User talk:Carom/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

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 quite regularly. 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 recommended that you watchlist it.
• The project has a monthly newsletter; it will normally be delivered as a link, but several other formats are available.

There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:

• Starting some new articles? Our article structure guidelines outline some things to include.
• Interested in working on a more complete article? The military history peer review and collaboration departments would welcome your help!
• Interested in a particular area of military history? We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, or periods.
• Want to know how good our articles are? The assessment department is working on rating the quality of every military history article in Wikipedia.

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 22:20, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election - vote phase!

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will select seven coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of eleven candidates. Please vote here by August 26!

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot - 11:26, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Battle of Hastings

Thanks for the fix on the talk page for GA status. Silvdraggoj 20:15, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject Newsletter - Issue VI - August 2006

The August 2006 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 -- 11:57, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Colditz Castle/Oflag IV-C

Thank you for supporting my position on splitting this (in my opinion) unwieldy article. However it appears that others are opposed to making any changes (see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Military_history), just because it was a featured article. Being quite new to Wikipedia I am unfamiliar with the administrative politics, and don't want to make waves.

I am willing to do the work. What do you suggest? Syrenab 18:31, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I have done the work of splitting this article into

• Colditz
• Oflag 4c - this is temporary and needs to be renamed Oflag IV-C 0nce rewrite is approved. Ar present Oflag IV-C automatically redirects to Colditz Castle and I haved not been able to figure out how to fix it.

I requested approval on the appropriate Talk pages. So far no response.

Syrenab 15:01, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Webley Revolver

Why did you object to this article being A-class? How would you improve it? Be specific, because I'm at my wits end with the whole evaluation process and I'm sick to death of people complaining about the articles I work on without being prepared to help improve them as well. --Commander Zulu 13:54, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback... Having gone over the article again, I still feel it's A-class and will renominate accordingly. --Commander Zulu 00:33, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history Newsletter - Issue VII - September 2006

The September 2006 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 - 18:56, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Shahid Afridi John Kay (flying shuttle) Battle of Lostwithiel Miguzi Ralph 'Sonny' Barger Pusan Perimeter Tim Wheeler Water frame Edwin, Earl of Mercia Gloster Hill Store Mosse National Park Shield wall Creatures 2 Killin HMS Loch Lomond (K437) Spinning frame Anthony Mosse Ben Ledi Monsieur Mosse

Cleanup The Bear and the Dragon Black Kettle Desert warfare Merge Loch Pork jelly Sonic boom Add Sources Ethelweard Modern warfare Craufurd's Light Division Wikify James Brockman Esq. Pleshey James Brockman Esq b1626 Expand Safri Duo 3.0 Yarn Horse archer

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 13:38, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

B-class articles

Hi .. see you have classified several articles, for example, the Battle of El Mazuco as B-class (failure, like B-movie, one must assume), but with no suggestion as to how it could be improved. Why? Thanks quota 20:14, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Military history Collaboration of the Fortnight

You supported Tank, which has been selected as the Military history WikiProject's new Collaboration of the Fortnight. Please help improve this article to featured article standards. Kirill Lokshin 00:28, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Re: Renaming

The tags should be placed as {{subst:cfr|Military units and formations by war|Military Units}} (and so forth), but the basic setup looks fine. Thanks for helping out with this! Kirill Lokshin 18:39, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I've copied over the full list from the project page onto CFD, so that anybody commenting is aware of the scope. They all still need tagging, though. :-\ Kirill Lokshin 18:46, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Oflag IV-C Need help

Carom

I have split the Colditz Castle article into its two logical components, per previous discussions. I posted requests for comments on the Colditz Castle talk page on 3 October. There have been no comments, so I wish to complete the task. I am unable to move the temporary article Oflag 4c to its correct name "Oflag IV-C", but I am prevented from doing this. Can you help me, please.

Syrenab 19:21, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, after following your advice, I was able to copy content over. Job completed. Syrenab 14:36, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I have edited Colditz to include just history of Castle, with links to Oflag IV-C article. Syrenab 15:16, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue VIII - October 2006

The October 2006 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 21:04, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

User:Copiedimage

I have not caused vandalism - and you show bad faith in calling me a Vandal. The information for Battle of Wigan Lane is a stub, orphaned on its own, and belongs with Wigan unless you state why not, or improve it. Note this userID was created to stop "cut 'n' paste" copyright violations, and see the referenced matter at Wigan. Any "revert war" will be reported. Copiedimage 23:28, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

In reply to your post on my talk. You did not post any comment at the Comment Page of Battle of Wigan Lane either, but did put a vandalism post in its history, directed at me.Copiedimage 23:42, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: World War I Portal

Unfortunately, there's no way to have articles queued up automatically. Using exiting FA/A/GA articles might work (although that's a pretty small set to work with, for WWI); but it's still necessary to create each article's subpage on the portal by hand. Kirill Lokshin 21:46, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

You can have it change based on the calendar, if you want; alternately, you can use the trick that some other portals have developed (and which is currently implemented in the portal skeleton) of having a new set displayed every time the portal is reloaded by a user. Kirill Lokshin 21:54, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue IX - November 2006

The November 2006 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 22:06, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 27th.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 2, Issue 48	27 November 2006	About the Signpost

Arbitration Committee elections: Candidate profiles	Steward elections begin
Group apologizes for using Wikipedia name in online arts fundraiser	News and notes: 1.5 million articles, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 01:29, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for December 4th.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 2, Issue 49	4 December 2006	About the Signpost

Arbitration Committee elections open	The Seigenthaler incident: One year later
Wikimedia celebrates Commons milestone, plans fundraiser	Wikipedia wins award in one country, reported blocked in another
News and notes: Steward elections continue, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:28, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Your input is requested

Your input would be appreciated at this Request for Comments. Kelly Martin (talk) 17:16, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Battle of Ghazni

Hi There,

Just created this article, Battle of Ghazni during the First Anglo-Afghan War. I was wondering if you could fix up anything which is incorrect or add to this battle or link this battle to other articles so that it generates traffic. Thankyou. Mercenary2k 02:53, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Jane the Dinosaur in Battle of Stillman's Run

Jane the Dinosaur was used as a template to insert a picture icon, and then edited with the appropriate photo. (Test of user talk) Rattis irrittis 13:00, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue X - December 2006

The December 2006 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 22:24, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Something for you...

For your diligence in implementing the military unit naming conventions and your work on military portals, I hereby bestow upon you the Military history WikiProject Distinguished Service Award. Kirill Lokshin 06:56, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

pagemoves

Knock yourself out :-)

UK formations almost all done (plus two or three actually called "British XYZ") - I'll start going through them removing all those extra "British" from wikilinks next week. Shimgray | talk | 02:03, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Move of Australian 10th Division

Hi, can you please tell me why you moved the article Australian 10th Division to 10th Division (Australia). Doing this has removed a common naming convention shared with the other Australian division pages. If there is a new naming convention for all divisions could you please send me the link. Hossen27 03:12, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks thats fine I thought you just changed this article in isolation, but if there all going to change I dont have a problem. Hossen27 03:37, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

With the Australian divisions and I guess with other countries there are Divisions with have existed more than once and have separate article (eg Australian 1st Division (World War I) and Australian 1st Division (World War II), there is also a current Australian 1st division that doesn't have an article yet. What naming convention is used in this case. Hossen27 03:49, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Alright thats no problem if I get some time ill lend a hand. Regards Hossen27 04:02, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh a think there is a little problem you moved Australian 5th Division (World War II) to 5th Division (Australia) but there is also a Australian 5th Division (World War I) the same for 1,2,3,4 divs. This is the case for all the Australian divisions from the 1st through to the 5th. Hossen27 04:08, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

They shouldn't be merged they are completely different formations. The World War I units are part of what is known as the First Australian Imperial Force similar to the AEF, but it was a totally regular volunteer force. The First AIF was disbanded after WWI. The WWII units were created during the 1920's and are predominantly Militia units, quite often conscripts on national service. The units share no historic links and share no battle honours. Hossen27 04:35, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Already done. Hossen27 04:42, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: WWI portal

Looks quite good; I would suggest adding some images for the introduction and a listing of related portals, though. As far as updating content is concerned, the main advantage of the random rotation method is that you can forget about the portal completely and it'll still function quite well; you can add new items to the queues at your leisure, but there's no real need for any particular speed of updating.

Ideally, we ought to be able to make some progress on replacing {{World War I}} with links to this portal now that it's taken shape; I recall that getting rid of that huge template on articles was one of the reasons the portal was created. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 06:50, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

The replacement would basically entail changing {{World War I}} to {{portal|World War I}} in articles that use that large template. I have no idea if it'll be a controversial move, but I would hope that people would see the sense in it. :-) Kirill Lokshin 17:40, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:World_War_I. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 19:04, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

There are two minor points of formatting that ought to be fixed:

• The titles of the selected articles should be linked, not just bolded.
• The picture section needs to include some form of image credit. Since you're working primarily with photographs, I would suggest an explicit credit line, as on Portal:War.

