User talk:Eurocopter/Archive 7

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Eurocopter. 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.

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

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

The March 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:11, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

A-class review of Armia Krajowa

In March you've commented on the Armia Krajowa article, which have eventually passed the A-class review. Since then I have been steadily expanding the article (my goal is to FA it one day), but in recent days a content dispute is threatening to destabilize this article; your comments would be much appreciated here.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 01:45, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Op En TF

Good man! --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 10:00, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

News! Tag & Assess 2008 is coming ...

Milhist's new drive – Tag & Assess 2008 – goes live on April 25 and you are cordially invited to participate. This time, the task is housekeeping. As ever, there are awards galore, plus there's a bit of friendly competition built-in, with a race for bronze, silver and gold wikis! You can sign up, in advance, here. I look forward to seeing you on the drive page! All the best, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 11:10, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

One Stripe (200 articles)
Two Stripes (400 articles)
Three Stripes (600 articles)
Tireless Contributor Barnstar (1000 articles)
Chevrons (2000 articles)
Working Man's Barnstar (3000 articles)
Barnstar of Diligence (4000 articles)
Third place overall
Second place overall
First place overall

i agree

Wow i agree with ut thoughts about Kosovo and Russia. I dislike NATO and US bases in Europe.EZ1234 (talk) 11:10, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

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

The April 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:46, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Erich Hartmann

Hi, I noticed that you closed the A-class review on the Erich Hartmann article. I assume that the consensus was that the article meets the A-class criteria. My question is who updates the Erich Hartmann talk page and elevates the article to A-class status? Thanks so much. MisterBee1966 (talk) 09:07, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

IAR 95

Tigre, I just ran across the IAR 95 page, and wondered if you might be able to improve this in any way, or at least have access to more sources. The Romanian article has more info, but appears to use the same (uncited/non-footnoted) sources. At any rate, I didn't see any edits from you on the page history, so I thought you might be interested in the aircraft if you hadn't seen the page before. Thanks. - BillCJ (talk) 02:06, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

RAF Tempsford

As one of the coordinators of Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/World War II task force, could you lend me some arbitration on a WP:NPOV point here? Many thanks! Neddyseagoon - talk 09:45, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Can you believe that guy?

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Thanks for reverting all that vandalism on my talk page :) Parsecboy (talk) 15:14, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Assessment issues

My bitey comment was left because "Again, it does not meet by far criteria No.1." did not seem to be welcoming to me. It was obvious that the user wasn't aware of the alphabet soup of policy pages we have here, specifically WP:RS and WP:V. A much better response would have been an explanation of why it doesn't meet our criteria. It is easy to forget that some people haven't been around here as long as we have and don't know all the lingo, or even our basic standards. Woody (talk) 17:49, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I saw your reply on the assessment page and it was appreciated. I interpreted your first comment as being bitey and dismissive of the request for help which is why I commented on it. To me, it was obvious that the user was not privy to the WP:EIEIO that we have all become accustomed. My post boiled down to asking for a bit more tact when dealing with the newbies those who request re-assessment and try and help them to understand the culture round here a bit more. Woody (talk) 21:42, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Muzeul militar, Academia militară

Hi! I have a feeling these two will interest you - they're certainly in need of expansion, if you are so inclined. Biruitorul (talk) 22:46, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Cold War

Just thought I'd ask if you were interested in joining the WikiProject. People have their names on it, but aren't very active, as far as I can tell. Of course, I'm guilty of this, too! Hires an editor (talk) 18:08, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

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

The May 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:34, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: Question

I'd guess that the easiest way to go about it would be to put it up for another A-Class review (to consider both questions). Kirill ^(prof) 19:31, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I think it'd be the first re-review (at least since the original set was done when the review process first started). I think we're just going to have to accept that an article going through a review is in an undetermined level on the scale. Kirill ^(prof) 20:47, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Eric Bols

Hi there. I've expanded the lead of Eric Bols if you wouldn't mind seeing if it now comes up to the quality expected of a B-Class article. Cheers! Skinny87 (talk) 18:21, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Charles Symonds

Thanks for the assessment - but I'm slightly curious as to why you've marked it as a no for structure? There's a lead, and sections, what's missing? David Underdown (talk) 11:50, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Aviation Regiments

