User talk:Cuprum17/Archive2012
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Cuprum17. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Picture of the Point Class
I myself know hardly anything of the US Coast Guard, but I have a few old pictures and pictures from friends due to my years in the Cadet Corps travelling to America and making friends so if I find any more I will upload them. From Chay Pearson
Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited USCGC Point Herron (WPB-82318), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Babylon, New York (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:43, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Military Historian of the Year
Nominations for the "Military Historian of the Year" for 2011 are now open. If you would like to nominate an editor for this award, please do so here. Voting will open on 22 January and run for seven days. Thanks! On behalf of the coordinators, Nick-D (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:53, 15 January 2012 (UTC) You were sent this message because you are a listed as a member of the Military history WikiProject.
January 2012 Newsletter for WikiProject United States and supported projects
The January 2012 issue of the WikiProject United States 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.
--Kumi-Taskbot (talk) 18:52, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited USCGC Point Roberts (WPB-82332), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Japanese Navy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:13, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXX, January 2012
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:51, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
Point class cutters
Please note that the correct category for United States Coast Guard point class cutters is Category:Point class cutters, not "USCG Point Class Cutter". Also, please be aware that you need to unhide the category declarations (i.e. remove the <!-- and --> around them) when you move a page from your sandbox into articlespace; it ends up creating a lot of unnecessary work for other people if your pages show up on the uncategorized articles list because you haven't unhidden the categories. Thanks. Bearcat (talk) 23:33, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
- Thought I had changed the title of that category. I will watch this in the future. Will also unhide declarations. Thank you for your guidance. Cuprum17 (talk) 00:57, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Ahoy, it's a Coastie!
... 23 skiddoo, mateys, toss those bottles over the side! Any input on an old rumrunner, the Malahat (schooner)? Seems like the USCG side of this should get a mention. Djembayz (talk) 22:38, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited USCGC Seneca (1908), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Curtis Bay (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:36, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited USCGC Seneca (1908), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages St. Vincent and Derelict (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:31, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXI, February 2012
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 09:40, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited USCGC Point Lomas (WPB-82321), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tan My (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:39, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
TUSC token
I am now proud owner of a TUSC account
5f0e818073897a86ee90adea1663c0f6
The Bugle: Issue LXXII, March 2012
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:06, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
Overly precise ships' names
Re: US Coast Guard history.
No one who wants to read exciting sea stories needs to be constantly reminded that a ship called the Comanche in 1943 is probably not the same as an 1810 Comanche or a 2010 Comanche.
That extra degree of precision, that nitpicking pedantry, gets in the way of what the article is actually about.
If I'm reading about how the Enterprise is launching aircraft to hit the bloody Japs, then I don't need to be reminded that this particular Enterprise is neither a schooner nor a space shuttle.
Right? Varlaam (talk) 04:14, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
- Actually the article History of the United States Coast Guard is an article on the history of the U.S. Coast Guard and hopefully not a group of "sea stories". The Coast Guard has a long and proud history that has as part of its heritage the use of hundreds of ships to complete its missions. Part of Coast Guard tradition is the re-use of many of the names of older ships, often as many as a half a dozen times. Indeed, the mention of the cutter Comanche in the article caused me to do some detailed search for exactly which Comanche was meant. The original USCGC Comanche (WPG-76) was 165 foot patrol craft commissioned in 1934 and decommissioned in 1948. Another instance of Comanche was the ocean-going tug that was originally commissioned by the U.S. Navy in 1944 and acquired by the Coast Guard in 1959 and not decommissioned until 1979. The original USCGC Jackson (WSC-142) was a 125 foot patrol cutter that was sunk during a storm in 1944 while attempting a rescue with the loss of 21 of her crew. Shortly thereafter, the Navy commissioned USS Jackson (PCE(R)-858) as a rescue escort patrol boat for convoy service in the Atlantic Ocean during World War II. With the war over the Navy no longer needed her and transferred her to the Coast Guard. The Coast Guard after the war did not have enough manpower to operate her so she was decommissioned soon thereafter. During the time she was commissioned in Coast Guard service she was the second cutter named USCGC Jackson. The Navy and the Coast Guard often times have the same name for a ship at the same time, being differentiated by the designator USS in the case of the Navy and USCGC in the case of Coast Guard commissioning.