Once that's done, I think the portal will basically be ready for nomination at WP:FPCAN. Kirill Lokshin 21:01, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's intended to be an author credit rather than a source credit; you should indicate who took the photo, not where it was uploaded from, in my view. Kirill Lokshin 21:35, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Probably; or you could credit it to, say, the Royal Navy if you know it's a naval photographer but don't have his name. Kirill Lokshin 21:47, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

The easiest thing to do would probably be to subst: the template onto a subpage of the portal and just edit that. Kirill Lokshin 16:19, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

WW 1 Casualties

My intention is to create a discussion on the reasons why the current numbers are higher. I would be great if people from the CWGC would comment on this. Must run to crunch some Nrs for my boss--Woogie10w 18:09, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Original research is forbidden here at Wikipedia, I can only list data from sources that can be verified. Howeever, in the case of WW2 casualies I did a statistical study of UK Army casualties and found an undercount of losses from the Colonies, Africa in particular. My hunch is that the War Office in London did not concern itself with the losses of Asians or Africans back in 1946. I never mentioned this research on the WW2 Casualties page since it was my own work

In the case of WW 1 casualties I would not be surprised if there was an undercount of colonial losses that has been rectified by the work of the CWGC. This is a topic that needs the attention of young Phd canidates interested in military history.--Woogie10w 02:52, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I posted those remarks to the talk page to make sure everybody was numbed up before I started to pull the teeth and screw the implants in. Time to hit the hay.--Woogie10w 03:48, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

The Urlanis book Population & War is available for sale online on ABE and Alibris. It is an interesting and informative book. I reccomend it highly.--Woogie10w 14:08, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Renaming of IJA 1st Division, IJA 2nd Division and IJA 3rd Division

Renaming of these divisions to 1st Division (Japan), etc poses a problem, as these articles describe military divisions under the Imperial Japanese Army, which no longer exists. At present, the Japan Ground Self-Defense Force has a 1st Division, 2nd Division, etc,. which are not considered to be successors or in any way related to former Empire of Japan military units. I would suggest either reverting to to previous name, or else using something in this name to distinguish that these units are Imperial Japanese Army units. --MChew 05:07, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough - would "Nth Division (Imperial Japanese Army) be an acceptable solution? The parenthetical disambiguation is preferred, and I would like to avoid using initialisms such as "IJA". Carom 05:09, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Sounds very good to me. I was also unhappy with using "IJA". --MChew 05:12, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for answering my question on the reference desk. --Jones2 08:27, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Treaty of Sèvres Reservist German 91st Infantry Division First Balkan War U.S. 14th Infantry Division German 207th Infantry Division Treaty of Lausanne South African 6th Armoured Division German 10th Panzer Division British First Army order of battle, 20 April 1943 German 9th Panzer Division German 90th Light Infantry Division British First Army order of battle, 4 May 1943 German 218th Infantry Division U.S. Fourteenth Army U.S. 19th Infantry Division German 21st Panzer Division German 169th Infantry Division Hungarian Third Army

Cleanup Portuguese Army German 164th Infantry Division Operation Veritas Merge Mechanized warfare Imperial Guard of Japan Armoured warfare Add Sources French 101st Infantry Division 5th SS Panzergrenadier Division Wiking Second Battle of Heligoland Bight Wikify Meaty Beaty Big and Bouncy College rugby Office of CBP Air Expand German 22nd Panzer Division Ardahan Operation Varsity

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 16:52, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: German/English translations for SS divisions

I would leave them untranslated, actually. While normal Wehrmacht ranks are typically translated, I've always seen the original SS ones used in historical works on the topic (mainly, I suppose, because Waffen-SS officers were typically given explicit double ranks, e.g. "Gruppenführer und Generalleutnant der Waffen-SS"). Kirill Lokshin 21:07, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Yep, the OOBs can probably be translated (as the article titles themselves would be). There's some suggested translations on the old unit naming convention draft page that could be useful there; I've been intending to pull those over to the relevant task force page, but the issue has been held up by the little dispute over what to do with the old draft page afterwards. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 21:19, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't think we should give them as translation only. In many cases we use "native" terms such as nauarch, strategus, centurion to give the reader a grasp of the native tongue and concepts that differed from ours. The idea why the SS used not the established military terms like the Wehrmacht(which should be translated) is that they wanted to emphasize their being different. In the Nazi party they competited with the SA for Hitler's favour while as a military force they competited with the Wehrmacht and established an independent corps more loyal to the reigning party. The army officers corps had its own tradition and while they were nationalists they couldn't be considered the safest column of the Nazi government. So basically to stress this idea of a Nazi military force that is sometimes also called the Schwarze Orden(Black Order) a bit of folklore should remain with untranslated names. I think it will end up really stupid if these ranks get directly translated, like "Up(per)stormbann(er)leader=Obersturmbannführer". A possible solution could be to write the corresponding rank as a remark behind like: "Obersturmbannführer(major)"

The SS had some officer dissidents among its ranks who pushed new concepts of command and control that were quite revolutionary for the revolutionary German armed forces and others during their age. Highlighting this claim for being different in their whole approach to the established classes of Officers/NCOs/soldiers may be also an argument.Wandalstouring 22:00, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but for the record the equivalent of an obersturmbannführer is a lieutenant-colonel.--Anthony.bradbury 19:59, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

You can only translate them or put the English translation behind the native word. For technical terms such as Panzer, Haubitze or Krad it is probably best to translate only.Wandalstouring 22:52, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Carom,

I'm not sure I can really help you with military terms. The only thing I could say is that one possibility would leaving the terms untranslated since the English Wikipedia has articles about the German terms, but you probably have thought of that yourself already.

Sorry

--Carabinieri 10:46, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi there; translating NSDAP rank or administration terms is difficult at best, and the advice above not to do so is probably best. If you really must translateabteilung then probably troop is as close as you are going to get, although as you say detachment is commonly used. The problem with "detachment" is that its use as a translation of Sturmabteilung is clearly inaccurate, as the SA were not any sort of detachment, but Storm Troop will do. A member of the SA is then a Storm Trooper, which is common usage - but it's still not very good, and using the German is better. As for a STuG, or Sturmgeschutz, assault gun is as close as you will get.

The problem extends to the Waffen-SS and indeed the Regular Army. In German, the word oberst means highest. So Generaloberst means highest General. But it is always translated as Colonel-General, which makes me cringe. Also seeOberstGruppenFuehrer, which is the equivalent of a full General but comes over as "highest group leader" or sometimes even "colonel group leader". Yikes. I would stick to the German if I were you.--Anthony.bradbury 19:56, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Page moves

I can take a look at them; but if the existing redirect has only a single history entry (the move or redirect itself), you can move a page over top of it without needing admin tools. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 22:08, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Prepare to be boarded

Seriously, I'm thinking about nominating you for one of the coordinator positions. Wandalstouring 23:56, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

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 20:20, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

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 10:13, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Please do run! :-) Kirill Lokshin 14:26, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

RE:Portal:World War II

Hi Carom. I am still interested in maintaining the portal, I was actually going to make it my next portal project now that Portal:Military of Australia is featured. I would certainly appreciate help in the improvement of the portal, it shouldn't take long for the two of us to get it to feature status. Hossen27 03:10, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Battle of Mărăşti

Hello. I wonder if you could please take a look at this new article of mine (or tell me someone who might be willing to) and make any improvements you see necessary. I also have a question on one point of detail: if you look at the second table, the Romanian source used for the article says that the Second Battle of the Aisne lasted from 16 April to 5 May and that the front was penetrated up to 5 km. Our article, though, says it ended on 9 May and that 4 km had been captured by 5 May. I'm not sure how to square that difference but I assume the en.wiki article is more reliable. Any thoughts? Biruitorul 03:17, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, and I look forward to your edits. I wrote to the ro.wiki editor who did the original, and he put in a couple of citations, which I've inserted. If he puts in more, I'll do the same. He also confirmed the fact that he has yet to write a large mid-section on the actual battle (as opposed to before and after), so clearly the thing is incomplete, but he promised it within a few days, and I will translate whatever he provides. Biruitorul 06:34, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Dreadnought battleship article

Hello, Carom. Back in December, you announced your intention to create a new Dreadnought battleship article, containing material from the existing HMS Dreadnought (1906) article. At the moment, however, Dreadnought battleship simply redirects to Battleship. Did you change your mind, or has someone pre-empted you?

