User talk:Raoulduke47

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello Raoulduke47! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some recommended guidelines to facilitate your involvement. Happy Editing! IronChris | (talk) 21:45, 22 September 2006 (UTC) Getting Started Wikipedia Tutorial How to edit a page The five pillars of Wikipedia Manual of Style Be bold in editing How to write a great article WikiProjects Getting your info out there Cite your sources Neutral Point of View Point of View Verifiability Uploading images Image use policy Getting more Wikipedia rules Policy Library Getting Help New contributors' help page Where to ask a question Help Desk Frequently Asked Questions Getting along Wikiquette Civility Sign your posts Wikipedians Conflict resolution Getting technical Cleaning up vandalism Pages needing attention Peer review Utilities Village pump

[edit] License tagging for Image:Aiglebateleur.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Aiglebateleur.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 10:05, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Missing bird article

Hi there;

You know what article is really missing for birds? It's one with the name of the feathers and wing structures (bird wing). As far as I can see there is no article about bird wings (wing is a general article about all types of wings). A little bit ago I initiated the article on insect wings and I think it was very useful. I couldn't find a good diagram on the commons though, that might be a bit difficult to find. Keep in touch, IronChris | (talk) 16:18, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Crabier.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Crabier.JPG. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may 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. — Indon (reply) — 12:20, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Good job!

Good job on the Montagu's Harrier article, sire! I raise my horn to you!

[edit] 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 very frequently. 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 highly recommended that you watchlist it.
• The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, peer review, and project-wide collaboration.
• We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, periods, and conflicts.
• Our requests page has extensive lists of requested articles, images, maps, and translations.
• We've developed a variety of guidelines for article structure and content, template use, categorization, and other issues that you may find useful.

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 12:33, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] re: Semi-protection for Ahmed Shah Massoud

Hello. Yes I actually wanted that long time ago and requested it but it was not approved for some reason. Recently I've been getting frustrated with the large volume of vandalism from unregistered users so I decided to just do it myself, but I guess that against the rules. I'll try again, maybe due to the more recent vandalism the admins will approve it this time. Thanks alot for that tip.

And I think you are right about the poster of Ismail Khan. However, I personally think it is better in that section because the actual picture of him was taken in that era and that was his appearance during that era. But if you still disagree I personally don't mind if it is changed back to the way you placed it. Its up to what you think is best. Thanks again. --Behnam 17:12, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 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 21:20, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article assessment question

On the Sentinel tank talk page you marked it Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met, I was just wondering what needs more coverage, or what was inaccurate? Since that criteria It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. doesn't really help me figure out what's wrong with it.

Well first of all, my assessment was not a criticism of that article. It just means that, IMO, it doesn't meet B-class criteria. If you don't agree, you can submit it for assessment at WP:MHA or for peer review at WP:MHPR. Concerning the article, I don't think it's inaccurate, but it is probably too short. If you look at other B-class articles, you'll find they are considerably lengthier(for ex.: Rise of the Islamic Courts Union (2006), Royal Navy CVF programme). You should add more details about the design history. It says "the Australian tank was built closely along the lines of a British Crusader": in what ways were they similar? Also there must have been a political decision to build this tank, or was it designed as a private venture? These are some details that need to be added, I think.

The main problem was clearly the references. There have to be inline citations for "all major points". I take this to mean there has to be at least one per paragraph. I see you have added some since the assessment, but I think it could still use a few more.

That's my opinion, for what it's worth, but I say again, if you want a more in-depth analysis, go to the peer review department. There's plenty of tank specialists out there who can point you in the right direction.

As a sidenote, I did not choose how the " criterion not met" appear in the checklist(with the red cross and the highlight on not), this is an inherent part of the template code.

Regards.--Raoulduke47 12:20, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I can see it's a template and you didn't have any choice about how it appears, it's just that since you did an assessment it made sense to me to ask what you felt was missing or needed improvement, and that point in particular. The refs was fairly straight forward although even the ones I listed contradict each other, and occasionally even themselves, it's hard to add any information to that article that someone with a different source couldn't change to be correct. For a given value of correct.

Regarding the Crusader comment, the turret layout and shape is the same, and unlike the M3 the hull doesn't overhang the tracks, the whole 'shape' of the two tanks is the same, as was their intended use. It was a political decision. Sort of. It's complicated, government-owned annexes attached to private and state owned companies. The article is short I suppose partly because the things were built and never used, so no combat history or any real use or anything.

