real mouthful of type; secondly, they're not easy to remember; so all in all it's an unnecessary inconvenience. How do people feel about very broad sub-categories directly under Cat:World War I (sub-cat: France and World War I, sub-cat: United States and World War I etc) with the more specific stuff (sub-sub-cat:Military history of the United Kingdom during World War I, sub-sub-cat:Military personnel of the USA, etc) under them? There's a lot of good material and it's getting lost by over-specific categorisation and there are also way too many categories with very little stuff in them. This simplification would also give editors really obvious but relevant sub-categories for initial categorisation of their articles. The articles can always be moved/copied to better sub-categories later. Thoughts? Roger 07:57, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
I've written an article about Zhou Tong, the archery teacher of Song Dynasty General Yue Fei. For some reason, it is listed as being within the scope of you project. Why is that? I guess it could be since he taught archery to a future general, but he never fought in any wars are anything like that. ( Ghostexorcist 11:23, 11 May 2007 (UTC))
A few more editors are needed to complete the A-Class review for Sino-Indian War; please stop by and help review the article! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 15:54, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Guys, what's the current thinking on disambiguation article titles for senior military and naval personnel? There's just been a change from Benjamin Bathurst, former First Sea Lord and Chief of the Naval Staff, to the rather half baked Benjamin Bathurst (naval commander). Personally I'd go for Admiral Sir Benjamin Bathurst, but if there's a precedent than it should follow.
ALR 09:13, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
The A-Class review for Battle of the Plains of Abraham is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 10:53, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
As the Rus & Sov TF talk page is not very active, I thought I'd make the request here for the Russian language references at Divisions of the Soviet Union 1917-1945 to be translated into English. My Russian is just enough to recognise refs to units, but not more. Thanks ! Buckshot06 13:14, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
After a very long discussion the image copyright template has been depricated. New uploads to the template will be speedily deleted after 48 hours - older images will be given a long grace period to be migrated to free templates for example {{ PD-RU-exempt}}, {{ PD-USGov-Military-Badge}}. Please take any discussion to Template talk:Military-Insignia. Thanks. Megapixie 14:43, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
The article List of special forces units is a predominantly unreferenced bag of the proverbial. It seems to attract all kinds of contributions, indeed some countries seem to have more SF than anything else!
I've already tried to can it once, but the majority opinion was to keep it, with only one of those offering an opinon actually doing anything about it, and his edits were decimated in pretty short order afterwards.
With only a couple of people watching it and the majority of additions being fly-by it seems pretty unmaintainable. I do have an inclination to cite request every entry then delete the majority in a week or so, but I don't believe it'll sort the maintainability problem.
I'd welcome views on the best approach to deal with it, leave it as is or migrate to category.
Cheers
ALR 15:27, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
My suggestion is a clear definition and the lists of special forces get moved to the specific article's about each country's military, we only link there with this article.
Wandalstouring 19:15, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
I'd like to create a task force based on military uniforms, ranks, and awards. This would cover the superficial, yet interesting, procedure related to appearance in today's armed forces. Please talk this over with me, including ideas for improvement or encouragement. C0N6R355 talk contribs 00:29, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Any opinions about creating a MoS for the military topics instead of having the Guidelines section at the project main page? I think the section covers all essential things but it would be helpful if non-members can find out about a military MoS at the Wikipedia style guidelines category. -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 11:49, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
What about duplicating it? Keeping it at the project main while creating the MoS. -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 16:29, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that the Honor Guard page is very bare. Since it is marked as one of your project pages I thought I would let you know about it. I can help you after July 25th on it, but untill then I am afraid that it is up to you-- Cadet hastings 14:56, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
The A-Class review for AHS Centaur is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 15:38, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Could you please have a look at some issues going on at that article? Some third party comments are badly needed at the talk page. Please refer to wikipedia gets gamed. I've already gave my 2¢ but i think if there are some other views it would be better. -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 17:26, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Hey, do we have some sort of consensus that winning a Silver Star is not a noteworthy act, or does it warrant its own Wikipedia entry? Either way, please comment on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephen Boada. Palm_Dogg 16:07, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
I just created a userbox for the Military History Wikiproject and I was wondering if you would like me to put it on the page that shows you what you have to type for the Military History Wikiproject banner. I made it because some people don't like banners and prefer userboxes!
