User talk:Carom/Archive 1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Welcome to the Military history WikiProject!
Hi, and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.
A few features that you might find helpful:
- Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
- The announcement and open task box is updated quite regularly. You can watchlist it if you're interested; or, you can add it directly to your user page by including {{WPMILHIST Announcements}} there.
- Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is recommended that you watchlist it.
- The project has a monthly newsletter; it will normally be delivered as a link, but several other formats are available.
There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:
- Starting some new articles? Our article structure guidelines outline some things to include.
- Interested in working on a more complete article? The military history peer review and collaboration departments would welcome your help!
- Interested in a particular area of military history? We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, or periods.
- Want to know how good our articles are? The assessment department is working on rating the quality of every military history article in Wikipedia.
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask one of the project coordinators, or any experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Kirill Lokshin 22:20, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
Military history WikiProject coordinator election - vote phase!
The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will select seven coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of eleven candidates. Please vote here by August 26!
This is an automated delivery by grafikbot - 11:26, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Battle of Hastings
Thanks for the fix on the talk page for GA status. Silvdraggoj 20:15, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Military history WikiProject Newsletter - Issue VI - August 2006
The August 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 -- 11:57, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Colditz Castle/Oflag IV-C
Thank you for supporting my position on splitting this (in my opinion) unwieldy article. However it appears that others are opposed to making any changes (see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Military_history), just because it was a featured article. Being quite new to Wikipedia I am unfamiliar with the administrative politics, and don't want to make waves.
I am willing to do the work. What do you suggest? Syrenab 18:31, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
-
- I have done the work of splitting this article into
- Colditz
- Oflag 4c - this is temporary and needs to be renamed Oflag IV-C 0nce rewrite is approved. Ar present Oflag IV-C automatically redirects to Colditz Castle and I haved not been able to figure out how to fix it.
I requested approval on the appropriate Talk pages. So far no response.
Syrenab 15:01, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
Webley Revolver
Why did you object to this article being A-class? How would you improve it? Be specific, because I'm at my wits end with the whole evaluation process and I'm sick to death of people complaining about the articles I work on without being prepared to help improve them as well. --Commander Zulu 13:54, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for your feedback... Having gone over the article again, I still feel it's A-class and will renominate accordingly. --Commander Zulu 00:33, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
WikiProject Military history Newsletter - Issue VII - September 2006
The September 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 - 18:56, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
|
|
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 13:38, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
B-class articles
Hi .. see you have classified several articles, for example, the Battle of El Mazuco as B-class (failure, like B-movie, one must assume), but with no suggestion as to how it could be improved. Why? Thanks quota 20:14, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Military history Collaboration of the Fortnight
You supported Tank, which has been selected as the Military history WikiProject's new Collaboration of the Fortnight. Please help improve this article to featured article standards. Kirill Lokshin 00:28, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
Re: Renaming
The tags should be placed as {{subst:cfr|Military units and formations by war|Military Units}} (and so forth), but the basic setup looks fine. Thanks for helping out with this! Kirill Lokshin 18:39, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
- I've copied over the full list from the project page onto CFD, so that anybody commenting is aware of the scope. They all still need tagging, though. :-\ Kirill Lokshin 18:46, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Oflag IV-C Need help
Carom
I have split the Colditz Castle article into its two logical components, per previous discussions. I posted requests for comments on the Colditz Castle talk page on 3 October. There have been no comments, so I wish to complete the task. I am unable to move the temporary article Oflag 4c to its correct name "Oflag IV-C", but I am prevented from doing this. Can you help me, please.
