User talk:Tefalstar

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Welcome to the project 2 The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XV (May 2007) 3 The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XVI (June 2007) 4 Military history WikiProject coordinator selection 5 Military history WikiProject coordinator election 6 Crusades etc 7 The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XVIII (August 2007) 8 For the Love of God (artwork) 9 Guide to referencing 10 RIchard I 11 The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XIX (September 2007) 12 Gerard de Ridefort 13 The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XX (October 2007) 14 Pot vs Kettle 15 Franco-Mongol alliance 16 Libertines 17 Crusader dynasties 18 The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXI (November 2007) 19 WP:V and WP:BLP 20 The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXII (December 2007) 21 Bohemond 22 Dore engraving 23 DNFT 24 Æthelwold's revolt 25 The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIII (January 2008) 26 Military history coordinator selection 27 The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIV (February 2008) 28 Crusades task force 29 The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXV (March 2008) 30 Editing templates 31 Tripoli 32 Your recent edits 33 Falklands War taskforce 34 Ayyubid-Crusader War 35 Seljuk-Crusader War 36 The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVI (April 2008) 37 Forbelet 38 Re: Coats of Arms 39 66.252.191.90 40 More about Forbelet 41 The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVII (May 2008) 42 Your edit to Henry V of England

[edit] Welcome to the project

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XV (May 2007)

The May 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 16:00, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XVI (June 2007)

The June 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 14:57, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Military history WikiProject coordinator selection

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by August 14! Kyriakos 11:22, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators from a pool of fourteen candidates to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by August 28! Wandalstouring 12:23, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Crusades etc

Hey Tefalstar, thanks! Yeah, this is what I do "professionally" (although I am still a student so it's not quite a profession yet). My current mission is to find all the articles about crusade historians and make sure there are plenty of links to them, and I've been trying to bring Kingdom of Jerusalem up to Featured status, although I'm not sure I'll ever have time to finish that! I'll help out with the Richard article as much as I can though. That one might be a little harder than Henry...Richard is unfortunately well-known to the general public, and I find it impossible to keep articles like that up to any academic standard (similarly, people don't know anything about the K of J, but they do know what the crusades are!). Adam Bishop 15:45, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XVIII (August 2007)

The August 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 10:16, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] For the Love of God (artwork)

FYI, re repeated refs:[1]. Do you by any chance have the page number and article title of the Daily Mail article? Tyrenius 00:58, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Guide to referencing

Click on "show" to open contents.

Using references (citations)