- The follow-on ship type and hull number system used by the Navy and the Coast Guard tells the type of ship that she is and mission she serves. I include this information in the articles both for historical accuracy and also because every sailor that I have known during my career as a Coast Guardsman wants to know what ships that you have served on and where they were as well as the type of duty. When a Coast Guardsman tells another that they were on a WPB the other knows that that person served on a patrol boat. Additionally if he mentioned that he served on WPB-82331, the other would know that it was an 82 foot Point class cutter, in this particular case the USCGC Point Marone (WPB-82331). The ship type and hull number are used by historians to specify exactly which ship is being referred to and I use them to insure that the reader knows that. There are literally thousands of ships that have been commissioned in the service of the United States by the Navy and Coast Guard, as well as the U.S. Army and others. Almost any well written military article in Wikipedia uses these identifiers in the first instance of referring to a particular ship. I see no reason to change that.
- When I began editing the article "History of the United States Coast Guard", many of the cutters referred to in the article were already using the identifiers; others were not because of differences in the editors for several sections. In the interest of accuracy and a uniform look to the article I began editing the ship names to a uniform look. Every editor on Wikipedia has a different philosophy about how an article should appear and there is no one right answer. You have your opinion and I have mine. I take umbrage at your use of the phrase "nitpicking pedantry". If you have a criticism of my editing style then as the more experienced editor you should be able to explain my editing faults without resorting to the use of pejoratives. My motives in the editing of the article were to improve its accuracy. If you do not like what I have done to the article, you may; as any editor may; change it to suit you. I will be working on Wikipedia in the future as I have in the past to improve articles relating to the Coast Guard and may in the future do more editing on the article in question. I will do so as time allows and always with the idea of improving the article so that the reader will get an accurate history of the service that the Coast Guard has provided to the United States.
- Thank you for your interest and your edits to the article "History of the United States Coast Guard". Cheers Cuprum17 (talk) 20:01, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
MI 66 Brigade
Re: "Undid revision 487155896 by 79.225.26.4 (talk)revert edit: two soldiers out on the brigade does not support meaning of sentence."
Thats fine too. Will leave citation request open though. Maybe someone can bring in a public source which lists qualifications without names. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.225.30.51 (talk) 15:16, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
- The statement in the article that says "Soldiers of the 66th Military Intelligence Brigade hold qualifications in military intelligence, counter-intelligence and also partly military and/or civilian academic degrees." means to me that all soldiers in the brigade have qualifications in military intelligence/counter-intelligence/military academic degrees(what ever that is)/civilian academic degrees. This I find hard to believe, and I will explain why:
- Not all personnel in the brigade have military intelligence MOS. There are support personnel that do not possess or have a need to have MI qualifications. Supply and other logistics personnel don't have training in MI.
- Not all personnel trained in MI have or require as a part of the brigade TO&E, counter-intelligence skills.
- I would be willing to bet that not all brigade personnel have advanced degrees (post-secondary).
- To support the statement with a reference it would require published third party statistics about the educational qualifications of all brigade personnel that are reasonably available to Wikipedia users. I doubt that there is a source.
- I will leave the sentence stand with a {{Citation needed}} tag for a reasonable length of time and if there is not a citation supporting the statement after that time, I will remove the statement.
- I thank you for your interest in the article, but you must follow Wikipedia guidelines when editing. I am a former sergeant in the 1st Military Intelligence Battalion during its assignment in Vietnam and i maintain an interest in military intelligence to this day. Cuprum17 (talk) 17:14, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXIII, April 2012
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:56, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Upcoming Wikimedia events in Missouri and Kansas!