Thanks for all your hard work on adding the strategic bomber and transport regiments to this page. However one thing you did for readability, at least in my browser, doesn't help; the extra title lines, which display out of line after each section break. Would you mind if I removed them until we figure out how we can line them up properly (I'm sure there are experts round here to help)? Buckshot06(prof) 01:25, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Eurocopter. The precedent for this is List of Wings of the United States Air Force, so I would rather create a List of Aviation Divisions of the Russian Air Force, and an independent squadrons one later on. I think you'll probably find there's a list of divisions of the USAF somewhere, even if only a category. Would you also mind putting a source on that figure for Backfire numbers? Cheers Buckshot06(prof) 10:11, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou Eurocopter but would you mind if I changed the titles? All these formations have lots of lineage to Soviet corps, divisions, and squadrons, so I'd rather have List of Aviation Divisions of the Soviet Air Force, running up to 1992 and then onwards to all the divisions that exist now, and separate pages for corps and squadrons etc exactly on the RAF model, not combined pages. I've got access to masses of information - I'll send you a copy of Feskov et al 2004 if you want to interpret the Russian - and on aircraft numbers, I've got access to all the recent back issues of the Military Balance, plus of course there's globalsecurity.org and others available too. Buckshot06(prof) 21:59, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

No problems with Sov/Rus delineation, but can we separate corps and divisions? What you do there if you keep them together is mix the Air Defence Forces corps, until 1998, with the Air Forces' divisions, which is inaccurate from a historical perspective, not to mention that there may be also Air Forces corps yet to discover (there have been a lot of disbandments, if you check out the pre-92 lists on vad777's site or the old issues of AFM) Buckshot06(prof) 22:59, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Good point. I won't split it immediately, but add a few more before I do so. Cheers Buckshot06(prof) 01:02, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence

Hello. In light of the fact that it is the first book the U.S. government ever went to court to censor before its publication(!), I was hoping you could help improve the The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence article as part of an effort to make it worthy of becoming a featured article candidate? --Loremaster (talk) 14:13, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Maps

Hi Noclador, would it be possible for you to edit maps, therefore make battle maps if I provide you a model and all the informations? I can send you a model through email if you want.. Cheers, --Eurocopter (talk) 12:34, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

if you have the map - and I will insert the military part (troops, movements and so on) it is possible. Designing a map is to much work (and currently there is much to do in my job). let me knwo what maps you have in mind. --noclador (talk) 14:55, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

A-class review of Greco-Persian Wars

You closed this review premature. So far there were comments about what needs to be done to improve the article, but there was not yet a reply by Yannismarou who nominated the article for review. In such cases you should first ask whether there was work in progress before closing the review. Wandalstouring (talk) 10:45, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Please comment on the Cold War montage

The user wanting to add the montage is pretty insistent, and I've added what I can, but another editor adding $.02/€.02 worth of comment would be a good thing. Thanks!

PS Thanks for all your work on the Cold War article. Hires an editor (talk) 14:07, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

May wish to comment

Hi Eurocopter, you may (or may not) wish to comment at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Moreschi#Block_of_Mrg3105. Also, as above, see what you think of my changes at the Russian corps and divisions article. Regards Buckshot06(prof) 04:00, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Would you also mind commenting at the RfC on the Infantry divisions 1917-1957? Be good to get some more input there so we can bring the discussion to a close. Regards Buckshot06(prof) 16:13, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Integration of Stalin into the CW article

Hey Eurocopter, I'm trying (without much success, I'm afraid) to integrate some material from the Stalin article into the "Containment" section. One of the problems is that many of the things in the Stalin article aren't referenced, and another is that while the CW article really does focus a lot on Truman, the Stalin article is a more general focus on world events, taken in a European then Asian context as it relates to the CW. The CW article does not really have much to say about what happened with Asia. I can see how Stalin would have thought himself surrounded...anyway...here's my (minimal) effort: User:Hires_an_editor/CWSandbox. Tell me what you think? Hires an editor (talk) 14:44, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Absolutely! Permission granted. Hires an editor (talk) 15:45, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't blame you on changing your mind. My biggest complaint is that this whole section is way too big in comparison to the rest of the article. And now its grown even bigger to give it more balance. I cut out a few things in my sandbox that I did, and reworded a few things. Maybe I'll have a chance to see it tonight after I get out of work. Hires an editor (talk) 20:42, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't have any access to the works cited in this article at this point. I guess I'll have to invest in a few of these books. Cheers! Hires an editor (talk) 16:52, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and I am glad to see the containment section shrink! It's been a complaint of mine for a while, I just haven't had the energy to pare it down the way I did with the background and post WWII sections. So, thanks for doing this! Hires an editor (talk) 16:54, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Cold War comments FAC

