This is an archive of past discussions with Kirill Lokshin. 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.
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.
Here are some tips to help you get started:
To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).
Kirill, thanks for the welcome, and I hope to contribute!
Old Windy Bear
Thanks for the positive feedback & tidying up my work.If you need help researching, typing etc, I'll gladly do it, (for a minor fee of course...that was a joke...).Spawn Man02:48, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Invitation
Hi there, Kirill! Your name tells me that you might be interested in adding your articles on Russian/Soviet history at Wikipedia:Wikiportal/Russia/New article announcements. Also, check out the Wikipedia:Wikiportal/Russia as a whole. The main page rarely sees any changes, but the New Article Announcement section sees a lot of action. Happy editing! KNewman 04:42, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
Categorisation errors
Ok thanks, that saves me half the problem, anyway :) GeeJo(talk) 23:47, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
Battles and year categories
I see that you have been editing in year categories into a number of American Civil War battles. I believe the intent of whoever set this up was that the campaign categories would be subcategories of the year, not individual battles. For instance, Category:Battles of the Prairie Grove Campaign of the American Civil War is a subcategory of Category:1862. Hal Jespersen16:21, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I was not clear earlier: I believe this is the intent, although it has been very poorly executed and only a few of the campaign categories currently include the year category. But it would be simpler to correct that than to edit the hundreds of battle articles. Hal Jespersen17:40, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Categorization
Thank you for your tireless work on the re-categorization of battle articles. I should remind you that Battles of England does not cover post-Union (1707) articles. Albrecht 18:47, September 3, 2005 (UTC)
I would like to second that - Thank you very much for your work on recategorizing battles. I have been waiting months for some kind of consensus to be reached on this, so that we can finally start editing and altering battle articles... LordAmeth13:33, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Question: On your edit of Category:Battles of Japan, you indicated that this category covers battles starting in the 10th century. I would argue that we should start with the beginning of either the Yamato period (3rd century) or the Nara period (710). What is your logic behind choosing the 10th century? And if we do end up sticking with a later date (710 or the 10th century), then what do you suggest we create as a category for earlier battles? Thanks for your thoughts. LordAmeth00:17, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Flying Elephant
Hello Kirill! Thank you for your kind comments about the additions I made to your Flying Elephant article (which, I might add, was perfectly well written as it was, so I avoided altering the existing text as much as I could). I will certainly follow your suggestion to post the images in WikiCommons - as soon as I figure out how to do so! Given that your knowledge of such an obscure vehicle implies a considerable interest in Great War armour, you may be interested in visiting this site: Landships
Cheers! McTodd22:16, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for the trouble you have taken. Let me congratulate you once more on your tireless efforts. Albrecht 21:34, September 10, 2005 (UTC)
Helping hand:
Just so you know, I have been slapping the
{{WikiProjectBattles}}
on every single battle talk page I can find to help you out a bit on promoting our Wikiproject Battles... As I said earlier, you're doing an awesome job on everything. Our WikiProject Battles members has grown quite a lot recently... So, I'm off to add more of those thingys... Spawn Man05:11, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks
Hi Kirill. Thanks for reverting the anon AOL vandal's attacks on my talk page. I only wish that the idiot would realise that I never see his work unless I go looking for it, thanks to the efforts of good folks like yourself, because he works in the middle of the night my time! -- Arwel13:29, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Seacoast Church Copyright
Hi I am the Communications Pastor at Seacoast Church and placed the age that you reported for copyright violation. I am in charge of web content for the church...
I am new to Wikipedia - how can I get the page back up?
Shawnwood@seacoast.org
Request:
Hi Kirill (Can I call you KillBill Munchkin? Don't ask me why...).
As you may or may not have seen, I have finnally finished the Great Retreat article. Although I have asked around for people to polish it etc, I know that you're the guy (or girl, which I do not know) for the job. As a personal request, would you be able to add some pictures or maps (especially showing the Allie's retreat path) to the article? I want to get it into featured article thingy. I would be forever thankful...
P.S. I like your surrender icon to put in battle boxes...
Awesome awesome awesome!!! The pictures you put on are awesome!! Thanks alot Kirill!! I'll see if anyone else has any maps up their sleeves (not counting people wearing tee shirts). If you need anything done... just ask... Thanks again... Spawn Man04:07, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
As a side note, can you see the two pictures you've put in on the Great Retreat? Because I can't (not just because I'm blind...), it comes up with a little cross in a box... Spawn Man
Well...there aren't going to be any Kingdom of Jerusalem battles that aren't crusade battles, and similarly there aren't going to be many crusade battles that don't involve Jerusalem (for example), aside from the ones that took place later in Europe I guess. Also of course there are a number of battles that involve Jerusalem, Antioch, Edessa, etc, all at the same time. It seems like overcategorization to make a separate category for every state. It is much simpler just to say they are all battles of the crusades. There's never going to be hundreds of articles that will make the category unwieldy, and splitting it up this way in fact makes it less useful since it spreads out the information over many different places. This is a problem with our bizarre category system in the first place, I think. But if some standard has supposedly been created I guess I can't argue with that...it just seems dumb to me. Adam Bishop03:05, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Nah...there are probably less than 10 crusade battle articles that haven't been written yet (that would be worth writing, I mean). Unless we wrote another article for every insignificant battle (and there are many, since they were constantly at war), there would never be more than 3 or 4 in each crusader state subcategory. Adam Bishop05:59, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I was wondering, my talk page is getting longer, & would you, when the time comes of course, be able to archive my talk page? I have, (and probably never will, be able to archive my talk page due to the utter uselessness of myself & some aspects of the wikipedia world. Don't be a stranger, pop into my talk page & drop a line, (perferably a line & tackle so I can go fishing), or visit one of the many new articles. Spawn Man05:14, 30 September 2005 (UTC) P.S. Did you notice 2 of my new article's facts got put on the main page as DYKs? Thanks...[reply]
==Who's RfA== Thank you for supporting my masters RfA. He appreciates your support and comments and looks forward to better serving Wikipedia the best he can. Of course I will be doing all of the real work. He would have responded to you directly, but he is currently out of town, and wanted to thank you asap. Thanks again. --Who's mop?¿? 20:43, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Two of the articles that I have created have been deleted because of so-called copyright issues. See 1 & 2. I find this wrong because, 1, I did not use the source they state, infact I used books & another internet source. 2, Many other people have contributed to the articles. 3, They have been there a long time, & no one has had a problem with it. 4, The person who blocked the articles seems incompetant & foolish, & possibly a past enemy of mine. I think his name is Wikiheak or Wikiphreak. You seem like a knowledgable person, what can I do to get these unblocked, because clearly, I did not copy the info from firstworldwar.com. Sincerly, Spawn Man00:02, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot for helping resolve this issue!! I'm forever in your debt. Please, don't hesitate to ask if you need anything from me. Spawn Man02:18, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Help, again:
Hi Kirill, i know it's a big ask, but could you put my talk page on archive? I got into a bad dispute. Mix that with a bad week, make that year, & it boiled into something bigger. I just want to put it all behind me & start anew. If that's possible, I would be sooo thankful & relieved. Spawn Man12:02, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your support
Thank you very much for your support on my nomination for adminship. Now that I have been made an admin, I will do my best to live up to the truest you and the community have placed in me. If you ever see my doing something you think is incorrect or questionable, or does not live up to the standards that should be expected of an admin, please let me know. DES(talk)15:39, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your support of my RfA
Dear Kirill Lokshin: I just wanted to let you know how much I appreciated your enthusiastic support of my RfA candidacy, and to thank you very much for voting. I promise that I shall do my very best to use my newly-bestowed abilities for the good of the wiki, and never ever for evil. I am truly honoured that yourself, and other Wikipedians, saw fit to entrust me with administrator privileges. Although I don't think we've met in person, I look forward to working with you on Wikipedia in the future. Thank you again, --NicholasTurnbull | (talk)(e-mail)(cabal)00:59, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Warbox
Hey Kirill. I've started an article on WP:WARS, but somehow the warbox is protesting. I have to sign warbox-end twicve, or the other table (with the colours) is also included. I cant find the problem. Any idea? --The Minister of War07:20, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, nice, youve made a portal! You've really been up to a lot the last few days! :-) I also really like the WP:WARS tag, it's beautiful, mes compliments.
Glad you liked the idea to revive the project. My main motivation was that some people might have it on their watch page and regain interest. But if we are to implement this new warbox, we're going to need all the help we can get!
Maybe you're right about the colourscheme. But any alternatives? Any colourschemes which do make sense? Hmmm... --The Minister of War08:27, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Brain teasers/Trivia:
Hi, just sending out a friendly notice stating that I have now got brain teasers on my user page. Will post new questions one day after the older ones have been answered. Thanks, Spawn Man09:10, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
New Engineering Wiki
Engineering Wiki is a wiki entirely dedicated to collecting information about Engineering. I invite you to join this wiki.
How did you know right where to look when I did those joke redirects/renames? You're no stalker, are you?
KJI is so evil he's the Emperor Palpatine of the non-fictional world, more or less. You relate to comparing him with Emperor Palpatine, right?
Also, hurricanes are getting ever stronger every year, and one at least as strong as Katrina is likely to strike NOLA next year, which won't be enough time to upgrade those levees to withstand Category 5 storms. Hence, New Orleans' traffic will soon be replaced by boats and gondolas, much like Venice is today. New Orleans might be renamed New Venice someday soon. I'm merely giving a warning, and hope those engineers upgrade those levees fast.
I also made a hypothesis that if the Korean Peninsula was to reunify under the DPRK Government (lets hope not!), Seoul may be renamed Kim Il-Sung City much like Saigon was renamed Ho Chi Minh City. I plan on joining the Navy once I grow out of my asthma well enough, and may get to fight on or around the Korean Peninsula, to help reunify the Koreas under the ROK Government if a 2nd Korean War were to happen.
Understood. Where do I put conjectures then? Are there other wikis where it's OK to put up conjectures? And you do agree that Kim Jong-il is like Emperor Palpatine in MANY ways, right?
Hardest Questions In The World Section:
Congratulations, you are currently tied 2nd on the scoreboard with 3 correct answers. You are 2 correct answers away from the scoreboard leader. Spawn Man01:02, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your remarks! Yes, I noticed (blush) that there was no clear way to obtain English references. Since I'm a native French speaker this didn't strike me. I now have added English references (some official sites carry translations of official French texts into English). Do you think it's enough? David.Monniaux09:15, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for your support - my bid (as you probably know) went swimmingly. I couldn't have asked for a better one. Thank you very much and I just hope I don't mess up! I don't recall having much interaction with you but that ust makes your vote that little bit more special. --Celestianpowerhablamé12:23, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Spawn Man would like to nominate you to be an administrator. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact Spawn Man to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Kirill Lokshin/Archive 1. If you accept the nomination, you must formally state your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.
Looks like they don't need mustering anyway.... The whole population has come out for support. Just finished watching Hotel Rwanda, very good movie.... Spawn Man04:29, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Kirill. What about creating some template like this called "Battlebox needed". I think it can be very useful in fixing battle articles without battleboxes. - Darwinek17:00, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings. You've recently been involved with working on get articles up to featured status, so I wanted to let you know about a new page, Wikipedia:Bounty board. People have put up monetary bounties for certain articles reaching featured status - if the article makes it, the bounty lister donates the stated amount of money to the Wikimedia Foundation. So you can work on making articles featured, and donate other people's money at the same time. If this sounds interesting, I hope you stop by. – Quadell(talk) (bounties)22:21, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your vote on my RFA
Now that the voting has officially closed, I would like to thank you very much for supporting my candidacy for adminstrator and as of 18:36, 28 October 2005 (UTC) I am an administrator. I will make sure to use the additional power judiciously and I welcome any comments you may have. --Reflex Reaction19:00, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You're a sysop!
Hi, Kirill Lokshin/Archive 1, Congratulations on Becoming a Sysop
Hey there. I'm pleased to let you know that, consensus being reached, you are now an administrator! You've volunteered to do housekeeping duties that normal users sadly cannot participate in. Sysops can't do a lot of stuff: They can't delete pages just like that (except patent nonsense like "aojt9085yu8;3ou"), and they can't protect pages in an edit war they are involved in. But they can delete random junk, ban anonymous vandals, delete pages listed on Votes for deletion (provided there's a consensus) for more than one week, protect pages when asked to, and keep the few protected pages that exist on Wikipedia up to date.
Almost anything you can do can be undone, but please take a look at The Administrators' how-to guide and the Administrators' reading list before you get started (although you should have read that during your candidacy ;). Take a look before experimenting with your powers. Also, please add Administrators' noticeboard to your watchlist, as there are always discussions/requests for admins there. If you have any questions drop me a message at My talk page. Have fun! =Nichalp«Talk»=
No, thank you kirill, you deserve to be an administrator. You have gone un rewarded for far to long, plus you're my friend, so you definitely deserved it!! Spawn Man02:09, 30 October 2005 (UTC) BTW, Can you create a second archive for my talk page some day? Pretty Please?... Bye.[reply]
Hi, the box does look much better now thanks. I'm pretty new to boxes, so I had to make one from a box on another article. I'd wanted to put info on the result of each of the 4 parts to the war.. something like this: User:Astrokey44/cambrai - but I didnt know how to make the result section go across without breaking up. Maybe you know how to do it? Astrokey4413:29, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You are most welcome, my friend and most deserving as well. As for concerns, you'll have to look elsewhere, if anywhere for those:> You managed to get dozens of support votes and no opposition...no small accomplishment that, in these times of increasingly contentious Rfa's. Congrads!--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine)15:10, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Not to be a bother:
But a post of mine keeps being reverted on the talk page: User talk:Prosfilaes, after he called me a self-righteous asshole. The comment isneither rude nor acusing, & the conversation is both on my & his talk page. Could you check it out? He has reverted the comment twice already... Thanks Kirill. If you want, I could do some work on your articles to make up for all my requests; wouldn't want to be a pain. Spawn Man21:49, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Also checked out warbox design. Great, looks like the battlebox design. Mind you I've always liked the battlebox design, so maybe I'm bias?... Thanks again matey potatey, (funny longish way of saying mate), Spawn Man02:16, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed how he doesn't mention that I removed the comment about him the instant after I wrote it, and that he speculated on my personal attributes in his comment. Also, he's continued to post to my talk page. --Prosfilaes04:25, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
And continue to post to my talk page, and this time threatens me with blocking. This is abusive and hostile, and I'm very tired of it.--Prosfilaes00:31, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I did not threaten. If you didn't delete my posts on your talk page you would see that I gave you 3 good chances before I had to get an admin in. Plus I never threatened with blocking!! I was not abusive nor hostile, in fact I have three people who saw the comments that would agree that it was none the bit hostile. If you want this to stop, then stop talking about it! I said I would drop it & let you delete my posts, (if you look at his talkpage history you will see all that I said!!!!). It's one thing to call me an asshole, but never ever call me a liar, because I was never hostile. If you want to continue this conversation, please do so on my talk page, not wasting Kirill's. I did not want to continue this conversation & had let it drop, but you persist in bringing it up! I would stop, because you cannot delete posts on other people's talk pages.... Regards, Spawn Man03:31, 4 November 2005 (UTC) P.S. Sorry Kirill for wasting your talk page space with this as I thought, finished argument...[reply]
Hi Shawn, I'm not sure of the etiquette of adding comments on a talk page. I added the Sun Yat Sen Speech on Pan-asianism and you said it should be moved to WikiQuote. Fine. Perhaps Wikisource would be better. I'm new to wikiworld and don't know how or where. The translation isn't mine, but I would bet its in public domain as it was either the creation of a puppet govt. in 1940 or perhaps in the 1920s.
--Kenmayer22:14, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
That message is from me, Ken Mayer. I don't know how these bizarre talk/discussion pages work. Shawn sent me a message. I clicked on Shawn's name, got Shawn's user page, which says leave a note on Shawn's discussion page.[reply]
At the top of Shawn's discussion page there's a note from Kirill ending "If you have any questions, see the help pages, ask a question at the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome, and good luck!
Kirill Lokshin 03:39, August 17, 2005 (UTC)"
I was just following orders, I didn't know whether Shawnc and Kirill Lokshin are the same person. So my message ended up on Kirill's page. I suggest removing Kirill's greeting from the beginning of Shawn's discussion page.
Hi! Congratulations on becoming an admin! I've made a Template:Infobox British Army regiment to replace the single-use templates currently in use with some regiment articles; however, as I know hardly anything about this type of stuff, my attempt at making the field parameters optional failed. A modular infobox would be preferable. I'm sure what I'm doing wrong is glaringly obvious, so I apologise for my ignorance. Sorry about bothering you with this. SoLando (Talk) 20:00, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thanks for your response. I think only (;-)) Colonel-in-Chief, Colonel-of-the-Regiment, Nicknames, Motto, Anniversaries, Marches, and Alliances need to be optional, as many of these tend to not be filled, or just aren't applicable to a particular regiment. Again, sorry about this and thank you so much for your help. SoLando (Talk) 11:11, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I'm ok with the template being devoid of footnotes - it's what sections are for IMO ;-) Here's a(nother) barnstar for you. Take care. SoLando (Talk) 11:22, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I award Kirill Lokshin a barnstar for his overall contributions, dilligent work in the field of templates and kindness. SoLando
Thank you for your support on my RfA. I will use my new abilities with the common interest in mind. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me.
I see you have an interest in military affairs, and appreciate that you have included two battles which involved my native land, Mysore, in an ongoing project. Can you please include the Anglo-Mysore wars as well? These are historically significant, and were played out on a wider canvas.
I had bunched wars and battles together into one category, from which you created a new one by culling out the two battles for inclusion in your project. This is fine, but I hope you can include the wars in your project - - wishing you every success in that.
Please reply on this page, since I am not as yet a registered user.
Regards,
Anon
Thank you for your kind words!