Syrenab 19:21, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Thank you, after following your advice, I was able to copy content over. Job completed. Syrenab 14:36, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
-
- Yes, I have edited Colditz to include just history of Castle, with links to Oflag IV-C article. Syrenab 15:16, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
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 21:04, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
User:Copiedimage
I have not caused vandalism - and you show bad faith in calling me a Vandal. The information for Battle of Wigan Lane is a stub, orphaned on its own, and belongs with Wigan unless you state why not, or improve it. Note this userID was created to stop "cut 'n' paste" copyright violations, and see the referenced matter at Wigan. Any "revert war" will be reported. Copiedimage 23:28, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
In reply to your post on my talk. You did not post any comment at the Comment Page of Battle of Wigan Lane either, but did put a vandalism post in its history, directed at me.Copiedimage 23:42, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Re: World War I Portal
Unfortunately, there's no way to have articles queued up automatically. Using exiting FA/A/GA articles might work (although that's a pretty small set to work with, for WWI); but it's still necessary to create each article's subpage on the portal by hand. Kirill Lokshin 21:46, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
- You can have it change based on the calendar, if you want; alternately, you can use the trick that some other portals have developed (and which is currently implemented in the portal skeleton) of having a new set displayed every time the portal is reloaded by a user. Kirill Lokshin 21:54, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
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 22:06, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 27th.
 |
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 2, Issue 48 | 27 November 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 01:29, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 4th.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 2, Issue 49 | 4 December 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:28, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Your input is requested
Your input would be appreciated at this Request for Comments. Kelly Martin (talk) 17:16, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
Battle of Ghazni
Hi There,
Just created this article, Battle of Ghazni during the First Anglo-Afghan War. I was wondering if you could fix up anything which is incorrect or add to this battle or link this battle to other articles so that it generates traffic. Thankyou. Mercenary2k 02:53, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Jane the Dinosaur in Battle of Stillman's Run
Jane the Dinosaur was used as a template to insert a picture icon, and then edited with the appropriate photo. (Test of user talk) Rattis irrittis 13:00, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue X - December 2006
The December 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 22:24, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
Something for you...
pagemoves
Knock yourself out :-)
UK formations almost all done (plus two or three actually called "British XYZ") - I'll start going through them removing all those extra "British" from wikilinks next week. Shimgray | talk | 02:03, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
Move of Australian 10th Division
Hi, can you please tell me why you moved the article Australian 10th Division to 10th Division (Australia). Doing this has removed a common naming convention shared with the other Australian division pages. If there is a new naming convention for all divisions could you please send me the link. Hossen27 03:12, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks thats fine I thought you just changed this article in isolation, but if there all going to change I dont have a problem. Hossen27 03:37, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- With the Australian divisions and I guess with other countries there are Divisions with have existed more than once and have separate article (eg Australian 1st Division (World War I) and Australian 1st Division (World War II), there is also a current Australian 1st division that doesn't have an article yet. What naming convention is used in this case. Hossen27 03:49, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Alright thats no problem if I get some time ill lend a hand. Regards Hossen27 04:02, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Oh a think there is a little problem you moved Australian 5th Division (World War II) to 5th Division (Australia) but there is also a Australian 5th Division (World War I) the same for 1,2,3,4 divs. This is the case for all the Australian divisions from the 1st through to the 5th. Hossen27 04:08, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- They shouldn't be merged they are completely different formations. The World War I units are part of what is known as the First Australian Imperial Force similar to the AEF, but it was a totally regular volunteer force. The First AIF was disbanded after WWI. The WWII units were created during the 1920's and are predominantly Militia units, quite often conscripts on national service. The units share no historic links and share no battle honours. Hossen27 04:35, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Already done. Hossen27 04:42, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
Re: WWI portal
Looks quite good; I would suggest adding some images for the introduction and a listing of related portals, though. As far as updating content is concerned, the main advantage of the random rotation method is that you can forget about the portal completely and it'll still function quite well; you can add new items to the queues at your leisure, but there's no real need for any particular speed of updating.
Ideally, we ought to be able to make some progress on replacing {{World War I}} with links to this portal now that it's taken shape; I recall that getting rid of that huge template on articles was one of the reasons the portal was created. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 06:50, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
- The replacement would basically entail changing {{World War I}} to {{portal|World War I}} in articles that use that large template. I have no idea if it'll be a controversial move, but I would hope that people would see the sense in it. :-) Kirill Lokshin 17:40, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:World_War_I. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 19:04, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
- There are two minor points of formatting that ought to be fixed:
- The titles of the selected articles should be linked, not just bolded.