Hi, thanks for completing my comments. I see you have done wonderful things with the article, and I thank you. I don't think I can fully support the article *yet* because of a discussion that has just gotten underway at the talk page. Anyway, the Cold War is a really interesting topic and I am available to help out with anything on the page if you need me. I know a lot about the Cold War period of the mid-to-late 1970s to 1991, so please let me know if you need any assistance. Thanks and best, Happyme22 (talk) 18:05, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Military History Wiki

Dear Eurocopter, you are a member of Wikiproject Military History, and I would like to notify you that a new Wiki has been made for Military History. If you are interested in participating in this project, please follow the following link.http://www.militaryhistorywiki.scribblewiki.com/Main_Page. Cheers, ṜέđṃάяķvюĨїήīṣŢ ^{Drop me a line}_{Review Me!}

Fortifications of Bucharest

Hi - I think this article should be of some interest to you. I could only find one real reference, but if you have more to add (like details of where precisely the forts are, or particulars of their design, or a photo), by all means go ahead and expand. Biruitorul ^Talk 04:53, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Milhist reviews March-May 2008

		The Content Review Medal of Merit
		In recognition of your contribution in improving Military history articles through A-Class and Peer Reviews, during the period March-May 2008, please accept this Content Review Medal of Merit, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 02:10, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Good to see you pop on!

I hope you're having a good vacation! Hires an editor (talk) 13:22, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to the book store today to see what I can find. Should be fun! And yeah, there's a little bit of some edit warring going on with that lead paragraph, and then the "dubious" tag...I sorta worried that it would happen that people would see the FAC and make the article worse, rather than better. I worried that the article will fail in the first effort, and then maybe on the second round we can get there. My son is going away for 3 weeks July 18 (to see his mom, he's 3), so I'll have time during the day before I work to make some bigger contributions to the article. It's hard right now with him interrupting me all the time! :-) I'm glad to see the effort some are putting into the article, but the size has grown over 10 KB! Oh well. Have a good rest of your vacation! :-) Hires an editor (talk) 14:13, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll certainly do my best - have a good time! Biruitorul ^Talk 14:33, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

No finding any books at the book store, so I'll hit the library to see what I can find. Meanwhile, have a look at my CWSandbox to see what I've done with the containment section. I'm about half done, but it's coming along. It will be a major rewrite of what's there now. Let me know what you think. Hires an editor (talk) 04:36, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Welcome back!

Thanks, Eurocopter, it's good to edit here again! ;) First of all, congratulations for all the good articles you wrote. You did a hell of a job, especially in the field of Romanian military history. Kudos to you! Secondly, sorry for not being here to help you guys, but I've been pretty busy lately... and I will be for a couple of years (working and studying at the same time do take a lot of my free time ...) However, I'll try to pop in now and then and give you a hand with any articles you guys think they need a good work-over. It's better that you coordinate this thing because I won't have much time for other issues than editing. Anyway, I'll be glad to help wherever and whenever possible. Thanks again and enjoy your vacation! Mentatus (talk) 07:18, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, Eurocopter, I'll have a look at the Romanian Land Forces article. Cheers, Mentatus (talk) 12:54, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVIII (June 2008)

The June 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:40, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Portal:World War II

Since you are one of the coordinators at the World War II task force, I think you should know that the World War II Portal is now featured. Bewareofdog 21:21, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

List of naval air arm engagments during world war II

Im attempting to create a List of naval air arm engagments during world war on my user page, do u have any good sites that would help me?

Actually I kind of gave up on it, if your still interested reply to this message--EZ1234 (talk) 11:35, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Ro Land Forces

Salut. Am vazut ca ai inceput din nou sa lucrezi la RoLF Structure, si m-am apucat si eu. Uite 5 unitati noi.

3 sunt din Brigada 69 Artilerie Mixta (divzia 4-a). Linkul [1] e din anul 2008, ceea ce inseamna ca desi probabil e planificata transformarea brigazii intr-un regiment, deocamdata brigada 69 e inca brigada.