Actually, the Anglo-Mysore Wars are already part of our project—you'll find the project notice on the article's talk page. Because there are so many countries to work with, however, we haven't had the time to tag all of the categories; thus, Category:Wars of Mysore is missing its notice (which probably suggested to you that we weren't including it). We'll add the notice eventually, but if you'd be willing to help us, you could add {{WikiProject Military history category}} to the category page yourself.
Thank you very much for supporting my rather contentious request for adminship, but now that I've been promoted, I'd like to do a little dance here *DANCES*. If you have any specific issues/problems with me, please feel free to state them on my talk page so that I can work to prevent them in the future, and thanks once again! ALKIVAR™07:33, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for supporting my RfA
I know I've been slow in saying this, but thanks for supporting my request for adminship. It was an honor to be both nominated and approved as an admin. If there is ever any adminish (is that a word :-) things you need help with, please let me know. --Alabamaboy16:31, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Battles of Persia
Yes you are right, I'll sub-categorize them, thnx for reminding. Amir85 11 November 12:43 (UTC)
For many, many reversions and deletions and active involvement at AFD. Ingoolemotalk
Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my userpage. When I looked at your contributions and Special:Log/delete, I saw that you perform many such reversions, have deleted many unworthy pages, and are very active on AFD. For these valuable contributions, I hereby award you the RickK anti-vandalism barnstar. Ingoolemotalk18:37, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for supporting my RfA. It recently closed with final tally of 51/1/2. I sincerely appreciate it and I hope I can live up to your expectations. I will try my best to be a good administrator. If you ever need anything, just let me know. Thanks! -- Psy guy(talk)05:49, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Project Notice
Kirill, just wanted to thank you for always adding the WikiProject Military History banner to my articles; eventually I'll start to remember to do it myself. LordAmeth15:04, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Merci beaucoup
Hi, Kirill! Thanks for your vote of support on my nomination to become an administrator. I passed, and my floor rag has since been bestowed upon me. Please let me know if you need me to help with anything in particular! —BrianSmithson16:12, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Categorization
I'm not very familiar with categorization, but with the help of the links you provided, I'll see what I can do. Thanks for the advice. Roy Al Blue02:57, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I'll work on that. That list should also prove helpful. I'll keep putting in battle stubs, and hopefully I'll get the categories right. Roy Al Blue03:15, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for supporting me for adminship. The RfA passed today. I look forward to working with you to make Wikipedia a better place. --Nlu03:38, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
A featured article! Congrats! I wish I'd had the capacity to work on it with you. Speaking of featured articles, (mysterious pause, even the floorboards creak with anticipation), would you be able to support my submission (Dinosaur) on the Article Improvement Drive page. It's a familiar subject matter for me (as you'll see under my list of created articles) & I have recently reformatted the whole article. Basically it's a pet project of mine. I would love it to become a FA, but fear the somewhat evil, (to put it nicely), Bill Gates will beat it. You're my last hope Obiwan......... Bye Spawn Man03:53, 21 November 2005 (UTC). P.S. Like my post title?[reply]
I am now an administrator and would like to thank you for your support on my RfA. I was very surprised at the number of votes and amount of and kind comments that I gathered. Please don't hesitate to contact me if I mess up in the use of my new powers. --GraemeL(talk)14:40, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Ianblair23's RfA
G'day Kirill,
I would like to thank you for supporting me on my RfA. It closed with the final tally of 57/0/0. I can only hope I can live up to the expectations that this wonderful community of ours demands from each of its administrators. If you ever need anything, please just let me know. Cheers! -- Ianblair23(talk)02:05, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Miborovsky's RfA
Hello there Kirill Lokshin/Archive 1,
Thank you for supporting me on my RfA. It's Thanksgiving Day, too... so once again a big thank you! Have an awesome weekend! (If you celebrate Thanksgiving, that is.) I will do all I can for Wikipedia, to protect it from the alien scum of the universe... I mean, uh, from Willy on Wheels and Wikipedia is Communism!
I'd like to thank you for your support of my RfA, and congratulate you on your recent promotion. As I wrote, I was looking forward to feedback from the community, and I would like to let you know that you should please feel free to leave any further feedback for me you may have for me in the future at my Talk page. Thanks again. Jkelly08:53, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Kirill. I just want to thank you very much for supporting my RfA, and to say also that I hope I'll make a good job of it. I'm supposed to be working on an assignment at the moment, and had delayed thanking people, but I'm finding the new rollback button so easy to use that I'm just keeping Wikipedia open on my browser while working on other things, and I thought I'd like to thank at least a few of my supporters while I'm here. Cheers. AnnH(talk)20:49, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Sean Black RfA
Thank you very much for your support of my RfA. Thanks, in part, to you, I am now an Administrator, and I pledge to use my newfound powers for good rather than evil. Thanks again!--Sean|Black07:30, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the barnstar! I wouldn't mind being awarded some coffee too - well, if I liked the stuff ;-) I can't believe just how many battleboxes there are. The thought of replacing them all is quite daunting - makes swimming with a Great White shark while looking like an extra out a Hammer Horror movie seem palatable! Anyway, thanks again. Take care. SoLando (Talk) 02:54, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks
Hi Kirill,
Thanks for voting to support my RfA. I wasn't expecting an unopposed promotion (I thought I'd hit some die-hard edit-counters at least) and I'm touched by the trust shown in me. I'll try my best to continue to earn that trust. But first, I'll have to work on not sounding like a politician; that last sentence was awful. Oh well. Let me know when I screw something up with the shiny new buttons. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 05:58, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Jesuit College Preparatory School of Dallas
I just went to look at this page and noticed that you had removed much of the material because of copyright violation. I do not know if permission was given to copy material from this page, however, the page it was copied from is not copyrighted itself. Much of the information on this page to be represented correctly must be from a direct school source as it concerns the official policies, history, and philosophies of the school. It may still be a copyright violation (I obviously don't know) some how. Although some information may be copied directly, the majority of it is original in content. I wished I had never nominated this article to be a feautured article if I knew this was going to happen. Having recently joined Wiki, I now am having second thoughts and I am questioning the welcoming community of Wiki; however, I do understand the seriousness of copyright violation. Thank you. (Dustimagic22:30, 3 December 2005 (UTC))[reply]
Thanks for contacting the school regarding this matter. I know a lot of students along with myself have put much time and effort into this page and it would be a shame to see it all go to waste. Hopefully they will say that this material is ok to be copied. I am glad that there are watchdogs like you on Wiki. Thank you again for looking into this article. {Dustimagic22:47, 3 December 2005 (UTC)}[reply]
Thanks!
Now that my RfA is fully and officially completed, I want to thank you for your support. I appreciate your confidence that I can do the job. -- SCZenz18:58, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks!
Now that my RfA is fully and officially completed, I want to thank you for your support. I appreciate your confidence that I can do the job. -- SCZenz18:59, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Mindmatrix scam adminship
I have recently been granted greater access to your systems, and can begin the process of salvaging the sensitive information from my politically unstable land, as I promised. Please accept this loonie as a token of faith that I will conduct myself as required to complete our transaction. Thank you for your support. Mindmatrix20:28, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
RFA for TheParanoidOne
Hello Kirill Lokshin. Thanks for the vote of confidence in my RFA. I have now officially received the badge, so I shall try my best to be a good administrator. Thanks again. --TheParanoidOne21:42, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Cnwb's RfA
Kirill,
Thanks so very much for supporting my Request for Admin. The final result was 38/0/0. I'm looking forward to spending my summer holidays shut away in a darkened room, drinking G&Ts and playing with my new tools ;-) Please accept this Tim Tam as a token of my gratitude. Cnwb22:46, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I just received a thread on my talk page from the IP address 68.126.239.34. He was criticizing me for reverting his edits to George W. Bush. Those edits had been reverted before by another user. In his critical thread, he made the following statement: "Btw im not a newbie either" (68.126.239.34). However, upon looking at his contributions page, I saw that he does not have that many edits listed, and all were made today. This seems to contradict his statement. This sounds somewhat suspicious: do you think that IP may be a sockpuppet? Roy Al Blue02:07, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
That's twice this week that someone has vandalized my personal page. I woinder what I did to encourage that? ANyway, thanks for fixing that.--Mike Selinker16:15, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Although my RfA is not over yet, I figured that since so many people voted before it had been posted, I may as well start thanking people before it wraps up. It'll take me that long to thank everyone who voted anyway! Thank you Kirill, for your support (no, really, I wasn't one already!) - I'll do my best as an admin to make the reality rise to the level of the dream. BD2412T05:11, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'm an admin now!!
Hi, thanks a ton for your support on my rfa - the final tally was 50-0-0. Just saw your Anti-vandalism barnstar and the Janitorial medal apart from one FA. would try to emulate you asap, as imitation is the best form of flattery ;) --Gurubrahma12:04, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Dj Dharma deletion
Dear sir,
Why would you elect this article for speedy deletion. It discusses a factual time line for a disk jockey that influenced the New York City rave scene for 6 years. What makes this less important than anything else?
Regards,
Pablo Idez
Mixed up messages
Hi Kirill, I'm not sure why the two messages were posted on your page, but thank you for informing me and sorry for the mix up. Shawnc23:26, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
My RfA
Kirill, thanks for your support on my RfA. The final count was 46/0/0. I hope I'll live up to your faith in me in my use of the mop and bucket. Please accept this wikithanks as a token of my gratitude ;) --bainer (talk) 23:50, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
hiddenStructure is coded in the main MediaWiki stylesheets. It is still an ugly hack, but it's FAR simpler than the If templates, plus does not burden the servers. After you copy the code into Template:Warbox, could you then move Warbox to Template:Infobox War to keep the name along the same standard as other infoboxs? -- Netoholic@17:17, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I deserately need help. Here's the whats... On the Dinosaur talk page, there's a banner stating that it was a failed FAC. But now I have re nominated it for FA status. But now, the old banner, (stating that it was a failed FAC), gives the link to the new FAC subpage. Can you get the old banner pointing to the old subpage & the new banner pointing to the new subpage? Pleeeeeeeease? Thanks, Spawn Man23:08, 11 December 2005 (UTC) BTW, I noticed you objected to Jesus. You pagan you!! (kidding)... bye...[reply]
Please see that same site to note that Chadbryant is not a victim here. He has engaged in behavior in the past which served no purpose other than to attack and taunt other users; he has abused the Wikipedia definition of Wikipedia:vandalism to replace it with one of his own definition to suit his own nefarious purposes; he has reverted multiple articles simply because the user prior to him was someone he did not like; he has edited talk pages to manipulate the comments of others (or, in many cases, remove them altogether). I guess what I'm saying is, if you've stepped in shit, there's probably a bull or two around who was there to create it. In this case, you may want to check the bottoms of both of your shoes rather than just one. Chattanooga Choo Choo23:53, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Esperanza elections
File:Voting box clipart.gifHi Kirill Lokshin/Archive 1: This is a quick note just to let you know that there's an election under way at Esperanza. If you'd like to become a candidate for Administrator General or the Advisory Council, just add your name hereby 15 December 2005. Voting begins at 12:00UTC on 16 December.
You've received this spam because you signed up for it here. To stop the spam, pop over and remove yourself and you'll never hear from Esperanza again!
Thank youThank you so much for your support of my RfA. The results of the request was 18/0/1. With the help of your support vote, I am now a bona-fide Wikipedia sysop/admin. I pledge to use my newfound powers for the good of Wikipedia and its editors. If you have anything to tell me, dont hesitate to "speak on it"!. --LBMixPro<Speak|on|it!>
one small battle goes to the good guys!
Hey Kirill Lokshin/Archive 1! Thanks for your support on my RfA. The final outcome was (57/4/3), so I am now an administrator.
If you need help, have a question, or just want to chat (or if I get out of line!), please don't hesitate to let me know! Again, thanks! :D
Hey Kirill Lokshin/Archive 1! Thank you very much for your support on my RfA. To my amazement there were no negative or neutral votes and the result was (28/0/0). I am now an administrator so I'll try and do my best in this new position. I'll be happy to answer any comments or requests from you. Thanks one more time, Mihai -talk20:28, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Alhutch's RfA
Dear Kirill Lokshin,
I'm an administrator, and I've got you to thank for it! Thanks to your support, my RfA passed 25/0. Please don't hesitate to contact me if I can help you with anything. See you around the wiki, :-) Alhutch06:05, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
SoLando's RFA
Hi Kirill, thank you for voting in support of my RFA; the result was (28-0-0 ). Thank you for the kind words you said. I hope my admin (super) powers will benefit the Military history project in some strange way. If you see me mess up anywhere, have any concerns, please don't hesitate to tell me! Take care. SoLando (Talk) 09:53, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, just wanted to ask, could you tell us (a few members of the Jesuit student body actively involved in wikipedia (User:Pjones, User:Dustimagic), as well as myself when you get the response from our school? Much appreciated. Polanco21:45, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
News from Esperanza
Hello, fellow Esperanzians! This is just a friendly reminder that elections for Administrator General and two advisory council positions have just begun. Voting will last until Friday, December 30, so make sure you exercise your right to vote! Also, I'm pleased to announce the creation of the Esperanza mailing list. I urge all members to join; see Wikipedia:Esperanza/Contact for more information. All you need to do is email me and I will activate your account. This will be a great way to relax, stay in touch, and hear important announcements. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?)
This message was delivered to all Esperanza members by our acting messenger, Redvers. If you do not wish to receive further messages, please list yourself at WP:ESP/S. Thanks.
My RFA
Thank you for voting for me at my RFA, which closed with a 24/1/1 outcome. I will do my best in the position I now am in. Thanks again, and see you around Wikipedia!
Check your User Page! I have awarded you the Working Man's Barnstar after noticing that you had put up project notice after project notice for all those battle articles. Keep up the good work. Roy Al Blue01:01, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Kirill. Thanks for your support on my recent RFA. The request was successful, with a final tally of 33/0/0. I'm delighted that you decided to support it and I hope that I can live up to your expectations. Leithp(talk)09:46, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
User:SpawnMan
I think the encouraging comments you made on this user's talk page were extremely ill-advised. Whether he's four, fourteen, forty-four, or whatever, if the level of petulance he's displayed in response to my unremarkable comments on the Dinosaur FAC is completely unacceptable behavior. I can't imagine why any reasonable user, no less an administrator, would think his conduct has been anything other than uncivil. The level of civility here is already far too low. Monicasdude01:12, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I hate arguing. I've had a bad day in the real world, & on here. I just wanted to enjoy my FA victory, which I will do. But no, someone has to ruin it... He told me that I should keep track of my objectives. So I asked him if he was calling me retarded. Then he sends me all this bull ^%$@ about how I've offended all the mentally disabled people. And I was like, What the..? Then he calls me an adolescent, the number one pet peeve of mine. I hate people telling other people to do stuff just because their slightly older. Of course I'm annoyed & of course I hate him right now. I have a short fuse & get annoyed easily, especially when I'm under stress. He acts like he had nothing to do with it. I'm pee'd off. I get enough stress in real life! People act as though I don't have stress off here, but do they wonder, maybe I do? No! I thank you for your kind congratulations & consider you a good friend on here, even if you do sympathise with the enemy.... Spawn Man01:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Please help your faithful friend
I've gotten caught in a frustrating bit of unpleasantness over at Spanish Empire. As you may have gathered in the past by the infrequency of my contributions, I simply don't have the time for disputes such as this, where people are detoured from productive activity and stalled in fruitless discussion for the vaguest of reasons. Please do what is necessary. Albrecht04:34, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I will neither let this lapse nor concede the issue. His map is simply and utterly terrible: Europe is all wrong (Habsburg lands are not Spanish lands, for starters), Africa is a joke (Morocco was never under Spanish control), Louisiana reaches up to the Northwest Territories (!!!) and Oregon is an ill-defined blue blob, Portuguese colonies are nowhere to be found; it's neither asynchronous like mine (which, whatever your objections – and they are not necessarily unfounded – is at least a consistent & coherent approach) nor based on any fixed date (his "source" is a 1770 map yet he includes territories that were lost in the 16th and 17th centuries (Jamaica, the United Provinces, etc.) and others that weren't added until the 19th and 20th (southern Argentina, Rio Muni, Western Sahara, etc.).
Enlarge mine and his, and give them a few moments of careful study. This shouldn't even hang in the balance.
If for no other reason, mine should be used because it conforms with the standard "Blank World Map" system (see my comment on the talk page). Please consider these matters carefully and take the necessary action without the slightest delay (and I am sorry to involve you in a private dispute, but I know of no other admins – I have refrained from further reverts only in the interest of civility and sanity). Albrecht03:23, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Ianbrown's RfA
Thanks for voting in my recent RfA. I was overwhelmed at the turnout and comments received.
I'm having a rough time over here, and happened to notice that you had previous dealings with a similiar situation with User:Monicasdude on Dinosaur's FAC, so I thought I would like to ask you for a third opinon on this matter. Kindly reply in my talkpage, and thank you in advance! :)
Thanks for your advice! Yes I also feel that it's something not worth fighting for, but it looks like things are getting uglier. (Monicasdude filed a 3RR aganist Huaiwei). Yes, I will continue to remember WP:CIVIL (and double check my edits just in case). I hate fighting to put fires out. My last FAC wasn't like that. :( - Mailer Diablo16:58, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I think your comments on this matter have been, at best, ill-advised. This is, for the most part, a garden-variety verifiability issue. I believe that unsourced, potentially inaccurate statements in articles should at the very least be toned down so that their accuracy cannot reasonably be disputed. If you believe that this is not consistent with Wikipedia policy, I would be interested in knowing why. With regard to the specific disputes over the FAC article, I think two points ought to be clear: First, nothing can accurately be said to "ensure" future events (or non-events); to say otherwise is inappropriate, if not self-deluding. For a glaring example, compare documents relating to the US space shuttle; bureaucrats may say "ensure," but the real, accurate technical documents talk about risk management and minimization. Moreover, if you were to review the actual references provided for the disputed article (as I've pointed out on a different point on the Mailer diablo talk page), they don't line up well with the disputed language in the article. "Enhance," for example, is the authority's term of choice, not mine; and, as Mailer diablo's last posting on my talk page points out, the system's goal is not 100% incident reduction, but reducing the accident/injury rate to the most cost-effective level. Whether that rate "ensures" safety is a subject, POV interpretation, and not suitable for inclusion in the article as though it were factual. Finally, quite frankly, I believe that as an admin it would have been much more appropriate for you to devote more attention to to user:Huaiwei's conduct, given his conspicuous violations of the applicable civility and personal attacks policies, his undeniable 3RR violation, his unprovoked belligerence, and his sanctioning by ArbComm barely two weeks ago for similarly disruptive behavior. Your response simply encourages repetition of thoroughly unacceptable conduct. Monicasdude22:13, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
my RfA
Thank you!
