User talk:UberCryxic

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1. I will reply on your talk page unless you request otherwise.
2. Please be calm and courteous when writing. Do not troll here.
3. Sign your messages with four tildes at the end.
4. Contact me at resenbrink78@yahoo.com if you do not wish to write here.

Archive 1 (5 February, 2006 - 22 May, 2006)
Archive 2 (25 May, 2006 - 23 October, 2006)


Contents

[edit] FS Charles de Gaulle article

You haven't violated 3RR yet with your edits (from a quick glance at the edit history), however you're coming close. Please continue discussing the issue rather than simply reverting. Mark83 14:26, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

You really need to read-up on Wikipedia official policies. Also, being more diplomatic will help you. Confrontation on flimsy subject matter = failure. Wikipedia is all about consensus and quality. Just a recommendation. Take it or leave it. I hope that you will become a constructive asset to Wikipedia.

Natobxl 03:01, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Protocol for discussing Krasnoi

Uber:

I will continue to discuss Krasnoi with you, but I request that all comments and questions from you be very specific, and that they pertain to any of the numbers #1 through #13 on this map (double click on the map to enlarge it):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Krasny.JPG

The map carefully lists what happened in chronological order, #1 through #13, and it lists troop strengths, commanders, etc.

Your comments or questions should be left at the bottom of my talk page, and they should include a specific number (i.e., #6, #11, etc.) at the beginning of your comment/question.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Kenmore

Any comments or questions that do not begin with a specific number will not be answered, and will be deleted.

Thanks.

Kenmore 16:52, 25 October 2006 (UTC)kenmore

[edit] More Krasnoi stuff

Thank you for your message tonight.

However, I must admit that your input on this battle has made me realize something I was overlooking: that being the strategic importance of the Guard's staring down the Russians on 11/17.

Ordering the Guard's feint on 11/17 was a brilliant, bold manuever by Napoleon, and it enabled him to withdraw 75% of the combatants that were under his command. He therefore achieved his strategic goal -- to escape -- even if it was not accompanied by an actual defeat of the Russians.

Knowing he was facing Napoleon in person -- a military genius at the helm of Europe's most elite troopers (the Imperial Guard) -- Kutusov dared not send his inexperienced conscripts on an attack on 11/17. On that day, the Guard's vigil consigned the Russians to hiding behind their artillery...not daring to attack in spite of their overwhelming superiority. It is exactly what Napoleon wanted...to play a game of "chicken", and it worked.

Kutusov would not allow his troops to follow the French even as they were retreating from Krasnoi...he was so concerned about Napoleon and the Guard that hours passed before he sent his infantry to occupy the town.

My narrative will be revised to pay more attention to Napoleon's strategic gambit at Krasnoi...it is an extremely important part of the battle.

You can take credit also for getting me to research the Young Guard's devastating attack against Ozharovsky on 11/16. Segur and Davidov write about that episode very colorfully...in rich detail. I am going to elevate its importance in my narrative as well.

As far as a Wikipedia "result" for Krasnoi, we could very well call it "inconclusive" or "mixed". The Russians cleaned up on the non-combatant half of Napoleon's army, but Napoleon outnerved them on 11/17, and they decided to let him escape.

Consider yourself part of the Krasnoi project...I'm eager to hear your input regarding Riehn and other sources.

Kenmore 02:57, 27 October 2006 (UTC)kenmore

[edit] The Krasnoi article is now generally done

Uber:

The Battle of Krasnoi article is now basically complete...except for final spelling and grammar checks. The organization of subheadings is complete, and the content is finished.

I will do spell check/grammar edits later this week when I have time. I also plan to footnote more material (don't have time now).

Your criticisms, feedback, etc. are welcome.

You can credit yourself for having gotten me to better appreciate those aspects of Krasnoi that were French successes: such as the Guard's route of Ozharovsky, and Napoleon's strategic success concerning the Guard's feint on Nov. 17th. I would have overlooked that stuff otherwise.

Kenmore 17:42, 6 November 2006 (UTC)kenmore

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue VIII - October 2006

The October 2006 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 is an automated delivery by grafikbot 22:36, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unprotection

No, you're quite right. I hadn't. Please remember, no edit warring. By the way, I commend you keeping your cool when some others came close to loosing their cool. Mark83 23:44, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] FN Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier

Would you mind waiting for a new opinion on the subject? I certainly wouldn't like to say "yes, pay for the article". Also, say you did and you and I were 100% satisfied. However someone could come along tomorrow, click on the cite and be met with a subscription page, how are they going to verify the info? Please just leave the situation as it is and wait for a new opinion. Many thanks, Mark83 00:22, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cretan War

Can you please copy edit the Cretan War. Seeing as your WP:MILHIST best copy editor. Kyriakos 09:47, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

I added the bit you suggested as to how the allies won. Can you please check to see if it all right? Kyriakos 20:46, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for spending your time copy editting it. Kyriakos 20:48, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

The Cretan War has failed its A-class review and Kirill advised me to see if you could help me make any improvements to the areas where it has been suggested to improve. (I have put a link to the article here) Kyriakos 06:35, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your congrats. Kyriakos 23:28, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Charles de Gaulle