- The picture section needs to include some form of image credit. Since you're working primarily with photographs, I would suggest an explicit credit line, as on Portal:War.
- Once that's done, I think the portal will basically be ready for nomination at WP:FPCAN. Kirill Lokshin 21:01, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- Well, it's intended to be an author credit rather than a source credit; you should indicate who took the photo, not where it was uploaded from, in my view. Kirill Lokshin 21:35, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Probably; or you could credit it to, say, the Royal Navy if you know it's a naval photographer but don't have his name. Kirill Lokshin 21:47, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- The easiest thing to do would probably be to subst: the template onto a subpage of the portal and just edit that. Kirill Lokshin 16:19, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
WW 1 Casualties
My intention is to create a discussion on the reasons why the current numbers are higher. I would be great if people from the CWGC would comment on this. Must run to crunch some Nrs for my boss--Woogie10w 18:09, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- Original research is forbidden here at Wikipedia, I can only list data from sources that can be verified. Howeever, in the case of WW2 casualies I did a statistical study of UK Army casualties and found an undercount of losses from the Colonies, Africa in particular. My hunch is that the War Office in London did not concern itself with the losses of Asians or Africans back in 1946. I never mentioned this research on the WW2 Casualties page since it was my own work
- In the case of WW 1 casualties I would not be surprised if there was an undercount of colonial losses that has been rectified by the work of the CWGC. This is a topic that needs the attention of young Phd canidates interested in military history.--Woogie10w 02:52, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- I posted those remarks to the talk page to make sure everybody was numbed up before I started to pull the teeth and screw the implants in. Time to hit the hay.--Woogie10w 03:48, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- The Urlanis book Population & War is available for sale online on ABE and Alibris. It is an interesting and informative book. I reccomend it highly.--Woogie10w 14:08, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- I posted those remarks to the talk page to make sure everybody was numbed up before I started to pull the teeth and screw the implants in. Time to hit the hay.--Woogie10w 03:48, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- Original research is forbidden here at Wikipedia, I can only list data from sources that can be verified. Howeever, in the case of WW2 casualies I did a statistical study of UK Army casualties and found an undercount of losses from the Colonies, Africa in particular. My hunch is that the War Office in London did not concern itself with the losses of Asians or Africans back in 1946. I never mentioned this research on the WW2 Casualties page since it was my own work
Renaming of IJA 1st Division, IJA 2nd Division and IJA 3rd Division
Renaming of these divisions to 1st Division (Japan), etc poses a problem, as these articles describe military divisions under the Imperial Japanese Army, which no longer exists. At present, the Japan Ground Self-Defense Force has a 1st Division, 2nd Division, etc,. which are not considered to be successors or in any way related to former Empire of Japan military units. I would suggest either reverting to to previous name, or else using something in this name to distinguish that these units are Imperial Japanese Army units. --MChew 05:07, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
- Fair enough - would "Nth Division (Imperial Japanese Army) be an acceptable solution? The parenthetical disambiguation is preferred, and I would like to avoid using initialisms such as "IJA". Carom 05:09, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Sounds very good to me. I was also unhappy with using "IJA". --MChew 05:12, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Thank you
Thank you for answering my question on the reference desk. --Jones2 08:27, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 16:52, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Re: German/English translations for SS divisions
I would leave them untranslated, actually. While normal Wehrmacht ranks are typically translated, I've always seen the original SS ones used in historical works on the topic (mainly, I suppose, because Waffen-SS officers were typically given explicit double ranks, e.g. "Gruppenführer und Generalleutnant der Waffen-SS"). Kirill Lokshin 21:07, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
- Yep, the OOBs can probably be translated (as the article titles themselves would be). There's some suggested translations on the old unit naming convention draft page that could be useful there; I've been intending to pull those over to the relevant task force page, but the issue has been held up by the little dispute over what to do with the old draft page afterwards. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 21:19, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- I don't think we should give them as translation only. In many cases we use "native" terms such as nauarch, strategus, centurion to give the reader a grasp of the native tongue and concepts that differed from ours. The idea why the SS used not the established military terms like the Wehrmacht(which should be translated) is that they wanted to emphasize their being different. In the Nazi party they competited with the SA for Hitler's favour while as a military force they competited with the Wehrmacht and established an independent corps more loyal to the reigning party. The army officers corps had its own tradition and while they were nationalists they couldn't be considered the safest column of the Nazi government. So basically to stress this idea of a Nazi military force that is sometimes also called the Schwarze Orden(Black Order) a bit of folklore should remain with untranslated names. I think it will end up really stupid if these ranks get directly translated, like "Up(per)stormbann(er)leader=Obersturmbannführer". A possible solution could be to write the corresponding rank as a remark behind like: "Obersturmbannführer(major)"