Kirill Lokshin, thanks for your support on my RFA. I was rather suprised at the overwhelming support I received. Thank you for your confidence in me. I hope that I'll live up to your expectations in the future as well. -- malo(tlk)(cntrbtns)04:27, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
first of all Spain controlled Poland because it was part of the Habsburg empire also! Second you have no right to state his map is better how can you even say that your self if like you say "I don't know about the subject well enough". You have NO RIGHT to talk behind my back and pick sides with people just because they IM you first!
I would like to thank you for your kind support on my RfA. I'll do my best to be a good administrator. If you need anything or if I ever do something I shouldn't have, please, don't hesitate to drop me a line. Izehar16:31, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Adminship
Hi, thanks for supporting my request for adminship. If there's ever something I can help you out with please drop me a note. Happy holidays! Jacoplane16:31, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't worry too much about the first, which, like it or not, is still in use on British Empire topics. But the copy was created only to pollute Talk:Spanish Empire. It needs to drop dead and begin rotting. Albrecht05:30, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The little twerp snuck in a last-minute objection. O, Wikipedia deletion process, this is the reward of your sluggishness! Albrecht04:39, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
HLS BLAIR IS A REAL PERSON, LOOK AT THE IM ADDRES AT THE BATTLE OF TOURS WEBSITE, I ADDED HER AT HER REQUEST
,
HLS BLAIR is a real person, a friend, and a contributer to wikipedia, which, if you monitored the Battle of Tours site, you would know. She asked me to add her to the battle project, which I am doing, and if you wish to check with her, simply im her at her address. You need to check your facts before removing legitimate contributers, and calling me a liar. No offense, but real historians need to be editors, not engineers. Your work is not bad for an amataur -- except for going off half cocked in instances like this -- but as a historian who has literally lived and studied all over the world, I would prefer to see real historians more active in the roles of deciding what is legitimate history. And feel free to answer on my page. OLDWINDYBEAR
I just wanted to thank you for supporting me in my RfA. To tell you the truth, I was surprised by all the support I've gotten. I never saw myself as more than an occasional Wiki-hobbyist.
My wife sends her curses, as Wikipedia will likely suck up more of my time. She jokingly (I think) said she was tempted to log on to Wikipedia just to vote Oppose and let everyone know that she didn't want her husband to be an admin.
Thanks for clearing the peer review issue up with me. Sorry I put the link there - I thought you put requests for peer review there, and then overnight as I thought about it, it became clearer that that wasn't the case. So, thank you!
Would you take a look at this template, and determine if your WikiProject's infobox can replace it? If not, then maybe you could document the template in some fitting way so that people are aware it exists. -- Netoholic@09:34, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for voting for me in the Esperanza elections. I've been appointed to the Advisory Committee, thanks to your show of confidence in me. I'll do my best to make you proud, but please feel free to ask me for help at any time or to give me tips as to what you would like to do. Thanks for being an active member of Esperanza! I'll see you around. Titoxd(?!? - help us)00:50, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Since you moniter the War Portal and happen to be an admin you seem like the best person to ask for this: It seems that an edit war is brewing on the page Iowa class battleship over the inclusion (or lack thereof) of line regarding the Iowa-class in relation to the Japanese Yamato class battleships and the Brittish battleship HMS Vanguard. Looking back over the history for 31 December 2005 I don't see that the three revert rule was broken, but at least four people (myself included) seem to have placed this in the article or taken it out of the article.
I know that an edit war is not allowed here, and I know that more than three reverts can get a user (or users, as the case may be) locked out for 24 hours or worse; therefore I was curious if you could moniter the page and make sure that Wikipolicy is upheld while the other users and I work to resolve this. TomStar8109:03, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think we got the issue resolved; just to be safe I am going to keep an eye on the page for the rest of the week, but for now it looks like all is quite on the western front. TomStar8100:57, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine. But don't ask me to do anything. This is a wiki. You do as little or as much as you want. Tell me about a rule, don't tell me to "keep the three-revert rule in mind". That's tell me to do something, even if it was with a please. You can tell me a rule exists, which i already knew about anyways, but don't tell me to think about it. I'll keep it in mind if I want, or not.
How about doing something about the article. Take a look at the discussion and you will see that the line in question is clearly POV. Why is it admins think they can just go around telling people what to do and they never actually do any editing or discussion. You think you're better than a user. You're not. You are in fact nothing more than user. --MateoP19:27, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You're not a robot, you're a regular user. you can do what you want. This is a wiki. Just don't tell me to do things. --MateoP19:36, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I wanna move article
Interexchange it with redirection page. I could copypaste original article to page that redirect to it, and put a redirect to the old one. The problem is that history and discussion would be gone(it would be left on redirection page). It not much history there and almost no discussion, but anyway. Article was created by me, I started to edit empty link, by the time i realized it should be placed by different name, the article was created. How could it be done? Not a popular article, so not a big deal, but I would love to move it anyway. TestPilot23:35, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've uploaded an image onto wikipedia. It is on my user page, but isn't showing. Is it just me or can neither of us see it? Plus is the licence I put on it suitable? I want to reserve the right to claim it at any point & want to be able to have my name attributed ot it, so like no one can go "This is my photo". Can you please help? I desperately need help... Spawn Man03:38, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Signature
Not important, but you and some other esperanza guys sign up your post in a cool way, with color letter inside. Could you set up wiki to do it automatically for you, or you edit your name by hand every time? In case you could, please explane how or give me idea where to look. I want my name in green in bold. Thank you. TestPilot05:42, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings, Kirill Lokshin! I wanted to sincerely thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed with a final result of 55/14/3. Your support means a lot to me! If you have any questions or input regarding my activities, be they adminly or just a "normal" user's, or if you just want to chat about anything at all, feel free to drop me a line. Cheers! —Nightstallion(?)07:53, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there. As you know, I recently added a bunch of category tags to several talk header templates. I noticed you went though them and adjusted them for spacing. I had checked my edits and didn't think they were affecting anything, but I guess they were. So, I wanted to thank you for fixing my mistakes. Thanks! :-) --DragonHawk15:27, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Deletion
I'm still not satisfied with the photo thingy so could you please just delete the picture of it, (my cat on my user page) so that it no longer appears on wikipedia or anywhere else on related sites. Here's the link I think....
Hi Kirill, as a friend and one of the best admins around IMO, I might need your help on a certain matter. HERE are the dirty details. I really hope it does'nt come down to it though. But SHOULD it happen, it is nice to know I'd have you and Sol and Leithp in my corner this time. Also my apologies for dragging you into this and for not helping out more with the template replacement chores. I've been too busy warring and trying to undo bot vandalism on some of the history articles. SIGH C'est la guerre mon frere...take care :>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine)11:28, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Mr. Lokshin, thank you for writing an excellent comment at the big RfC, and thank you, too for your support of my RfA! I promise to do my very best to be a good and useful admin. If there is any way I can be of service, just ask. My car once broke down in Baltimore. It was awful, loud pop, smoke everywhere. Thanky thanky, Babajobu23:46, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's my pleasure! I'm using wedding thank you notes as my model: individually written, brief but personalized. See you around, thanks again, Babajobu23:58, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Battlebox
If you're working on the battlebox -- could you please NARROW it? It takes up more than half the article width on my 17" screen. Perhaps you have a wider monitor and don't notice the problem. But I think it is a problem when the battlebox overwhelms the text. Zora22:06, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I like 150px templates with smaller text. See the Islam template for an example. The long narrow templates fit much better on the page. Zora22:13, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Destroy!
Could you please delete/destroy these two images? I was still experimenting & would like them destroyed & thrown into mount doom so noone else can see or use them again. I'll ask a couple of people so that it gets done quickly. Thanks again..... Spawn Man01:45, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks for supporting my request for adminiship, I'm sure you'll be glad to know the final result was 92/1/0. I am now an administrator and (as always) if I do anything you have issue with, please talk about it with me. --Alfmelmac08:46, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The final outcome was (80/3/0), so I am now an administrator. I was flattered by the level of support and the comments, so I'm under real pressure not to disappoint, thus if you have any queries, suggestions or problems with any of my actions as an admin then please leave me a note --pgk(talk)10:08, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I saw your changes and they are better for the time being. However, my ultimate goal was to make it so that the previous version could be identified when the template was included therefore making it easy to get diffs with present version. Granted there'd be a lot of old articles that we'd need to find the version it became featured... however, I think it would be invaluable for FARCs. Can you think of a good way to do that? grenグレン13:00, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weird goings ons.....
Hi. May I ask to enlist your help again? You're one of the most informative & knowledgable editors on here, so I wanted to tell you about the strange goings ons on the Dinosaur article, involving the footnotes. If you click on all the footnote links in the section Dinosaur#Notes, you will find that all seems well. All the little, ^ 's go to their appropriate inline number. So if you click on the ^ 's from numbers 1 through to 28, they all go to their appropriate inline number. But when you click on 29's ^ , it goes to the 30th inline ref. If you click on 30's ^ , it goes to 29th ref. 31's ^ goes to 32, 32's ^ goes to 33 & finally 33's ^ goes to 34. I've tried experimenting, but some things I've tried only make it worse! I had the footnotes running perfectly when Dinosaur was on FAC & I was running the show, but ever since this User:WAS 4.250 character started ignoring footnotes, the whole thing's stuffed up!! Please help. I'll ask others too, just incase.... Thanks... Spawn Man01:24, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Your advice needed
hi i have nominated Wikipedia:Peer review/Kargil War/archive1 for a review. Since you contribute a lot towards military related ones, I thought I could ask you to help in improving the article from any angle seen fit. I'm requesting others with similar interests in military/history to do the same to guide the editors in improving it to FA status if possible. Tx and cheers. Idleguy07:31, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Link spam
The user spam multiple articles wit a link to pages on http://www.molecularstation.com . Thouse pages are just a links directory, and in one case page contained short article. One time he made a external link section in a disambiguation page. Could we do something about that? User IP (might be not all) used so far:
69.158.103.191
142.20.136.120
69.158.105.176
69.158.102.23
Articles spammed includes but not limited to:
Transcription (genetics)
Enhancer
Promoter
Mammalian embryogenesis
Stem cell line
Stem cell
Vergina Sun
Bioinformatics
Arabidopsis
Drosophila melanogaster
Caenorhabditis elegans
RNA interference
Small interfering RNA
Peptide mass fingerprinting
DNA
RNA
Protein
Proteomics
Protein microarray
RT-PCR
Complementary DNA
Gene Ontology
DNA microarray
Splicing (genetics)
I tried to remove links, but he will be back soon. —The preceding unsigned comment was added byTestPilot (talk • contribs) .
I am a researcher at a hospital in Canada. Is there a reason you are thinking this is spam? these are great pages I use for my research, and no doubt useful for others as well. All links comply with wikipedia and are informative for the subject.
The final outcome was (70/5/0), so I am now a bureaucrat. I seriously didn't expect so many good comments from everybody and I appreciated the constructive criticism from those that gave it. If you have any queries, suggestions or problems with any of my actions as a bureaucrat then please leave me a note. -- Francs200021:44, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A Spanish fairy came to this page from Spawn Man's, blew some glittering magic Wikilove dust all over Kirill Lokshin, smiled at him, and flew over to Ghost In The Machine's page.
Kirill Lokshin, thank you very much for supporting me during my recent RfA campaign! Thanks to you, I am now an admin. Please drop by if you need anything - I'll be glad to help you. Once again, thanks! --M@thwiz202022:51, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My RfA
Thank you for supporting me on my successful RfA! It passed with a final tally of 40/9/1. If there's anything I can do to help, just ask! Sceptre(Talk)
I confirm it. My name is EddieSegoura and I've been trying to familiarize myself with how wiki works and I do hope to have an RfA nom by the end of April. That will be three months to teach me the thing I need to learn such as spotting vandals, and honing my edit skills -- Eddie11:08, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Just a word of advice from someone who's had to effectively clean up after Eddie since November, that I'm a bit worried that "vandal spotting" may not be the best thing to move forward with at this point in time. If I may be to bold to suggest, I believe Eddie needs more help understanding Wiki policies (WP:AUTO, BIO, NOT etc). NSLE(T+C)01:16, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Toast to The War of the League of Cambrai! Cheers! Hey let's celebrate with a War Of The League Of Cambri Drinking Game! Read the article and each time you see a battle, Have a sip if the side you favor looses, chug if your side wins. Two if it is a decisive win or loss. A sip everytime someone changes sides, a chug if it is Venice. A sip when the Pope or mercenaries are mentioned, chug at the mention of specific types such as Landsknechts, Condottieres or the Swiss. And A hearty Chug when the gallant Gaston de Foix falls (Did you know he was nearly 7 ft tall?!). Fun and informative for the whole (drinking age) family! But I shall have to test it out first...maybe this evening for the sun's not yet over the yardarm;>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine)14:48, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My RfA
I don't have a fancy layout like other new admins, but I just want to thank you for your support at my RfA. It passed 48/3/1, so I have officially been promoted. I hope I won't let you down. If I'm not doing something properly, please tell me. AecisMr. Mojorisin'21:03, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I forgot to congratulate you on the WOTLOC (war on the league......) getting to the main page. I saw it, but I totally forgot to drop by & congratulate you. Now you, me & R.D.H. have had a FA on the main page! Drop by my talk some time.... Spawn Man01:18, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Kirill, you´re right - the article is not "new" - but only last months it is possible to present it somwhere (before it was a stub - and never could be in some PortalPage). I hope you´ll rethink your deletion - cause it is much more interesting than for example: John Crocker. Szalas
Since you asked about it, I'll try to write up some advice on vandal-fighting a bit later this week; if there's anything else I can help you with, feel free to ask. —Kirill Lokshin14:33, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Just so you know, that after a full year long recovery from the tse tse immune defective virus, The Hardest Questions in the World Section is back on my user page!! Don't be too quick to tire the section out too quickly, but make sure you pop round to make sure you get a good score on the leader's board.... Spawn Man04:55, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for support the proper version of the Comparative military ranks of World War II aticle. Unfotunately some participants do not want hear our arguments and continue edit-warring according to their own sence. So I ask you to help to organize an effective dispute resolution that can lead to a decision based on factual material.--Nixer06:08, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I support your idea to place Genelalissimo separately (though there was Generalissimo in Chinese army). Himmler, by the way is not on the top of hierarchy. He placed on the top in this fantastic version. Hitler had the higher SS rank.--Nixer15:01, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I need your help ...again
I Renominated the article WWI for Featured Article Removal, the discussion can be found here. Unfortunatly, this is my first ever post on FARC, so could you check and make sure I didn't screw anything up? TomStar8104:59, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I always thought you should be coordinator, but hoped I might be able to assist. (it doesn't appear it will happen, but thank you for the kind statement!) It isn't just the formal education in history - which I do have, but I felt living all over the world, and being able to read arabic, latin and greek, might help. I also have actually waded through Gibbons entire long version of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, and Nowich's really excellent triology on Bzyantium and the Eastern Empire. I have been either traveling or studying history all my adult life. Even after my crippling, it didn't stop my traveling till relatively recently. Do you know the most eerie place I ever stood? My father and I travled to Ain Jalut (the Spring of Goliath) where the Mongols were decisively defeated on September 3, 1260. Kirill, I swear you could feel something special had happened there, i know it sounds silly, but when the desert winds blew in -- you could FEEL THE SENSE OF TIME AND HISTORY. Anyway, I really appreciate the kind statement, because I highly respect your intelligence and knowledge of history. I don't know how an engineer became such a good historian, which you are! By the way, it appears we are both in Maryland -- I live in Laurel. Take care, and thanks again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by oldwindybear (talk • contribs)
User:Kirill Lokshin (talk • contribs)Hi Kirill! I don't know if you are following the current revisions on the Battle of Tours, but the tag has been removed, and Palm dogg and myself reworked the conclusions to better fit wikipedia's format, and address concerns of a user who felt the conclusions were correct, but inappropriately worded for an encyclopedia. He was right. I did the rewrite, then Palmdogg, who is quite good, split the conclusion ("After Tours") into sections, making it a great deal easier for people to see how the perception of the battle has evolved through the centuries and through the cultural matrix. Kirill, the article is almost ready for consideration as a model article. ALMOST, and I will get it finished shortly. Kirill, I was going to start from scratch with basically rewriting the whole series on the Mongol Empire, prior to the Military Coordinators election, (there are a list of issues with the current articles a mile long, which I can send you later if you wish, along with some source listings, and general thoughts -- we really, for instance, ignore the incredible impact of the two lengthy female regencies over the largest continuous land empire in history! And there is little information -- other than what I have added, on the fact that the ONLY reason Europe did not crumble under the Mongol lash is simply internal politics; Batu Khan loathed Ogedei's son, and his mother, and the feeling was mutual -- that dispute, which lingered until Mongke Khan became Great Khan, kept Batu from unleashing his army on Europe -- he had to keep it posted east, to protect him from his cousins!), but that really falls into the province of yourself and your assistants once the election is over. I also have notes I have made on edits I was starting on the Islamic wars of expansion, the Byzantine Empire, and the Carolingian Empire, if the coordinator responsible for that area is interested at all? I did greatly appreciate your vote -- I guess I have not been around long enough. I am probably going to shift to the culture wars, movies, music, and the arts, once Tours and Frank Hamer are completed. ANYWAY, i did not want to start any major projects in the Military history arena until after the election, and then, if you want my materials, I would be delighted to send them to you. Kirill, you are going to do a GREAT job. You are an amazingly gifted historian, especially for someone self taught! (though as Essjay told me once, too much is made of degrees!) You also get along well with other people. ANYWAY, again, i wanted to offer this material, if the assistant or yourself is interested once the elections are complete...old windy bear03:59, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sig...