You're invited to 3 exciting events Wikipedians are planning in your region this June—a tour and meetup at the National Archives in Kansas City, and Wiknics in Wichita and St. Louis:
|
 |
|
And two local editions of the Great American Wiknic, the "picnic anyone can edit." Come meet (and geek out with, if you want) your local Wikipedians in a laid-back atmosphere:
|
 |
Message delivered by Dominic·t 19:40, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXIV, May 2012
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 14:32, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
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 Nettrom (talk), 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 (talk) 17:06, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
Your article has been moved to AfC space
Hi! I would like to inform you that the Articles for Creation submission which was previously located here: User:Cuprum17/USCGC Bitt (WYTL-65613) has been moved to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/USCGC Bitt (WYTL-65613), this move was made automatically and doesn't affect your article. Your draft is waiting for a review by an experienced editor, if you have any questions please ask on our Help Desk! Have a nice day. ArticlesForCreationBot (talk) 17:07, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
Mil:Hist Assessment
Hello
Sorry about the delay normally requests do get answered within two-three days but there are exceptions when editors are busy.
- USCGC Point Ledge (WPB-82334) is B
- USCGC Catenary (WYTL-65606) is stiil a stub
Just a little note: In future can you make sure there is a military history template on the article's talk page before going to military history requests for assessment as most of the time there are editors going around filling in the blank requests alot quicker than the requests for assessment sub-page can answer them.
Gavbadger (talk) 15:32, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
- I will make sure in the future that I include a copy of the MILHIST template. It would be helpful if there were a copy of the template somewhere that I could paste to the talk page of the article. I have seen several versions on articles that I have reviewed, but don't know which version is the preferred one. Thank you for your suggestion and help. Cuprum17 (talk) 16:10, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
- Just add this { {WPMILHIST} } (without the spaces) and it should get assessed and the parameters added like for which country and what period the article in related to.
If you assessing another
- { {WPMILHIST|class=B|B1=y|B2=y|B3=y|B4=y|B5=y} } it should remotely look like this or
- { {MILHIST|class=start
- | B1 Referencing and citations = y/n
- | B2 Coverage and accuracy = y/n
- | B3 Structure = y/n
- | B4 Grammar and style = y/n
- | B5 Supporting materials = y/n
- |Maritime=yes|US=yes} }
(without the spaces and bullet points)
Gavbadger (talk) 16:28, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you, you've very helpful and are going a long way toward restoring my faith in the goodness of fellow MILHIST Project editors. Cheers Cuprum17 (talk) 16:58, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
- Hi, i have just noticed the template i gave you actually doesn't work, sorry about that. The correct one is below
{ {MILHIST|class=B | B1 = y | B2 = y | B3 = y | B4 = y | B5 = y} }
(go into the code view before copying and remove the spaces at the ends of the template) !
17:11, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
- done, and thanks! Cuprum17 (talk) 17:49, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
USCGC Catenary
Please don't feel like there is a 'Cabal' or otherwise just looking after their own. The truth is WP is a massive place and assessment of articles can be squeezed sometime into limited time. I'd personally advise you expand the article a bit more if you're interested in it, and then I'd be happy to do you a detailed assessment. Please also feel free to ask me for help at any time. Cheers Buckshot06 (talk) 21:56, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you also for your efforts at History of the United States Coast Guard, and I'll take a look at 66th Military Intelligence Brigade. Buckshot06 (talk) 21:58, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
- I've expanded the article as far as my references will allow. See my comment on the article talk page. Look at the article history before I started editing the article and then look at the present article...both are currently rated as a stub article. Why waste time beating a dead horse? No one has even bothered to rate it as Start.
- If MILHIST would award someone awards for the number of MILHIST articles reviewed COMPETENTLY then maybe editors would feel they could devote more time to review work. I will be the first to admit that I don't do as much review work as I probably should, but my WP time is rather limited as it is and I would rather research and write articles than review material that my knowledge is limited.