- The SS had some officer dissidents among its ranks who pushed new concepts of command and control that were quite revolutionary for the revolutionary German armed forces and others during their age. Highlighting this claim for being different in their whole approach to the established classes of Officers/NCOs/soldiers may be also an argument.Wandalstouring 22:00, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, but for the record the equivalent of an obersturmbannführer is a lieutenant-colonel.--Anthony.bradbury 19:59, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
- You can only translate them or put the English translation behind the native word. For technical terms such as Panzer, Haubitze or Krad it is probably best to translate only.Wandalstouring 22:52, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
- Hi Carom,
- I'm not sure I can really help you with military terms. The only thing I could say is that one possibility would leaving the terms untranslated since the English Wikipedia has articles about the German terms, but you probably have thought of that yourself already.
- Sorry
- --Carabinieri 10:46, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi there; translating NSDAP rank or administration terms is difficult at best, and the advice above not to do so is probably best. If you really must translateabteilung then probably troop is as close as you are going to get, although as you say detachment is commonly used. The problem with "detachment" is that its use as a translation of Sturmabteilung is clearly inaccurate, as the SA were not any sort of detachment, but Storm Troop will do. A member of the SA is then a Storm Trooper, which is common usage - but it's still not very good, and using the German is better. As for a STuG, or Sturmgeschutz, assault gun is as close as you will get.
The problem extends to the Waffen-SS and indeed the Regular Army. In German, the word oberst means highest. So Generaloberst means highest General. But it is always translated as Colonel-General, which makes me cringe. Also seeOberstGruppenFuehrer, which is the equivalent of a full General but comes over as "highest group leader" or sometimes even "colonel group leader". Yikes. I would stick to the German if I were you.--Anthony.bradbury 19:56, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Re: Page moves
I can take a look at them; but if the existing redirect has only a single history entry (the move or redirect itself), you can move a page over top of it without needing admin tools. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 22:08, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Prepare to be boarded
Seriously, I'm thinking about nominating you for one of the coordinator positions. Wandalstouring 23:56, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XI - January 2007
The January 2007 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 20:20, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
WP:MILHIST Coordinator Elections
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect seven coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 11!
Delivered by grafikbot 10:13, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- Please do run! :-) Kirill Lokshin 14:26, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
RE:Portal:World War II
Hi Carom. I am still interested in maintaining the portal, I was actually going to make it my next portal project now that Portal:Military of Australia is featured. I would certainly appreciate help in the improvement of the portal, it shouldn't take long for the two of us to get it to feature status. Hossen27 03:10, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Battle of Mărăşti
Hello. I wonder if you could please take a look at this new article of mine (or tell me someone who might be willing to) and make any improvements you see necessary. I also have a question on one point of detail: if you look at the second table, the Romanian source used for the article says that the Second Battle of the Aisne lasted from 16 April to 5 May and that the front was penetrated up to 5 km. Our article, though, says it ended on 9 May and that 4 km had been captured by 5 May. I'm not sure how to square that difference but I assume the en.wiki article is more reliable. Any thoughts? Biruitorul 03:17, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you, and I look forward to your edits. I wrote to the ro.wiki editor who did the original, and he put in a couple of citations, which I've inserted. If he puts in more, I'll do the same. He also confirmed the fact that he has yet to write a large mid-section on the actual battle (as opposed to before and after), so clearly the thing is incomplete, but he promised it within a few days, and I will translate whatever he provides. Biruitorul 06:34, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
Dreadnought battleship article
Hello, Carom. Back in December, you announced your intention to create a new Dreadnought battleship article, containing material from the existing HMS Dreadnought (1906) article. At the moment, however, Dreadnought battleship simply redirects to Battleship. Did you change your mind, or has someone pre-empted you?