I was wondering about how you could improve on your signature on here. You know how there's 3 parts to it, the first part being Kirill Lok, the 2nd being "s", & the last part being hin, well instead of linking "hin" to your main user page, why don't you link it to your talk page? So you'd have a link to user, talk & esperanza... What ever that is.... Anyway, just thought I'd make a suggestion.... Spawn Man00:04, 25 January 2006 (UTC). BTW, You should ease up on the quiz, your wasting everybody!! Honestly though, you must be a brain box, or have a fast google search..... :)...[reply]
As I put on my talk, could you delete the pages? I was just experimenting anyway... I'll restart them later if I have to.... Spawn Man04:05, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I can't make up my mind? Is this article a vanity article or actually a real subject? Taker Syndrome. Poorly written, so I'm thinking it's actually a fake article. I was half way through editing it when I thought some thing was fishy. Can you check it out. I saw it on the recent articles list... Thanks. Spawn Man02:07, 26 January 2006 (UTC).[reply]
In response to: "Thanks for the comment; no lasting harm done, I think ;-) —Kirill Lokshin 02:00, 27 January 2006 (UTC)"
Hopefully no harm done, but the experience has taught me to place a little more trust in people. It's just very rare to associate both "immature content" and "brilliant prose" with the same person!! Kareeser|Talk!02:19, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. How did you find out about it so quickly? Your intervention was much appreciated, as it could have been much worse...
Thanks! I've been a bit busy these few days with finals so I couldn't have worked on it a bit more than I did, but I'm happy to see it made FAC nontheless. -- МиборовскийU|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!04:15, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Succesful RfA!
Thank you for your support during my RfA! The community has decided to make me an administrator, and there's work to be done. I look forward to seeing you around the project in the future, and if you see me do anything dumb, let me know right away! Regards, CHAIRBOY (☎) 23:23, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As I remember, the last spam that was handed out was on the 20th of December last year, so I think it's time for another update. First and foremost, the new Advisory Council and Administrator General have been elected. They consist of myself as Admin General and FireFox, Titoxd, Flcelloguy and Karmafist as the Advisory Council. We as a group met formally for the first time on the 31st of Decembe. The minutes of this meeting can be found at WP:ESP/ACM. The next one is planned for tonight (Sunday 29 January) at 20:30 UTC and the agenda can be found at WP:ESP/ACM2.
In other news, Karmafist has set up a discussion about a new personal attack policy, which it can be found here. Other new pages include an introductory page on what to do when you sign up, So you've joined Esperanza... and a welcome template: {{EA-welcome}} (courtesy of Bratsche). Some of our old hands may like to make sure they do everything on the list as well ;) Additionally, the userpage award program proposal has become official is operational: see Wikipedia:Esperanza/User Page Award to nominate a userpage or volunteer as a judge. Also see the proposed programs page for many new proposals and old ones that need more discussion ;)
Other than that, I hope you all had a lovely Christmas and wish you an Esperanzially good new WikiYear :D Thank you! --Celestianpowerháblame16:57, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply] Message delivered by Rune.welsh using AWB. If you wish to recieve no further messages of this ilk, please sign your name here.
Dodgey?
I'm enjoying delving into the new articles list & finding borderline articles! I'll add more here for you to look at.... Spawn Man04:31, 30 January 2006 (UTC). BTW, R.D.H. is up for adminship.... BTW, does Wikipedia seem dodgey at the moment to you too? The text on here is going haywire!...[reply]
Check it out now. It's not a very pretty default parameter... since oldid is completely bypassed.... but it works well since default ends up linking to history now. So, functionally I think it's as good as we can get... even if it's not so pretty... but, I don't know who notices that. grenグレン?17:28, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Battle of San Jacinto
Hey Kirill, who is going to be assigned to rewrite this article? (Battle of San Jacinto) It is not bad history, but it needs to be divided into sections, (early revolution; the Alamo; the Long Retreat; the battle of San Jacinto; Aftermath of the battle, for instance, and needs considerable expansion) I don't want to start working on it if you have someone in mind for it, sir! Also, did you see the note I left you on my working notes on reworking the entire set of articles on the Mongol Empire, which i feel are very weak? I would be glad to forward all my notes, sources, and drafts to whoever you have in mind. Hope you are having a good day! Mine has been a little rough physically, but I am still typing away, lol! old windy bear02:20, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Kirill LokHi Kirill! I will do the San Jacinto Article as soon as I finish the Battle of Tours article in toto; it is very close to being complete, and a very good article, I am proud to say. The Frank Hamer article is also winding it's way to completion with Kate's help, bless her heart. The Mongol Empire I would be reluctant to undertake until after the Military Coordinator's election is finished, and things up and running there, becuse it might well conflict -- most of that empire's history can literally be linked and almost defined by it's battles! -- with the new assistant coordinator's ideas. I had sort of figured after those elections to slip over into biographies, and (please don't laugh) literature. I prefer military history, especially the Roman Empire, Carolingian and Holy Roman Empires, the Mongols, and the period of Arab expansion. (other than the Mongol explosion onto the world stage, the period of Arab expansion is unmatched for empire building that lasted -- as you know, Alexander the Great built an empire second only to Ghenghis Khan's in size -- but with his death, it fell apart! And Kirill, reading the Arab histories in Arabic is REALLY fascinating, because it really does not accurately translate to English -- some of the concepts are so alien to our culture and mindset that translation is virtually impossible to do with great accuracy! The Arab word for "honor" for instance, carries a whole plethoria of obligations and values in that one word!) But after the elections I think I will go to literature, and biographies. (I don't see any support for my ideas in the Military coordinator's election, which is okay -- this is an election, and my ideas did not ring with the voters!) Kate had me look at Margaret Tudor's article the other night, and after doing some research on that period and the Tudors and Stuarts, I was able, I think, to add to that article substantially. I hope to do the same with others, and with articles on great books. I wish I could have helped you with the military project, but the way that is set up, it really is for the assistants to fill that role. I would have enjoyed working for you though, you are a genuinely nice person -- a rarity in today's world, I am sorry to say! Thanks again, and I will do San Jacinto, probably next week! Take care, and you will do very well with the Military project.old windy bear02:50, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Scouting portal
I see you often comment on featured portal candidates. I created a Portal:Scouting and everything is moving along nice, but I can't figure out how to do one thing...the "edit" button at the right of the box headers seems to default to blue. I chose green for my header color and there's not enough contrast with the "edit" links. How do I change the color of the edit link, if one can? Any constructive comments on the portal would be appreciated. Thanks. Rlevse19:46, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'll try a lighter green. If it doesn't work, I'll just live with the blue. You can see it, but it's hard to read; but at least you can tell where it is.Rlevse02:25, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your sharp eye. I never noticed the intro box "bled". I fixed items 2,3,4; but don't know how to fix the intro box bleeding. Also, can you tell me how to set up auto-rotating content?Rlevse18:20, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have now completed setting up auto rotation for the requisite boxes. I did this on a monthly basis because I thought weekly was too often. Is there a way to do it bi-weekly? I believe this now addresses all your concerns. Thank you for the help. I saw you did some small tweaks on your own too. I do appreciate it. Rlevse23:32, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Administrator Help
Hi, Kirill.
This must make me look a little daft, but oh well, better to ask and know than to never know. I set up a Wiki system for a pal of mine, and being the first time I've ever done this, I don't know how to control it (admin, or Sysop-wise). I'm the super-user, but I really don't know.
I'm sorry to bother you but while I was cleaning out the Old Infobox section on the Wanted Articles page I noticed the majority of the list contained Star Wars battles. I was curious do the same infoboxs used for historical battles apply or does the Star Wars wikiproject have a specific template ? Thanks for your time. MadMax02:40, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
RfA Thanks!
Okay, this is perhaps a bit overdue, but thank-you for your support in my recent RfA! I passed with a final vote count consensus of (82/1/0), which was a lot of support that I really appreciate. I'll try to live up to the expectations; and on that note, if there's ever something I do wrong (or don't do right), please spit in my general direction. Cheers! --PeruvianLlama(spit)05:31, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Consistency
Hey Kirill,
Tommorrow you will officially be taking over the Military Project, so I have a question for you: As you know, I was working on various things, but trying to begin to reorganize the entire series on the Mongol Empire (I have a horde of notes if whoever is going to be doing that wants them!). Anyway, Zora and I have been working on the Battle of Bagdad. Zora's position as a historian is that we should not put anything that there is not an original document copy of -- for instance, in the Battle of Bagdad, I had put in the message translated by John Woods from writings by Abdullah Wassaf, a HIGHLY respected Muslim Persian Historian of that era, that Hulagu Khan ostensibly sent to the Caliph, warning him of the consequences if he failed to yield and present himself to the Khan. Zora struck it, because we do not have the original document -- and it probably was not written anyway, as far as we know, Hulagu did not read or write, and sent his messages by Emissaries. As you know, I am also a historian, and I understand Zora's point. There are historians who agree with her, and as you know, there are those who believe that citing a respected historian of the era who claims to have known of it is sufficient. I am not asking you to override Zora, who is intelligent and dedicated. BUT, if we follow the policy of not citing such messages, then the same message should not be in the article on Hulagu Khan! We need consistency in the way we write articles. I also personally - and would have recommended it to you had I been allowed to be your assistant, which is not happening -- that we follow the same format for all battles, something along the line of a lead paragraph, background, the battle, and aftermath, and require sourcing for all. I just started on reorganizing the Battle of Ain Jalut (it will probably be my last before you guys take over) -- one of the true turning points of history, if you believe military historians -- and until I worked on it, the article did not have even reference number one! (I have since organized it along the lines discussed above, and put good references and sourcing, and two good external links) Please check it yourself -- remember Kirill, this is not the end, just a work in progress, but check the before, no table of contents, no attempt to put in context or explain how it came to pass, or it's very real vital place in history, and finally, no resources cited, no external links. Please give me your honest opinion on what you think of the work I put in changing it: Battle of Ain Jalut
As I said, just as we need to explain what brought the opposing forces to the battlefield, I also believe in the aftermath section, as I put in Ain Jalut, that we need to discuss the literal long term impact of the battle. Tours is another such. (one of honest machrohistorical importance, both militarily and culturally!) Anyway, just some thoughts for you before you and the assistants take over this project. Good luck, you will do well. I just wanted to toss those ideas to you -- and you had doubtless thought of them already!old windy bear23:59, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Roman Era Wars and Medivial Wars
Thank you very much for the kind words on the article on Ain Jalut -- I am sorry I did not know we had a recommended structure for battle articles -- but I do now and will adhere to it in finishing up Ain Jalut. The article is beginning to take shape -- and Kirill, it demonstrates, I hope, what I had wanted to do if I had able to be your assistant. Show why the battle happened, what led to it, what was happening historically, then the battle itself, then the aftermath -- with some reverberating through the centuries, literally! I wish I had made the assistant position -simply because I really do believe I could have helped you. The Roman list will be HUGE because of the time frame we are talking about. The Republic had 200 years of significant warfare (including Hannibal and the Carthigian struggles) 450 years of empire in the west, and 1100 more in the East. Nonetheless, as a military historian, these are the 10 most critical -- in my opinion, and I can back it up with Gibbons, Norwich, et al -- Roman battles, defining "Roman" as republic, united empire, and separate empires, west, and then East alone:
1) Scipio Africanus in 204 BC forced Hannibal to return to Carthage, where Scipio defeated him at Zama (202 BC)- this defeat assured the ascendency of Rome as the paramount power in the centuries to come, and marked the onset of the end for Carthage as an independant power.
2) Spartacus was killed in the battle of the river Silarus, putting down a slave rebellion which required the entire might of the empire to put it down, and caused the creation of the first Triumvirate. Pompey aligned himself with Julius Caesar and Marcus Crassus in the First Triumvirate in 70 B.C. -- this political alignment finished what Sulla had started, effectively ending the Roman Republic, and setting the stage for the Empire, though trappings of a republic existed till Augustus became the first emperor after the era of the Second Triumvirate and subsequent wars.
3) Battle of the Teutoburg Forest (A.D. 9), an alliance of Germanic tribes led by Arminius ambushed and wiped out three Legions of unsuspecting Roman allies. The battle established the Rhine as the boundary of the Roman Empire for the next few hundred years, until the decline of the Roman influence in the West. The defeat was so traumatic for Augustus he ceased wars of expansion -- and set in motion inevitable problems for the Empire beyond the Rhine.
4) Battle of Milvian Bridge, October 28, 312. Though Constantine the Great was not baptized until he was on his deathbed, his conversion, according to official Christian sources, was the immediate result of an omen before his victory in the battle. This battle, and the aftermath, made christinity the official religion of the Roman Empire and assured the establishment of the christian faith as a world force.
5) The sack of Rome by Alaric on August 24, 410, Alaric and his Visigoths burst in by the Salarian gate on the northeast of the city. She who had been mistress of the world now lay at the feet of foreign enemies. Ironically, savaging Rome had never been Alaric's ambition. He saw the greatness of the civilization of the Empire, and a place in it for his people. If they had given him that, history would have been at temporarily different. (whether an infusion of new blood would have reversed the decline is highly unlikely, but it might have delayed it as much as another century!) This really was the day the Roman Empire of the West died.
6) The Battle of Chalons - Aetius assured his place in history by defeating Attilia the Hun in the only defeat the Scourge of God ever suffered, and though our article disagrees -- and I have not edited it --Gibbons, Creasy, all the great historians agree this battle was one of the 15 most important of history. It assured the continuence of Bzyantium, as Attila for the remainder of his life looked west, and thus assured the Empire of the East would go on.
7) The Bzyantine Empire survives sieges of Constantinople in 717-18 AD, which, if successful, would have ended the Eastern Empire, and assured world ascendancy for Islam.
8) Battle of Manzikert occurred on August 26, 1071 between the Byzantine Empire and Seljuk Turkish forces led by Alp Arslan, resulting in the defeat of the Byzantine Empire and the capture of Emperor Romanus IV Diogenes, and in the long term, assured the loss of the anatolian heartland of the Bzyantine Empire, and it's fall.
9) The Fourth Crusade (1202–1204), originally designed to conquer Jerusalem by taking Egypt first, instead, in 1204, conquered and sacked the Orthodox Christian city of Constantinople, capital of the Byzantine Empire, establishing a shadow Latin Empire for 59 years, and ended what was left of the real Eastern Empire, though a shadow would remain for another 190 years.
10) The Fall of Constantinople came after a two-month siege by Mehmed II on May 29, 1453. The loss of the Mother of Cities, showed the West how dangerous the Ottomans were and foretold centuries of strife with them.
I would start with these ten, though the seige of Constandinople is not one battle, but it's importance historically should render it in the military project. These ten were picked out of a lsit of over 100 for the greatest impact militarily and culturally.
Medivial Battles: We can start with the Carolingians, and go from there.
1) Battle of Toulouse; a stunning upset victory in 721 by Duke Eudes gave Charles Martel badly needed time to build the veteran army which would stand him in such good stead at Tours, 11 years later, when he turned back the most serious attempt Islam ever made during the height of the Islamic Expansion Era at taking Europe, as it conquered the remains of the Roman and Persian Empire.
2) Battle of Tours -- turned back the most serious attempt Islam ever made during the height of the Islamic Expansion Era at taking Europe, as it conquered the remains of the Roman and Persian Empire.
3) Battle of Narbonne in 759 Pippin the Short retakes the last Islamic outpost on this side of the Pyrenees
4) In 778, Charlamagne led the Neustrian army across the Western Pyrenees, while the Austrasians, Lombards, and Burgundians passed over the Eastern Pyrenees. The armies met at Zaragoza and received the homage of Soloman ibn al-Arabi and Kasmin ibn Yusuf, the Moorish rulers. Zaragoza did not fall soon enough for Charles, however. He could not trust the Moors, nor the Basques, whom he had subdued by conquering Pamplona and Barelona, establishing the Marca Hispanica across the Pyrenees in part of what today is Catalonia, reconquering Girona in 785 and Barcelona in 801. This formed a permanent buffer zone against Islam, which became the basis, along with the King of Asturias, named Pelayo (718-737, who started his fight against the Moors in the mountains of Covadonga 722) and his descendants, for the Reconquista until all of the Muslims were expelled from Iberia. (though this is a series of battles, it is one campaign with a great many minor battles, but huge historial significance -- he left Frankish outposts in Iberia, the Moors never again came into Europe proper, and started the Reconquista.
5) Battle of Hastings on the morning of Saturday, October 14, 1066, Duke
William of Normandy killed Harold, last Saxon King of England, and assured the mixture of Norman and Saxon which would produce Imperial Great Britain down through the centuries.
NOTE: THIS LIST DOES NOT INCLUDE BATTLES OF THE ROMAN ERA, WHICH, IN THE CASE OF MANZIKERT, WOULD MAKE THE MEDIVIAL LIST ALSO!
These are just five medivial battles, just enough to give you an idea of what I look for -- great historical significance in the aftermath -- what it caused decades, CENTURIES, down the road!
I hesitate to offer advice, but I would split the Roman Era Battles thusly:
First, a list of ten most important battles of the Roman Era in toto, as noted above, then split as follows with secondary lists of:
1) 10 most important for Rome, the Republic
2)10 most important for Rome, East or West; while one Empire
3)10 most important for Rome, East Empire
4) 10 most important for Rome, West Empire
(I can provide all the above)
The medivial era, I would split among the Carolingians, and Ottonians, (the Carolingians down to Otto the Great, the Holy Roman Empire, and developing France and Germany, the English wars of conquest on the continant, and finally, central European wars, including Poland, Hungary, et al.