Eh, he seems to be limiting it to people who commented on the talk page earlier. I wouldn't be concerned unless he actually starts spamming other editors. Kirill Lokshin 01:13, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi. I'm not sure what you mean (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mark83&diff=84163824&oldid=84163644). I was happy to try and resolve the dispute, my approach seemed to calm the situation. I don't fell badly treated by anybody involved. Let me know if you have any lingering concerns or if I can help with anything else. Mark83 13:09, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kosovo edit on Albania wiki

actually it's not redundant; kosovo is under un administration....serbian sovereignty there is only nominal

I am aware of the situation in Kosovo and I am also aware that Kosovo has a majority of ethnic- Albanians, but isn't this a POV issue when the northeastern border of the country is referred to the province rather than the country itself? Please reply here instead of my Talk page. 210.7.5.4 01:46, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

The statement as it is, "southern Serbian province of Kosovo to the northeast," both reflects the fact that Kosovo is still (officially and nominally) part of the country of Serbia while acknowledging its unique status.UberCryxic 01:54, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:French deployments.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:French deployments.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:06, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Copyedits

Thanks for your solid work—I'm surprised you can muster the patience for this stuff after all the crap you've gone through. I see you tackled the later sections as well (I can't bear to look at some of them, let alone try to edit them). Hopefully my narrative will overwrite them sooner rather than later.

Incidentally, and while I hesitate to distract you from The Good Fight™, I'm wondering what you think about this exchange. Am I being unreasonable here? Have I finally lost it? Or are there grounds for concern? Albrecht 04:44, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Re Surrender: Yeah, that's my thinking as well. Even if one were to take Wiki is not paper to bizarre extemes, one would need to demonstrate the need for the article first—clearly, there can be no justification for an article with practically no substantive content beyond its title.
I'm considering changing back a few of your edits to Peninsular War, and I figure I should run it by you first:
  1. Reverting "Napoleon secured" to "Napoleon moved to secure"—I think the distinction here is important, because although Boney's actions were intended to consolidate his position in Spain, they had just the opposite effect. In other words, if Napoleon had "secured his gains," there might still be a Bonaparte in Madrid.
  2. Reverting "resulting in some 150 slain French soldiers" to "with the loss of some 150 French soldiers slain." The grammar here's a bit tricky; no specific action resulted in these casualties (and certainly not the cavalry charges, which probably saved the French army). Probably more correct simply to mention the loss.
  3. Changing "largely successful French armies" to "nigh-invincible," or something like that. The earlier phrasing ("invincible") was admittedly an exaggeration (albeit one shamelessly repeated in most published accounts), but I think "largely successful" is too conservative and kills the dramatic effect— the readers will wonder what the big deal is over a "largely successful" army being defeated at Bailen.
Again, let me know if I've missed something here. Cheers. Albrecht 21:37, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Indomitable is a good substitute for invincible in this situation Davu.leon 09:43, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] French Navy

Please can you engage in the debate if you wish to make a point. Many people have worthwhile contributions to make to Wikipedia, and your input can be valuable too. However, your current edits to the French Navy article seem to be based on emotives and not fact. Look forward to your input :)--Ordew 15:08, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Marshall Cavendish

hi, do you have Marshall Cavendish documentary dvds maybe? this is an US collection. you might have some. the battle of france is well documented in there. if you understand French there is a great source of military audio and video at www.ina.fr National Audiovisual Institute. about the US in Arzew father told me he was thankful to the US (you probably knows there are many communist and leftist French who are criticizing them and are antiamerican) because it was thanks to them that we don't speak german. i guess the old man is not so wrong. well time to sleep, 2:45 AM dammit. BTW why are you into French stuff, your nickname sounds like German? Shame On You 01:46, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] EU maps

Hi Uber, As far as I see the discussion is still ongoing. I doubt consensus would ever be reached and new maps then used. These maps are simply too POV. Best regards, Asteriontalk 17:59, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Operation Allied Force

Hi UberCryxic, As I get the impression that there is an edit war unfolding, I took the liberty to jump in. I have edited the infobox to quote directly from the NATO press statement. Please note that the Casus Belli implies that "a government [needs] to demonstrate that it was going to war only as a last resort", therefore the non-acceptance of the Rambouillet terms is the casus belli, that what ultimately led to the war unfolding. Regards, Asteriontalk 18:47, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks very much. Hope it will please everyone, if not I will place a Request for Comment to get a second opinion. Regards, Asteriontalk 19:11, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:2005 tahirih.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:2005 tahirih.gif. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --– Quadell (talk) (random) 19:05, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Beslidhja Skaut Albania

Beslidhja Skaut Albania has been proposed for renaming (along with other foreign-language Scouting article titles) to bring it into compliance with the spirit of both WikiProject Scouting - Rules Standards, Article names and Wikipedia:Naming conventions.

The discussion about this is currently taking place at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Scouting/Translations#Proposed_article_name_changes. No one involved speaks Albanian. Since you speak Albanian, could you please help out? --evrik (talk) 15:23, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hello UberCryxic

I wonder if you can help med with a image. I have created a article about the French Army Special Forces Brigade and would like to add there badge, but I am not particular good with the whole upload thing. I have found a copy of the badge here: [1] (Brigade des Forces Spéciales Terre) and think it would be ok to use under the same principle as the badge of the Special Reconnaissance Regiment.