I thought you might find it useful to have some information about references (refs) on wikipedia. These are important to validate your writing and inform the reader. Any editor can removed unreferenced material; and unsubstantiated articles may end up getting deleted, so when you add something to an article, it's highly advisable to also include a reference to say where it came from. Referencing may look daunting, but it's easy enough to do. Here's a guide to getting started. Good references A reference must be accurate, i.e. it must prove the statement in the text. To validate "Mike Brown climbed Everest", it's no good linking to a page about Everest, if Mike Brown isn't mentioned, nor to one on Mike Brown, if it doesn't say that he climbed Everest. You have to link to a source that proves his achievement is true. You must use Reliable sources, such as published books, mainstream press, authorised web sites, and official documents. Blogs, Myspace, Youtube, fan sites and extreme minority texts are not usually acceptable, nor is Original research, e.g. your own unpublished, or self-published, essay or research. Simple referencing The first thing you have to do is to create a "Notes and references" section. This goes towards the bottom of the page, below the "See also" section and above the "External links" section. Enter this code: ==Notes and references== <references/> The next step is to put a reference in the text. Here is the code to do that. It goes at the end of the relevant term, phrase, sentence, or paragraph to which the note refers, and after punctuation such as a full stop, without a space (to prevent separation through line wrap): <ref>             </ref> Whatever text you put in between these two tags will become visible in the "Notes and references" section as your reference. Test it out Copy the following text, open the edit box for this page, paste it at the bottom (inserting your own text) and save the page: ==Reference test== This is the text which you are going to reference.<ref> Substitute your own text in this space </ref> ==Notes and references== <references/> (End of text to copy and paste.) Information to include You need to include the information to enable the reader to find your source. For a book it might look like this: <ref> Smith, Timothy: "A Guide to Planets", page 29. Solar Publishing, 2001 </ref> An online newspaper source would be: <ref> Plunkett, John. [http://media.guardian.co.uk/site/story/0,14173,1601858,00.html "Sorrell accuses Murdoch of panic buying"], ''[[The Guardian]]'', [[2005-10-27]]. Retrieved on [[2005-10-27]]. </ref> Note the square brackets around the URL. The format is [URL Title] with a space between the URL and the Title. If you do this the URL is hidden and the Title shows as the link. Use double apostrophes for the article title, and two single quote marks either side of the name of the paper (to generate italics). The date after The Guardian is the date of the newspaper, and the date after "Retrieved on" is the date you accessed the site – useful for searching the web archive in case the link goes dead. Wikilinks (double square brackets which create an internal link to a wikipedia article) function inside the ref tags. Dates are wikilinked so that they work with user preference settings. Citation templates You may prefer to use a citation template to compile details of the source. The template goes between the ref tags and you fill out the fields you wish to. Basic templates can be found here: Wikipedia:Template messages/Sources of articles/Citation quick reference Same ref used twice or more The first time a reference appears in the article, you can give it a simple name in the <ref> code: <ref name=smith> DETAILS OF REF </ref> The second time you use the same reference in the article, you need only to create a short cut instead of typing it all out again: <ref name=smith/> You can then use the short cut as many times as you want. Don't forget the /, or it will blank the rest of the article! A short cut will only pick up from higher up the page, so make sure the first ref is the full one. Some symbols don't work in the ref name, but you'll find out if you use them. Example You can see refs in action in the article William Bowyer (artist). There are 3 sources and they are each referenced 3 times. Each statement in the article has a footnote to show what its source is. Next step When you become familiar with the process, the next step is to have one section, "Footnotes", with links embedded in the text, and another, "References", which lists all of your references alphabetically with full details, e.g. for a book: Lincoln, Abraham; Grant, U. S.; & Davis, Jefferson (1861). Resolving Family Differences Peacefully (3rd ed.). Gettysburg: Printing Press. ISBN 0-12-345678-9. If you're ready to go into it further, these pages have detailed information: Wikipedia:Citing sources Wikipedia:Citing sources/example style Wikipedia:Citation templates Wikipedia:Footnotes I hope this helps. If you need any assistance, let me know. Tyrenius 00:58, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RIchard I

That's okay, I'm too busy to contribute anything major these days. As for becoming an admin, I have no idea about that anymore, it's totally different from when I became one 4 years ago. I think they'll want you to have something like 2000 edits, and to have contributed to at least one featured article. It's really not that big of a deal, kind of meaningless, except for some extra buttons. Adam Bishop 01:06, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XIX (September 2007)

The September 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 10:33, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gerard de Ridefort

Hi, I think that just means some Victorian writers misread it as a B. They weren't very good palaeographers, I suppose! I don't see any references to him as "Bideford" anywhere else. Adam Bishop 19:42, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XX (October 2007)

The October 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 15:00, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pot vs Kettle

The use of the term "Adelin" etc is worth using. Moreover, the article was rubbish as it stood, and if you can't see that then I suggest you reconsider your own behaviour. Michael Sanders 00:47, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

As the article now stands it has a small paragraph on the etymology of his surname, and a rewrite of what is relevant to William - his life, his death, the relevance of his parents' marriage, etc. There isn't enough to require sections. Furthermore, given that you are a self-confessed former vandal, you'll forgive me if I doubt your judgement in the content of articles. Michael Sanders 00:54, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Franco-Mongol alliance

Thanks for taking the time to read through it, I much appreciate it! Can I get you to also please post your approval at Talk:Franco-Mongol alliance#Article rewrite? That way it's easier to show consensus.  :) --Elonka 21:56, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Libertines

Hi, I was intrigued by your edit here. Would you mind explaining why you undid my edit? Thanks in advance. --John (talk) 20:30, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. Please see WP:V and WP:NPOV. --John (talk) 15:37, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm terribly sorry if I came across as patronising. The term 'chemistry' has a meaning in the real world and so it should always be used with great care when used as a metaphor as here, I hope you agree. The reference you introduced does not quite support the use you made of it. --John (talk) 16:51, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Crusader dynasties