The Mongol Era deserves a whole separate section, and Ain Jalut is the most important battle to be totally unknown, just about, in the west. You don't read about it in American schools, but it probably determined the fate of the world, in that it clearly is the moment the Mongols began imploding. Just some thoughts! I wish you all the best, and wish I had been able to help. You are a really nice person, and would have been fun to work with and for.old windy bear18:38, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
CONGRATULATIONS AND A QUESTION!
Kirill Lok , you will do a great job, and I congratulate you! I supported you because you are the best person for the job, and will do a great job. I assume the two asssistant coordinator positions went to Loppy and Miborovsky? Would you or either of them be interested in the notes I had put together on rewriting the entire series of Articles on the Mongol Empire? (I was also working on Batu Khan's article, and was going to proceed from there after I finished that article and of course The Battle of Ain Jalut). Kirill, what did you think of my suggestions on the battles of the Roman Republic/Empire/Bzyantine Empire, and dividing the medivial world between the west, and basically the Islamic world, and then the Mongol era? I was really curious what you thought of my ideas on Rome, and the history framework I suggested, and the 10 I selected as being so vital as needing immediate attention. I really would like your opinion on that! Take care, and again, you will do a great job.old windy bear00:35, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers
I don't wanna overdo it or anything, so here's just a brief note thanking you for supporting me in the WikiProject Military history coordinator elections. Cheers, and I hope I can please as Assistant Coordinator. And congratulationss yourself! --Loopye01:26, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I am late! Been away watching the Superbowl. I'm not good at thank-you messages, but still, thank you for supporting me, I'll do my best. Congratulations to you too, though it was a foregone conclusion from the start... (you didn't really have to run, we all accept you as the supreme dictator!) :D If you ever need help, you know who to ask! -- МиборовскийU|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!03:46, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations again. I sent you a message - which you may not have had time to answer - on my notes on the Roman Era, and materials I had sent for on it, which I would gladly forward to whichever assistant you have assigned to that task.
On the Mongols, I am finishing up the work I was doing, and wanted you to look at Mongol Military Tactics and Organization, which I reorganized, put in categories, sourced, rewrote where necessasry, and I think you will find that it now makes a nice edition to the military project. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_military_tactics_and_organization#Conclusion
Also, I had on my list the Mongol invasion of Europe, which was also tagged, and rightly so. I also reorganized that article, put in categories, sourced, rewrote where necessasry, and I think you will find that it now makes a nice edition to the military project also, if you wish to check it at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_europe
Neither article was sourced at all when i got them. Fortunately, I have all those books in my own library, was able to check, do sourcing, set up references, and wanted to let you know so you could check them. I am also finishing Ain Jalut before I go. Again, the Roman Era materials I sent for would be valuable (along with the standards, Gibbons, Norwich, Runican, et al, all of which I have also) for the expansion of the battles of macrohistorial importance during the Roman Era.
Take care, Kirill, and hope you like the "new look" on Mongol Military tactics and organization, and Mongol Invasion of Europe -- I cleaned both up, plus the article on Batu Khan. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batu_Khan -- this one needed sourcing and references also, and I took care of that, and they are all legitimate) Let me know on this Roman stuff.
Please check the title of the document and the location of the conflicts. They do not match. That box you removed was intented to solve the problem generated by people who wants to code all these activities under MIDDLE EAST. I do not know if you side with the argument of "english speaking people", but you are making a mistake. --Karabekir04:05, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think problem is not wanting to define an "Ottoman Front" or "Ottoman Theatre" page. The (two) campaigns of middle east should be under middle east page, that is what you were working. It seems there are political issues related with that decision. Gallipoli Campaign and Caucasus Campaign are not related to middle east. Their political consequences, geological locations, and armies who fought the war were sharply different. --Karabekir04:18, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My RfA
Thank you for your support on my request for adminship. It ultimately succeeded with votes of 52/1/2, so I am now an administrator. Should you have any questions, comments, complaints, or requests at any point in the future, please do not hesitate to let me know on my talk page or via e-mail.
FYI, lest my spamming of the WSS/proposals page get too out of control and turn it into another 'roads' discussion, the exact counts of the potential splits are here. I agree that if there's "mass-stubbing" of the Napoleonics, that should be systematised: perhaps only NW-b-stub, and only the country-b-stub of the battle site, rather than of all the participants, if that's what's happening. Alai06:28, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that's what I suspected the issue was, though I haven't looked at the actual articles to any great extent, so I don't know for sure. If it's done on many articles, it could possibly affect the 'viability' of one or two of the proposed types, though that's assuming there's some scheme to reduce the extent of it. The basic trouble here is a "cross-category" scheme: splitting by country on the one hand, and era on the other... Might be clearer after I've crunched some more numbers. Alai06:46, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've uploaded said crunching here. Quadruple-stubbing with battle-, NW-, France-hist-, and some other type indeed seems to be pretty common. Reducing this to mere triple-stubbing would only be limited progress, I'll grant you. If you've any ideas for how to improve this, I'll hold off on the creations to see if it changes the counts. (Ideally I'd like to do them all in a single 'sweep' of battle-stub.) If we're stuck with them, though, the battle- sub-types seem at least somewhat useful, and at least do reduce the size of that category. Alai21:30, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think the {{Infobox Military Person}} works really well in terms of framing the article. It makes it very clear up front that the article is nnot just another article in the encyclopedia but about a person. Obviously a good pic is important here. I found the box's syntax a bit fiddily to use but do not have any experience of using them previously so maybe this is just the way they are! I was also not too sure how many battles to put in the nOtable Battles line but I guess this will become clear with experience. Thanks for suggesting it Nickhk
All necessary consent has been received for #2, but I'm not clear on how to proceed in cases like this (where the target page already exists). Is it just a matter of copy/paste? If not, could you please carry out these two moves? Albrecht21:22, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Charles Martel
Hey Kirill, how did you like Smerc and my work on Charles Martel's article -- I think it is as good as you will find outside a book source! I will be on Rome this coming week. old windy bear00:35, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Military Project
In response to your statement, I would be happy to be put in charge of the War of 1812 portion of the Military Wiki Project. What would this entail and would I have the ability to crack down problems ? Cordially SirIsaacBrock01:06, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate your offer but I do clean ups now on my own. If I was made an Administrator I would work on the Military and Dog projects in a more official capacity. Cordially SirIsaacBrock03:18, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In the near future I'm going to write and article on the Battle of Los Angeles. This was fought between the American Army and what they believed to be Japanese forces however it was really a weather ballon that had gone astray. I was going to follow the normal WikiProject Milliary history, but I'm not sure if for the info box it should be colored with North America or Fictitious. If you could answer my question that would be great and I might have some more while writing the article. Thanks a lot RENTAFOR LET?07:27, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Another Esperanzial note...
Hi again Esperanzians! Well, since our last frolic in the realms of news, the Advisory Council has met twice more (see WP:ESP/ACM2 and WP:ESP/ACM3). As a result, the charter has been ammended twice (see here for details) and all of the shortcuts have been standardised (see the summary for more details). Also of note is the Valentines ball that will take place in the Esperanza IRC channel on the 14th of February (tomorrow). It will start at 6pm UTC and go on until everyone's had enough! I hope to see you all there! Also, the spamlist has been dissolved - all Esperanzians will now recieve this update "newsletter".
The other major notice I need to tell you about is the upcoming Esperanza Advisory Council Elections. These will take place from 12:00 UTC on February 20th to 11:59 UTC on February 27th. The official handing-over will take place the following day. Candidates are able to volunteer any time before the 20th, so long as they are already listed on the members list. Anyone currently listed on the memberlist can vote. In a change since last time, if you have already been a member of the leadership, you may run again. Due to the neutrality precident, I will not vote for anyone.
User: Kirill Hey Kirill,Thanks for resolving the issue with how to explain Tours in the battlebox; we had an revert war developing, (It was part of the wars of the Islamic Conquest Era, but very significant in that most historians have agreed that it marked the highwater of that era, and beginning of it's end, and really, the end of the dynasty in Damascus which had fostered it! - i read a fascinating article once in a book by John Toland where he explained that most military empires exist only as long as they enjoy unbriddled success, and both the first Caliphate and the Mongol Empire are specific examples he used of empires which began to collapse the second their expansion was checked!) and I told the two to ask you for resolution -- and your resolution was an excellent one. I have finished all my notes on the various Mongol articles, and will be putting those in the rest of the week, ditto for the Carolingian Era, (Tours, Charlemagne, et al), and next week will be moving to the Roman Republic. I won't bother you with daily updates, but if you don't mind, when the Mongol updates and Carolingian rewrites are complete, I will email you and let you know, so you can give it the "Kirill approval," and I can move happily on to Rome. Kirill, thanks for letting me help with this. This is the one area my disabilities have no dehabilitating effect. My mind and knowledge are intact, and you are giving me a chance to use them...THANKS.old windy bear23:49, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry for doing the talk page wrong. I am a new user. I was trying to make one for the request for speedy deletion of that article because the article is nonsense. How should I have done that so I can make talk pages correctly in the future?
Sifaka04:09, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for taking the time to vote in my RfA, which passed with a final vote of 54/2/1 despite my obvious inadequacy for the job. I'll do my level best to use the mop and bucket — or, as I said in my RfA, plunger — responsibly. Of course, in the best tradition of politicans everywhere, I've already broken a campaign promise (I blocked a vandal last night despite having said "I don't anticipate using the blocking tool very often"). Nevertheless, I'll try not to let the unbridled power corrupt me. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 14:56, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Infobox
Re: your help on infobox! Again thank you; - I've now created a user name / page to help wiki by doing image cleaning, in my spare time, if that's of any use to Wikipedia. I've started by doing a couple in your excellent article War of the League of Cambrai as an idea of what I mean. Could you please take a look and see if they are acceptable? if not just let me know and delete them and I will go back in my box. Ta. Image Shop16:09, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I'm fairly new to this; I didn't know there was a different place to do stuff. when I uploaded the first image I cleaned a warning, in big red letters said the image already existed and couldn't be replaced. That's why I then uploaded it with the word 'cleaned' added on the end. Guidence would be welcomed? Please. Do I need to create a new user login to work in the Wikipedia commons ? Image Shop16:36, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Kirill, thanks for your support in my RFA, which succeeded. If I can ever improve or help in any way, please let me know! :) —Quarl(talk)2006-02-16 11:26Z
Thank you! Hello Kirill Lokshin/Archive 1, and thank you for your support in my request for adminship! It passed with a final count of 98/2/0. If there is anything I can do to help you, please leave me a message on my talk page! -- xaosfluxTalk
Thank you!
Thank you very much for your support during my recent Admin election, I appreciate the trust that you have put in me. Please contact me if you have any questions, comments or concerns regarding my work as an admin.
Hi Kirill Lokshin, I have proposed a motion to close Monicadude's RFC. I plan to file an arbitration case after the motion closes, you may like to support or oppose the motion. Thanks. --Terence Ong15:21, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Portals
Who is responsible for promoting portals (like Raul654 for aricles)? The Australia portal was promoted after about 2 weeks and none since then. There are 2-3 portals will all support votes now that have been there over two weeks. Thanks, Rlevse15:52, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Update: Something just happened with my Scouting portal, only part of the intro comes up. I can't edit, get to the talk, or anything. Rlevse17:19, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Anthing else I can do to get your support for FAC? Nickhk
My RfA
Thank you!Thank you!
Hi Kirill Lokshin/Archive 1. On behalf of my right eye, I'd like to thank you for giving me your support on my recent RfA. It ended with a final tally of (73/2/2) and therefore I have been installed as an administrator now, and I'm ready to serve Wikipedians all over the world with my newly acquired mop and bucket. If you have any questions, do not hestitate to forward them to my talkpage. Once again, thanks for your support. SoothingR21:00, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your support of my request for adminship. I'm delighted that the RfA ultimately succeeded with a final consensus of 52/1/0, so I am now an administrator. If you ever have any comments regarding my editing, or I can help you at any point in the future, please feel free to leave a message on my talk page. Again, thank you!
Thank you for supporting me in my successful RFA. The admin tools will definitely be useful for dealing with vandalism more swiftly. Please drop a note on my talk page, should you have questions about any of my actions. --Aude (talk | contribs) 02:24, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
With apologies for the impersonal AWB-ness of the message...
Thanks for your support on my recent request for adminship. It passed at 91/1/0, and I hope I can continue to deserve the community's trust. Let me know if there's anything I can do to help you, and if I make a mistake be sure to tell me. My talk page is always open. (ESkog)(Talk)02:32, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your support. You wrote: I'm particularly concerned about 1941-44 becoming 1941-44, and not 1941-1944. I take your point and will try to achieve that. bobblewik21:15, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, coaches. As you can see, there is a significant backlog at the Esperanza Admin Coaching program. Since we do not want users to have to wait forever to get assigned, I'm asking all of you for a status report. If you feel that you are done, that your coachee is not active enough, or that you could handle the extra load from another coachee, please tell me in my talk page as soon as possible. Thanks! Titoxd(?!? - help us)06:44, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Kirill: Thank you very much for your support on the ongoing Esperanza elections. While it looks like I didn't make it onto the committee, I appreciate your vote nonetheless, and hope that we all can continue working for a better project. Regards, Bratschetalk19:19, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I see everthing's going well in the military world? Anyway, I have a proposition for you..... again... I was wondering, would you be able to design or possibly make little template thingys for the Wikipedia:WikiProject Dinosaurs project? I want something like you did with those military history boxes that we placed all over battle talk pages. That way, more people would come to the project & improved the prehistoric life articles, as there are a great deal to get through. I was hoping I'd be able to commandeer the project & get it active again. A specialist has just joined up & I was hoping that with your help on the "fancy box thingys" side, the project could grow a bit. I'm gonna start rearranging the project page a bit & any help or advice would be greatly appreciated, after all you do maintain your own project practically! I'm just gonna inform the members about my plans & I'll gladly put you on our page as our designer if you can help. It would be awesome if you could! Thanks, Spawn Man01:51, 1 March 2006 (UTC).[reply]
This article, category, or template is part of WikiProject Dinosaurs, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of dinosaurs and other prehistoric life. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Maybe something like the above?? Yes, I stole it off your template, but who cares.... Could do with a picture though! And maybe, just maybe, after the project expands a bit, we can create the whole shebnag like WP:MH, including user boxes, collaborations, task forces etc etc. Isn't it exciting? Spawn Man02:28, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
When you've finished with the Polish thingy, give me a call. I'll be off soon, & I'll probably be back on Friday or thursday. Then we can talk about things. Thanks for your help so far. I'll put your name on the project page when I come back, unless you don't want it on there... Spawn Man03:58, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well I'm the only one who's been involved with the idea as of yet. I've let everyone know that there will be some changes & that if they touch them, they will die immediately.... :). Spawn Man04:57, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, feel free to change the wording to anything you like. I wanted to stick to the name of the Polish Army which in the name of the project, but I'm fine with any solution as well. As to the bioboxes... I'd rather avoid it. Partially because {{Infobox Polish Soldiers}} IMHO looks much better than the {{Infobox Military Person}} (with the shoulder straps, and all the stuff) and partially because I've spent quite some time recently updating it to include the correct shoulder strap automatically (will post the new version as soon as I finish). How about letting the template be, posting a link to the uniform {{Infobox Military Person}} at its talk page and updating it to include all the additional fields from the latter template just in case someone wanted to use it? Halibutt02:49, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Let's keep the infobox then. I thought for it for a while and Walerian Czuma's infobox still looks better to me than, say, Donald J. Kutyna's. As to the message to other people - good idea, I'll let them know tomorrow (it's 4AM here...). Appleseed was not listed probably because he joined wikipedia after the project died... I'll let him know as well. Halibutt03:16, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there! I modified the infobox to include all (?) of the parameters from the Infobox Military Person and at the same time the new feature of automagical addition of a rank insignia to the template (gotta love those tiny little colourful graphics :) ). You can see how it works at Stanisław Maczek. BTW, I significantly expanded the article lately and it might need some {{fact}} tags, spellchecks and glitches here and there so you might want to take a look not only at the infobox :)
Anyway, the new template is still not 100% complete as it works correctly only for officers of the land forces. I'll add other branches of the Polish Army as soon as I have time. Halibutt14:41, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. As I mentioned before, there is a better - yet more complicated - way of doing this. Take a look at {{Football club infobox}} to see what I mean. Adopting that solution would mean that we'd have a one-size-fits-all table with constant place where the stars and bars are located, a huge collection of various backgrounds, bars and stars for the insignia and some code to combine all the elements into the final shoulder strap. However, I'm not sure it's really worth the effort and the solution with fixed names (say Image:MilInsignia_<Country><Rank><Branch>.png would be both easier to prepare - and easier to use. One has to include the country, rank and branch anyway, so this would all be pretty user-friendly (if not user-less). Halibutt14:58, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Esperanza Elections
Hey Kirill Lokshin! I wish to say thanks for your vote at the Esperanza elections.
I've made my way into the Advisory Committee, so if you ever need any help or have any queries about the stuff we do, please do not hesitate to ask. Thanks again, KnowledgeOfSelf10:03, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. It looks like we might be admin coaches together! I look forward to it!
Dinosaur new template?
This user is a part of WikiProject Dinosaurs, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of dinosaurs and other prehistoric life. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
I created the above template for users on the project, so I was wondering if you could create a page for it & let me know? Thanks, Spawn Man00:13, 2 March 2006 (UTC).[reply]
WikiCheese
Hey there. I was just wondering, isn't there something we can do about this vandal besides blocking user accounts. Can't we block the ip address. Just curious. I'm not an admin.
Can you take a look at this. Another editor has nominated this article for speedy twice now. The original author recreated it. Now he keeps removing the speedy delete tag. I don't want to risk a violation of 3RR.
