User talk:Colputt

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Thanks and Happy New Year 2 The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVII (May 2008) 3 Nieuport 11 4 111th Reconnaissance Squadron

[edit] Thanks and Happy New Year

Firstly, let me wish you a very happy New Year and thank you for all your help in the Milhist Tag & Assess 2007 drive. Your service awasrds are re-issued here in the new neater format.

		Military history service award
		For tagging and assessing 250 articles in Tag & Assess 2007, by order of the coordinators I hereby present you with this Military history WikiProject Service Award. --ROGER DAVIES talk 10:44, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

		Military history service award
		For tagging and assessing 500 articles in Tag & Assess 2007, by order of the coordinators I hereby present you with this Military history WikiProject Service Award. --ROGER DAVIES talk 10:44, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

		Military history service award
		For tagging and assessing 1000 articles in Tag & Assess 2007, by order of the coordinators I hereby present you with this Military history WikiProject Service Award. --ROGER DAVIES talk 03:15, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVII (May 2008)

The May 2008 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 has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:15, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Nieuport 11

I have put in the references - also cut some of your additions - the Nieuport 10 and 12, for instance, are distinct types with their own articles - whereas the 16 was basically an 11 airframe with a larger engine. I added most of your stuff on the 10 into the relevant article - although it needs work too! --Soundofmusicals (talk) 12:05, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 111th Reconnaissance Squadron

I did it like that thinking that it would be more standardized. I forgot that the standardization could include sub headings. I've usually seen tables more on USAF units. Then again, all inspiration is from those units to begin with. I'm truly sorry that I did that, so i'll fix it. Thanks for bringing attention to my oversight. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 18:45, 9 June 2008 (UTC)