Another thing, Davidbober has created a good article about the 13th Foreign Legion Demi-Brigade, maybe a good candidate for unit of the week. Carl Logan 23:33, 11 November 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Image:Rafale fighters.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Rafale fighters.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Mishatx 06:27, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Roman military - peer review request

Hi, this article is currently pending peer review and I see that you have an interest in military history and have peer-reviewed articles before - if you have time I would greatly appreciate any advice or comments you can give within the peer review structure for improving this article. Many Thanks - PocklingtonDan 16:24, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cicero at the gates

You might as well expect apples from an elm. Courage! On l'aura! Albrecht 02:50, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Roman military system" - could you provide input on proposed changes please?

Hi

I've proposed some changes on the discussion page of "Roman military system" given that its contents are currently a misnomer and do not match the title. Could you comment/vote on whether you approve of the proposed action please? Cheers - PocklingtonDan 13:15, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Could you also please take a look at the same sort of problem on Military history of ancient Rome - I've started a thread on the talk page but basically the article content has nothing to do with the article title. If you were able to add your opinion on the proposed changes I would be grateful. Many Thanks, PocklingtonDan 13:39, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Balkan military history task force

Hey Uber, I have put some suggestions for the organization of the task forde here. If you'd like to comment or add any suggestion please feel free too. Kyriakos 08:53, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

Barnstar
For your contribution to Wikipedia, I Chanakyathegreat award you this Barnstar.

Chanakyathegreat 15:53, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Waterloo

Do you really think it's doing any good continuing to argue with that anon about the Battle of Waterloo on what is now an archived talk page? Please consider the advantages that would arise from simply ceasing to respond. The issue of who won the Battle of Waterloo has absolutely nothing to do with an article on the French Revolutionary Wars, and continuing this pointless argument is a complete distraction. john k 21:18, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

How serious are you being? At any rate, I hardly think there's much to be proud of in an interminable, completely off-topic argument with an anon. john k 03:14, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Polish-Russian Wars

Hi UberCryxic, I noticed you removed the Polish-Russian Wars template from French invasion of Russia (1812). You had mentioned on the talk page that you're not sure it belongs there, and Piotrus responded to your message. Would you mind taking a look at his response? If you're still not convinced, perhaps you could respond as well? Appleseed (Talk) 22:20, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks again

Thanks again for participating in the Ebionites peer review. We incorporated most of your comments. No reply necessary. Ovadyah 05:12, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use images in user space

Hello. It might be a good idea to remove Image:Melissa Theuriau.JPG and Image:Michaeljacksonthriller.jpg from User:UberCryxic/Contributions/Boxes, since fair use images should not be used in the user space according to Wikipedia:Fair use criteria #9. Thanks. Khatru2 08:07, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue IX - November 2006

The November 2006 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 is an automated delivery by grafikbot 23:21, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Battle of Austerlitz

Main Page on the 201st anniversary. Well done. -- ALoan (Talk) 11:07, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Feminism

Thanks for reverting all that vandalism - I tagged the perpetrator. I hope you got it all Mgoodyear 22:48, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Napoleonic Wars

Dude??!! Did you look at what I altered on the Napoleonic Wars page? I put the name of the portrait and noted that it was painting of him as king of Italy and included the name of the painter. I am not vandalising!! Smooth move. -Sean 12/01/06 if this crap keeps up I'll become a wikipedia detractor - I'm just trying to pretty things up.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.181.255.248 (talkcontribs) .

[edit] Battle of Austerlitz

Hourra, hourra! On les a! Congrats. Albrecht 01:52, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Battle of Amstetten

I have completed the article on the Battle of Amstetten. Can you please verify the infromation (esp. numbers) and add additional information to it? I do not have many resources on that specific battle. --Ineffable3000 01:45, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Agn-Dalian

Can you take a look this page, I think it's nonsense and should be speedly delteted. Carl Logan 23:01, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Request

Dear UberCryxic,

I am trying to get the Ohio Wesleyan University article to FA status. I was wondering if you might have some time to take a look at it and make some suggestions for improvements (help with editing will be most welcome). WikiprojectOWU 02:11, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bennigsen's lack of judgment at Friedland, 1807

I started a discussion on the Battle of Friedland article...specifically about Bennigsen's folly in sending his army across the Alle. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Battle_of_Friedland

Kenmore 11:32, 12 December 2006 (UTC)kenmore

[edit] Fair use images use

Re [2]: That an image is a logo does not mean it is permitted to be used on templates even though it is copyrighted. The three images in question are all tagged with a tag requiring their use on Wikipedia to be under terms of fair use. As such, they must adhere to Wikipedia:Fair use criteria item #9, which proscibes the use of fair use images outside of the main article namespace. Please do not re-add the images, or any other fair use images, to templates. If you have questions about this, I'd be happy to answer. Thanks, --Durin 02:46, 17 December 2006 (UTC)