Hi, yeah that Byzantine-Chinese link would be pretty cool. I've never heard of it...I know there was a lot of contact classically, but I don't know about the middle ages, especially as early as the 11th century. Anyway, for crusader dynasties I'm not sure they really have names, before the Lusignan dynasty. At first it was supposed to be an elected monarchy, Godfrey and Baldwin I had no children, and we don't even really know how Baldwin II was related to Baldwin I. Once Fulk becomes king I suppose there is some legitimacy in claiming there was a "Plantagenet" or "Angevin" dynasty, especially since this linked Jerusalem more closely to England and France, but I still don't think it is that useful of a term. I would just leave out the dynasty parameter altogether, actually. Adam Bishop (talk) 18:05, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXI (November 2007)

The November 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 has been an automated delivery by BrownBot 02:49, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:V and WP:BLP

I have to say that I found this rollback quite rude. I had given a reason for my edit, and you didn't even bother to address it in an edit comment or on the talk page. In case my point wasn't clear: Something like "X show on radio Y" (where X is a weekly show which has run for years) is not a valid source reference in the sense of Wikipedia:Verifiability, since it makes it almost impossible for other editors to verify that the claim in question was actually made: Most radio shows are not publicly available after they have been aired, and even if this one was, one would have to listen closely through hundreds of hours to find the passage which contains this information in question.

Please realize that this article has been the target of ongoing hoaxes for months. I just removed the claim that he is a homosexual, even though it was "sourced" in the same way as above, I hope you are not going to reinsert this too (see also WP:BLP).

Regards, High on a tree 17:32, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for digging out a better reference (but please note that it says 12 December 2007, not 5 December). I still think that encyclopedia articles are not a good place for announcing future activities (WP:CRYSTAL), but I won't spend the next ten days edit warring about this...

Regards, High on a tree 17:51, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXII (December 2007)

The December 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 has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:44, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bohemond

hello, you have recently updated the bohemond page.. i am not sure about that.
i don't know the author of the book cited, but the sicily norman monarchy was founded by Roger I in primis, then bye Roger II.
See the List of monarchs of Sicily too.
Maybe his descents was in touch with sicily and norman kingdoms, but he didn't found them.
--Mauriziogiraldi (talk) 10:29, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I was in error. Very sorry, excuse me.sometimes my english fail
--Mauriziogiraldi (talk) 07:48, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dore engraving

I have no idea if it is Bohemond climbing the wall or just watching, sorry! I'll see if I can look it up somewhere. I suppose Dore himself must have had his own caption for it. Adam Bishop (talk) 06:54, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] DNFT

Hi Tefalstar! Thank you for cleaning up the vandalism of Talk:Pokémon. However, and you propably heard this before, you should not feed the trolls. Adding provoking comments like you did here is propably exactly the reaction they want, and it might encourage them to write more insulting messages. This IP is propably dynamic, and the person might never actually see your text. But still, I hope you understand my point. Cheers, Face 17:19, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Æthelwold's revolt

Interesting article, but wouldn't it have been better to expand the article on Æthelwold (and the one on Edward the Elder) with this information? Angus McLellan (Talk) 00:35, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIII (January 2008)

The January 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) 01:18, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Military history coordinator selection

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 14! Woody (talk) 10:40, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIV (February 2008)

The February 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) 08:12, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Crusades task force

Hi Tefalstar, I've created a Crusades task force as part of the Middle Ages WikiProject, and I thought you might be interested in helping out. Adam Bishop (talk) 10:20, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXV (March 2008)

The March 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) 02:49, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Editing templates

Sometimes there is an "edit" link included, but I guess not here...if you need to edit the box itself, you just need to put "template:" before the name of the box. In this case, it is Template:Infobox British Royalty. If you need to add something to William's box, you just have to edit his page normally. Adam Bishop (talk) 21:38, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tripoli

Cool, thanks, but what about page numbers for the references? Adam Bishop (talk) 01:03, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah they bug me too. No one ever connects them like that. It's useful to have all the links in one spot, but not with that title... Adam Bishop (talk) 09:04, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd talk to User:Djmaschek about that, he's been working on the campaignboxes lately. Adam Bishop (talk) 03:55, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 19:35, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