But thanks for the feedback, I'll have a think about it and see what I can do to improve the article. Just realised I forgot to sign my last comment. Ways 13:43, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 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 11:26, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Harrier-hawk.jpg

Hi, I like the image of harrier-hawk that you placed in wikipedia. I would like to use it in polish article about harrier-hawk. Are you able to put this image also to wiki commons? We could then use it in other non-english wikipedias. --xRiffRaffx 00:03, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

OK I uploaded it to commons here[1]. However, the Flicker user who originally took this picture has since changed the license to a non-free one, so it may get deleted. Raoulduke47 13:00, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

OK, thank you. We will use it, until the licence won't change. --xRiffRaffx 21:57, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mahdist War

Hey Raoulduke, I was scrolling through the articles in the campaign infobox of the Mahdist War, adding flags to the countries involved. Is there a flag or symbol for the Sudanese under the Mahdi at the time that should be next to his forces like the Union Jack is to Great Britain? SGGH 23:57, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Well... Not really. The Mahdists had several different flags, but none was a national flag like the British and Egyptians had. Apparently the Khalifa(sucessor of the Mahdi) flew a black flag, with inscriptions from the Coran and the recitation of the Mahdist creed. I haven't found a faithful reproduction of this anywhere. Apart from this, every Emir had a different flag. For an example of a Mahdist flag see here: [2]. And thanks for adding those flags! Raoulduke47 10:17, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, the Khalifa's flag might look a bit like this: . Maybe we could use this one... Raoulduke47 19:19, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

That flag is also on Al-Qaeda, is it just a symbol for a jihad? You might have to clarify the use of that one for the Mahdi I'm afraid im not following... SGGH 12:13, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, personally I think that might be taking a bit of an unreasonably liberty with history, but you've put in far more work on the topic than I, and there is plenty of argument for using that flag. It's up to you :) SGGH 18:20, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Aérospatiale Gazelle Pop Culture

Why can there be a mention of the modified Aérospatiale Gazelle used in Blue Thunder, but there can't be a mention of it as it was used in The Highwayman series? I believe it is uniquely notable enough. Cyberia23 21:38, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Several reasons: First of all i don't know how notable The Highwayman is, i've never heard of it, it may have been a runaway success, but that's not the impression one gets as it only ran for ten episodes. Also if there has to be a pop culture section(of which i am not convinced), then it should include only instances where the gazellle plays a significant role. This is the case in Blue Thunder, where the whole film revolves around the helicopter, but apparently not in The Highwayman where it is only one part of the Highwaymans panoply. Adding a mention for each appearance of the gazelle in a movie or series is unnessesary, it has been done before and such sections have been removed. Regarding your inference that The Highwayman is no less notable than Blue Thunder, you might well be right, but that makes me think they sould both be deleted per WP:Air/PC and Wikipedia:Avoid trivia sections in articles, "Popular Culture sections should be avoided". Regards. --Raoulduke47 00:20, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Just seems the military articles here are very strict in what can be mentioned and what can't. Pop Culture references are all over the place for a lot of other things. I can see cartoons and anime being ruled out, but one of the unique aspects of The Highwayman was the truck-helicopter vehicle and I thought it deserved mention. You may remember Airwolf as a popular show, which took the idea from Blue Thunder, but Airwolf was more memorable than Blue Thunder which was an action-movie and it's TV series I think ran for even less episodes than The Highwayman. But whatever. Cyberia23 21:34, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 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 14:43, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the vote! --Petercorless 08:27, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Assessment for Alsace-Lorraine Brigade article

Hello - noticed you assessed the Alsace-Lorraine Brigade (France) article. Is the rating as a stub still in force?
Cheers
W. B. Wilson 18:49, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 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 16:26, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Request for info on Battle of Gallabat

My concern with tagging that passage was that there was no clue who expressed that opinion, or where it came from. (I had suspected it might be Churchill's The river war, but far too often original research or crank opinions have a way of donning a disguise in this manner & sneaking into an article. No insult intended, & my apologies if it comes across that way.) As for my Ethiopian sources, all of the standard modern accounts forget about the Mahdist-Ethiopian war after Gallabat & turn all of their attention to the growing conflict with Italy, so I honestly have no information just what happens after this battle.

I have no problem with your citing Churchill's book; I can't think of any obvious reason why it might not be reliable (besides the fact he's a dead white male -- the kind of people some Wikipedians immediately distrust as sources ;-), so if you could indicate that this is what Churchill wrote with a footnote all of my concerns are more than adequatly handled. Thanks! -- llywrch 22:47, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Coup de poing

Hi Raoul, I tend to agree with you. Consulting the books I didn't have when I first wrote the article, I seem to have misread the webpage. The importance is confirmed by all the books I've got, with Ngansop giving the event a full subchapter seven pages long, titled "Le raid français sur l'aérodrome de Ouadi-Doum". Maybe I should title it Oudi Doum Air Raid? What do you think? And also, I wanted to thank you for all the work you've done with this article and more still with Chadian-Libyan conflict, an article I've been working on for quite a long time; unfortunately, my English, as you've certainly noted, is far from perfect. Ciao, Aldux 16:09, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 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 19:55, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Battles of Zhawar

On 5 April 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Battles of Zhawar, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--howcheng {chat} 23:01, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Cool! - Raoulduke47 18:17, 8 April 2007 (UTC)