Here is a preview of it:
User:Dreamafter/MILHIST
Dreamy 02:29, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
The A-Class review for Operation Lam Son 719 is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 16:40, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
This Military history WikiProject page is an archive, log collection, or currently inactive page; it is kept primarily for historical interest. |
This page 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. |
I noticed some inconsistency in casus belli (CB) listed across WP articles. Is CB: a) the initial act of war committed in the ensuing conflict, or b) the justification (as insolent as can be) for the initial act of war? In some warboxes CB field is empty: Invasion of Poland (1939), Operation Barbarossa (shouldn't they say Lebensraum?), Anglo-Iraqi War, Iran-Iraq War, etc. Some articles interpret CB as (a), e.g. the Falklands War lists "Argentine occupation of the Falkland Islands and South Georgia" rather than Argentinian claims, while others as (b), e.g. Yom Kippur War's CB line was recently changed to "Israel's retention of territory taken from Egypt and Syria in Six-Day War". What do reliable sources say? TIA. ← Humus sapiens ну ? 11:53, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
The A-Class review for Russian-Circassian War is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 17:43, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
I was hoping that wikipedia may be able to make a section for Holocaust & Genocide as either a project or portal. I thought that it might be part of the Military project of the History section. Looking for assistance with this. Thanks. I would appreciate comments & assistance to be left on my talk page [ [1]]. I hope to hear from you soon. Eric Rodrigues.
Article: British anti-invasion preparations of World War II, has been put forward as a featured article candidate. If you would like to comment on this article's nomination, please see here. All opinions will be most welcome. Gaius Cornelius 17:34, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
The A-Class review for Royal Wiltshire Yeomanry is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 17:51, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
The A-Class review for Tupolev TB-3 is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 03:35, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Para Commandos currently goes to an article on India’s Para Commandos. As Belgium also has Para Commandos, should Para Commandos be a disambiguation page, with...
If people agree, I'm happy to do this. Regards Chwyatt 08:50, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
A few more editors are needed to complete the A-Class review for Russian-Circassian War; please stop by and help review the article! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 18:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi,
I'm not a member of this wikiproject. Recently, due to the popularity of the movie 300, the Battle of Thermopylae rec'd a high number of visits...
John Woo is making or gonna make a movie about the Battle of Red Cliffs. I'm expecting a similar surge in popularity. I'm thinking it might be proactive if y'all started a collaboration to improve that article, and perhaps a few closely related ones.... just a thought. :-)
Later! -- Ling.Nut 02:31, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
I expanded the nickname part of the infobox and added redirects and also dealed with the nagging "half the intro is the motto" problem a short while ago. -- Pupster21 Talk To Me 19:16, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, I was going to request that User:RM Gillespie expand the Vietnam War section, but other than that nothing really.-- Pupster21 Talk To Me 17:23, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
A few more editors are needed to complete the A-Class review for Tupolev TB-3; please stop by and help review the article! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 21:29, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
The A-Class review for Benjamin Franklin Tilley is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 17:10, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Does anyone here have this page on their watchlist? Would appreciate help in looking out for bad edits --- there is some anon in Stockton, California with a variety of IPs who repeatedly reinserts Vietnam-related items to this page about immigrants or refugees, rather than instances of military incursions (e.g. Koreans in Vietnam). Made a request for semi-protection of the page but it was refused. Thanks, cab 07:53, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
I found the one guilty of tagging this list:
Revision as of 05:02, 12 February 2006
({{WikiProject Military history}})
Kirill, yoa wanna maintain this article, thou included within thy scope, or shalt we throw it into the electronic purgatory? Wandalstouring 17:02, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
A few more editors are needed to complete the A-Class review for Benjamin Franklin Tilley; please stop by and help review the article! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 17:14, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