Feel free to post your reply here; I have added this page to my watchlist. Regards, John Moore 309 23:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Like many things on wikipedia, it kind of dropped to the back of my mind. I copied content to my sandbox with the intent of reworking it into an article, but got bogged down with other business, in both real and wikilife, and never got around to it. I still intend to do this, but no pormises as to when I'll actually get around to it - I hope it will be soon. Carom 06:01, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Portal:World War I

In its current states it won't do that but I can add that variable no problem. It will take some concentrated work and I'm at work right now and can't but I will be more than happy to add them when I get home tonight.Cheers — WilsBadKarma ^(Talk) 17:10, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey man, I have been playing around with this thing for a while now and there is no way to add the variable to the template. The problem is that the actual articles are never referenced when you add one. You reference the subpage of the portal in which you have copied part of the article to, but never the article. And since the process is random there is no way to add it automatically. The only way to add the read more to the bottom of the page is to do it manually. The other problem is that none of the random portal templates will allow you to add something to the footer while its turned on on the portal so you will have to remove all reference to the footer on the template and all all the links; read more, suggest and archive manually if you still want to add read more. Anyway sorry I couldn't help I tried what I could. If you still want to add it I don't have a problem assisting in changing it over or giving some pointers adding everything. Cheers — WilsBadKarma ^(Talk) 22:46, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey if it gets too heated use the Portal:United States Navy as a reference since it is already featured and I use the same layout on it.Cheers — WilsBadKarma ^(Talk) 04:46, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

translation Afrika Korps

I translated the songs of the Afrika Korps, but there are some points I'm not quite sure of or may have overlooked. The German language is quite poetic (sometimes turgid by using the same verb twice to emphasize) and contains some unusual constructions (fürchten uns wie die Pest). Generalmarsch has been my biggest problem. I have not a clue what is the English equivalent. The footnote links to a site where you can listen to MP3s of both songs. It has been a long time since I was thrown out of bed with such beautiful choires and it's quite effective for that purpose. Wandalstouring 16:49, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

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 13:41, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to WikiProject LGBT studies!

Hi, Carom, welcome to WikiProject LGBT Studies! We are a growing community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to identifying, categorizing, and improving articles of interest to the LGBT community. Some points that may be helpful: Our main aim is to help improve LGBT-related articles, so if someone asks for help with an article, please try your hardest to help them if you are able. Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it. The project has several ongoing and developing activities, such as article quality assessment, peer review and a project-wide article collaboration, all of which you are welcome to take part in. We also have a unique program to improve our lower quality articles, Jumpaclass, so please consider signing up there. If you have another language besides English, please consider adding yourself to our translation section, to help us improve our foreign LGBT topics. If you're planning to stay, have a square in our quilt! You can put anything you want in it. If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the talk page, and we will be happy to help you. And once again - Welcome!

-- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 17:11, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

General Sir Edward Quinan

You recently rated this as a "Start" class of article. As one ofthe principal editors of this article I would apppreciate it if you could let me know what in your opinion could be added to improve it. I am afraid there really isn't much more published information about him. Dabbler 14:41, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator elections

It gives me great pleasure to inform you that you have been elected as one of the Military history WikiProject's Assistant Coordinators. Congratulations!

To start with your coordinator work, please visit this page and familiarize yourself with the material gathered there; it's also a good idea to place the page on your watchlist, as it's the main place where discussion among the coordinators takes place.

Thanks again for offering to take up this responsibility, and congratulations on your success! Kirill Lokshin 00:04, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Congrats!

Assistant Cooridinator of the Military History Wikiproject

Congrats on your election as an assistant coordinator. In honor of your achievement, I present you with these stars. I wish you luck in the coming term. TomStar81 (Talk) 00:38, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Coordintors please drop by

The old coordinators (Kirill, Dryzen and me) decided to established a kind of regular meeting of the coordinators. The intention is to exchange information, opinions and coordinate our work. The current meeting is here. Wandalstouring 00:58, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

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 14:47, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Adoption of PaladinWhite

It looks like we have extremely similar interests; it would be an honor to have you adopt me! I can tell that you're a very experienced editor, and the study of military history (more specifically military equipment) is one of my hobbies. Thanks so much for the offer! Although my learning curve has been steep and fast the past couple of weeks, there are still a lot of things I've yet to learn, and it will be great to have someone around to bother incessantly with questions!... PaladinWhite 06:36, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

WUSTL Project

Hello, I noticed you've made edits to WUSTL articles or that you are in some way connected to Washington University in St. Louis. I thought you might want to become a member of Washington University in St. Louis WikiProject . We've recently built the project page and started a drive to improve articles in the WUSTL series. Please take a look to edit an article or add one of your own. Once an article's status has been agreed upon, feel free to stop by and lend a hand in getting it to featured article status. Hope you can participate!

--Lmbstl 07:18, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Assessment from an article page

Thank you for helping out with the Biography assessment drive. Good news. Outriggr recently designed a script that will cut your biography assessment time down by about ten fold (what took ten hours now may only take one hour with Outriggr's script). For more information, please see the 'assessment from article page' discussion. -- Jreferee 20:21, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Billiards

Are you are billiards/pool/snooker player? Just asking because of the user name. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 13:40, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

assessment bug?

Hi Carom, I am still having difficulty reproducing the problem you're having. Can you tell me what browser and version you're using? Yes, I can add other milhist parameters if you let me know which ones are important. –Outriggr § 06:54, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Credentials Proposal

As regards Jimbo's proposal (assuming that we're thinking of the same proposal): I tend to view it as a special case of "thou shalt not lie to thy fellow editor", which happens to be a principle I agree with. Granted, I think it won't work very well in practice—with a system that relies on the feedback of other editors, the buck doesn't really stop anywhere, so it's not clear how to deal with the people that do claim fake credentials—but at least the general idea seems innocuous enough.

More generally, I take a rather dim view of any proposals that would disadvantage editors without (claimed) credentials, verified or otherwise, for fairly obvious reasons; but I haven't seen anyone taking that particular approach recently. Kirill Lokshin 06:48, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Meh, it's probably too early to say what long-term effects any of these proposals might have. On the surface of things, they're not particularly meaningful even if they become hard rules; the only effect will be to limit what credentials people can claim anonymously. Whether that would result in any cultural changes, I have no idea. Frankly, I doubt it would; the way Ph.D.s are regarded is somewhat independent of whether we can actually verify that they're who they claim to be. (Indeed, prior to the Essjay mess, the idea that they could be lying wasn't really at the forefront of things; most people tended to accept such declarations of credentials on faith, without necessarily changing anything in practice with regards to how those editors were treated.) Kirill Lokshin 18:53, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Memorials to B-class

Hi there. Thanks for dropping by the La Ferté-sous-Jouarre memorial article that I created. How much more work do you think is needed to get it up to B-class status? I've been looking over the criteria, and I think that 3-5 are OK, and if I find the missing information mentioned on the talk page, that should deal with 2. As for 1, what is the best way to reference some of the statements in articles about war memorials? Some of the stuff, you might have noticed, comes directly from the inscriptions, which are, unfortunately, 'verified' by the pictures - not ideal, I know. Other than that, I think I would be right in saying that there would not be much more that could be done. Would I be right to say that this is one of those 'short' articles that can't progress much further after B-class status, and is not really a candidate for A-class or Featured Article status? If so, what other work could I do on war memorials (while my interest lasts...)? Thanks. Carcharoth 22:51, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Replied on my talk page. Carcharoth 00:09, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: MILHIST Banner

They need to be converted to link to the appropriate subpage of Portal:War. The syntax changes from:

|portal=N

to

|portal1-name=War
|portal1-link=Featured article/N

(I've been going through them, but there are obviously still a bunch left to do.) Kirill Lokshin 18:39, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I'd be very grateful for the help! :-) Kirill Lokshin 18:48, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

That looks great. Thanks again! Kirill Lokshin 23:28, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

ASALA

Hi, I am not sure military category is right, the attacks of ASALA were aimed at diplomats not soldiers. The name is Armenian Secret ARMY for liberation of Armenia, but I don't think Armenian SSR would accept any link between them, I don't think there is any link between them either; the organization is just an organization that was listed as a terrorist organization by US, and some other states during its existence. deniz 22:01, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I found only two, Turkey and Armenia, I added to Turkey deletion lists, and it was already added to Armenian deletion lists. Relevancy might be important. There might be people visiting military deletion lists that would not like to see irrelevant AFD's; ASALA AFD might be found irrelevant, unless one means to include all armed aggressions there in the military deletion lists. Currently all the AFD's there except ASALA AFD are relevant to military. deniz 22:41, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Smile!

Here's some Penguins for you! Penguins somehow in their own strange way promote WikiLove and hopefully these Penguins have made your day seem even better. Spread the WikiLove by giving something friendly to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Make your own message to spread WikiLove to others! Happy editing!Crested Penguin 05:44, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

== technical stuff ==

How do you add "This user is a member of the Military History wikiproject" to your user homepage? I've seen others with it, how do you do it? Thanks

Climie.ca 19:43, 20 March 2007 (UTC) Cam

Last push for the Biography Assessment Drive

We've done great work so far on the WikiProject Biography Spring 2007 Assessment Drive, reducing the 135,345 backlog by 38,626 to 96,719 as of March 20, 2007. We have only 6,720 more to go to get below 90,000. That would be outstanding and any extra effort that you can offer in these last few days of the drive (which ends March 24, 2007) would be much appreciated. If you haven't already, you may want to load Outriggr's assessment script in your monobook.js. If you have any questions, please feel free to post them on my talk page. -- Jreferee 23:13, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Conversion of AFV template to Infobox weapon

When you do these can you put in the requisite parameters even if you don't put the info for them? The recent British tanks have ended up with blank type and origin lines. GraemeLeggett 12:38, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Stalingrad Map

I've managed to find a map of the Stalingrad Pocket in one of my books. Do you want me to scan it and put in on the article?