- Personally, I would rather write one or two really well written articles a month than a bunch of poorly written articles with few references. That makes me a loser when it comes to the Contest each month on MILHIST because a months effort on my part might garner 10 points and 6th place in points ratings. Why even bother to enter...what is the point? Why have a contest when a member of the "Cabal" wins the contest each and every month. They tend to fast track each others reviews and don't seem to have the time to review anyone elses work except to slap a rating on it and not tell you what you could do to IMPROVE your work. I have been a part of the project, albeit, on the edges of it for 4 years and I know how it works. I know that not all MILHIST editors work that way but some do. I really do appreciate your offer of help and if you are sincere, then please take a look at this Sandbox article which I have worked on for well over a year and tell me where it needs improvement. Keep in mind that it is not finished in a few areas. My goal is to finish it sometime in the next month and move on to something else related to the Naval History of the Vietnam War.Cuprum17 (talk) 22:36, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
- 66th Military Intelligence Brigade isn't my doings. I have made extensive edits there to keep unreferenced material out of the article...don't blame the poor condition of that article on me. Still interested on your opinion of my Sandbox article if you have the time to look at it and offer suggestions...Thanks. Cuprum17 (talk) 22:41, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
- G'day Cuprum, regarding the Catenary article, I've made a couple of tweaks on it. Please take a look and feel free to adjust/tweak/revert as you feel necessary. I hope that it helps somewhat. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:05, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
- Just seen your comments. I was not blaiming you for the 66th, I was saying I would get in the face of others who claimed that every soldier had MI qualifications and a degree from the National Defense University (yes, I'm exaggerating). Coast Guard Squadron 1? Mainspace it immediately. It's too good to be left in userspace, and in mainspace other people can help you with it. Add it to Category:Units and organizations of the United States Coast Guard. I should note that the convention with U.S. Navy squadrons seems to be numerals rather than spelled out (COGARDRON 1 rather than COGARDRON ONE) which is why I've redlinked the '1' version. To be honest, I never worry about contests; I worry about an FA every couple of years (and that one has the makings of one!) Cheers Buckshot06 (talk) 02:16, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
- Well, when we get it figured out, we can add it to Delhi class destroyer and the associated ship articles. Buckshot06 (talk) 02:21, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
- How many AFCs and userspace drafts have you got, exactly? They need to be expanded a bit, if Bitt is any guide, but then stop running them through AFC and just start creating them on your own (WP:BOLD) Buckshot06 (talk) 02:26, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
- G'day Cuprum, regarding the Catenary article, I've made a couple of tweaks on it. Please take a look and feel free to adjust/tweak/revert as you feel necessary. I hope that it helps somewhat. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:05, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
- 66th Military Intelligence Brigade isn't my doings. I have made extensive edits there to keep unreferenced material out of the article...don't blame the poor condition of that article on me. Still interested on your opinion of my Sandbox article if you have the time to look at it and offer suggestions...Thanks. Cuprum17 (talk) 22:41, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
The Coast Guard uses the squadron name spelled out in every reference that I can find...Coast Guard Squadron One or COGARDRONONE in message traffic. I used the AFC that one time to see how the process would work... all of the cutters at Point class cutter in the box at the bottom of the article that aren't redlinks are my articles except two and they were developed in User:Cuprum17/Point class project space and moved to the mainspace when they were complete. All but one is B class and it was a C Class, don't ask me why...I didn't see any difference it it from the others. Cuprum17 (talk) 02:45, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
- Because somebody different assessed them. Honestly, please, don't get hung up over assessments; you can easily self-assess them if you wish (I do sometimes, and I systematically go with the lower of the two options so as to attract more interest in improving them). If you've never seen a reference to 'Coast Guard Squadron 1' then go with the One version. Cheers Buckshot06 (talk) 04:55, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
Sorry if I offended you
I would like to apologize for not leaving comments on USCGC Catenary (WYTL-65606). I didn't know that you wanted feedback for the edits you made on the article. I did notice the changes you made and think that you made considerable progress on a sector of maritime history that is neglected on Wikipedia. If you want feedback on an article recently assessed I would ask the person who assessed it feedback. If they do not leave any you can always ask me or request on the MILHIST assessment page. Much Ado --MOLEY (talk) 04:58, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
- I must have gotten up on the wrong side of the bed yesterday...bad coffee, etc. When the assessment for USCGC Catenary (WYTL-65606) was unchanged after I had added a infobox and a reference or two plus some copy edit, it just didn't sit right with me...I melted down; over-reacted if you will. I just didn't understand how something I had worked on that much could not change the assessment to at least a Start. I've stirred up too much trouble already. Thank you for your kind reply... Cuprum17 (talk) 14:26, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
GOCE July 2012 Copy Edit Drive
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:47, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/USCGC Bitt (WYTL-65613).