The current title for the page on the conflict between the United States and Mexico, 1846-1848, is the Mexican-American War. However, it is argued ("Talk Page: Misnomer" and "Talk Page: Name of War = Title of Article") that the "Mexican War" is actually the most common name used to refer to that event. Kraken7 19:55, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
The article Treaty of Craiova apparently is within the scope of this WikiProject, so I will bring this up here: according to the article ( Treaty of Craiova), the Treaty was imposed on Romania by Nazi Germany. Why was this? What did Nazi Germany stand to gain with this Treaty? Were they interested in maintaining some sort of peace in the area, or was this in the interest of relations with Bulgaria? Is any information about this available? And if so, could someone with access to that information add it to the article? A ecis Brievenbus 23:10, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Help is needed to monitor Bay of Pigs Invasion, which at present is in very poor shape, and seems to be in freefall due to numerous spurious anon edits over a long period. I have just restored the lead and infobox after they were absent for days due to anon removals.-- Zleitzen (talk) 00:08, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi there. I've got a peer review request open at Wikipedia:Peer review/Battle of the Plains of Abraham/archive1 for an article that I feel has a pretty good shot at FA in the near future, but it's gotten no traffic from WP:PR. Might I ask that any folks here who might be interested drop by and offer some suggestions? Much appreciated. Cheers! Tony Fox (arf!) 04:58, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
The article is pretty bad, overall. It seems to be biased (example: hated Austro-Hungarians , hated Bulgarians ) and presents the entire front only through the Entante POV, without giving any detailed information on the Central Power's armies (unit number and strenght, morale, disposition, casualties) and their overall strategic situation and problems (etc. lack of resources, homefront anti-war opposition). The article stresses the importance of Greece entering the war, but doesn't give much info on its army's strenght and disposition, apart from being able to gather 9 divions. The fighting in Albania is also lacking in detail. The Battles of Doiran and Dobro pole seem to be mixed up, both being fought around the 18th of September. Dobro pole was major Allied victory, which led to the breaktrough of the Bulgarian front (and consequently to the Solder Rebellion, which should also be covered), while Doiran was decisive victory for the Bulgarians and was used in the diplomatic negotiations to protect the country from occupation. Hope the article will be revised with more datailed accounts from both sides. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.238.215.65 ( talk) 07:57, 26 April 2007 (UTC).
The A-Class review for Battle of Arras (1917) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 21:20, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
I've created Israel-United States military relations partly as a merge of an earlier article, partly as a content fork of Israel-United States relations (which it's intended to parallel) and partly as a chunk of new content sourced largely from Jane's. The format is intended to be usable as a standard framework for multiple articles of this type - see the explanation on Talk:Israel-United States military relations. I see it as a possible prototype for a series of articles on bilateral military relations. I'd be grateful if people could take a look and let me know what you think. -- ChrisO 23:40, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Template:Military-Insignia has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Megapixie 02:41, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Folks, there's currently a proposal to merge Washington's crossing of the Delaware with Battle of Trenton at Talk:Washington's crossing of the Delaware#Merge with Battle of Trenton. I personally oppose merger, but I'm soliciting more views from the Military History WikiProject. Wl219 21:12, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
I notice that you have added the following guideline since I was last here: "Depictions of military history in cultural art forms, such as painting, sculpture, music, film, poetry, and prose." I was wondering if this would extended to TV shows like Moder Marvels which cover the topic of the show from its orgins to the present, but do not nessicarily focus exclusively on Military Hardware. Would shows of this nature come under this projects umbrella? 129.108.204.3 22:24, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
The A-Class review for Pontiac's Rebellion is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 22:36, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
We have a young Wikipedia contributer named User:Shark kid, who has been adding a lot of material to many military articles. He means well, but he seems to have no idea what is appropriate and what is not. I have already deleted too much of his material, and I don't want to stalk him. If editors in this project see fit, please edit or delete his additions, and leave a note in his user page. He may grow up to be a good historian someday. — Aetheling 18:32, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
