Template talk:WPMILHIST Announcements

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This non-article page is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

Military history WikiProject
General information Main project page + talk  → Discussion archives Announcements and open tasks talk  → Articles needing attention talk  → Nominations for deletion talk  → New articles talk Assessment department talk Collaboration department talk Publication department talk Review department talk Image, map, and media resources Showcase  → Featured picture gallery talk Portals
Project organization Coordinators + talk Members talk Awards talk Outreach department talk Project banner talk Project category talk
Guidelines Naming conventions Notability Article structure Content and style Infobox templates  → Infobox design style talk Categories Featured article advice
Infobox templates Firearm cartridge infobox talk Military award infobox talk Military cemetery infobox talk Military conflict infobox talk Military memorial infobox talk Military person infobox talk Military structure infobox talk Military test site infobox talk Military unit infobox talk National military infobox talk War faction infobox talk Weapon infobox talk Campaignboxes talk Command structure box talk Service record box talk
Task forces General topics Maritime warfare talk Military aviation talk Military historiography talk Military memorials and cemeteries talk Military science talk Military technology and engineering talk Weaponry talk Nations and regions African military history talk Australian military history talk Balkan military history talk British military history talk Canadian military history talk Chinese military history talk Dutch military history talk French military history talk German military history talk Indian military history talk Italian military history talk Japanese military history talk Korean military history talk New Zealand military history talk Nordic military history talk Polish military history talk Russian and Soviet military history talk Spanish military history talk United States military history talk Periods and conflicts Ancient Near Eastern warfare talk Classical warfare talk Medieval warfare talk Early Modern warfare talk Napoleonic era talk American Civil War talk World War I talk World War II talk
edit · changes

Contents 1 question 2 Changed formatting 3 Commonwealth of Nations 4 England expects that every man will do his duty 5 Abraham Lincoln 6 Operation Downfall 7 USS Wisconsin (BB-64) 8 Eureka Stockade 9 Battle of Leyte Gulf FAR 10 help with ww 2 article please 11 Picket duty 12 Battle of the Somme FAR 13 Military history of the Soviet Union FAR 14 Battle of Alesia FAR 15 Zeppelin FAR 16 A proposal

[edit] question

whats the diffrence between "critique" and "review". is the Battle of the Thousand Islands ready for either of these?

Generally speaking, "critique" refers to articles listed on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates, while "review" refers to articles listed on Wikipedia:Peer review. I would suggest adding your article to the peer review page; it's not always useful, but can often produce some good recommendations.

Hope that helps! —Kirill Lokshin 18:01, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Changed formatting

I found the taskbox before a bit too cluttered and busy, so I've brought it down to a slightly simpler look with fewer colours, so it's easier to follow, which I personally prefer. Of course, this is only what I feel works best so if anyone objects I don't mind at all changing it back or having it further modified. --Loopy ^e 01:34, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Looks good. I've changed the collaboration from a bullet point to an arrow, though; I think it's useful to make a distinction between regular tasks and one-time things. —Kirill Lokshin 01:55, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Bolded the whole lot, then =) --Loopy ^e 02:06, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Commonwealth of Nations

Commonwealth of Nations is up for a featured article review. Detailed concerns may be found here. Please leave your comments and help us address and maintain this article's featured quality. (Can someone please add it to the article page?) Sandy 15:01, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Quite honestly, I can't see what that article has to do with military history, as it's entirely political in scope. Kirill Lokshin 20:28, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, Krill, I probably notified here because it was included in the "What Links here". Sandy 00:18, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] England expects that every man will do his duty

England expects that every man will do his duty is up for a featured article review. Detailed concerns may be found here. Please leave your comments and help us address and maintain this article's featured quality. Sandy 00:18, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Abraham Lincoln

Abraham Lincoln is up for a featured article review. Detailed concerns may be found here. Please leave your comments and help us address and maintain this article's featured quality. Sandy 00:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Operation Downfall

Operation Downfall is up for a featured article review. Detailed concerns may be found here. Please leave your comments and help us address and maintain this article's featured quality. Sandy (Talk) 21:59, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] USS Wisconsin (BB-64)

USS Wisconsin (BB-64) is up for a featured article review. Detailed concerns may be found here. Please leave your comments and help us address and maintain this article's featured quality. Sandy (Talk) 14:22, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Eureka Stockade