I have reverted your changes. Please do not simply take over the United States Armed Forces WikiProject. If you would like to join the project or talk about merging the project that is fine. But do not simply redirect all of the pages to your new project with no discussion. — Linnwood08:12, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Kirill, I nominated the Greek War of Independence as a candidate for the Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Collaboration because I felt with a little work that it would be close to attaining Featured Article Status. After nominating it, however, I saw that an article had to be on the worklist in order for it to be nominated and saw that this war was not listed. How does such an article get listed on the worklist? --Caponer21:04, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Someone's transcluded this closed AfD, which you closed, onto today's (Mar 3) AfD page. I can't figure out why this was done, nor why the current article exists when the consensus was delete. I've nominated the article for speedy under CSD G4. -ikkyu2 (talk) 07:12, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Third Serville War
I agree that the boxes should be in that order - but you might note that it break the "float" for the edit links for the sections to the left. Not sure why it does this, or why having the boxes in the "wrong" order does not. - Vedexent01:19, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Thank you for your support in my recent RFA. It passed 53/1/2 and I am now an administrator. I appreciate that some of you made exceptions to your usual requirements re length of service and so on because we've interracted positively in the past, or because of my credentials, so I will endeavour to use my new mop cautiously. I'm always open to feedback and gently constructive criticism. If you're not an admin and need some assistance do of course please let me know. Thanks again --kingboyk00:23, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. If you are interested in The Beatles, User:Lar has asked me to tag on a little note advertising the creation of a new Beatles WikiProject that we are currently setting up. Please sign up and help.
Tidying up
Damn - it always seems like you're tidying up little things after I'm done with an edit. Makes me feel guilty for making more work for you - Vedexent03:10, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Re: Worklist
D'oh! So noted. Thanks for moving them sorta into place. If you think they are fine "sorta" sorted like that, it is probably easier to let them sit where they are. Some of the "series wars" of the Romans interleave, and the Punic and Macedonian wars overlap as well. I can put them in exact order if you prefer though, although that'll have to wait 'til tomorrow :) - Vedexent05:04, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your support in my RFA. The final vote count was (66/2/3), so I am now an administrator. Please let me know if at any stage you need help, or if you have comments on how I am doing as an admin. Have a nice day! Stifle17:02, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"that causes the top border to be hidden in IE"? Is that some kind of bug? Also, float is not optimal because it moves the title 4em to the left. →AzaToth22:53, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Categorisation
Hi - an aspect of Wiki that foxes me. I am wondering why Targul Frumos is not showing in the Soviet-German War campaignbox? Maybe you can make it magically appear, or explain to me what is not working there? TIA! Andreas17:05, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot for your help! I corrected the order of the battle-box, using the start-date of each battle to place it. I hope I got it all right. Andreas17:23, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Kirill Lokshin/Archive 1, how is it going? Thank you for supporting my Request for adminship! It passed with a final vote of 73/1/1, which means that I have been granted adminship! I look forward to using these tools to enhance and maintain this wonderful site. I will continue regular article/project contributions, but I will also allocate a sizable portion of my wikischedule toward administrative duties :) Thanks again, and if you have any questions/comments/tips, please let me know! — Deckiller04:44, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga
You are listed as a participant of WikiProject Anime and manga. A recent change in how participants are listed — using a category — will result in your inadvertent removal from the project. If you wish to continue your participantion, please check the the project page for details on how to add yourself back to the project. - Squilibob01:08, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Could you delete the redirect that sends this to Armour? There's only three lines about it in the main article and it doesn't fit well within that subject. There are a couple of good images at Wikimedia commons and I'd like to create a separate article on the subject. Cheers, Durova02:36, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your support in my RfA. It passed, with a final tally of 62/0/1. I'm touched by all the kind comments it attracted, and hope I'll be of some use with the new tools. You know where I am if you need to shout at me. Flowerparty?15:54, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The Decline of the Wiki?
Hi Kirill. I'm curious about something you said over at Project: Military History: "This is a very subtle issue that ties in heavily with various other discussions—all over Wikipedia—about the significant social problems facing the community. I think that we have managed to maintain a certain collegial atmosphere within this project that is sometimes missing in the community at large."
When you find the time, could you please give me links to some of these discussions along with explanatory notes, if needed, on what this all means and how it relates to the Project we've built up? Consider this very low priority. Albrecht20:01, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much for the full and clear account you wrote up. If you can believe it, I had no idea something like this was going on. Probably better that way, in fact. Reading these things daily must impose a huge drain on your time, strength, and mental health. Albrecht15:23, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Kirill, I got most of the work done on the Mongol empire, and turned my attention to Rome, but have had increasing health problems, so am taking a month or so off. I tried to send you an email, but for some reason, it would not let me! I will let you know when I am back, as I will be working on Rome. (unless you send me elsewhere!)old windy bear04:52, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for supporting my RFA. I really appreciated the show of support and all the kind words from so many great Wikipedians. I hope I live up to them! -- Vary | Talk17:31, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Third Serville War
I notice that you've rated Third Servile War as "B-class". It's an article that I've spent a lot of time and research on. Ideally I'd like to write it up to FAC status. While I am currently
rewriting the terse prose into a little more "flowing and engaging" and...
Hi Kirill. Thanks for the suggestions you made on improving the Christianity Portal at its FPC page. I have incorporated all your suggestions, as you can see in my reply. Hopefully you can now review your vote. Thanks for helping! Brisvegas12:26, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It shows from the History that you entered into the article the fact that 11 UN people died from it. Can't seem to find a source on this. Do you remember where you saw this?
Featured Article candidate (Military history of France)
Hello Kirill. Thanks for all your help with the military history of france in the peer review. Now that I've nominated for FA, would you please, if you have time, give a review? Thank you very much.UberCryxic00:20, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your support on my recent RfA, which I am pleased to say passed with a final tally of 80/1/1. If you ever need any help, or if I mess something up as an admin, please let me know.
Hi User:Kirill Lokshin my doc says light work is not going to hurt me. I can return to Rome, where I was beginning with the early Republic, or go to the medivial project, which you mentioned. I would like - if you don't mind - you to assign me one project to work on, and I will take my time, and work on it until it is done, and move on to the next. I feel most of the work - updating the Khans, the Major Mongol Battles and their unique military tactics and organization, is done. So I am back, a little beat up, but would like to help. Again, you mentioned the middle ages - if so, just tell me which project. Thanks for your kind wishes. if I take it easy, I should be fine. old windy bear18:46, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
User:Kirill Lokshin I listen to you my friend, because you are a truly nice person, highly competant, incredibly knowledgable - especially for someone not formally trained as a historian! - and a good project leader. I will start with the Roman Republic, though i will check with the gentleman you suggested I talk to. I just wanted to warn you I will be doing about an article a week for right now, instead of the 3-5 I was doing on the Mongols. My strength is down considerably, but I want to help! If somethign does come up you feel I could be useful on, pull me off the Roman Republic, and send me wherever! old windy bear19:41, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"Heh, these guys are going to be after you when they find out how many new small stub categories you've created ;-) Kirill Lokshin 02:29, 18 March 2006 (UTC)"
I've just been helping out by sorting battle stubs by country and correcting such things. Is this a bad thing or a good thing? Besides, some of them were pretty large. Rshu02:32, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I was only trying to help, but I will try to find out how to better categorize these battle stubs. I just really hate whenever people confuse English and British in battle stubs, which is why I made the English battle stub category. In short, I was trying to make the battle stubs cooridinate with the battle category. Rshu02:42, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks for your help, I might of gotten myself in a predicament here, but it may not be so. I will try to get some help from Alai and make better battle stub categories. I got an idea, many of those battle stub categories could turn into subcategories to larger battle stub categories with some edits to the templates and such.Rshu02:47, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, give me the play by play of all of the battle stubs. I had to put multiple ones for some of them because they were fought by multiple countries. I may want to do a merge of English, Scottish, and Welsh battle stubs all into British battle stubs for convenience purposes. Rshu02:59, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've taken my name off that list to avoid an edit war with you or someone else. I don't feel like bickering, but i'm not going to accept any description such as that one or the former one as accurate. Please don't put my name back there unless you wish to edit war with me, which I hope we can avoid. KarmafistSave Wikipedia16:08, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
About a month ago, when I created the competition section which ended the edit war on the page Iowa-class batleship MateoP added three citation need tags for some of the information. As a courtesy I set about researching his points to tighten the article and allow the all of the information to remain in the article; however school work must come first, and with midterms and other educational obligations I have been somewhat slower than usual in my checking of the points raised.
The other day I got a hit on the page Iowa-class battleship (which has been on my watchlist for some time) from MateoP. He has removed the information that was not cited, I move that I am sure he feels is right. Unfortunatly I remeber well the last edit war over the information in that section, and I fear that this move may occasion another round of edit warring. Could you keep tabs on the page until I finish the research to make sure nothing serious happens? TomStar8110:32, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The Maps
Holy crap man, they are really good maps! Thanks a billion. Is this an online place where you got the maps? If so, do tell, because after Austerlitz I plan to hit every major Napoleonic battle for FA and I could really really use those high-quality maps.UberCryxic18:38, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Re: So...
I am sorry for any embarrassment I caused. I don't want to bring the Project into disrepute.
But still, when the Emperor has no clothes...
Anyway, onto something constructive: I've described my "Warbox Results" philosophy over at the Project talk page. Let's hope some good comes of all this. Albrecht06:22, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, thanks a bunch. I might not be able to contribute as much as I'd like these next two weeks, but I hope you and the others won't hesitate to consult me for help. Given what I've seen from previous collaborations, I'm sure the end result will, in any event, be splendid. Albrecht00:32, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please help!!!!
I know I haven't spoken to you in a while, but I really need your help. One of my subpages (User:Spawn Man/Reviews) has been picked out by a big time editor & is now up for deletion here, Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Spawn Man/Reviews. I know it may sound like I only come around when I need something, but this is really important to me. I only did this as a last resort. Please vote to keep the page & I'll do anything, eat your shoes, clean your toilets for a year, even wear one of those t shirts that say I'm stupid! I just want my page which I've spent so much time on to be left alone. Thanks, Spawn Man01:10, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for supporting / opposing / vandalisingmy RFA! The result was 71/3/0 and so I am now still a normal user / an administrator / indefinitely banned. Your constructive criticism / support / foulmouthed abuse has given me something to think about / helped me immensely / turned me into a nervous wreck. If there's any way I can help you in return, please ask someone else / suffer and die / drop me a line! --Sam Blanning (formerly Malthusian)(talk)19:47, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Mr Blanning, thank you for choosing the ACME Auto-thanker! Simply strike out the phrases that do not apply and tear off this strip at the indicated line to give all your supporters and detractors the personalised response they so richly deserve. N.B: DO NOT FORGET TO TEAR THIS BIT OFF, MORON!
To Kirill Lokshin, for his outstanding and tireless efforts in making the Military History Project a beacon of hope and model of efficiency for all the rest, I hereby award the Golden Wiki.R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine)02:00, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Are we allowed to hand out the award for the project if we spot someone doing a lot of really good work? :) Or is that for the project managers to do? :) - Vedexent21:30, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for voting on my RfA. It passed with a consensus to promote of 45/7/1. To those of you concerned about the fact that I am a relative newcomer, I encourage you to poke me with a sharp stick if I make a mistake. Or better yet, let me know on my talk page, and I'll do my best to fix it. Makemi05:06, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My RfA
Thank you so much for supporting me in my recent RfA, which passed with a final tally of 56/1/0. I thank you for your confidence in my abilities. If you ever need anything or find that I have made an error, please let me know on my talk page. — Scm83xhook 'em21:21, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Reach out is a program aimed at allowing users to bring issues that they have had in Wikipedia to a listening, sympathetic and caring audience:
"No one can know how we feel if we do not say. We cannot expect to get understanding if we do not ask for it. No one will dispute that sometimes life's issues are too much for one person. It is fair to say that sometimes Wikipedia's problems fall under the same heading. This is a place where you can bring the bruises that can sometimes be got on this project for attention."
The Stress alertsprogram aims at identifying users who are stressed, alerting the community of thier stress and works in tandem with the Stressbusters at trying to identify causes of stress and eliminating them.
Note from the editor
Welcome to this new format of the Esperanza Newsletter, which came about during the last Advisory Council meeting - we hope you like it! The major changes are that each month, right after the Council meeting, this will be sent out and will include two featured programs and a sum up of the meeting. Also, it will be signed by all of the Advisory Council members, not just Celestianpower. Have an Esperanzial end of March, everyone!
I am eager to recieve feedback from someone who has made a featured article in the past....someone such as yourself (i.e. War of the League of Cambrai)...so if you have any further suggestions (even if minor) I'd be grateful if you could tell me. --Chubdub00:11, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. But in terms of organization, is it best to keep the "casualty" sub-section under "Battle" or "Historical significance"? And is there any collaboration of the week or peer review specialized for military history topics? --Chubdub00:27, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My RfA
My RfA recently closed and it was a success, passing at 84-02-00. I would like to thank you for taking the time to weigh in and on your subsequent support. And I know it's quite cliche, but if you ever need any assistance and/or want another opinion on something, grab a Pepsi and don't hesitate to drop me a line on my talk page. Thanks again. Pepsidrinka04:57, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you
Military history of France is now a featured article! Thanks a lot for your support and suggestions. But there's also a problem: I can't see the FA logo at the upper right of the article. Any ideas on what could be wrong? Thanks again.UberCryxic18:33, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose you could try and clear your name of this heinous crime, as I see Sjakalle has, but its quite amusing. MarkSweep's "but everyone else does it, so it must be okay" defence takes the biscuit. It looks just a tiny bit desperate.
In any case, I don't particularly feel like going anywhere near that page; I've had quite enough of the whole userbox mess for the time being. Kirill Lokshin14:27, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Aww c'mon! You want to be "bleeding edge" dont yas? Rfc and ARBcomm is the sheeznitz. You ain't nobody till you've been involved with at least one, preferably more...It'll give ya ROGUE CRED, dude;>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine)07:31, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
An independent military history peer review has been created for the benefit of the project. A number of articles have already been reviewed, receiving significantly more feedback within the project than they did on the generic peer review page.
Welcome to the inaugural issue of the Military history WikiProject's newsletter! We hope that this new format will help members—especially those who may be unable to keep up with some of the rapid developments that tend to occur—find new groups and programs within the project that they may wish to participate in.
Please consider this inital issue to be a prototype; as always, any comments and suggestions are quite welcome, and will help us improve the newsletter in the coming months.
Proposed guidelines for categories of military people are currently being discussed. A number of issues have already been resolved, but the proposed scheme is still in draft form and further input would be very welcome.
I should join the WP:MILHIST project, just so I can steal from it more consistently, it seems to do all the cool things first. WP:BEATLES is thinking of starting this practice and of course, we plan to nick this as a basis, unless you squawk, as it is very well done. PS, can you drop me an email offline? There is something I want to ask you about. ++Lar: t/c16:39, 31 March 2006 (UTC) (PS, please respond here, I will watch)[reply]
Nope that was exactly what I meant, thanks! ... and I sent a reply (and that's the last time I mention it here, promise! smile) ++Lar: t/c17:26, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Kirill LokHi buddy! I will be posting an article on the first Punic War this weekend; in the interim, I did want to ask you to look at several articles that Smec and i haved worked on jointly on the Carolingians:
Battle of Tours
Charles Martel
Carloman the son of Charles Martel
Pippin the Short
I think the first two at least deserve some recognition. The article on Martel is the best now online, and we put a LOT of work in it.
I am on Rome, and as I said, will be posting the first article on that this weekend. Take care!old windy bear11:32, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for supporting my RfA. I’m proud to inform you that it passed with 75 support to 1 oppose to 2 neutral. I promise to make some great edits in the future (with edit summaries!) and use these powers to do all that I can to help. After all, that’s what I’m here for! (You didn’t think I could send a thank you note without a bad joke, could I?) --HereToHelp13:09, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Content Experts
2000 Hours 1 April 2006
Please note: The title of the page is "Encyclopedia" not "Wikipedia." Surely you are not suggesting that the very word encyclopedia should be subverted to mean "Wikipedia." There is a separate page dedicated to "Wikipedia," is there not?
Historically, encyclopedias and their predecessors, dictionaries, have been researched and written by well-educated, well-informed content experts. Can you deny that this statement is true and accurate?
An encyclopedia researched and written by persons who are not well-educated or particularly well-informed will not fulfill the basic requirements for an encyclopedia.
Best Regards, Philippsbourg
0920 Hours, 2 April 2006
Of course I change the statement. If I had not changed it, you would have simply deleted it again. The fact remains that the current statement is historically accurate.
Philippsbourg
Thank you
Thanks for your support in my RFA. The final vote count was (88/3/1), so I am now an administrator. Please let me know if at any stage you require assistance, or if you have comments on how I am doing as an administrator. Once again thank you and with kind regards Gryffindor18:22, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
RFA Thanks
Hi Kirill. Thank you for your support vote on my RFA. The final result was a successful request based on 111 support and 1 oppose. --CBDunkerson14:28, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As coordinator of WikiProject Military history, I thought you should be aware the stub article Operation Iraqi Freedom has been nominated for deletion. In the context of the Military History project, I feel that specific military operations, such as this, merit their own articles. Your opinion? —ERcheck @ 01:19, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Again, thanks for the additional information. I've modified my AfD vote. After reviewing the existing articles, it appears that 2003 invasion of Iraq is the appropriate main article for the redirect. —ERcheck @ 01:55, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Was wondering if you would acknowledge someone for me. I realize that anyone can give out the Wiki chevrons for the project but I have already given this user a barnstar and since then their contributions have been outstanding and numerous and I don't want it to look like I am the only one awarding him. Also, I think it looks good when the head of the project actually gives the awards. ERcheck has been making outstanding edits to USMC related articles and is very deep into creating pages for every USMC Medal of Honor recipient. His work has been extensive and the number of pages he has created is pretty amazing. It would be great to see the efforts awarded. Thanks in advance.--Looper592022:12, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Admin coaching
Hi! While User:Titoxd is on a Wikibreak, he gave me permission to do some leg-work concerning Esperanza admin coaching. I was curious how your coaching with User:EddieSegoura is going. If it is finished (or even if it isn't), would you be able to take on another coachee? Don't feel guilty if you don't have the time- I perfectly understand, and wouldn't want anyone feel overworked. Thanks for all your time! EWS23 | (Leave me a message!)04:16, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the recognition / awarding of the Distinguished Service Award. Working on the USMC articles has been very interesting; I'm making progress, but there is a lot to do. It is nice to have the Military History WikiProject to look to for guidance. —ERcheck @ 05:08, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Battle of Khaybar
Thank you very much for your improvement of this stub. Any contributions you can make here are likely to be greatly appreciated. As it first appeared, it was an unsourced screed against the conniving Jews and the peacable Muhammad, etc. I am sure you are familiar with this style of narrative. Anyhow, the more we can keep it in the real world, the better. I don't know much about the tactics of this area and era, but insights of that nature why Khaybar was a valued strategic objective, etc., might go a long way in this regard.Timothy Usher02:10, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Colours / Facings
Kirill Hi, Sorry if I caused a problem editing the military info box. However the Infantry Colours and Facing have two diferent meanings. Colours are the standards carried in battle and on parade. Facings were originally the linings of the different units uniform / tunics, which are now usually shown as backings to Regimental capbadges, such as a Yellow Diamond for the QLR's or a Red triangle for the DWR. All Infantry Regiment's carry a set of Regulation Regimental and Queens colours, albeit with different battle honours emblazoned on them. However facings may be white, scarlet, yellow, green, etc these need to be shown as 'Facings' not 'Colours'. Is there any other way of doing this? 86.3.1.23613:50, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The easiest way would be to include both items in the field, like this:
{{Infobox Military Unit
...
|colors_label= Colours and facings
|colors=''Colours'': insert colours here <br/> ''Facings'': insert facings here
...