The A-Class review for Zveno project is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 08:29, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Warsaw Uprising has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. LuciferMorgan 15:22, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
I would like to ask two questions about current policy about flag icons posted in articles and templates:
I've looked on talk history but there was no detailed guidelines and it was last discussion about flag icons found by me. Regards, Piotr Mikołajski 10:49, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
The crucial points are how the flag icons are being used. (1) Are they accurate or are they misleading? (2) Do they help readers visually distinguish items? (3) Do they distract from the text? (4) Does the accompanying text make it obvious to the reader what the flag is for? If they would learn more from clicking on the text link than the flag, then get rid of the flag and put the flag in the article about (say) the Regia Marina or the Imperial Japanese Navy. I suppose it all depends on whether you want to represent the participant in a conflict as the navy or the country. Carcharoth 13:47, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
I think that Templates should stick to one type of flags. You either use war flags for all coutnries who have them or you do not use them at all on that template. Problem is, that not all war flags are very well known(like , or ) so I think that WW II template should stick to state flags.-- Staberinde 14:57, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm clearly in favour of using the icons, and would be in favour of the more correct war flags. — Nightst a llion (?) 17:01, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry Staberinde, but I disagree with you. This is an encyclopedia. The purpose of an encyclopedia is to teach, inform, and make available ALL relevant information on any given scholarly topic. Therefore, the argument that we should not use war flags because people would not be able to atrribute them to the proper country is nonsensical. Keep them there, and perhaps readers would look those flags up; the readers might even be able to figure out who the flags belong to by using deductive reasoning, or just by reading the article. That's my opinion.-- MKnight9989 13:03, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
The A-Class review for B-52 aircraft crash at Fairchild Air Force Base is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 10:55, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject Japan is working on incorporating several smaller related wikiprojects as task forces, and since you guys are so very good at this, I'm wondering if one of you might be willing to help me incorporate that into our project banner. I've done a little bit, but I'm not that good at the coding in the banners, so I don't know how well I've done it. Any help would be appreciated. The banner is here: {{ WikiProject Japan}}. Thanks! ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihon joe 02:01, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
A few more editors are needed to complete the A-Class review for Zveno project; please stop by and help review the article! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 12:03, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
The editor who first created the proposal for the Cold War History project has not edited since early January. It has had roughly 8 members since March. I figured this project, given the amount of overlap, would probably be the best one to contact about possibly setting the project up. Thank you for your time. John Carter 18:33, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
There's a survey over whether we should move Battle of Lawrence to Lawrence Massacre (or another name). Talk:Battle of Lawrence#Requested move. - Will Beback · † · 20:03, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello,
I just joined the American Civil War task force.
Before I joined this task force, I already made some articles about Civil War soldiers and the wives.
Here they are:
Soldiers
Wives
Unfortunately, many of these articles are only stubs. Any additional information in these articles would be appreciated.
Thanks!
Psdubow 22:36, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
P.S. - Please leave replies on my talkpage.
I nominated Category:Sixty Years' War for deletion. I could be wrong. Please visit the nomination page to determine if I have any idea what I'm talking about. Thanks! — Kevin Myers 18:34, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Preliminary research for my overhaul of USS Iowa has turned up enough information to spin the 1989 turret 2 explosion into its own article, but I am not sure what to call it. I thought about 1989 Gun Turret Explosion aboard USS Iowa or 1989 Explosion in Turret #2, but figured I would ask here before doing anything definitive with this. Any other suggestions for a name? TomStar81 ( Talk) 02:25, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
A Seminole War related article that you may have been involved in editing, Alexander George Arbuthnot, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alexander George Arbuthnot. Thank you. Kittybrewster (talk) 13:23, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that we've made a Middle Eastern Military History Task Force [I'm in it] and I think that's great. However, there's one other task force I'm wondering why we don't have.