Climie.ca 16:58, 23 March 2007 (UTC) Cam

Re: WPMILHIST Active Members

Once every few months seems like the best balance of keeping the list updated while not spending too much time fiddling with it. (It's not a particularly important thing in the short term; the main use of it is really to filter out the people who've left Wikipedia since signing up, and that tends to be a long-term thing.)

(For what it's worth, I have a script written that goes through the list checking the editing dates, which is much faster than trying to do it by hand; so I wouldn't suggest doing that unless you're really bored. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 00:44, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Task force banners

I'm just wondering something.

Should the Military History task forces [such as WWII and WWI] have their own banners. if you go to wikiproject Canada, each of their task forces has their own banner. You can check on my user page if you need further info. Would it be possible for the military history task forces [those that aren't also part of a nation wikiproject, such as periods of conflict] to have their own banners?

Climie.ca 18:41, 29 March 2007 (UTC) Cam

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 18:39, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Have a great trip!

I had a question and figured I'd pop in, but I see that you're away, so I'll just {{helpme}} instead. Where are you traveling? Hope you have a great time wherever it is! PaladinWhite 18:12, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back! PaladinWhite 22:56, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Richard O'Connor

Can you pls double-check the assessments at Talk:Richard O'Connor? {{ArticleHistory}} was done manually rather than waiting for GimmeBot; the bot routinely assigns B class to demoted FAs. I've changed them; pls feel free to re-do if incorrect. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:02, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, just wanted to double-check since it was a non-standard closing; will you change it back, or should I? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:26, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

OK, thanks again; sorry for causing you extra work :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:32, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

SatyrBot 05:00, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Biography Spring 2007 Assessment Drive

Thank you for your contributions! -- WikiProject Biography Spring 2007 Assessment Drive 16:43, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For your tireless and endless efforts in assessing biography articles, WikiProject Biography Spring 2007 Assessment Drive hereby awards you The Working Man's Barnstar. 16:43, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		In recognize of your particularly fine contributions in assessing biography articles, WikiProject Biography Spring 2007 Assessment Drive hereby awards you The Original Barnstar.16:43, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Italics v. Quotations for a Short Story

What's the deal with italics v. quotation marks, concerning short stories? I'm looking through a series of them, and most are italicized, but some are quotation-marked - is there a coherent guideline for this somewhere on Wikipedia? I've checked Wikipedia:Manual of Style and more specifically Wikipedia:Manual of Style (titles), and I can't find anything.

Thanks! PaladinWhite 04:03, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Fun stuff

Please don't let him goad you into running afoul of 3RR. :-) Kirill Lokshin 05:09, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Obtaining an author's image

I am trying to start a new page about an author. In the absence of an easily-located public-domain image, would it be inappropriate or against policy to request that the author provide a photo herself?

Thanks so much for all your help! PaladinWhite 01:27, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Kirill-- WikiChevrons With Oak Leaves???

I think that it would be the right thing to do to nominate him man. --Pupster21 Talk To Me Today is my birthday! 12:18, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Editor review

I reviewed you. YechielMan 03:36, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Coordinator work

The centralized bookkeeeping-type tasks tend not to be very time-intensive, overall; I don't mind letting someone else do them if someone wants to, but they're not necessarily something I'm being buried under, for the most part.

What would be extremely helpful—although, admittedly, probably a lot of work for anyone who wants to take this on, so I'm hesitant to try and foist it off on anyone—is if someone could start up a system of going through the member list and notifying (selected) members with an interest in the topic when new peer review, A-Class review, and FAC requests show up. Right now, one of the major weak points in our review structure is that we generally have trouble with getting enough people to participate when we need them (which causes all of these "X review needs attention" messages I'm always leaving around); I suspect that a more personalized system of notifications would be more effective in getting multiple reviewers quickly.

Quite honestly, I'm not entirely sure how much effort it would take to do something like this. Assuming that we average almost one request per day, and that we want to ask at least a dozen people to participate... how much time would that consume? Probably too much for a single person to be doing it all; but if we could set up some way for coordinators to take turns doing this for individual requests, it may be something we could try. Your thoughts would be very appreciated; is this something that might be feasible, or am I getting too grandiose with my plans here? Kirill Lokshin 00:57, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Or a subpage of the coordinator page, perhaps (e.g. Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/Toolbox/Member interests)? But that does seem like an excellent way of making this easier. Kirill Lokshin 01:10, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Yep, we could create a subst:able boilerplate like the ones used for the project-space notifications; that shouldn't be a problem. Please feel free to start compiling this if you have the time and inclination; you should probably also drop a note on the coordinator talk page so that everyone else can pitch in. I think we'll probably need breakdowns of editors interested in topic areas, countries, and (large) conflicts? Kirill Lokshin 01:23, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Great. Thanks a lot! Kirill Lokshin 01:40, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Just thinking a bit: is it going to be enough to list just the names, or do we want to copy the (relevant bits of) their statement of interest as well? Some people might have fairly specific interests within a broader area, and we probably don't want to be sending them requests that are related only by having a country in common. Or am I overanalyzing this? Kirill Lokshin 04:08, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I've created a set of four boilerplates, to be used identically to the others:

• {{subst:Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/Toolbox/A-Class review personal notice|X}}
• {{subst:Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/Toolbox/FAC personal notice|X}}
• {{subst:Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/Toolbox/FAR personal notice|X}}
• {{subst:Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/Toolbox/Peer review personal notice|X}}

The wording could probably use improvement; please feel free to play around with them. Kirill Lokshin 05:19, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. Great work regardless, though! :-) Kirill Lokshin 18:32, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Frogmen

Hey Carom, I've run across a couple of articles that could use some serious work, and seem to be within your scope of interest. If you don't feel like working on them directly, I trust you'll know of a way to attract some badly-needed attention to them. The articles are Frogman and many of the articles it links to, including Anti-frogman techniques - mostly the problems are with formatting (proseline), but I guess it's never bad to add in additional info, too. PaladinWhite 00:47, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Concerning Holocaust & Genocide

I was hoping that wikipedia may be able to make a section for Holocaust & Genocide as either a project or portal. I thought that it might be part of the Military project of the History section. Looking for assistance with this. Thanks. I would appreciate comments & assistance to be left on my talk page [[1]]. I hope to hear from you soon. Eric Rodrigues.

Response to Genocide

""::A portal would also be useful here, although I would suggest starting with a general "genocide portal." If you need assistance wih creating a portal, there are plenty of experienced portal ceators within WPMILHIST who I'm sure would be willing to help you out. Carom 16:06, 16 April 2007 (UTC)""

I would certainly appreciate any and all help that you could offer on creating a portal for Genocides. I was wondering though what exactly are the differences between a WikiProject and a Portal? I certainly hope that fellow Military History member will want to contribute. Looking forward to hearing from you again. From what it seems, though, a portal sounds best. --EricSRodrigues154 20:03, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Camron, thanks for the definitions. A portal would definetly be better for the begining at least. I think that the most important thing to do first is sent up a centeral location for all genocide artles. After that, a project could be assembled if needed. So, yeah, I definetly want to start a Genocide portal. I think calling it "Genocide Portal" might be better than something like "Wikicide," etc. --EricSRodrigues154 20:26, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Another Question

While in editing mod, is it possible to write key words for the wikisearch engine for a particle article. Sometimes the name of an article is good, but it could be called something else and often people don't find what they are looking for because they assume it doesn't exist. --EricSRodrigues154 20:26, 16 April 2007 (UTC) (I certainly appreciate your help; You've been mst helpful thus far)

Genocide Portal

Might you be willing to create the portal for genocide. I was loking over the 'portal' articles on how to create a portal and it seemed rather confusing. So, I was wondering if you might be able to set the frame work for it. I should be able to go from there.--EricSRodrigues154 20:44, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Having some problems

I've been working on the genocide portal. My issue is, though, that I can't successfully get an article or picture to appear on the page when I want it to. Please help me with that. Thanks. --EricSRodrigues154 23:00, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the infastructure workk with the picts, etc. stuff. Thanks a million. --EricSRodrigues154 23:35, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, now I understand the picture thing, but I am having difficulty with a picture I thought I had added properly. File:450px-Rwanda genocide wanted poster 2-20-03.jpg. On the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Genocide/Selected_picture page its #4. Could you may be delete the file so I could redeclare it. I don't know how to do that. --EricSRodrigues154 23:40, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I was attempting to download it. I found the right address for it though. Check the page out I added to it. The issue know is the sizing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Genocide/Selected_picture --EricSRodrigues154 23:52, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I was wondering how to do that. I certainly will go about it. I was going to ask you about that. Thanks. --EricSRodrigues154 00:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a Million!

You have been a great help with the Genocide portal. I am going to be adding more information to the page over the next few days. So far I only have used one bio, but I have a list of peoples bios that I want to include. I will also be making a master list of all articles dealing with Genocide on WIKIPEDIA.

I was wondering if you might be interested in creating a LOGO for the GENOCIDE portal. Please RSVP me with any ideas you may have for it.

I also intend to add the GENOCIDE portal LOGO, once one has been created, to all the pages that I list in my section. I will also do the same with other related portals where I will be adding our LOGO to other portals under their "RELATED PORTALS" section.