Feel free to post your reply here; I have added this page to my watchlist. Regards, John Moore 309 23:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- Like many things on wikipedia, it kind of dropped to the back of my mind. I copied content to my sandbox with the intent of reworking it into an article, but got bogged down with other business, in both real and wikilife, and never got around to it. I still intend to do this, but no pormises as to when I'll actually get around to it - I hope it will be soon. Carom 06:01, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
Portal:World War I
In its current states it won't do that but I can add that variable no problem. It will take some concentrated work and I'm at work right now and can't but I will be more than happy to add them when I get home tonight.Cheers — WilsBadKarma (Talk) 17:10, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- Hey man, I have been playing around with this thing for a while now and there is no way to add the variable to the template. The problem is that the actual articles are never referenced when you add one. You reference the subpage of the portal in which you have copied part of the article to, but never the article. And since the process is random there is no way to add it automatically. The only way to add the read more to the bottom of the page is to do it manually. The other problem is that none of the random portal templates will allow you to add something to the footer while its turned on on the portal so you will have to remove all reference to the footer on the template and all all the links; read more, suggest and archive manually if you still want to add read more. Anyway sorry I couldn't help I tried what I could. If you still want to add it I don't have a problem assisting in changing it over or giving some pointers adding everything. Cheers — WilsBadKarma (Talk) 22:46, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Hey if it gets too heated use the Portal:United States Navy as a reference since it is already featured and I use the same layout on it.Cheers — WilsBadKarma (Talk) 04:46, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
translation Afrika Korps
I translated the songs of the Afrika Korps, but there are some points I'm not quite sure of or may have overlooked. The German language is quite poetic (sometimes turgid by using the same verb twice to emphasize) and contains some unusual constructions (fürchten uns wie die Pest). Generalmarsch has been my biggest problem. I have not a clue what is the English equivalent. The footnote links to a site where you can listen to MP3s of both songs. It has been a long time since I was thrown out of bed with such beautiful choires and it's quite effective for that purpose. Wandalstouring 16:49, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject Military History elections
The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting seven coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by February 25!
Delivered by grafikbot 13:41, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Welcome to WikiProject LGBT studies!
 Hi, Carom, welcome to WikiProject LGBT Studies! We are a growing community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to identifying, categorizing, and improving articles of interest to the LGBT community. Some points that may be helpful:
If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the talk page, and we will be happy to help you. And once again - Welcome! |
-- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 17:11, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
General Sir Edward Quinan
You recently rated this as a "Start" class of article. As one ofthe principal editors of this article I would apppreciate it if you could let me know what in your opinion could be added to improve it. I am afraid there really isn't much more published information about him. Dabbler 14:41, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Military history WikiProject coordinator elections
It gives me great pleasure to inform you that you have been elected as one of the Military history WikiProject's Assistant Coordinators. Congratulations!
To start with your coordinator work, please visit this page and familiarize yourself with the material gathered there; it's also a good idea to place the page on your watchlist, as it's the main place where discussion among the coordinators takes place.
Thanks again for offering to take up this responsibility, and congratulations on your success! Kirill Lokshin 00:04, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Congrats!