Eureka Stockade is up for a featured article review. Detailed concerns may be found here. Please leave your comments and help us address and maintain this article's featured quality. Sandy (Talk) 21:11, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Battle of Leyte Gulf FAR

Battle of Leyte Gulf 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. Sandy (Talk) 22:05, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] help with ww 2 article please

Hi. could some of you guys please go over to the World War 2 article? There's currently a proposal there by only two users to rewrite most of the article, mainly to shorten it. I'm very concernred that only two people could rewrite an entire large article, consisting of dozens of people's work, without any underlying consensus. It seems to me that this would mean the removal of the work of many people by a small handful of users, mainly to attain what they consider the "correct" article length. So I'm disturbed that this is happening without any underlying consensus. i'd feel a lot better if a few more people could come over to the article, and take a look. Thanks. --Sm8900 04:12, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Picket duty

Many articles refer to "picket duty" or "picket" but it doesn't seem to be defined or covered in an article anywhere. 2nd Vermont Brigade and USS Mannert L. Abele (DD-733) both use this term several times and it appears in dozens more. Is this an article that should be added by someone familiar with the topic? ✤ JonHarder ^talk 03:17, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Seems to me like it's a more appropriate candidate for Wiktionary. The "picket" entry there right now is incomplete, leaving off this once-common use of the word. Pickets, as you probably know, are sentries or advance troops whose job it is to warn of contact with the enemy. Not sure if that's enough for an encyclopedia article, but certainly "pickets" and "picket duty" should be mentioned in an article like military terminology, which is currently one of the worst articles on Wikipedia. —Kevin 06:08, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Yep, crummy article. There was a brief discussion a few months back about creating some sort of glossary of military terminology to take care of the various topics that needed an easy-to-locate definition, but didn't have enough material for an actual article, but I don't think it really went anywhere concrete. Kirill Lokshin 06:18, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

There is the oddly named List of established military terms, which needs work but would be a good place to start for someone interested in doing the job. —Kevin 06:26, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick responses! I suggest trying to pull together enough information to make an article; the other terms in List of established military terms have one! There must be substantial difference between US Civil War picket duty and the radar picket duty mentioned in USS Mannert L. Abele (DD-733). This appears to be a case where the article writers assume I have a background understanding, but in this case I don't have a clue what is meant! Or I had to go to other websites to figure it out. If the experts here decide to start an article, I'm more than willing to ferret out all the articles that have such a reference and add the link. (I may have started this discussion in the wrong place; if so, please move it!) ✤ JonHarder ^talk 03:40, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Battle of the Somme FAR

Battle of the Somme 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. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:18, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Military history of the Soviet Union FAR

Military history of the Soviet Union 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. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:43, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Battle of Alesia FAR

Battle of Alesia 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. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:47, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Zeppelin FAR

Zeppelin 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. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:02, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A proposal

Why don't we add to the template the military history good article candidates? It would give them major visibility, and possibly make the evaluating of these articles faster. What do you think?--Aldux 20:37, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, there are various subtle considerations (the GA process is not really highly regarded within the project, for one), but the main practical reason is that it doesn't use individual review pages (or any other standard and long-term place for discussion), so creating links for each article is rather impractical.

(I'd be open to just adding a single link to the section on the nomination page where the articles are listed, under the "Articles needing attention" heading; but I'm not sure how useful that would be.) Kirill Lokshin 20:57, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

In theory, someone could monitor the GA process and add every article to the banner (using a link to the article talk page, perhaps? a lot of GA discussions seem to occur there), but, as Kirill points out, the GA process is not highly though of within the project, so I'm not sure that nominations would attract a lot of attention from project members even if they were listed in the announcements section. Carom 01:42, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

The problem with linking to the talk page is that an editor following such a link would have no idea what they were supposed to be doing there, since there's generally no GA-related discussion actually on them until after the nomination has already been dealt with by a reviewer. The advantage of explicit subpages is that you can click on the link and wind up in the place where the review you're trying to participate in is actually happening; I don't really see any good way of linking to GA candidates on a per-article basis and still having the links point somewhere useful. Kirill Lokshin 01:50, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough - personally, I don't have any desire to add the GA nominations to the announcements template. I was only suggesting a possibility for a link if there was some support for doing this. And of course, this is only one of the problems with the whole GA system... Carom 02:07, 16 March 2007 (UTC)