I'd love to hear from you again about all this, especially the logos. Eventually I'll make some drop down lists, though I will need some help with that. Thanks again for the portal help thus far. I'll have to find some medal or something on wikipedia to give you for all this. --EricSRodrigues154 01:57, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Please vote on the Genocide Portal Logos

Follow this link and tell me which of the four Logos you like most to be the new Genocide portal LOGO. Leave your vote in a comment in the "YOUR VOTE" esction on the page and indicate which # is best. Thanks. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Genocide/Things_you_can_do/Logo --EricSRodrigues154 03:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Cool, I'll go with #2. I might change in the future to #3, though. --EricSRodrigues154 04:04, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

upcoming translations

I wanted to inform you that within the next three months there are likely to appear some quality works on archeology in the German wikipedia and I would appreciate your help with translations. It happened that I became part of a seminar (correctly an Übung not a Seminar) in my university where we do have to write several wikipedia articles. Wandalstouring 19:00, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Battle of Lundy's Lane

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent contribution removed content from Battle of Lundy's Lane. Please be more careful when editing articles and do not remove content from Wikipedia without a good reason, which should be specified in the edit summary. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. --24.235.229.208 16:28, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Queenston Heights

Please do not delete content from articles on Wikipedia, as you did to Queenston Heights. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. --24.235.229.208 17:04, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Images

Yep, anything done to a public domain image is still public domain. Kirill Lokshin 18:52, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

working userbox

the userbox that you have [This user is currently working on Battle of Arras]..How did you get that?

Climie.ca 03:31, 27 April 2007 (UTC) Cam

Royal Navy

Are you the maintainer of the Royal Navy Portal? If so, I have done some minor editing. Please tell me if you like it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spacevezon (talk • contribs)

Map request

Carom - let me know the specifics of what you need and the timeframe you are looking at. This looks like an interesting map to put together! :) Rarelibra 19:34, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Cobra Video needs attention

Cobra Video, the article about a gay pornography production studio, has some serious neutral-language issues. As you're a member of WikiProject LGBT studies, I thought I'd give you a heads-up. Cheers! PaladinWhite 22:06, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

difficulties with editing

Carom, something weird has been happening within my editing of Battle of Verrierres Ridge. I've been adding my sources and references, and the first one went along fine. However, when I added in my second not, half of the original article was gone. Do you have any idea what's going on? If you don't know how to assist me, then could you possibly forward this to someone who does? Thanks, and I appreciate the help Climie.ca 23:00, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind, I managed to fix the problem. Sorry for the inconvenience.

Climie.ca 04:53, 29 April 2007 (UTC) Cam

History of a deleted page

Is there any way to view the history of a deleted page? Specifically, I'm wondering about MotherLoad, a viable article six months ago that is now nonexistent. PaladinWhite 01:59, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

In fact, Google's cache of the page seems to have been updated as recently as 2 April, making me wonder even more about where this article went so fast. PaladinWhite 02:01, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

East German Food

Thank-you for that website! I'm fine with the German, too, thanks. ^_^ 82.12.214.93 17:25, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Other Images

Canadian troops rest in a ditch in the vicinity of Arras.

Hi Carom. Just found this image, and thought you might be interested. It's supposedly dated Sept, 1918, but the location is about right, and apparently the Scarpe River is to their left. If you'd like, I'll give you a link to where I found the original. All the best. Esseh 18:41, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Also, you might be interested in an audio of an interview with Sir Georges Vanier, former Governer General of Canada, who was then a Major with the Royal 22e Régiment and was wounded at Arras. The audio, from CBC radio, is here. Esseh 19:46, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

COINCIDENCE

Carom, I've verifeid that the informatoin below is accurate, can you please let it in.

Lincoln was elected in 1860. Kennedy was elected in 1960.

Kennedy's secretary's name was Lincoln. Lincoln's secretary's name was Kennedy.

Both secretaries advised their presidents not to go to the places where they were assassinated. Both men were shot in the presence of their wives. The successor of each president was named Johnson.

Andrew Johnson born in 1808. Lyndon Johnson born in 1908.

Of the two assassins: Booth was born in 1839, Oswald was born in 1939. Booth ran from a theater, Oswald ran into a theater.

Both men were killed before they could be tried. Both were killed on a Friday --67.107.109.102 19:55, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Verrièrres Ridge

Hi Carom, thanks for fixing my link in Verrièrres Ridge. Wasn't sure what 9th it was. (I KNOW the 12th - Kurt Meyer should still be in Dorchester... IMHO). (Oh, and you may want to see my apology on the AfD for Ethnostate.) Esseh 04:43, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, thanks. Niether of us could actually figure out exactly what that was. thanks for clearing that up.

Cam 16:44, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Carom. Cam is on leave, so I wonder if you could help out with a technical problem. Turns out the "Verrierres" in Battle of Verrierres Ridge is really spelled (spelt) "Verrières". We have to lose the 4th "r". (Adding the accent would be a plus, too - unless it screws up searches.) I can make the changes in the body of the article, but the article itself needs to be renamed. Do we do this as a move-and-redirect, or what? Esseh 03:02, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Carom. Most excellent! When I'm through playing e-mail and posting ping-pong with Farbatus over formatting of the Battle of Jutland, I'll get to changing the spelling in the text. Cheers. Esseh 03:22, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XIV (April 2007)

The April 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 13:38, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

Thanks for all your help in getting me accustomed to wikipedia and the wikimarkup. Here's something for all of your help! Thanks again!! Cam

Something totally different...

Hi Carom. If you've got a few seconds free, would you mind having a look at the article on glans. Not exactly military history, but I respect your experience as an editor. I'm having a bit of trouble over there, and have been asking a few folks to look over what's been happening and give me their opinion. Thanks, Esseh 23:16, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Military Wikiproject

Thank you very much for your quick response. I saw the project page, and I am looking forward to joining it very soon. If you don't mind, I may be buggin' you a little bit for more information or help sometime soon. Thanks again! Jmlk17 23:35, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Excellent, thank you again! Jmlk17 23:50, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: Milhist tagging/assessment

Unfortunately, I've been horribly busy for the past few weeks, and haven't had time to finish up preparations for that. Once I start having a reasonable amount of free time again—probably in another week or two—I'll get back to it. Of course, if you (or anyone else you know) wants to have the Perl script I've been using, I'd be happy to let someone else try their hand at it.

If Wandalstouring finds a bot for the category table generation before that, incidentally, this may become a moot point, at least as far as this way of setting up the drive is concerned; but I have no idea how quickly we may be able to get somewhere on that.

As far as the ads go: I've seen them around, and I'm not entirely sure that they're a good idea—I'd expect that people would be irritated by banner ads even if they're for Wikipedia things—but I have no particular objections to a MILHIST one. I have no idea how to go about creating one, though; my graphics skills are not exactly stellar, as you know. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 02:59, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

I am happy of joining this group. I love learning about World war 2. It will be fun. politics rulePolitics rule 19:23, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Navy of The Islamic Republic of Iran

Now you are important in the Military and History project, well there is a problem. Irans active troops are 545,000 from those 545,000 there are 125,000 revolutionary guards and 420,000 regular army soldiers. Those 420,000 are made up of 52,000 airforce personel 350,000 army personel and 18,000 navy personel, add up perfectly to 420,000 so no problem. Iran has got 3,000 marines so I assume they are part of those 18,000 as they are part of the navy but there is this guy VatooVatoo or something that insistis Irans navy has 20,600 and they also have 3,000 marines so it would total 23,600 navy personel and he is putting it everywhere. Now he won't stop changing it back the whole time so I thought I should come to the project and since you sent me my welcome messege I thought I'd contact you. If he is right (wich he probably isn't) I think the total of 545,000 should be changed to 550,600 instead of putting his numbers by the navy but not counting it the total. The Honorable Kermanshahi 18:20, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I read your messege and I'll do it tomorrow. But cluold you tell VatooVatoo to stop changing it back. He found some sources but they had their information from wikipedia and had even copied wikipedia pages so those sources can't really be used. The Honorable Kermanshahi 21:09, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I found reliable resource from CSIS as Kermanshahi said before. You can read Talk:Islamic_Republic_of_Iran_Navy#numbers for resource. Please tell to Kermanshahi first try to find truths. His resources or numbers are old. --VatooVatoo 12:00, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Replied

On my page to keep it all together Roger 05:02, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the help

Now you made me feel bad... I would have posted here for your help instead of {{helpme}}ing, but I figured you might not be around! PaladinWhite 14:41, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Back with another question! Is there a template for an article which focuses only on the human anatomy, but should be expanded to include other organisms? (Mucus is the article I have in mind.) I looked through the list of template messages you linked to and didn't see one that fit the bill. Thanks again! PaladinWhite 00:55, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: Categories and so forth...

In the long run, it could probably be CSD'd; empty categories are a (vaguely worded) criterion. On the other hand, it's probably best not to run around deleting things until we've actually worked out which ones we need. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 15:48, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Warsaw Uprising

Few weeks ago you expressed the will to help update the article; we have begun serious work on this article in the past weekend - feel free to jump on-board; we very much need a native English copyeditor.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  16:48, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for the copy-edit, the article needs all kinds of help. I guess me and Piotrus could cope with the content, but the matters of style and proper English... we leave it up to others.