- To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the
- Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! avs5221(talk|contrib) 11:03, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
Well, what ever I do, It's going to have to wait a while so that I can finish the Squadron One article. Right now even that is going to have to wait for a while while I take care of some personal business. Hopefully I can get back on it next week. Thanks for your advice and I will probably work on a class article for the 65foot WYTL's and the use that as an excuse to fill in the blanks in the class. Probably ought to fill in the blanks on my 82 foot Point class cutters first though. That could take a while, no faster than I compose and write...he, he. Cuprum17 (talk) 22:20, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXVI, July 2012
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 09:12, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 19
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
- Integrated Deepwater System Program (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Department of Justice
- USCGC Point Baker (WPB-82342) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Department of Justice
- USCGC Point Judith (WPB-82345) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Santa Rosa Island
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 03:39, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited USCGC Point Franklin (WPB-82350), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cape Charles (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:09, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXVII, August 2012
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:45, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 3
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited USCGC Point Steele (WPB-82359), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Haitian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:19, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
Congratulations
|
The Writer's Barnstar | |
| For placing second in the August 2012 Military history WikiProject Contest with 60 points from 11 entries, I am delighted to present you with The Writer's Barnstar. Well done! --Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:25, 28 August 2012 (UTC) |
- Thank you, it is an honor and the first barnstar that I have ever received. Cuprum17 (talk) 18:00, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
Vivian Vance and the Halseys
A person who is from a town that has a category, isn't also put in the County parent category. Today I created[1] a People from Independence, Kansas category. Anybody who had been in the People from Montgomery County, Kansas category who had either been born or raised in Independence, had the category changed in their article....William 01:21, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
- Well, I guess one learns something new every day. I failed to see the sub-category. My bad. Thank you for your interest in Independence, Kansas, my hometown. Do you plan to do the same thing for Coffeyville, Kansas also? Cheers! Cuprum17 (talk) 03:52, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
- Yes I'm going to do Coffeyville. There should be in the high teens to low twenties in the amount of people from there when I'm done at least. When I fill up a town category, I also google search 'Born in so and so, so and so wikipedia'. So and so being the town and state. I also check baseball reference. Those searches found me 8 more people either born in Independence or Montgomery County to the ones already categorized. With Coffeyville I'm sure I'll find a couple of more at least.
- Of course when I get Coffeyville done, Category 'People from Montgomery County, Kansas', won't have many entries left. Look at 'People from Topeka, Kansas' and 'People from Shawnee County, Kansas' for an example of what I mean about not being in both the category and subcategory.
- Other Kansas towns for me to do- Parsons, Leavenworth, Fort Scott, and Garden City. A People from these towns category would I estimate respectively to have 10, 12-15, 15, and 20. If you know any Kansas towns or cities that don't have a category but if they did, there would be 10 or so entries, let me know.