--Tefalstar (talk) 15:29, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Falklands War taskforce

OMG that is so freaky, I was literally considering broaching the same very subject with Justin today! I'm in, but you should definately contact Justin about it (LOL he's our patriarch). I can't remember seeing you around the Falklands articles though, do you have much experience with running a task force??? Ryan4314 (talk) 19:38, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes it's always rather bothered me looking at articles about ex-Falklands ships (for example) and they're really unencyclopaedic/unreferenced and I've always thought that the articles primarily concerning Argentine forces need a good copyedit regarding their use of the English language, plus it'd be nice to have uniform set of standards to use across all Falklands articles. However I'm afraid I don't know much about running a task force, but I can offer you my 100% enthusiasm. Ryan4314 (talk) 19:50, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Not really, I have only made a fairly small number of edits to those articles and I'm not any kind of avid expert. Thanks for the offer though- I like the pun (of sorts) in the name of the group ;-) Badgerpatrol (talk) 20:29, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

LOL I didn't even notice that! 10 points for you ;) Ryan4314 (talk) 20:44, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Just checked your contribs mate, you'll wanna message Narson as well, he's old school cool on the knowledge too. Ryan4314 (talk) 20:50, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Less of the old, thank you, I wasn't even born when the war occured. I just have a weird ability to absorb facts no-one ever cared about. I would take a stab at it with you guys if you wish. While Falklands isn't a speciality area for me, someone has to keep Justin out of trouble. Narson (talk) 21:29, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Well u were editing the articles before me, so therefore your one of my patriarchs lol. Also you might wanna hit up Jor70 and see if he's interested, he could add to the Argentine contigent. Oh and Griffiths911 too, he doesn't do much editing but is a Falklands vet with tonnes of knowledge and pics (just check HMS Cardiff's commons page)! Ryan4314 (talk) 21:33, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

There used to be quite an Irish contingent that edited the articles back in the day, but they were 'led' by VintageKits who got himself indeffed and we havn't seen them for a while. It is a pity, I fear the taskforce will look awfully partisan with the editors who currently edit those articles. Necessary is a good chap though and he seems to be onboard. No-one can say the Danish are pro-British. We blew large chunks out of copenhagen in the Napoleonic Wars and stole their entire fleet. Narson (talk) 21:43, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Yea, until we get more people on board perhaps we should stick to Falklands articles that are less controversial, and just doing formatting edits etc. Ryan4314 (talk) 21:49, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, at the very least conversation should perhaps occur on the pages of the more controversial things, ensure things are transparant and that people who might object or bring forward a different view have the chance. Narson (talk) 21:53, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah that sounds fine, in a day or two it should be reasonably clear who and how many people are on board, then we can actually get something set up and start dabbling --Tefalstar (talk) 21:54, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

UNINDENT

A patriarch and a trouble maker? Is this what my friends think of me? Et tu Brutus.

Seriously, I'd be very interested. Couple of names for you. Give User:Pfainuk a nudge, he recently returned after a wiki break and has a great deal of knowledge on the subject but hasn't been too active of late. Pfainuk recommends User:Sebastiankessel as an Argentine editor who can be objective and I'd respect his opinion. Justin talk 10:35, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

So what's going on with this? Ryan4314 (talk) 16:57, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Well I think everyone who's up for it will have replied here by now. Its just a case of seeing if any of us have experience we could use in setting it up now? --Tefalstar (talk) 20:16, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

LOL if you set it up will Kirill "they (we) will come". Ryan4314 (talk) 15:21, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Not sure if I can lead the group, would someone with more experience like that role? --Tefalstar (talk) 15:29, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I suggest Justin but I'm not sure if he would enjoy it (plus I can see his 3RR block being dragged up and not sure if he wants to deal with that). Pfainuk seems good. There is always user:ALR too...have we spoken to him? Narson (talk) 22:35, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually I'd love people to have a look at my 3RR block, two editors with a chip on their shoulders, one an admin, start an edit war but the only person to get a 3RR block is the noob urging the group to take it to talk and not disrupt the article (and I didn't break the 4 revert rule). Anyway, whilst I'd be happy to help out but I doubt I'd be the best candidate to lead. Personally I'd suggest Pfainuk if he's interested or Ryan4314. Justin talk 08:50, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ayyubid-Crusader War