}}
As Monicasdude doesn't appear to be taking much from the two RFCs against him, I have opened a Request for Arbitration. Feel free to make a statement at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Monicasdude.
You were contacted because you endorsed a previous RFC against Monicasdude, please accept my sincere apologies if this message is not of interest to you and feel free to blank it. Stifle15:46, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The Barnstar Brigade is a new program aimed at giving more very deserving yet unappreciated users barnstars. It will officially start on 2006-04-09, but signing up is encouraged before this date:
"Here in Wikipedia, there are hundreds of wikipedians whose work and efforts go un-appreciated. One occasionally comes across editors who have thousands of good edits, but because they may not get around as much as others, their contributions and hard work often go un-noticed. Sadly, these editors often leave the project. As Esperanzians, we can help to make people feel appreciated, be it by some kind words or the awarding of a Barnstar. A project the size of Wikipedia has thousands of editors, so there are plenty of people out there who deserve recognition, one just has to find them. The object of this program is not to flood editors with Barnstars, but to seek out people who deserve them, and make them feel appreciated."
The Stress alertsprogram aims at identifying users who are stressed, alerting the community of thier stress and works in tandem with the Stressbusters at trying to identify causes of stress and eliminating them.
Information
Welcome to the second issue of the new format Esperanza Newsletter - we hope you still like it! This week, it was delivered diligently by our new dogsbody. MiszaBot (run by Misza13): any execution complaints should go to him. Content comments should be directed at the Esperanza talkpage. Thanks!
The current process for accepting proposals for new programs has been deemed fine. All Advisory Council members and the Admin Gen are to endevour to be bold when viewing discussion. If they feel that consensus has been reached, they will act accordingly.
A plea from the editor...
The propsed programs page is terribly underused! Please leave any comments, good or bad, on the page, to help us determine the membership's thoughts on the ideas there.
thanks for being so understanding, What I would suggest is that you consider Novels in the debate (I have to say I ame a bit of a fan of you project and how you go about things, having shamelessly copied some of your ideas for others I work in). Could you consider the place of Military Books, fiction and non-fiction in your scheme. And it might be nice to post a message of to when you get close to agreement on both the Book Project page and Novel Project page. Is that too much to ask. Regards :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk)10:50, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, thinking on this a bit further, I suppose technically speaking a wars subcategory of a "history of the empire" category should be named "Wars of the Mongol Empire". And the more general "Wars of the Mongols" category would cover other wars/battles before and after there was a Mongol Empire. It depends how much of a distinction there is (or will be) on Wikipedia between the history of the Mongols as a people and the history of the period when they had an empire. Might be best to add a note to the category saying that it is only intended for wars concerning the Mongol Empire, and to give dates delineating the period. Effectively, it is either a "by period" (Mongol Empire period) subcategory of the "by combatants" (Mongol people) category, or a more specific "by combatants (Mongol Empire as combatants) category! Might not be that important a distinction, though. Carcharoth13:49, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Can't sleep, clown will eat me RFA 33⅓
Thank you for your early support during my third RFA (and first). The last nomination turned out to be a success, with an unexpected number of participants from all over. If you ever need anything, are feeling snackish, or would just like to chat, please feel free to visit me on my talk page; I never sleep. 8-) Can't sleep, clown will eat me19:51, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Objectivity
Kirill, the numbers mentioned at battles edited by you are highly exagerated. Sometimes armies of 250000 to 350000 are mentioned for battles fought 1000 years ago!!!, which is very interesting considering the logistics involved in such huge numbers that makes it impossible. The populations of most countries were not big enough to accomodate and feed such huge numbers of men!. Most of these battles are mentioned without sources. Do you actually correct at all?. Orrin_73
Hi, I just noticed in the wikiproject page that the entry for Battle of Königsberg is missing. Can you please tell me which battle are you considering? The Napoleonic one, the 1945 Soviet assault, something else, or both? Thanks in advance. grafikm_fr16:10, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK, fine, because it's the one I'm currently writing. How convenient :) However, shouldn't it be renamed to something like Battle of Königsberg (1945), because there is the Napoleonic battle (with the famous failed siege of Pillau) as well? Thanks. grafikm_fr16:37, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you
Thank you! Hello Kirill Lokshin/Archive 1. Thank you for your support in my RfA! It passed with a final tally of 91/3/5. I am quite humbled and pleased by the community's show of confidence in me. If you need help or just want to talk, let me know. Cheers! -- Fang Aili說嗎?
Thanks :) I know! It's like there was a sudden "edit war" over pompons! I'll call for the RFC then. His removal of any mention of any other cultures - including the Roman colonization of the site later, seems ideologically based. - Vedexent01:47, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really care if they did or not. I just object to the unilateral removal of any other external culture's viewpoint of Carthaginian society. Hardly seems NPOV. Even if a view is wrong, it should be mentioned and discounted. - Vedexent02:02, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It is possible, yes. And if the community views go against him/her and s/he continues such adversarial editing, well... that's why they invented IP blocks and page locks. But "due process of law" is always a needful thing. - Vedexent02:15, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not when the editor is tumbling their IP and making anonymous edits. There really isn't a defense against that. There's just tons of reverting from the 3-4 people who responded to the RFC. - Vedexent00:31, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Has there been a rise it Wikipedia vandalism, or have I just become more aware of it as my watch list grows and grows? What have you noticed as an Admin? - Vedexent00:37, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Another admin locked Carthage less than a minute after the anon over-wrote with their version. Is there anything that can be done? Is there anything that should be done? - Vedexent14:24, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
LOL - Ok, yes, that link made me laugh. You have a point. I've set up a "voting tally" on the talk page to try and get people to vote and "weigh in" on the lock. In a couple of days maybe we'll have enough votes and comments to petition a sysop to unlock the page. Thanks for your advice - Vedexent15:03, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ok - you're a pretty level headed person :) I would like to ask you for a quick opinion regarding Carthage: Am I being unreasonable and "needing to chill"? I asked - so I won't be offended if you are "brutally honest" about it :D - Vedexent23:58, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
LOL - thanks. One of the downsides in trying not to be "dogmatic and narrow-minded" is the nagging suspicion that you may be the one being an unreasonable jackass and just have a blind spot about it. It helps to have an external opinion sometimes which is why I asked. Thanks :) - Vedexent00:10, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not really an objection, but I do think that "art" doesn't quite cover it if you start to include novels, could we consider a change to "Art and Literature". My thinking here is that there are two very different basic definitons of the work are one very general which covers anything which is not really a science (which I think is the one you are thinking of), and one which implies quite strongly in many the visual arts. At a stretch some might think to include music. So if this option is not appropriate, maybe a compromise of "War arts" might imply more thatn the visual. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk)16:09, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Campaignbox
It is nothing; I guess I was just perturbed at seeing everything disappear so suddenly, and without comment. It may be convenient if I state that, as a general rule, I see no reason why present-day conflicts should have different standards than the ones already in place at WPMILHIST. If people want to develop other templates, that's fine, but they shouldn't compromise the existing system. Albrecht01:05, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Happy Spring celebration / Easter (as your preferences and beliefs dictate)
Thank you for the copyedit, it's deeply appreciated. Unfortunately I'm pretty sure it's too little too late, several editors have left "this article is badly written" objects and never returned. I also have a back record of being ignored on talk pages. And no one likes me... Thanks again, HighwayRainbow Sneakers18:44, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, some of the complaints are just bizarre. Adults complaining about "name calling", from a teeanager. Which no-one knows apparently, which is probably why all the comments are depressing me. Thank you for the copyedit (it's very god from what I checked.) While I'm here, are there any other problems you spotted when copyeditting? Cheers, HighwayRainbow Sneakers19:20, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
We do, but we can't decide on them. As far as I edit;
Headers aren't in Italics
Game names are in Italics
Trading Card Sets aren't in Italics
"Pokémon" in "Pokémon anime" and "Pokémon video games" are in Italics
Manga titles are in Italics
Attacks are in Italics
Manga chapters/episode titles aren't in Italics
If you can point out any major inconsistencies that would help. Just to check, are you at Neutral at present? Cheers and thanks, HighwayRainbow Sneakers
Thanks! By the way, are you running in the Advisory Elections for Esperanza? I'd definitely support you. Cheers, HighwayRainbow Sneakers
I know you do a lot of work there so I can understand. I think I was feeling unwell when I signed myself, I'm the Esperanza version of Mickey Mouse :P. Good thing it isn't Approval Voting. Cheers, HighwayRainbow Sneakers
Mormonism and Judaism
Strong object:
No explicit listing of references. In addition, much of the material (particularly as regards Judaism itelf) is simply unreferenced.
The existence of article borders on original research; certainly there is no reputable source provided to demonstrate that a comparison between Mormonism and Judaism is particularly meaningful (versus, say, Mormonism and Shinto or Mormonism and Zoroastrianism), or that the article's choice of topics for comparison is appropriate. Kirill Lokshin01:47, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
RESPONSE Included it a list of other book on same issue, discrediting the original research, and reputable source complaint
Covenant and Chosenness in Judaism and Mormonism, Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, November 2001, ISBN0838639275
Spiritual Vision: Hebrew Cryptograms -- The Key to Unlocking Parallels Between Mormonism and Judaism, David B. Cohen and Irving Cohen, Deseret Books, SKU: 4702961
Mormons and Jews: Early Mormon Theologies of Israel,Signature Books, January 1993, ISBN156085006X
MY BURNING BUSH, THE SPIRITUAL JOURNEY OF NANCY GOLDBERG HILTON, AN AUTOBIOGRAPHY By Nancy Goldberg Hilton, ISBN0-9776403-0-2, Library of Congress Registration Number TX 6-288-494
Greetings, Kirill Lokshin/Archive 1. The judges would like to announce that the winner for the Esperanza User Page Contest has been chosen. Congratulations to Sango123 for winning the contest. The winning entry can be found here.
Great work on cleaning up the categorization; it was long overdue! One minor issue, though: now that the en.wiki replication lag is off the scale, Interiot's WikiProject List is going to be increasingly out of date; and since we're not leaving individual projects in Category:WikiProjects directly, there's no good category for active projects. (The subject-breakdown categories don't make this distinction, obviously; Category:History WikiProjects, for example, includes both highly active and utterly dead ones.) I'm not sure what the best way of dealing with this would be, though, or even whether it's a significant problem. Kirill Lokshin03:18, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, if you decide that it is a significant problem, the obvious solution is to simply have a Category:Active WikiProjects and put them all there; perhaps we could work out a system there every WikiProject that's not in "Inactive WikiProjects" is automatically placed there by a bot. And, thanks for the kind words! -Silence03:36, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Admin Coaching
Hi there. I notice that you and I am coaching Sf-Giants. Would you like to meet on IRC sometime and we can discuss how we are going to go about it? Regards -- Banez11:43, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Military maps
Hi Kirill,
I was wondering if this link was listed somewhere under resources on the milhist project. Indeed, it appears to contain a lot of useful maps and all of them appear to be in PD because it's a gov work (at least, several of them are listed on Wikipedia and commons with this tag). What do you think? TIA. Grafikm_fr15:28, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No problem ... I'll go back and add them to the dozen or so that I've completed ... and will add them to any future conversions. —ERcheck @ 02:30, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Casus Belli technical problems
Hey Kirill, when you added back the casus belli to the template a strange thing happened to the Six-Day War article. Its difficult to explain so maybe you should take a look for yourself. What I suppose happened is that the casus belli was already written in the article, but since it wasn't in the template it wasn't obviously shown, now that it is once again part of the template it seems to thrown something out of wack. What do you think caused this?- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk04:43, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the support on my RFA. Unfortunately, it did not achieve consensus. I look forward to your support in a couple months when I apply again. Holler at me if you need anything. ⇒SWATJesterReadyAimFire!01:16, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Mathbot1.0
Kirill,
Thanks for supporting the automation initiative at 1.0, but if I were you I'd hold off on doing a lot of work until we've tested out the system (I know how long your list is!). Everything is still somewhat in a state of flux, and I'd hate for you to do lots of work and then have to change everything. The testing will (I think) only take a few days - Oleg plans to test out the generation of logs on Sunday. He didn't seem to reject my proposal (from you) for separate logs for each subject area, so that's a good sign. Keep an eye on things via the Mathbot1.0 talk page. I'm using this chemistry list as a test list, but I think I want to change the format if that's OK with Tito and Oleg. By the way, I love your project's worklist, and I think it will provide a major source of articles for WP1.0. Sorry I thought you were from maths before, though they have a nice list too! Cheers, Walkerma01:16, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I got distracted in my reply and never answered your specific queries. Regarding how Mathbot is reading the information in, you'll have to ask that at the Mathbot page I think. As for the importance, I judged that the importance of an article is something that will not normally change (unless there is a major news event associated with it, like a major Earthquake in a previously unimportant town). Therefore we can assume that the importance is static information, edited by humans occasionally as needed. Walkerma01:44, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm appealing to you because what's happening on Battle of the Lower Dnieper and especially its talk page is starting to turn into complete nonsense. :(
Some user called heqs questions just about anything in this page, seeking (non-existent) reasons for moving (I saw you reply on this one), deletion (!!!) and removing huge chunks of content because they're supposed to be OR (and they're not). He's also "assisted" by some user called KPbIC, which is IIRC suspected to be AndriyK's sockpuppet. Incidentally, users like Kuban Kazak and Irpen reviewed the page and did not modify it, except for some typos and useful additions of course.
Since you're the administratior of the milhist portal and also a Wikipedia administrator, I call you for help... I'm far from being an expert at resolving such disputes, but I think that we should possibly go for a page protect until the dispute is resolved, and possibly an internal review of the page by users from milhist project.
Hi, thanks for notecing my work at Commons. I don´t know, but I have the the impression that there are allready too many categories in wikicommons. To be honest I am not very impressed by the eficiency of that wiki at all. Perhaps I am too used to the english Wiki. Flamarande16:12, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
FAC Help
Hi, Kirill. I know you like to contribute at FAC, so I was wondering if you could comment on an FAC I am assisting with. It's National College Athletics Association (Phillipines). The nom is a bit vote-poor so I thought I would ask some Esperanzians I see on FAC fairly often to help with the nom. Criticism is welcome, and I would actually appreciate it. The only problem is sourcing, because for that, you'll have to ask the original author, Circa 1900 Thanks! RyanGerbil1003:39, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I would like some details about how to implement the importance in WP1.0 articles. Easiest would be I think if I read that information from categories, but then those article talk pages need to be categorized. Maybe you could talk to Walkerma, Titoxd, and other interested folks about how to mark the imortance and how to standardise things in a predicatable manner. Then it will be rather easy to modify my script to collect that information. You can reply here if you have comments. Cheers, Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 04:39, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I'm happy for you to delete that announcement about Jetley – if you move it to the place which is the best place for it! Otherwise we're essentially saying there's no place to announce things which may be of specialist interest to project members. JackyR16:31, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
... *Ahem* Thanks. Anyway, you're doing the bulk of the work for the MILHIST WP, so your contribs are as great as any. I feel like I'm slacking off in that department as the asst coordinator... :S -- МиборовскийU|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!04:22, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Assessment of Milhist articles
Hi Kirill,
I saw that you started putting assessment grades on various Milhist articles.
Could you use some help of mine in assessing all those unassessed (which, as far as i can tell, are quite numerous)? I could help you with the most obvious stuff already (meaning stubs get stub grade), and why not with more complicated cases too.. :)
The Administrator Coaching program is a program aimed at preparing Wikipedians for Adminship or helping them understand the intricacies of Wikipedia better. Recently, changes have been made to the requirements of coachees. Please review them before requesting this service.
This would be something like the Welcoming Committee, but for people who have figured out the basics of editing articles; they're not newcomers any more, but they might want some help in learning new roles. Some might like suggestions about how to learn vandal patrol, or mentoring on taking an article to featured status, or guidance with a proposal they plan to make at the Village Pump, for example. In this way, Esperanza would help keep hope alive for Wikipedia because we would always be grooming the next generation of admins.
The Stressbusters are a subset of Esperanza aiming to investigate the causes of stress. New eyes on the situation are always welcome!
Note from the editor
As always, MiszaBot handled this delivery. Thank you! Also, congratulations go to Pschemp, Titoxd and Freakofnurture for being elected in the last elections! An Esperanzial May to all of the readership!
Posting logs of the Esperanza IRC channel are explicitly banned anywhere. Violation of this rule results in deletion and a ban from the channel.