Batalionul 317 Logistic [2]
Batalionul 315 Artilerie Şimleu Silvaniei
Batalionul 316 Asigurare Date "Guruslău"

De asemenea uite un batalion care a fost in Brigada 1 Logistica iar acum in Brigada 4 LOGISTICA.

Batalionul 43 Transport [3]

La Brigada 61 Vanatori de Munte (Divizia 4) uite un batalion nou.

Batalionul 26 "Avram Iancu" [4]

Dapiks (talk) 14:14, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Cold War FAC

Hey...it seems that the FAC is going down in flames, so I went ahead and rewrote the "Containment" section, and broke it down into two pieces (so far): Europe and Asia. I also tidied up the prose a little bit, too. I'll be working on adding some sub-sections like "Culture and Media" or something like that to each of the sections to answer some of the concerns in the FAC feedback. I'm also going to try to add stuff about espionage and such to each of the sections for the same reason, rather than having a section for espionage. Ugh. I hate how large the article is, but I can't seem to do a whole lot to shrink it down. So it looks like this is still a work in progress. Hires an editor (talk) 01:43, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Michael The Brave link

Eurocopte Tigre, I think it is a shame the "Transylvania" page has no link to Michael The Brave in its history chapter. Romania and Transylvania relations are not properly represented. You were very active in Michael The Brave page, you should do it! I dont think I am Romanio-centrist to ask for Mihai Viteazul being mentioned as part of Transylvanian heritage. You may contact me at gm@balimandira.com Mutumesc! Radu —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.162.168.178 (talk) 09:10, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Battle of the trench

There is some disagreement about citation style. Please write your idea here.--Seyyed(t-c) 02:15, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

SS Czar

Since I don't feel that Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment#Requests for assessment is really the appropriate place to be having an extended discussion, I've started a discussion on SS Czar's talk page in regard to whether or not it is within the scope of WP:MILHIST. — Bellhalla (talk) 22:41, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIX (July 2008)

The July 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:11, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Maps???

Hi Eurocopter tigre, you mentioned something with maps back in June... I'm swamped with work and am unsure if I had already respond you... Anyway - what maps do you need? --noclador (talk) 22:52, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:MLI-84.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:MLI-84.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 14:56, 11 August 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Megapixie (talk) 14:56, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Russian Ground Forces

1. 19th MRD. See List of guards units of Russia - it's not there. My source, Feskov's 'The Soviet Army during the period of Cold War' does not list it as a Guards formation, and the reference in the 2008 War article does not list the full name of the formation. I would guess that it is not a Guards formation.

2. Equipment numbers. IISS and Warfare.ru use different counting rules. IISS Military Balance 2008 lists 23,000 MBT, 250-300 T-90 by the end of 2008, 4500 T-80, 9500 T-72L/M, 3000 T-72, 4000 T-64A/B, 500 T-62, and 1,200 T-55. Then there's 15,140+ BMDs and BMPs, and 9,900 tracked and wheeled APCs. BTR-Ds, MT-LBs are the tracked and BTR 50/60/70/80/90s for the wheeled. So it depends what you count as in store, and in what condition. If you want to change the figures, go ahead, but remember to reference the change properly and remove the old reference totally, otherwise we'll have Warfare.ru numbers appearing to come from the IISS. Cheers Buckshot06(prof) 18:00, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Of course - I totally agree. That 23,000 is total in store and also being used, and should only be understood that way. I doubt now that any T-55s remain in any line units expect perhaps some Bases for Storage of Weapons and Equipment, for example. As I said, feel free to change the numbers, but make sure to change the IISS ref to a warfare.ru ref. Cheers Buckshot06(prof) 17:38, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Personally, I'd stick with the IISS data, maybe adding the context as per my above statements. But do as you wish... Buckshot06(prof) 14:48, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi

Just to say hello to my Russian freind. Greetings from Serbia!:)--Vule91 (talk) 10:01, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry, I am so stupid, I saw Russian userboxes, that one which shows u come from Romania I missed. I cannot belive... But still, we are also "ortodox brothers" :),so Hello my Romanian friend...--Vule91 (talk) 16:45, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Forgot?

You forgot to update the MILHIST templates at Lithuanian–Soviet War and Sejny Uprising with completed B-checklist.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 20:41, 30 August 2008 (UTC)