Hi. I got your note about Template:Campaignbox Ayyubid-Crusader War. I did NOT add Sixth Crusade, etc. to this. In my opinion, Acre and Jaffa are OK and the time span ought to be 1170 (when Saladin started attacking from Egypt) to 1191 (when Richard of England sailed home). The ending date is debatable, but don't forget that Saladin was still scarfing up Crusader possessions in 1188. At any rate, I didn't create this campaignbox and I certainly didn't add the extra stuff. I did remove Crusader invasions of Egypt and put it where it belongs, in both Template: Campaignbox Zengid-Crusader War and Template: Campaignbox Fatimid-Crusader War. These are my recent creations, along with Template: Campaignbox Seljuk-Crusader War. I was inspired to organize the earlier Crusader battles when I saw Ayyubid-Crusader War. Djmaschek (talk) 02:40, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Seljuk-Crusader War

You are right that the Seljuk-Crusader War and the Zengid-Crusader War could be merged. I will admit that they are both arbitrary constructions. They were only created because many battles don't fit neatly into one of the crusades and a single war would make a rather long list. Whether I will merge them is another story, since I've already written the Zengid-Crusader war article and the other one is being written right now. Once I decided on this division into two wars, it seemed to have a certain logic. Djmaschek (talk) 03:24, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVI (April 2008)

The April 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) 02:25, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Forbelet

Not according to Template:Campaignbox Ayyubid-Crusader War, but Belvoir and al-Fule fit the timeframe. Adam Bishop (talk) 21:19, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I guess we could move it...but to what? Adam Bishop (talk) 04:18, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Maybe making Forbelet a redirect to that article would be best, for now. Adam Bishop (talk) 06:29, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Coats of Arms

Hello, good work on the Arms for the Templar Grand Masters! Do you have the Arms for the later masters as well? That would be great, keep up the good work! --Tefalstar (talk) 14:56, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Not now, but I'am drawing them. I hope to finish it during this month. You can see the progression on fr:Armorial des maîtres de l'ordre du Temple. Odejea (talk) 15:39, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Brilliant, keep up the great work! Where did you find the armorials if I may ask? --Tefalstar (talk) 15:44, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I have put the bibliography at the end of the armorials (fr:Armorial d'Orient and fr:Armorial des maîtres de l'ordre du Temple). Mainly, I have found the description in these source (for the crusades) :

• Salles des Croisades, in Castle of Versailles
• Early Blazon : Jérusalem, Cyprus, Antioche and Tripoli and Constantinople.
• Les Templiers et les croisades

[edit] 66.252.191.90

They don't seem to be too much trouble. I wouldn't worry about it, the vandalism is easy to clean up. Adam Bishop (talk) 08:32, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] More about Forbelet

I noticed the discussion between you and Adam Bishop (talk) about the battle of Forbelet. If this is indeed the real name for this action, changing the name of the Battle of Belvoir Castle (1182) article would be okay with me. But please don't forget to cite your source. (This was not a mopping up action after Montgisard (1177).) I'll admit that calling it the Battle of Belvoir Castle was probably improper; I named it myself from the nearest contemporary location. (According to R C Smail, p 152, a few historians were convinced that it was a pitched battle though Smail didn't name what it would be called.) The alternative was calling it the "Crusader Campaign of 1182" but I chose not to because "Campaign" didn't seem to fit within the Battles of the Crusades category. I don't see what good purpose would be served by splitting the article in three parts, since there is little enough information as it is. In John Beeler's narrative, the campaign of 1182 is treated as a single event. (And so was the Battle of Sarmin campaign in 1115.) Djmaschek (talk) 03:11, 19 May 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) 02:13, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your edit to Henry V of England

Thanks for the new information on Henry V of England. Henry's membership of "The order of the dragon" was already in "Foreign affairs", so I have moved your addition there to join it. I added a couple of extra footnotes at the same time. All the best. --Old Moonraker (talk) 12:34, 11 June 2008 (UTC)