User talk:Ja 62
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Welcome to Wikipedia!!!
|
[edit] Another welcome
Hi, I hope you don't mind that I listed your article Arms shipments from Czechoslovakia to Israel 1947-1949 at Portal:Israel/New article announcements. You are welcome to join. ←Humus sapiens ну? 11:24, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Userbox
The part of WP:USER that the userbox violates is this section;
- Polemical statements:
| “ | libelling people on userpages is a bad idea, and in fact, using userpages to attack people or campaign for or against anything or anyone is a bad idea | ” |
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- - Jimbo Wales
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Particularly Jimbo's statement, which states that campaigning for anything is a bad idea. Please note however, that this is just my opinion that the userbox fails this. Embargo's editing of your userpage was not vandalism as he was acting in good faith, thats why I commented on his talkpage RyanPostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 18:35, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
I apologise for what you considered as vandalism. I was merely enforcing what I recently heard were wikipedia rules. Please be more respectable and polite when addressing me or anyone else in the future. Embargo 00:50, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] maybe oif interest
Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2007-02-19_Inayat_Bunglawala Zeq 08:32, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair Use image on User page
Wikipedia WP:FU#FUC9 is that Fair Use images can only be used in articles that discuss the subject of the image. Under the user page policy, I have removed the image of Pooh from your user page. ~ BigrTex 03:12, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 |
We would like to invite you to join WikiProject Czech Republic, a project dedicated to building and maintaining a large and neutral database of Czech Republic-related articles on Wikipedia. To join, simply add your name here. |
≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 12:30, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Czechoslovakian
It may seem inaccurate to you, but "Czechoslovakian" is the usual adjective in English, since the usual form in English for countries ending in "-ia" is "country name+n" (e.g. Romanian, Bolivian, Australian), although "Czechoslovak" is also used. See:
- Czechoslovak
- /chekkslovak/ (also Czechoslovakian)
- • noun a person from the former country of Czechoslovakia, now divided between the Czech Republic and Slovakia.
- • adjective relating to the former country of Czechoslovakia.
and
- czechoslovakian
- adjective
- 1. of or relating to Czechoslovakia or its people or their language;"The Czech border"; "Czechoslovak nationalists"; "The Czechoslovakian population" [syn: Czech]
- noun
- 1. a native or inhabitant of the former republic of Czechoslovakia
- WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University.
See also Czechoslovak military units on Eastern front. Regards, Grant | Talk 01:44, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
- Czechoslovak is more formal and therefore more correct form -e.g. official name of Czechoslovakia in English (long form) was Czechoslovak republic, mos notably it was during rule of communists - Czechoslovak socialist republic:(. I can't say that Czechoslovak is the only correct form, but it's the better one.--ja_62 10:38, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
- I know what you're saying. I felt the same way when I was in Prague and saw movie posters with "Nicole Kidmanova" on them ;-) Grant | Talk 12:06, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] 1st Czechoslovak Armoured Brigade
Nice edits. A couple of questions since you seem to be well informed about the Czech brigade. 1) A few years ago, I saw an article on the internet that discussed the brigade. One issue the article brought up stated that there were some internal conflicts in the brigade that persisted into 1944 (I seem to recall it had something to with communists or some kind of conflicting political loyalties), and that these conflicts were known by the British, and led to the permanent use of the brigade in the siege role at Dunkirk rather than employing it further to the east. I can't locate this information anymore and wonder if you have ever heard about this. 2) It was recently noted by a few editors of the Military History Project that Wikipedia does not have a good article on the Czech forces in the east led by General Svoboda. Have you considered authoring such an article? I could probably put up a basic start-class article on this topic, but as you are in the Czech Republic, you likely have access to much more information than I can find. Thanks--W. B. Wilson (talk) 12:31, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
- I don't think I'm particularly well informed, I've just made some minor explanations. For your questions -* 1) There was some level of (communist inspired) political tension amongst the enlisted men in Czechoslovak army units in UK, but its prime was in 1940/1941, or between fall of France and German invasion of USSR. The solution was quite easy, men particularly reluctant to Czechoslovak authorities were tranferred to Pioneer Corps Labour Companies, others gradually calmed down. In 1944, ratio of Communist Party of Czechoslovakia members to brigade strength was 239 communists to circa 4.500 men in the brigade. (On the other hand - some officers of the brigade (insignificant in number as well as in political influence) regarded Czechoslovak exile government in UK as too pro-Soviet and vaguely considered to make up some committee under US patronage, to which committe loaylty of the Brigade should be switch, but this option never reached any phase of serious possibility)
I don't think that above mentioned number by itself provides any definitive data for level of communist activity in the brigade - and I may look up for some sources - but probably it's not likely to consider Communist threat as rationale for employing the Brigade as besieging troops only. Much more likely is the simple fact that in 1944 there was no prospect - or Czechoslovak ministry of defence did not see any - to raise casualty replacements for brigade in any significant numbers (in fact it took some toil to find enough men to fulfill table requirements for armoured brigade group just prior to shipping of brigade to France), therefore the brigade was considered to be able only to perform combat rôle in some low-intensity combats area, as besieging of Dunkerk was to be.
- 2)I don't think I have enough information on Czechoslovak units on the Eastern front present time, as well as not enough endurance to find them for the Wikipedia article. My prefered involvement in Wikipedia editing is just to make some corrections to existing articles, since I don't feel I have enough time to write articles on my own. If you write some stub article on the topic, just notice me, and I'd attempt to make some corrections, and provide details - approximately as I made today to 1st Czechoslovak Armoured Brigade - but generally, when Czechoslovak wartime army units are poorly covered by Wikipedia, I still personally prefer Czechoslovak 11th Infantry Battalion article (which deserves, as I see it far more details than today's scope is) - for which purpose I wasn't able to find enough time since end of July, 2007. --ja_62 (talk) 16:20, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
-
- Thanks for the comments. The manpower dilemma sounds as good a reason as any for the Dunkirk mission. --W. B. Wilson (talk) 16:29, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks
Thanks for catching the error in the play referrence. You know I used to have an IQ of 6,000 but after 3 million years I sometimes even forget what I just said. You know I used to have an IQ of 6,000...Xenovatis (talk) 04:54, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