- The rule is a town needs 4 or more entries to have a category unless the town is in multiple counties. Take Sabetha, Kansas for example. It is in both Brown and Nemaha County, so there is a Category 'People from Sabetha, Kansas' despite it only having two entries. Personally I don't start a category for a one county town unless I think I can get around 10 entries in at least. In fact, if I find one-county town categories with 3 or less entries, I nominate them for merging. Like here[2]. The consensus is as I say before, a town needs 4 or more for its own category. Cheers!...William 11:07, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
- FYI, I just did a 'People from Fort Scott, Kansas' category[3]. I'll do Coffeyville next....William 14:57, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
Military history coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject has started its 2012 project coordinator election process, where we will select a team of coordinators to organize the project over the coming year. If you would like to be considered as a candidate, please submit your nomination by 14 September. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact one of the current coordinators on their talk page. This message was delivered here because you are a member of the Military history WikiProject. – Military history coordinators (about the project • what coordinators do) 08:51, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Original Barnstar |
| For your fantastic articles, this barnstar! And with it, the autopatrolled user-right. Keep up the good work :). Ironholds (talk) 12:15, 27 September 2012 (UTC) |
- No problem! Thanks for all your contributions so far :). Ironholds (talk) 19:25, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
HMCS Fredericton (K245)
I have resolved the issues that you cited in August with this article. In addition I have restructured the citations to include specific page numbers in the book references. Can you reassess for B-class? Thanks. Atrian (talk) 00:28, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
- Done..."B" Class. I tweeked some of the ship link formatting. Good job, and thanks for following this up. Cuprum17 (talk) 18:43, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks. In your opinion, what would it take to move this article to a higher ranking? Other than a formal peer review process, I don't see much difference between B-class and A-class. Atrian (talk) 17:21, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
- The crieria for A-class is somewhat tighter, but for a well researched and sourced article it shouldn't be a problem provided the grammar and punctuation are correct. Put the article in a MILHIST A-Class review and if there is a problem, I guarantee that someone will find it for you. Sometimes the things pointed out in a peer review are somewhat nitpicky, but are still relevant to the process of good article production. I would suggest taking an article that is in the process of being reviewed and following the comments and reponses made the reviewer and editor. That is a learning experience in itself and will help you understand the process more fully. It takes more time and patience than I have so I don't do articles above B-class as a rule. I have one article that is probably close to A-class work, but don't have the time to do the little tweeks that it would take to pass a review, so it stays B-Class until either I have time to work on it or someone else decides to take the ball and run with it. Your article appears to cover the subject very well and has good style and layout. Make sure your referencing will stand a thorough inspection. Keep up the good work and good luck...I will follow your progress and jump in with advice if I feel it will help rather than muddy the situation... Cheers! Cuprum17 (talk) 18:26, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for the advice. One of the online references has gone dark so I will have to look for alternative sources before submitting it for review. Atrian (talk) 23:52, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
- The crieria for A-class is somewhat tighter, but for a well researched and sourced article it shouldn't be a problem provided the grammar and punctuation are correct. Put the article in a MILHIST A-Class review and if there is a problem, I guarantee that someone will find it for you. Sometimes the things pointed out in a peer review are somewhat nitpicky, but are still relevant to the process of good article production. I would suggest taking an article that is in the process of being reviewed and following the comments and reponses made the reviewer and editor. That is a learning experience in itself and will help you understand the process more fully. It takes more time and patience than I have so I don't do articles above B-class as a rule. I have one article that is probably close to A-class work, but don't have the time to do the little tweeks that it would take to pass a review, so it stays B-Class until either I have time to work on it or someone else decides to take the ball and run with it. Your article appears to cover the subject very well and has good style and layout. Make sure your referencing will stand a thorough inspection. Keep up the good work and good luck...I will follow your progress and jump in with advice if I feel it will help rather than muddy the situation... Cheers! Cuprum17 (talk) 18:26, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks. In your opinion, what would it take to move this article to a higher ranking? Other than a formal peer review process, I don't see much difference between B-class and A-class. Atrian (talk) 17:21, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXVIII, September 2012
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project and/or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Nick-D (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:30, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXIX, October 2012
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Nick-D (talk) and Ian Rose (talk) 02:24, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
Greetings;
I have progressed quite a bit at Burke's article. When you have a moment, I would appreciate your review. Buster40004 Talk 02:08, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
A question for you: I need clarification on Wikipedia:External links#What can normally be linked. I have been able to locate only one image of John Burke, and it is a copy written image at: [4]. Direct link to image:[5]. The caption reads: John Burke on May 10th 1944 at position 50°50'N 130°127'W north west of Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada. Owned by U.S.Department of Commerce and operated by Northland Transportation Co.under WSA Service Agreement Form GAA (General Agent Agreement).