Congrats on your election as an assistant coordinator. In honor of your achievement, I present you with these stars. I wish you luck in the coming term. TomStar81 (Talk) 00:38, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject Military history/Coordinators
 |
Hello Carom. Congratulations for becoming a Military history taskforce coordinator. I hope our efforts would make this project the best one in Wikipedia. -- FayssalF - Wiki me up ® 13:30, 26 February 2007 (UTC) |
Coordintors please drop by
The old coordinators (Kirill, Dryzen and me) decided to established a kind of regular meeting of the coordinators. The intention is to exchange information, opinions and coordinate our work. The current meeting is here. Wandalstouring 00:58, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject Military history/Coordinators
 |
Hello Carom. Congrats Thanks for your support at the Military history elections. With your aid I was able to commision this ship to help plunder the coast of Military history. Na, just kidding. If you ever require any astance all you have to do is ask and you will see my ship on the horizon. Kyriakos 08:39, 27 February 2007 (UTC) |
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XII - February 2007
The February 2007 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.
Delivered by grafikbot 14:47, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
Adoption of PaladinWhite
It looks like we have extremely similar interests; it would be an honor to have you adopt me! I can tell that you're a very experienced editor, and the study of military history (more specifically military equipment) is one of my hobbies. Thanks so much for the offer! Although my learning curve has been steep and fast the past couple of weeks, there are still a lot of things I've yet to learn, and it will be great to have someone around to bother incessantly with questions!... PaladinWhite 06:36, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
WUSTL Project
 |
Hello, I noticed you've made edits to WUSTL articles or that you are in some way connected to Washington University in St. Louis. I thought you might want to become a member of Washington University in St. Louis WikiProject . We've recently built the project page and started a drive to improve articles in the WUSTL series. Please take a look to edit an article or add one of your own. Once an article's status has been agreed upon, feel free to stop by and lend a hand in getting it to featured article status. Hope you can participate! |
--Lmbstl 07:18, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Assessment from an article page
Thank you for helping out with the Biography assessment drive. Good news. Outriggr recently designed a script that will cut your biography assessment time down by about ten fold (what took ten hours now may only take one hour with Outriggr's script). For more information, please see the 'assessment from article page' discussion. -- Jreferee 20:21, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Billiards
Are you are billiards/pool/snooker player? Just asking because of the user name. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 13:40, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
LGBT WikiProject newsletter
| The LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|||||
assessment bug?
Hi Carom, I am still having difficulty reproducing the problem you're having. Can you tell me what browser and version you're using? Yes, I can add other milhist parameters if you let me know which ones are important. –Outriggr § 06:54, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Re: Credentials Proposal
As regards Jimbo's proposal (assuming that we're thinking of the same proposal): I tend to view it as a special case of "thou shalt not lie to thy fellow editor", which happens to be a principle I agree with. Granted, I think it won't work very well in practice—with a system that relies on the feedback of other editors, the buck doesn't really stop anywhere, so it's not clear how to deal with the people that do claim fake credentials—but at least the general idea seems innocuous enough.