We have military history task forces for all the big countries [Canadian Military History, British Military History, etc.]. Should we have an Israeli Military History Task force, because even though their military has only really been around for sixty some odd years, they've had an extremely lively history in that time period.
Just a thought..
If this would fall under the juristiction of the Middle Eastern Military History Task force, then I'll be fine, but I'm just thinking that it might be good to have a task force entirely devoted to the IDF history [an extremely busy one, mind you].
Just a thought....
Cam 03:28, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Cam 02:25, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
The A-Class review for First Command Financial Planning, Inc. is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 18:35, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
The following articles are those that I have started, but cannot finish alone do to a lack of expertise:
PLEASE HELP -- MKnight9989 12:56, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks alot. I was trying to make it a column before, but I couldn't figure out how. I put it in column form when I edited it, but when I saved it was not in column form. Would you mind telling me how to list things in column form? (like you did) -- MKnight9989 13:45, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Thank you!-- MKnight9989 14:08, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
It doesn't need to be done urgently, I just thought I'd put those articles out there because I'm sure there are wikiusers with far more knowledge on those topics than I. The only reason I created the cavalry sabre article was because it was on a list of articles needing attention; there was no article for it, so I had to create one.-- MKnight9989 12:22, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
We do have quite a lot of active editors who create a bulk of information without being member of a specific task force. My idea is to collect information about recognized editors and keep them in a maintained (by the coordinators) list on display.
The nomination process would be the same as with our awards, but we may cut it to a support by two coordinators plus the nominee has to accept and clarify for what subjects he wants to be "contact" for. The title of the so awarded is "contact". S/He receives a nice userbox and some obligations: answer direct questions and peer reviews on his subject. In return he has the great honor to be listed as one of our contacts underneath our taskforces(this list is likely a mixture between our categories and our task forces). The coordinators do maintain the contactship and can denominate or send on vacation if there are problems with a contact or s/he can't be sufficiently active any more. Wandalstouring 17:44, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
The A-Class review for Sino-Indian War is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 07:32, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
I have noticed what I think is a missuse of the battle categories. For example the Category:Battles of the Western Front (World War I) contains not only battles but also Iron harvest, Hartmannswillerkopf, National War Memorial, Islandbridge, Polygon Wood, Zonnebeke etc. I have nothing against this articles but there aren't battles and shouldn't be in that category. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Carl Logan ( talk • contribs) 18:24, 9 May 2007 (UTC).
In the past couple of months a motivated individual has transformed this article from one focusing on the military force in Iraq to an essay on topics only tangentially related to the subject. Could someone who has worked on more military focused articles please step in and help refocus it on the forces, rather than the casualities and the politics? Thanks! Kyaa the Catlord 15:54, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
User:The Rambling Man and I are pushing this toward FA. Please help. Thanks. -- Dweller 18:30, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
An article about a General who was Commander in chief of the Madras Army, namely Charles George Arbuthnot, has been listed by ElimintorJR for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles George Arbuthnot. Thank you. - Kittybrewster (talk) 02:42, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
An article about a General namely Charles George James Arbuthnot, has been listed by ElimintorJR for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles George James Arbuthnot. Thank you. - Kittybrewster (talk) 02:42, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Having done a fair amount of categorising over the last couple of days, I've been struck by how complicated the WWI sub-categories are. Firstly, they're a real mouthful of type; secondly, they're not easy to remember; so all in all it's an unnecessary inconvenience. How do people feel about very broad sub-categories directly under Cat:World War I (sub-cat: France and World War I, sub-cat: United States and World War I etc) with the more specific stuff (sub-sub-cat:Military history of the United Kingdom during World War I, sub-sub-cat:Military personnel of the USA, etc) under them? There's a lot of good material and it's getting lost by over-specific categorisation and there are also way too many categories with very little stuff in them. This simplification would also give editors really obvious but relevant sub-categories for initial categorisation of their articles. The articles can always be moved/copied to better sub-categories later. Thoughts? Roger 07:57, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
I've written an article about Zhou Tong, the archery teacher of Song Dynasty General Yue Fei. For some reason, it is listed as being within the scope of you project. Why is that? I guess it could be since he taught archery to a future general, but he never fought in any wars are anything like that. ( Ghostexorcist 11:23, 11 May 2007 (UTC))
A few more editors are needed to complete the A-Class review for Sino-Indian War; please stop by and help review the article! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 15:54, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Guys, what's the current thinking on disambiguation article titles for senior military and naval personnel? There's just been a change from Benjamin Bathurst, former First Sea Lord and Chief of the Naval Staff, to the rather half baked Benjamin Bathurst (naval commander). Personally I'd go for Admiral Sir Benjamin Bathurst, but if there's a precedent than it should follow.