![[5]](http://newgallery.usmaritimecommission.de/emergency0601/mce0609_john_burke/b0609a_john_burke_01_fag.jpg){kind=link}
Can I link to the page, or image, or can it be uploaded under fair use? Buster40004 Talk 15:57, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
- I think you would be safe to use the first image under a fair-use arrangement. The original photo was taken by the Canadian Armed Forces and was in the pubic domain because of that reason. In Canada, all photographs taken before 1949 are in the public domain anyway. See Wikipedia:Copyright situations by country#List under Canada. I interpret that to mean that the photo isn't under any copyright convention. I could be wrong. It would be nice to find the original source from the Canadian Forces, but that might be difficult. Upload the photo from [6] to Wikimedia and put a fair use clause on it and see what happens when you use it in an article. If it is wrong the worst that can happen is that someone will contest it and nominate it for deletion. Do not use the link you have given directly in the article.Cuprum17 (talk) 17:23, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
I replaced the generic image of SS John Brown with the image of John Burke. Buster40004 Talk 23:42, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
Welcome Home, Brother
I just noticed this was the first item on your user page. I too am a Vietnam Vet, serving 1968-1969 at a forward support base near Bao Loc, the Lam Dong province capital. We supported the 3/503rd Infantry, 173rd Airborne and several smaller units; MACV Team 38, 5/27 Field Artillery, 92 AHC and an engineering unit from the Idaho National Guard.
Welcome home, Brother!
Buster40004 Talk 21:41, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
- Well, we have something in common! Although I retired from the Coast Guard, I was in the Army from January 1966 to December 1968 serving in Vietnam 26 months from September 1966 to December 1968. I was a photo lab operation specialist (84G20) and served with the 1st Military Intelligence Battalion. at Bien Hoa Airbase about 15 clicks from Siagon. While my job was processing aerial photography taken by Air Force recon aircraft and used by Army units, I did also do aerial reconnaisance photography from Army and Air Force O-1 "Birddog" aircraft, mostly in the III Corps area. I am a life member of the Veterans of Foriegn Wars and a member of the American Legion. I retired from the military as a Chief Petty Officer (E-7) in the U.S. Coast Guard and am a life member of the U.S. Coast Guard Chief Petty Officer's Association. My interest in Vietnam and my Coast Guard career intersected with my authorship of the Wikipedia article Coast Guard Squadron One which I wish you would look at when you get a chance.
- Welcome Home, Brother! To you also... Cuprum17 (talk) 22:40, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXX, November 2012
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 01:44, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
| Decemmber 8 - Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle - You're invited | |
|---|---|
 |
|
Merlin O'Neill Article
I noticed that you recently added an expansion/major restructuring tag to the article I created on former U.S. Coast Guard Commandant Merlin O'Neill. If you need any assistance in expanding that article, please feel free to ask me. --TommyBoy (talk) 09:14, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
Come to the First Topeka Meetup, January 15!
Come celebrate Wikipedia Day with other Kansas Wikipedians sponsored by Wikimedians Active in Local Regions in the United States (WALRUS) and hosted by the Topeka and Shawnee Public Library. Come chat, hang out and enjoy good company while find out more about Wikipedia in our regional community! RSVP at Wikipedia:Meetup/Topeka/Wikipedia_Day.
If you can't come, but still want to find out about events in the greater Topeka region (which may include KC, Manhattan, Lawrence, Salina, or other places where volunteers are interested) sign up for future notifications at Wikipedia:Meetup/Topeka/Invite list.
Hope to see you there Sadads (talk) 20:12, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Teamwork Barnstar |
| For reviewing Conquest of Majorca and making constructive suggestions for its improvement. EagerToddler39 (talk) 20:55, 20 December 2012 (UTC) |
The Bugle: Issue LXXXI, December 2012
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:25, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Good catch...