More generally, I take a rather dim view of any proposals that would disadvantage editors without (claimed) credentials, verified or otherwise, for fairly obvious reasons; but I haven't seen anyone taking that particular approach recently. Kirill Lokshin 06:48, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
- Meh, it's probably too early to say what long-term effects any of these proposals might have. On the surface of things, they're not particularly meaningful even if they become hard rules; the only effect will be to limit what credentials people can claim anonymously. Whether that would result in any cultural changes, I have no idea. Frankly, I doubt it would; the way Ph.D.s are regarded is somewhat independent of whether we can actually verify that they're who they claim to be. (Indeed, prior to the Essjay mess, the idea that they could be lying wasn't really at the forefront of things; most people tended to accept such declarations of credentials on faith, without necessarily changing anything in practice with regards to how those editors were treated.) Kirill Lokshin 18:53, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Memorials to B-class
Hi there. Thanks for dropping by the La Ferté-sous-Jouarre memorial article that I created. How much more work do you think is needed to get it up to B-class status? I've been looking over the criteria, and I think that 3-5 are OK, and if I find the missing information mentioned on the talk page, that should deal with 2. As for 1, what is the best way to reference some of the statements in articles about war memorials? Some of the stuff, you might have noticed, comes directly from the inscriptions, which are, unfortunately, 'verified' by the pictures - not ideal, I know. Other than that, I think I would be right in saying that there would not be much more that could be done. Would I be right to say that this is one of those 'short' articles that can't progress much further after B-class status, and is not really a candidate for A-class or Featured Article status? If so, what other work could I do on war memorials (while my interest lasts...)? Thanks. Carcharoth 22:51, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
- Replied on my talk page. Carcharoth 00:09, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Re: MILHIST Banner
They need to be converted to link to the appropriate subpage of Portal:War. The syntax changes from:
|portal=N
to
|portal1-name=War |portal1-link=Featured article/N
(I've been going through them, but there are obviously still a bunch left to do.) Kirill Lokshin 18:39, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, I'd be very grateful for the help! :-) Kirill Lokshin 18:48, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- That looks great. Thanks again! Kirill Lokshin 23:28, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
ASALA
Hi, I am not sure military category is right, the attacks of ASALA were aimed at diplomats not soldiers. The name is Armenian Secret ARMY for liberation of Armenia, but I don't think Armenian SSR would accept any link between them, I don't think there is any link between them either; the organization is just an organization that was listed as a terrorist organization by US, and some other states during its existence. deniz 22:01, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I found only two, Turkey and Armenia, I added to Turkey deletion lists, and it was already added to Armenian deletion lists. Relevancy might be important. There might be people visiting military deletion lists that would not like to see irrelevant AFD's; ASALA AFD might be found irrelevant, unless one means to include all armed aggressions there in the military deletion lists. Currently all the AFD's there except ASALA AFD are relevant to military. deniz 22:41, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Smile!
== technical stuff ==
How do you add "This user is a member of the Military History wikiproject" to your user homepage? I've seen others with it, how do you do it? Thanks
Climie.ca 19:43, 20 March 2007 (UTC) Cam
Last push for the Biography Assessment Drive
We've done great work so far on the WikiProject Biography Spring 2007 Assessment Drive, reducing the 135,345 backlog by 38,626 to 96,719 as of March 20, 2007. We have only 6,720 more to go to get below 90,000. That would be outstanding and any extra effort that you can offer in these last few days of the drive (which ends March 24, 2007) would be much appreciated. If you haven't already, you may want to load Outriggr's assessment script in your monobook.js. If you have any questions, please feel free to post them on my talk page. -- Jreferee 23:13, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Conversion of AFV template to Infobox weapon
When you do these can you put in the requisite parameters even if you don't put the info for them? The recent British tanks have ended up with blank type and origin lines. GraemeLeggett 12:38, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Stalingrad Map
I've managed to find a map of the Stalingrad Pocket in one of my books. Do you want me to scan it and put in on the article?
Climie.ca 16:58, 23 March 2007 (UTC) Cam
Re: WPMILHIST Active Members
Once every few months seems like the best balance of keeping the list updated while not spending too much time fiddling with it. (It's not a particularly important thing in the short term; the main use of it is really to filter out the people who've left Wikipedia since signing up, and that tends to be a long-term thing.)
(For what it's worth, I have a script written that goes through the list checking the editing dates, which is much faster than trying to do it by hand; so I wouldn't suggest doing that unless you're really bored. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 00:44, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Task force banners
I'm just wondering something.
Should the Military History task forces [such as WWII and WWI] have their own banners. if you go to wikiproject Canada, each of their task forces has their own banner. You can check on my user page if you need further info. Would it be possible for the military history task forces [those that aren't also part of a nation wikiproject, such as periods of conflict] to have their own banners?
Climie.ca 18:41, 29 March 2007 (UTC) Cam
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XIII - March 2007
The March 2007 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 18:39, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Have a great trip!
I had a question and figured I'd pop in, but I see that you're away, so I'll just {{helpme}} instead. Where are you traveling? Hope you have a great time wherever it is! PaladinWhite 18:12, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
- Welcome back! PaladinWhite 22:56, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