ALR 09:13, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
The A-Class review for Battle of the Plains of Abraham is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 10:53, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
As the Rus & Sov TF talk page is not very active, I thought I'd make the request here for the Russian language references at Divisions of the Soviet Union 1917-1945 to be translated into English. My Russian is just enough to recognise refs to units, but not more. Thanks ! Buckshot06 13:14, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
After a very long discussion the image copyright template has been depricated. New uploads to the template will be speedily deleted after 48 hours - older images will be given a long grace period to be migrated to free templates for example {{ PD-RU-exempt}}, {{ PD-USGov-Military-Badge}}. Please take any discussion to Template talk:Military-Insignia. Thanks. Megapixie 14:43, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
The article List of special forces units is a predominantly unreferenced bag of the proverbial. It seems to attract all kinds of contributions, indeed some countries seem to have more SF than anything else!
I've already tried to can it once, but the majority opinion was to keep it, with only one of those offering an opinon actually doing anything about it, and his edits were decimated in pretty short order afterwards.
With only a couple of people watching it and the majority of additions being fly-by it seems pretty unmaintainable. I do have an inclination to cite request every entry then delete the majority in a week or so, but I don't believe it'll sort the maintainability problem.
I'd welcome views on the best approach to deal with it, leave it as is or migrate to category.
Cheers
ALR 15:27, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
My suggestion is a clear definition and the lists of special forces get moved to the specific article's about each country's military, we only link there with this article.
Wandalstouring 19:15, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
I'd like to create a task force based on military uniforms, ranks, and awards. This would cover the superficial, yet interesting, procedure related to appearance in today's armed forces. Please talk this over with me, including ideas for improvement or encouragement. C0N6R355 talk contribs 00:29, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Any opinions about creating a MoS for the military topics instead of having the Guidelines section at the project main page? I think the section covers all essential things but it would be helpful if non-members can find out about a military MoS at the Wikipedia style guidelines category. -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 11:49, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
What about duplicating it? Keeping it at the project main while creating the MoS. -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 16:29, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that the Honor Guard page is very bare. Since it is marked as one of your project pages I thought I would let you know about it. I can help you after July 25th on it, but untill then I am afraid that it is up to you-- Cadet hastings 14:56, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
The A-Class review for AHS Centaur is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 15:38, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Could you please have a look at some issues going on at that article? Some third party comments are badly needed at the talk page. Please refer to wikipedia gets gamed. I've already gave my 2¢ but i think if there are some other views it would be better. -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 17:26, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Hey, do we have some sort of consensus that winning a Silver Star is not a noteworthy act, or does it warrant its own Wikipedia entry? Either way, please comment on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephen Boada. Palm_Dogg 16:07, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
I just created a userbox for the Military History Wikiproject and I was wondering if you would like me to put it on the page that shows you what you have to type for the Military History Wikiproject banner. I made it because some people don't like banners and prefer userboxes!
Here is a preview of it:
User:Dreamafter/MILHIST
Dreamy 02:29, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
The A-Class review for Operation Lam Son 719 is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 16:40, 18 May 2007 (UTC)