...here. I see these things all the time, and I can only wonder what I was thinking about when I typed them in. Or why I just don't copy and paste ;) Thanks! Parsecboy (talk) 20:37, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
ACWTF Barnstar
|
The American Civil War Barnstar | |
| For your assistance with Monticello Artillery and 8th Arkansas Field Battery Thanks! Aleutian06 (talk) 20:06, 29 December 2012 (UTC) |
- Thank you, anytime you want to straighten out the Kansas units that were in the Civil War you are more than welcome. I'm impressed with what you have done with the Arkansas units that I have seen. Cuprum17 (talk) 21:51, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks!Aleutian06 (talk) 02:17, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Not a sailor?
Chief Copper:
Please enlighten me.
According to both Wikipedia and Merriam-Webster, the word sailor describes (and has long described) a mariner or seafarer, especially one other than an officer.
Still, though, do US Coast Guardsmen prefer not to be called sailors?
[Incidentally, one might wonder how soon the new-age revisionists will demand to substitute the invented term Guardperson or Guardsperson!]
What was your rating during your service in the USCG?
BTW, I'm, among other things, a former Naval officer, a submariner forever (Once a submariner, always a submariner!), and a retired professor of business law.
My opening question above represents a sincere attempt to learn – not to quarrel or quibble.
Smiles!
DocRushing (talk) 20:09, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
- Well, the members of the Coast Guard are kind of the red-headed step children of the US Armed Forces, they being the only armed service outside the Department of Defense as well as the smallest armed service. We have been called all manner of things, from puddle pirates to muddy water sailors. By direction of our current Commandant, Admiral Papp, the official term for a member of the Coast Guard is "Coast Guardsman" regardless of the gender of the person. This is as it always has been since 1915 and the merger of the United States Revenue Cutter Service with the United States Life-Saving Service. Former Commandant, Admiral Allen attempted to "modernize" the service with the term "Guardian", a non-gender specific term coined to cater to the women who serve in the Guard, but the terminology did not set too well with the experienced "Coasties" of the service; although, a lot of the younger crew seem to think it described them. Admiral Papp reasoned that "hell would freeze over" before the Marine Corps would change the name of "Marine", and we are every bit as proud of our service as any Marine. Former Commandant, Admiral Hamlet described many of my shipmates feelings with his authorship in 1938 of The Creed of the United States Coast Guardsman.
- I suspect that the term Coast Guardsman will change about the same time the term "seaman" is changed to "seaperson" in the Navy or Coast Guard somewhere just before hell freezes over. The Naval Services do have some traditions that should be immutable one should think. Coast Guardsmen are sailors in the general sense and there is nothing wrong with that, but the service identity is best communicated by the term "Coast Guardsman".
- My rating during my service changed from storekeeper to machinery technician. At the time I joined the Coast Guard Reserve there were no billets open for machinery technician and since I had a college degree in accounting, they enlisted me as a storekeeper third class (I had prior service in the Army). Since my civilian job was as a mechanic, and there were damned few advancements being made in the storekeeper rating, I petitioned for a lateral change of rate when the machinery technician rating open up some more billets. I was accepted and advanced steadily to chief machinery technician before retiring at age 60 in 2007. I was 42 when I enlisted and had a twenty year break in service from my service in the Army as a photo laboratory specialist. I spent 26 months of service in Vietnam out of a total enlistment of 36 months and I also served 3 years in the Army Reserve.
- Thank you for your interest in the article Alex Haley and my Coast Guard career, Sir...but remember also, Sir that "once an Chief, always a Chief". And now, after saluting the ensign that is flying aft... "Permission to leave the ship, Sir". (salutes OOD smartly) And after permission is granted I strut down the brow like I own the world and head towards the nearest watering hole....
- Thanks for the discourse, and if I can help in any way, let me know... Cuprum17 (talk) 22:34, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
- Roger. I enjoyed your comments and the material at your links. Heritage is not only cool but also useful and valuable. Once I teased a friend, a CG retiree, by saying, "Coasties are good people; sometimes they even get out of sight of land"; then, predictably, he said something or other about bubbleheads. Life is a hoot! Thanks much. DocRushing (talk) 23:00, 31 December 2012 (UTC)