Anyway, I'm slightly puzzled what to do now. You've copy-edited the lead, while that part has been on my personal to-do list for ages. Would that create a bad impression if I started to expand and rework the lead (possibly destroying much of your work)? //Halibutt 09:19, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Sure, I'll let you know as soon as I'm finished. I'll also ask Piotrus to do the same (we split the work between us two). BTW, are you the mythical uninformed reader by any chance? If so, feel free to add as many {{fact}} tags as you like. Some things are obvious to me, but perhaps should be sourced and such tags really help. Anyway, right now I'm finishing a set of maps for the article, I guess they might be helpful. //Halibutt 13:22, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Could you check the lead now? //Halibutt 14:07, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

More category stuff...

Yes, that's a good idea. What I've been doing is consolidating as much material as possible into the [Foo and WWI] category so that it can later be sorted. (So much material is missing it's rather disheartening.) One problem is that way too many categories only have one or two articles in. I'm inclining towards the view that specialized cross-conflict consistency (ie Fighter aircraft of Australia in World War I/World War II] cannot be achieved very easily (if at all). The same doesn't apply though to really broad categories like [Military of Foo in WWI], [People of Foo] and [Materiel of Foo in WW2]. As for redundant categories, I've put them into [World War I temp] for the time being, which makes it easy to keep an eye on them. Roger 20:38, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for the welcome to the Military History project - I've been editing for a while and thought it was about time I signed up ;) See you around! EyeSerene^TALK 18:47, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

one question

just one question..

In the casualties section of Battle of Arras (1917), it says that the British First Army casualties were 46,000. Does that INCLUDE the Canadian Corps, which I know was, at one point or another, attached to the British First Army? If it doesn't I'll add in the 11,000 Canadian Corps casualties from Vimy Ridge. If it does, I won't modify it at all.

Thanks. Cam 19:02, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

In that case, I'll keep it as it is. If the numbers seem to add up correctly, then they probably do. I'll just double check that (late). If there's a gap of about 11,000 in my sources and the number quoted, then I'll add it in.

Cam 00:32, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Graduation

Thanks for the graduation and the award - it seems particularly meaningful considering my high school graduation is tomorrow. I'm extremely grateful for all the help you've offered, and I can't express how much better of an editor I've become through your efforts. As you mentioned, graduation doesn't mean an end to questions, so I'm sure I'll see you back here again soon enough! PaladinWhite 17:16, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

moving battle of Cambrai

Carom, just curious

Since there is more than one Battle of Cambrai (Battle of Cambrai (1917) and Battle of Cambrai (1918)) page, would it be possible to do like what has been done to Battle of Arras, and have a disambiguation page so that it doesn't automatically redirect to Battle of Cambrai (1917) whenever I type in "Battle of Cambrai"?

Thanks Cam 17:18, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok, that works. Thanks

Cam 02:28, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: Infobox Conversions

As far as I know, all of the conversions can be done at this point; the only proviso is that we don't have an easy table of how the fields should be changed. In at least one case (the Submarine to Ship one), this is non-trivial, as the design of the new infobox is somewhat different from the old one. Kirill Lokshin 19:28, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Portal peer review

Hello, Carom! Since it has been a month since you nominated the World War II Portal for peer review, I hope you received good feedback on how the portal could be improved. If you would like, you could keep the portal listed at the portal peer review for more suggestions for improvement and ask the Wikipedians here for feedback. Also, if you think the portal is ready, you could nominate the portal for featured status. Either way, I hope you've received helpful reviews! Cheers, [sd] 13:33, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Messines Ridge

Carom, I'm just finishing a huge book by Leon Wolff on the Battle of Passchendale. As soon as I'm done, I'll give you a hand with Battle of Messines. Cam 03:45, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Help!

I'm still new to Wikipedia and I need help editing my user page. First off, how do you put up user boxes like the ones you have? And how do you insert pictures into your page? One last thing: what is the format used to write an article? If you have any other tips that you would like for me to know, that would be greatly appreciated too! Thanks.

RC93 23:27, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

congrats

Congratulations on the Battle of Arras (1917) finally becoming a GA Class Article. A lot of work has been put into it, and it's a well earned rating. Congrats, you deserve it.

Cam 17:02, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

YechielMan's RFA

Thank you for participating in either of my unsuccessful requests for adminship. Although the experience was frustrating, it showed me some mistakes I was making, and I hope to learn from those mistakes.

Please take a few minutes to read User:YechielMan/Other stuff/RFA review and advise me how to proceed. Best regards. YechielMan 21:44, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Gnome Week

Hey, thanks for the heads-up! I'm going to be insanely busy, but I'm addicted to Wikipedia, so I'm sure it will receive its fair share of my time during that week. The project does indeed look interesting, and I think it will go hand-in-hand with my recent application and acceptance for use of the Auto Wiki Browser (now if I can just figure out how to operate all the functions it offers).

I'm glad you brought it to my attention. PaladinWhite 01:00, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

WWI divisions

If it was down to me, I'd go for your first choice (Category:United States divisions of World War I) Brevity and all that ... Roger 08:21, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I've moved a few too ... Good luck with the rest! Roger 17:16, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Battle of Arras

I'm aiming to sort a map for this. It depends how much time I have free this week as I'm off to France on Friday am for the weekend. Roger 17:16, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I guessed as much Roger 18:16, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered on 16:00, 6 June 2007 (UTC). SatyrBot 15:59, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Wow, thanks for welcoming me. I've been using wiki for a while now, but i have just become a wikipedian about 4mths ago. Thanks andrewrox424 ^Bleep 06:27, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

The Environmental Barnstar

		The Environmental Barnstar
		I award The Environmental Barnstar for your help on assessing WikiProject Environment articles. OhanaUnitedTalk page 12:56, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Userpage question

I wandered over to your userpage after you so kindly reviewed my Mary Martha Sherwood page. Perhaps you can answer a question I have long had: I would like to make my "Awards" section small and "horizontal" (it is currently a "vertical gallery" of sorts). Do you know how to do this? Using <small></small> has not made it any smaller and I have no idea how to make it "horizontal," if you know what I mean. Any help on this would be appreciated. Thanks. Awadewit | talk 15:15, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

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 14:30, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Displaying a category without categorizing

Hey, how has everything been? Life has been crazy for me, but I've been back to Wikipedia in a big way the past few days.

Got another question for you: You showed me how to display a link to a template instead of the template itself using "tl|"; how do I display a category without categorizing the page? PaladinWhite 23:14, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

A favor

Hey, can I ask a favor? It seems to me that there are too many cleanup templates floating around, so I created a proposal to cut things down a bit; would you mind taking a look at it when you have a few minutes, and posting any comments you have? I'd really appreciate it. PaladinWhite 14:45, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

I appreciated the help with the title on BUFFALO HUMP! I have written and posted four new articles which fall in the military history purview: Buffalo hump about the real life Comanche war chief who led the Great Raid of 1840 which was in revenge for the Council House Fight and included the Battle of Plum Creek. You will get a laugh out of this. My grandson had to do a project for American History on the Texas Republic (which we need a separate page for, I think) and found to his dismay that there were no wikipedia articles on many of the famous battles, and events in military history. I decided to rectify that, and am doing so. If you get a chance, please review them, and let me know what you think! I worked about six weeks getting ready, reading exhaustively!old windy bear 23:37, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

my RFA

Thank you for supporting my RFA. I hope I will live up to your expectation. Let me know if you need any help, or I make any mistake. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 23:51, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

copyediting

Hi Carom, do you have some time to copyedit the following short series of articles, written by oldwindybear, on the Comanche wars and the Republic of Texas: Buffalo Hump, Council House Fight, Great Raid of 1840, Battle of Plum Creek and Battle of Pease River Greetings Wandalstouring 19:21, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

ad

This WP:MILHIST ad created by User:Miranda. :⇒ SWATJester ^{Denny Crane.} 16:11, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Re World War I template

Ok no problem ;) It justseemed me disturbing to have a template ofr WWII and not for WWI. So I tried to put the template on WWI article for 2 days to see if there were any reaction, and like there was none i added the template.

I'm removing them ;)

PS (However a template still seems me better for readers than a link to the portal ^^ --Mrpouetpouet 21:41, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Yep it would be quite interesting to have a discussion with editors about including or not the template.

I perfectly agree with the "no template" arguments. However a solution to the oppositions 1 and 3 is quite easy to found. The "1" because most of major topic about WWI (on which I inclued the template) are no more stub (except 1) and can consequently support the template without major problems. The "3" can be resolved by two different way; we can add "collapsed" to the template and thus it would be only seen by readers who want to. We can also reduce the number of links or rise the number of columns or even reduce the numbers of participants shown on the template.

Yes the template is large but not much larger than "War on Terror" or "WWII" templates. If they have a template why not WWI ?

Some arguments in favour of the template are the followings:

• It gives to every readers a very useful and intersting way to naviguate between the major topics on WWI. (Which is, I think, one of the main advantages of Eng. Wikipedia is the high numbers of template wich allows the readers to read read and read articles for hours when they just want to see one ^_^)
• It regroups the main article about one precise subject, which is also quite useful to the reader who doesn't have to look up in wikipedia to look for the link.
• A Template gives the subject a kind of "respect" from readers and "editors". As soon as a subject owns an as complete template as WWI it becomes much more considered (It's unfait and often unmerited but it's like that :o). There is no reason of WWII being more important than WWI.

The choice to add a link to the portal instead of a template was fully justified but now it's time to give the subject its rights back. WWI is a major event of history and a major article of each encyclopedia. For me it's time to add it a useful, impressive and beautiful template (which implys we'll have to modify it soon)

However the second "against" argument remains a problem. But WWI is not a so discussed subject. Facts are facts. And with editors as clever as you I don't doubt we'll find a consensus very easily about what should and shouldn't be integrate into the template (the present one is not so bad considering this aspect).

Whatever your choice and editors'one I also added the link to the portal to each article which didn't have it yet.

(PS Excuse my very bad english but it's 2 am for me and I'm sleeping on my keyboard) I wish you could understand most of my ideas ^^

--Mrpouetpouet 00:15, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I think there are two ways of looking at this:

On the one hand, navigational templates are certainly a good thing, in general. When properly used, they are a valuable complement to categories and in-text links for readers to use.

On the other hand, though, a well-designed navigational template needs to be more than a grab-bag of vaguely related topics. The real issue with {{World War I}}, in its current incarnation, is not that WWI doesn't need associated navigational templates; but, rather, that insisting on having a single navigational template for everything isn't the optimal solution. There are issues with both focus and size in the template itself, obviously; but, beyond that, forcing every link to appear on every article makes for far less intuitive navigation than placing only (somewhat) related links would.

Consider, however, a more sophisticated approach: create several (stackable, ideally; see {{WPMILHIST Infobox style}}) navigational templates instead of one large (and visually unwieldy) one. We would, for example, have a template (or several templates) for the timeline elements (e.g. {{Campaignbox World War I}}, a template for the countries, a template for the related conflicts, a template for the (many) treaties ending the war, and so forth. A core article (e.g. World War I) might have all of these; but a more lower-level one (such as an individual battle, or some particular treaty) could feature only a subset, to create a more focused set of navigational links.

(It's worth noting, incidentally, that the plan was to deprecate the WWII template as well; it's just that the WWII portal wasn't ready at the time, so this part of the process got shelved, apparently indefinitely.) Kirill 01:12, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

The idea of a more sophisticated approach is appealing, although it would be a fair amount of work (?) and require a coordinated approach. I'll try my hand at creating some basic templates somewhere in one of my sandboxes.

(Incidentally, I dropped the ball on the WWII template/portal conversion, although the WWII portal could is theoretecially ready for "deployment"). Carom 01:26, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

It wouldn't be that much initial work, I think; we could create most of the templates just by pulling columns from the main one and sticking them into the proper shell. The bulk of it would be propagating these into the articles; but that doesn't need to be done on any particular schedule. Kirill 01:30, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough - is this the kind of thing you had in mind? Carom 01:36, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I was thinking of using the normal MILHIST styling, so that we could stack all of these as needed; see the second variant I added to the page. Kirill 16:13, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

OK, that works as well. I take it you mean stacking on the right, with the existing campaignboxes, as opposed to at the bottom, with the non-military nav templates? Carom 16:44, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Yep, that's what I had in mind. Most of these articles are going to have a lot of "miltiary" templates (or, more precisely, a lot of templates that we can style like this without too much trouble ;-), so I don't think it's going to be a problem.

(As an aside, it may be a good idea to convert the campaignboxes to use the collapsing layout as well, once this gets adopted a bit. They are navigational templates, technically, and allowing them to auto-collapse will help with the stacking at the top of articles.) Kirill 16:48, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Excellent. Do you think this should be brought up for discussion on the project page at some point? Carom 16:52, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Assuming there are no obvious problems with the design that you can spot, we can probably go ahead and do that. Do you want to bring it up, or should I? Kirill 16:53, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

By all means, go ahead and bring it up. Carom 17:00, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok, done. Kirill 17:18, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Hi Carom. Thank you for your support and kind words in my RfA, which passed with 95 support, 1 oppose, and 1 neutral !votes. It means a lot to me to have your individual support and the collective support of so many others. I truly will strive to carry myself at a level representing the trust bestowed in me as I use the mop to address the never-ending drips of discontent in need of caretaker assistance. Jreferee (Talk) 07:51, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

interesting

Carom, you might find this interesting.

• Im currently in Europe; and (three days ago), I was in Arras. While there, I discovered that the tunnels used for the Battle of Arras (1917) are currently being refurbished, and it is hoped that they will be open to the public by May 2008. Just thought you might find that interesting....If you have not already by the time I get back, I will add it to the page.

Cam 19:18, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered on 16:00, 6 July 2007 (UTC).

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 13:29, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Cannon

I thought you might be interested that Cannon is up for A-class review, considering that you supported its nomination the last time around. Thanks for looking. --Grimhelm 22:00, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Imperial German Divisions

Thanks for the welcome. I note that you had created several of the Imperial German army unit pages and also commented on my suggestions regarding naming conventions. Please have a look at two revised pages where I added additional information: 1st Division (German Empire) and 2nd Division (German Empire). I don't know whether the "stub" designation can come off, since there's still a lot of information that could be added. What I added was basically a short 3-4 paragraph unit history and additional OOBs for the Franco-Prussian War and World War I, plus the infobox. Regards, Airbornelawyer 04:45, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Follow Up

Hi, would you mind taking a look at my follow-up question about Primal Fear on the July 6 Entertainment Help / Reference Desk? Thanks. I would appreciate any input. (JosephASpadaro 19:46, 12 July 2007 (UTC))

Arras map

Schematic of the battlefield at 05:00 on 9 April 1917

Not forgotten and underway. I hope to post something here in a day or two. ROGER ^TALK 15:40, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

This is proving to be a bit of a bugger - getting the balance right between geographical detail and military detail - but I'll have something finalish for discussion tomorrow or Wednesday probably. ROGER ^TALK 10:53, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Here, yar. ROGER ^TALK 16:13, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind comments. (It was inspired by the Paris bus map but don't tell anyone as that's a bit twee for MILHIST.) I think your placement idea is fine. If and when I get the energy, and if you think it's worth it, I'll edit it to create a second map showing gains. ROGER ^TALK 16:26, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks very much. The only outstanding thing, I think, is a sub-section to sit alongside the British preliminaries discussing the development of the defence in depth. I now have a good source. I'll do this ASAP but I have guests coming on sunday for a week and then a week after that I'm off to Provence for a month.ROGER ^TALK 16:53, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Listed, huh? Fine! Course I'll help field comments. Anyhow, let's wait and see what happens and remember (if it goes wrong) WP is basically only a bulletin board! ROGER ^TALK 16:56, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

PS. Did you mean to leave the uncaptioned? If not, I'll do it. ROGER ^TALK 16:59, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Done. (And thanks again for the compliments.) ROGER ^TALK 17:13, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Portal:British Armed Forces proposal

I am informing you that I have created a portal for the British Army. I am informing you of this because you are a major contributor to Portal:Royal Navy - and I was wondering if you wanted to help in in uniting the three British armed forces portals under one. They will all have their seperate portal but there will be an armed forces portal that hs tabs to the three portals and vice versa. If you want to help, and you want more details, tell me on my talk page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jhfireboy (talk • contribs) 20:14, 13 July 2007.

With the naming convention, that is a good idea. Can you please help me finish off Portal:British Army before we create the overall portal? Jhfireboy Talk 23:15, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the idea, but, unfortunately, I do not know how to do it. Would you be willing to do it for me, please? Jhfireboy Talk 22:47, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Ammendment

I went ahead and expanded the comment I left in the first section. I don't no if it will help any at this point, but I tried to adress the rfa issue that have come up. TomStar81 (Talk) 05:39, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for your support in my unsuccessful RfA. I appreciate the trust you and the WP community have in me; however, this time around things just didn't work out. TomStar81 (Talk) 21:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Arras FAC

Citations: I'll deal. --ROGER ^TALK 16:27, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

How to fix it

To keep your monobook.js out of Category:Unassessed biography articles replace:

assessmentMyTemplateCode = ["{{WPMILHIST|class=|importance=}}", "{{WPBiography|class=|importance=}}"];

with:

assessmentMyTemplateCode = ["{{WPMILHIST|class=|importance=}}", "{"+"{WPBiography|class=|importance=}}"];

Hope this helped; for any questions drop a note on my talk page. Psychless 17:17, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

project banners

Hiya. It would seem that your subpage User:Carom/monobook.js is coming up as being in the category of Unassessed-class WPMILHIST articles. I guess it's not a big deal, but it might be a good idea to try to not have user pages and subpages on that list. Cheers. LordAmeth 23:14, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 24 July, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Frederick Barton Maurice, 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.

--Yomangani^talk 15:57, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

copyediting

Hi Carom

I think there is a pretty good start on Auxiliaries (Roman military) that could do with some help in copyediting.

Greetings Wandalstouring 11:28, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

Thank you very much indeed. I greatly appreciate that. --ROGER ^TALK 06:00, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Next co-production

It might be fun to tackle another WWI article together. If so, one that's related somehow to Arras would mean that we wouldn't have to start from entirely from scratch with references and background. Obvious candidates are: Nivelle Offensive, Battle of Vimy Ridge or Second Battle of the Aisne though I'd be glad to hear of your suggestions if you think it's a good idea. For your information, an excellent new book has come out on Vimy Ridge (Vimy Ridge: A Canadian Reassessment, Hayes et all. 2007 Wilfrid Laurier University Press. ISBN 978-0889205086) which would provide sound and impeccably researched underpinning. As I think I mentioned, I'm away for a month from next Wednesday but I'll have plenty of time for reading. Your thoughts would be welcome. --ROGER ^TALK 06:00, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

PING! (replied chez-moi). --ROGER ^TALK 06:39, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Incidentally, can you do me a favour while I'm away and keep an eye on my pages for vandalism, reverting if necessary? --ROGER ^TALK 18:03, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Mostly silly stuff from kids. I've CSD'd a fair amount of stuff lately and you never know ... A month is a long time. --ROGER ^TALK 18:30, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: Query

In some sense, it's a wider topic than Ruthven, and could warrant its own article. As a practical matter, though, this will leave Ruthven's biography as a rump remnant of an article, since there seems little to discuss beyond the conspiracy; so, in the interests of having a high-quality article, it may be better to keep the two topics combined. Kirill 15:45, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Not a problem; I'll take care of it. Good luck with your move! Kirill 23:10, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the barnstar! I appreciate it! Awadewit | talk 19:03, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

		Thank you
		Thank you for your support of my recent unsuccsessful rfa, which concluded today with a final tally of 22/15/3. The comments and suggestions from this rfa, combined with the comments left during my first rfa, have given me a good idea of where I need improvement. —TomStar81 (Talk) 05:05, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

		My RFA
		User:TenPoundHammer and his romp of Wikipedia-editing otters thank you for participating in Hammer's failed request for adminship, and for the helpful tips given to Hammer for his and his otters' next run at gaining the key. Also, Hammer has talked to the otters, and from now on they promise not to leave fish guts and clamshells on the Articles for Deletion pages anymore. Ten Pound Hammer • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 16:54, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

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! Kirill 02:44, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Elections, other things

The list looks like a good start. Two things jump out, though:

• The "Type" column is fairly cryptic. To a certain extent this is just due to the lack of a key, but I would actually go further and suggest writing out the type explicitly (mainly for the benefit of our visually impaired readers).
• I'd avoid abbreviations in the "Commanders" column; it's more reader-friendly to either write the rank out or omit it entirely.

As you said, though, my experience with lists is very limited. :-) Kirill 01:45, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 15 August, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Walter Braithwaite, 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.

--Carabinieri 19:05, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

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 09:13, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Ask if you have any questions!

Thanks for your comments on the article Captain class frigate, I've added some footnotes to the History and Naming section, is this what you meant by inline citations? I'd like to know I'm doing the right thing before I go any further. Thefrood 06:38, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the new review, have you any suggestions on what I should be doing to further improve the rating? Thefrood 00:20, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Promotion to General on Portal:British Army

I would like to "promote" you to General on Portal:British Army (effectively a lead contributor). If you would like to accept just add yourself to the list found on Portal:British Army/Things You Can Do. Jhfireboy Talk 23:16, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Taking your advise on board: I have modified the layout to be a Lead Co-ordinator (myself) and two Co-ordinators and then general users. I would like you to become a Co-ordinator. This does not require a lot, just an occasional check to see that the Portal is fitting up to expectationsm as I plan to submit it for review by Wednesday 29th August but i need help in achieving this goal. I know you have had experience in portals from your creation of Portal:Royal Navy and I would like this experience and expertise passed on to Portal:British Army. Jhfireboy Talk 14:10, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Can I help?

Hi, through a "what links here" button I stumbled across your userpage User:Carom/Sandbox/4. I assume you are preparing this for an eventual appearance as an article and I was wondering if I could help out? I have recently been creating a string of articles on British general officers of the First World War and saw several on the list which are unlinked, I can link them up if you'd like?--Jackyd101 00:18, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes I noticed you'd done Bulfin a few days ago, he was on my to do list. We should have some way of checking them off, I guess this list might be a good way to do it. Over the last few months I've created articles on Samuel Lomax, George Thesiger, Thompson Capper, John Capper, Hurdis Ravenshaw & Hubert Hamilton (as well as Edgar William Cox, Cecil Rawling & Lionel Sadleir-Jackson, none of whom commanded a division). I'll get to work linking your divisions list soon, and nice work, keep it up. I also get what you mean about sandboxes, I had five on the go at once earlier this month working on something for WP:SPORTS. Its the most convenient way of creating a new article slowly.--Jackyd101 11:04, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 25 August, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Edward Bulfin, 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.

--Carabinieri 03:21, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Coordinator election

This is to inform you that you have been re-elected to serve another term as a coordinator of the Military history WikiProject. Congratulations! Kirill 00:25, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Congrats!

Assistant Cooridinator of the Military History Wikiproject, August 2007 — February 2008

Congrats on your election as an assistant coordinator. In honor of your achievement, I present you with these stars. I wish you luck in the coming term. TomStar81 (Talk) 00:59, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Help with identification

Hi, I'm writing because you have touched bases on the article I started on Ali Pasha Sherif a while back, and I could use some assistance. In essence, everything on this fellow I have researched is about his history as a horse breeder, but the articles I used suggest that he had some significant influence in the Egyptian government of the mid-1800s. Problem is, the horse breeding histories are vague (one said he was the "president of the Chamber of Commerce" for crying out loud!) the titles and claims of his fame conflict, people confuse titles and honorifics with names, and in short, I can't find his father's name on the list of Governors of Damascus, which he supposedly was, I can't find Ali Pasha Sherif on the list of Foreign Ministers of Egypt (which allegedly he was) and basically, while the fellow obviously had money and political power from somewhere, my sources are neither definitive nor helpful. For all I know there is another wikipedia article on this fellow under a different name. Can you skim the article for me and let me know (on the talk page would be fine) if this fellow or his father, El Sayed Mohammed, went under other names and titles? Or edit to correct information? My stake in this is that the fellow was a significant breeder of Arabian horses, worth a study for that reason alone, but I also want the article itself to be an accurate biography of the whole person. Help! Help!! Montanabw^(talk) 05:21, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Redwall Portal

Hey, thanks for visiting our little project! I'm definitely interested in creating a portal, but I've never done anything of the sort before. I don't really know much about coding, admittedly, so I'd appreciate any help you can provide about the technical aspects of building one. Drop me a line on my talk page, or on AIM, if you've got it. Thanks again! GlassCobra (talk • contribs) 02:26, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

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 09:09, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered on 16:00, 6 July 2007 (UTC).

WPMILHIST Elections

Thank you for your support. It was much appreciated. --ROGER DAVIES ^TALK 16:36, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Vimy Ridge

Still interested? I've been wiki-gnoming heavily over the last few days in the assessment drive (to earn my keep as an assistant whatnot) but the urge to return to the trenches is upon me again. :) Good summer, I hope, and thanks for keeping an eye on my pages. --ROGER DAVIES ^TALK 16:55, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm glad you're still interested. :))) --ROGER DAVIES ^TALK 16:36, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Royal Navy piece

Do you fancy slipping a little cooperative projectette into your busy schedule? There's a start class article on Jackie Fisher, 1st Baron Fisher which would be easy to get up to FA. As you know, he's the man that got the fleet into shape for WWI. Interesting charismatic man, loads of material, no maps required. There's a The Times obituary that contains lots of useful information. I already have two biographies. Tempted? Afterthought, do you have access to The Times Digital archive (many American libraries do)?

Good luck with your studies.

--ROGER DAVIES ^TALK 16:36, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

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 09:08, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered on 17:31, 11 October 2007 (UTC).

Albigensian Crusade

Having discussed the withdrawal of GA with LuciferMorgan, I give notice that I am sitting down with the three classic original source texts (Puylaurens, Vaux-de-Cernay and de Tudèle - the last in the Livre de Poche edition as the Martin-Chabot is long out of print) to add the missing inline citations to this page. I do not intend at this point to make any textual alterations, but if comments are made which are NOT justified, be prepared to state your sources now. Jel 17:21, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

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 13:37, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered on 12:00, 1 November 2007 (UTC).

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 01:08, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered on 20:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC). SatyrBot 20:57, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

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) 22:26, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Possible edit warring on project article

There seems to be some issues going on over on the article : Military history of African Americans, in particularly in the section Military history of African Americans#Confederate States Army. Could you take a look at the article's edit history as well as the discussion, Talk:Military history of African Americans, and possibly give some input? Thanks. Sf46 (talk) 23:56, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered sometime in January 2008 (UTC). SatyrBot (talk) 23:22, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

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! TomStar81 (Talk) 02:09, 1 February 2008 (UTC)