A disclaimer is going to be added to the Esperanza main page. We are humans and, as such, are imperfect.
Various revisions have been made to the Code of Conduct. Please see them, as the proposal is ready to be ratified by the community and enacted. All members will members to have to re-confirm their membership after accepting the Code of Conduct.
Referendums are to be held on whether terms of AC members should be lengthened and whether we should abolish votes full stop.
I have a lil' question for you regarding foreign featured articles. Not surprisingly, I would like to get some of the articles to FAs :), starting with those which foreign versions are already FA.
However, something bothers me about that. Are we exactly sure that FA levels of requirement are the same on all wikipedias?
The best example imho is probably Hundred Years' War, which Esperanto version is FA, while in my eyes, it would barely get a "start" if it was on English wikipedia war portal (I don't speak esperanto, but the length of the article, the absence of maps, the number of red links and so on are pretty obvious).
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.
Thanks. Sometimes it is indeed excessive (I've seen over six, a number of times; I might compile some stats on octuple-stubbing, etc, sometime, just for larfs), and if there's some rhyme or reason to the way the removal's being done (such as elimination of redundant stubbing with both a sub- and super-type). SPUI's antics I'm certainly already familiar with (at least so far as openly campaigning against WSS, use of {{stub}} on articles with insulting comments about their ostentatious unsortedness, and sprees of creation (and repeated recreation) of pointless and confusing redirects). Alai01:20, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I tried to make it as concise as possible, however the major powers might deserve a seperate page. USSR casualties is on my to do list. Soviet casualties is a can of worms. The four main issues are 1- The undercount of casualties at the beginning of the war because of the chaos in 1941. 2-The fact that Poland and the USSR both claim the losses in the territory annexed in 1939. One side has to pick them up in order to avoid a duplication. This has gone over the heads of most writers in the west. 3-The number of deaths due to Soviet repression is unknown and a subject of a debate I want to avoid. For example the Vlasov army POWs were marched off to the Gulag for an unknown fate. They may be included in Soviet losses. 4- 3 million civilians died of famine in the unoccupied USSR. They are included in Soviet war losses.
The issue of German war dead is another can of worms. Rudiger Overmans a well known German military historian did a study of WW2 casualties and concluded Germany lost 5.3 million. This agrees with the fact that Germany, Austria and the ethnic Germans suffered a demographic loss of about 8 million in the war. Historians in the English speaking world still copy the 1947 statistic that Germany lost 3.5 million soldiers in the war.
The other can of worms is Poland. After the war the Polish government claimed 6 million war dead. The number has been copied for years by western historians who never bothered to check this statistic. When the communist rule ended historians published studies that gave Polish losses at about 5 million. The missing 1 milion were never allowed to leave the USSR or decided to remain in their homes in Byelorussia.
Also the issue of combat and non combat casualties is a real problem. Some folks want to see only battle deaths listed. The deaths due to accidents, disease or POWs should be excluded. The losses of partisans is also a problem for some people who think they should br classified as civilians and civilian losses should be on deaths due bombing, shelling ect., Holocaust deaths excluded. I tried to post a gross number and explain the details in the footnotes.
In any case I think the page is far more informative than the Information Please Schedule with a few skimpy footnotes or Mr. Whites column of numbers that are averaged.--Woogie10w02:46, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Sounds fine, I am working on a page 'Soviet Casualties', I would like the input of folks who have a native command of the language, my Russian is only fair and I may have missed some work done by people in Russia. Is there anybody willing to work with me on this?--Woogie10w 03:19, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Kirill, again I ask you-How do you think the WW2 Casualties page could be improved? Please provide specific examples of how you would update the page. You must have a reason why you have rated this page a Cat:B.--Woogie10w09:35, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My goal is is to give the readers the facts with a minimum amount of verbage, if they need the details the references are cited. In this regard I have done a far better job than other Wikipedia contributers. Take a look at the article on 10/22/05, the reader was given a table of statistics without sources. Kirill, please take the time to read those footnotes, and again be specific about what needs to be done, thanks--Woogie10w11:04, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The book 'Population Changes in Europe since 1939' by Gregory Frumkin is essential for anyone researching WW2 Casualties. The author analyzes the population of each European nation to derive estimated war losses. The data he used from 1951 is dated in the case of Germany and Poland. However, his methodology should be used to determine war losses. I strongly reccomend that you read the book. I saw it available for sale on Bookfinder.com--Woogie10w12:04, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I posted a similar message on the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history page, but no one has responded. I realize that everyone is busy and has a life outside of Wikipedia. So do I, but I really need some help. First, since this is my first article I wanted to know if it was okay what I wrote and Second, I am having trouble with my footnotes. I do not understand HTML very well, but I tried. I used the [1] code. The numbers appear but not footnotes. Help Please. I really would like this to be a good article. It was a rewrite of a stub and I am kind sensitive about my writing. I hope to do more articles for Wikipedia and if what I did for the Battle of Kettle Creek is goood then I will contiune to use that format. If it needs improvement, I want to know what is wrong so I can fix it. Please help.
Thank You very much for fixing the probelm and reviewing the article. Not to mention your comments. One other thing. Did I add enough to the article to remove the stub tag?(Steve17:06, 10 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]
I apologize in advance — I've not been keeping up with the discussion and now find myself a bit confused: On Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Project_banner, it indicates that we are to use {{WPMILHIST}} with its appropriate additions of task forces, e.g. {{WPMILHIST|US-task-force=yes}} However, the Project discussion page indicates the use of {{catwikiproject|Military history}}. Am I understanding it correctly — to indicate the Military history project, there are two tags, one for articles and one for categories? —ERcheck @ 23:57, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Kirill, I have begun the rewrite of the article on the Khwarezmid Empire. Would you please check the new introduction, which has three paragraphs instead of one, and see if this is a direction you like?
Thanks! old windy bear23:59, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Monicasdude is placed on standard civility parole for one year. If he makes any edits which are judged by an administrator to be uncivil, personal attacks, or assumptions of bad faith, then he may be blocked for a short time of up to one week for repeat offenses. Monicasdude is banned from making edits related to the deletion process (excepting obvious vandalism and copyright problems) for one year. This is to be interpreted broadly, and includes, but is not limited to, commenting on articles for deletion nominations and removals of nominations for proposed deletion and speedy deletion. He may be blocked for a short time of up to one week for repeat offenses. After 5 such blocks, the maximum block time is increased to a year.
Should Monicasdude violate any ban imposed by this decision he may be briefly blocked, up to a week for repeat offenses. After 5 such blocks, the maximum block time is increased to a year. All blocks to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Monicasdude#Log_of_blocks_and_bans.
I just wanted to say I've probably read thousands of Wikipedia articles and this is by far the best. You wrote that mostly yourself? As far as giving the reader an absolute perspective of the events, especially considering it's a military article, this article blows anything else I've read out of the water. It certainly deserved to be a featured article, and its good to know there are editors like you out there. I normally wouldn't compliment an article if I didn't feel it really deserved it, but I was moved to do so in this case. great work! Dave01:54, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi
I was very pleasantly surprised to see that this article had been awarded a grade, first time out. It makes for good incentives. Even tho' it's not a very high grade, it is fun to have some 'external' recognition of effort. It also shows how much work is going on behind the Wikipedia scenes. Thanks for all the effort.
May I make a weasly remark? The spelling of 'substantial' in the B-Grade write-up has lost its second 't' - I can't find how to edit it so assume it's locked.
Keep up the good work! Ballista03:08, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This article was recently rated "b". One of its lacks is a "battle box" (I think that's the description). I would add it, but is it relevant, given that the operation was a disastrous "friendly fire" episode? Of course, the opponents could be Luftwaffe v. Kriegsmarine, but, apart from dark humour, it's inappropriate. Folks at 13719:04, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Hey Kirill, I was wondering if we could possibly add a key to the military conflict template. Honestly I have always been able to figure the symbols out until today when I saw the Battle of Sedan article. I would assume that the flag next to Napoleon III's name indicates that he was the leader of the country, however since I have never seen that symbol before I suppose it could also mean that he was the official leader but he didn't actually take part militarily, or that maybe it is supposed to mean that he was deposed right after the battle since it was a decisive victory for Germany and ultimatly ended the second French Empire. It seems to me that there really shouldn't be this much ambiguation, but maybe I'm just reading to much into it. Do you agree?- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk09:46, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I see your point, but would you ever consider adding a lot of little colorful symbols as well as a key so that they could be understood? I think that would give more life to the template. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg (talk • contribs)
Yea that was a stupid joke sorry, but I think we could add just a few symbols to show who had overall command when there are multiple leaders listed. Also if one of the leaders was the actual head-of-state we could show somthing there. If we only have like 4 symbols then a key won't take up that much room, and isn't possible not to include the key at all when none of the symbols are in use?- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk11:51, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have yet to see anyone on Wikipedia approach your level of commitment. In that spirit I present you this motivated barnstar. Please stay involved in all aspects of the project. Thanks.--Looper592011:54, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This motivated barnstar is given to Kirill Lokshin for his tireless contirbutions to Wikipedia Military history. I have yet to see a more concerned or active editor in any area of Wikipedia. Presented by Looper5920 17 May 2006
Importance definition
Hi Kirill, I was looking for my reply to you on this, but don't see it. Anyway, I have put a short description of this here. Does this help? By the way, how are the bot tests going for Military History? The response in chemistry has been very positive, I'm glad to stay. If the system is working well, I would like WP1.0 to be suggesting that other projects adopt this if they are willing (we will be contacting WikiProjects again soon). Cheers, Walkerma17:53, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes- I would like 10,000, though I'd settle for 2000 for V0.5 if needed - and I am indeed very excited about the number of assessed articles Mil Hist is generating. I also regard that project as producing many of the most important articles I would like to see in that 10,000 - sadly, many of the most important historical topics do relate to war and battles, and many of those are "must-haves" for WP1.0. However, we can't issue a CD with 10,000 articles, consisting of 9000 military articles, 500 chemistry, 200 tropical cyclones and 300 other topics! In other words, because of balance and the "importance" factor, there will be some less important military articles that will not get into WP0.5, because there are many more important articles from other fields that are still not there. Hopefully that can be rectified by the time we get to V1.0 and the first official release.
One other thing may be possible, you might want to consider producing a Wikireader on Military History or some part of it. This would mean a CD containing a complete collection of articles related to (say) the Second World War, or Wars in the 20th Century, or A History of European Warfare, or some such thing. I'm thinking we may want to do that for chemicals once we have all of our worklist raised up to B or A-Class. Walkerma18:21, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Fine by me, just asking. You have been here a long time, is there any way I can request images (or improvements of present images)? I don´t know someone you might know, or somplace where I can ask... Flamarande20:49, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Question on process for restoring blanked material
Kirill, With your extensive workings on Wikipedia, including adminship, I hope you can answer this question. I ran across the article Fashionista on AFD. It was created (July 2005) as an article about a band. In November 2005, an unrelated section "Fashionista (style)" was added to the bottom of the article. Since then and up until April, there was information added about the "definition" of the word, its use related to style, on blogs, in popular culture, etc. -- all unrelated to the band. On April 17, User:Donnell706 deleted all reference to the band.
In a normal blanking situation, I would just revert to the original about the band. However, there have been many edits in the interim. And with the band information deleted, the article was nominated for deletion, along with two other related vanity articles.
Question -- what is the proper process to restore the original band article (and retain edit history, as seems to be the requirement)? Is it ok to create an article Fashionista (band) with the original band material?
P.S. I have no special interest in this article ... except for process and not losing a contribution that was blanked. —ERcheck @ 04:58, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for pointing me toward the above; my first thought would be to favor "personnel", but I realise this has / can have stronger connotations than "people". (What I would suggest is unhelpful, however – especially bearing in mind that many non-native English speakers use Wikipedia – is the use of nouns as adjectives in the naming format "X people"; e.g. "American Civil War people", "War against the Peru-Bolivian Confederacy people" (!), etc.) For the time being, I think I'll remain an interested observer, as there are a couple of other Wikipedia/Commons issues I and others happen to be working through at present. No guarantees, though, that I might not throw in a suggestion or three if anything occurs to me! Thanks again, David Kernow18:28, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the big welcome. Or not... ;). Anyway, this guys vandalised my page a few times, could you give him a warning please for this edit, [2]? It would be much apreciated. Anyways... I guess you're to busy for me now huh? Thanks if you can, thanks if you can't... Spawn Man22:53, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Military history and war graves
Hi Kirill! I've started a new WikiProject on Commonwealth War Graves Commission cemeteries (here), mainly as a way of co-ordinating my own scattered thoughts, but also to try to get others interested in working on the subject.
I would like, if it is possible, to affiliate the project with WikiProject Military history, in whatever way you feel would be most productive and useful for WPMh. Can this be done? And, how would you like me to go about doing it?
Your help and advice would be most appreciated. Alternatively, I'm not offendable so feel free to tell me to get knotted :o)
Ta for the reply! I'm happy to do whichever option is likely to make the CWGC cemeteries articles appear (a) in best quality and (b) quickest. I have an extreme aversion to "ownership" of articles or projects (it's a wiki, after all!) so have no problem moving from being important-looking but doing all the work to being another editor sharing all the work. Not that that means I'm not going to be doing any of the work... :o)
So, basically, I'll go with whatever you suggest as the best way forward. That looks like giving up the separate internal infrastructure and becoming part of a military history task force. The Commonwealth War Graves Commission looks after the dead of all wars that any Commonwealth countries were involved in (South African, WWI, WWII, Suez, Korea etc) and extends beyond Britain, being made up of Britain, Australia, SA, NZ, Canada and Undivided India sections amongst others, so it kind of crosses a number of boundaries.
If a merger would be okay by you, can that be arranged? It should be easy enough to do by moving some pages, redirecting others and reformatting some templates, I'd imagine, which I'm happy to do (or have others do). Cheers! ➨ ≡ЯΞDVΞRS≡10:48, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent idea! There's a good logic to having a Memorials and Cemeteries task force - there's a lot of memorials and cemeteries and the articles are an ideal place to keep sections on post-wartime activities that don't fit comfortably into wartime articles; they also make good homes for small sections on soldiers who aren't notable enough to get their own article but should be noted somewhere.
A task force would be very useful here as there are things like the German cemeteries that should have their own articles but don't because the victors write the history books and the vanquished's source material isn't in English. With people working together, from the base of what I've already built up in the past 24 hours, that type of thing could now get included. I also think it would be a good thing for WPMh, not just for me! :o)
I'm happy to make/help make/watch others make the changes needed - let me know what you think should be done to get the ball rolling. ➨ ≡ЯΞDVΞRS≡13:18, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
All fine by me! "Cemeteries and memorials task force" is good and literal. "Remembrance task force" is my choice but is less literal. You choose! :o) ➨ ≡ЯΞDVΞRS≡14:31, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I just wanted to thank you for your participation in the FAC of the National College Althletic Association of the Phillipines. It's nice to see such prompt and helpful assistance in an arena which frequently lacks such. Thanks again, and have a pleasant/enjoyable/not bad (fill in appropriate time element). RyanGerbil1003:41, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Battle of Smolensk (1943) (again...)
Hi Kirill,
I have a question about the FAC process, namely: who decided to finally promote the article to FA?
Cause on Smolensk, User:ShortJason added the FA star but I do not know whether this move is quite legitimate or not...
Thanks for information. Looks like the guy did the same to F-4 phantom too, so he got messages from Emt and myself on his talk page :)) -- Grafikm(AutoGRAF)12:27, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Heh, you already found the new userbox... ^_^
The Peacekeeper is better than the halberds I think... :)
Mmm, userboxes
This user thinks that more Wikipedians would like userboxes if they were edible.
I'm not sure if it's worth arguing at this point, since we'll probably have the entire set proposed for renaming in a few days; what do you think? Kirill Lokshin 11:54, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
You are right. In any case, this seems to have ended up serving as a sort of trial balloon to gauge potential opposition to the proposed recategorization. Andrés C.14:21, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Military history WikiProject Newsletter - Issue III - May 2006
The May 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. —ERcheck @ 01:12, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
BTW — delivery is complete for the month.
Coats of Arms
Hello there! As to the CoA at the WPMILHIST template, my intention was to perhaps replace all national symbols with proper coats of arms created in accordance with the French Wikiprojet:Blason, as it would look quite uniformed in cases such as this one. Perhaps you're right that the Imperial Eagle of France and the Coat of Arms of Napoleon is not that well-known outside of France, Poland and other countries of continental Europe, but for sure in Poland it's quite recognizable - and definitely it is the only coat of arms with azurre, ancient eagle facing sinister I can think of.
On the other hand the painting by Jacques-Louis David shrunken to mere 35 pixels is not that easily recognizable even to someone who wrote a huge work on his works (as yours truly). Sure, the painting itself is identifiable, but not at this size. Any ideas? //Halibutt11:39, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I thought of it, though it might be problematic. Ever thought of a coat of arms of World War II? Also, some of the countries having their own parts of the project do not have a coat of arms at all, which doesn't help their uniformisation. It's easier with France as the fleur de lys is still widely recognizable (and I merely changed the old gif to a better version), but how about the United States? Anyway, we could always design some CoA-like icons for the other projects to make the {{WPMILHIST}} look more uniformed. How about:
Aviation... no idea, perhaps some fancy roundel or a shield with a bi-plane in the middle?
Y Canada - I could either prepare a CoA out of their official shield or make a similar shield, but with white background and a single red maple leaf
Y Chinese... we could either use their official, round emblem, or prepare a standard European shield with the inside of the emblem to make it more uniform. But there is also the problem of RoC with their own round emblem. I think I could try to combine both on a single shield, but this would be a tad risky... What do you say?
Classical task force - the modern seal of Rome seems a pretty obvious choice... alternatively a shield with fasces could do, but it's not as obvious as the SPQR.
Y French task force is done. My second choice would be the republican emblem with fasces, but some people could confuse it with the Italians or the Romans...
Memorials - no idea. Perhaps a simple shield with an obelisk in the middle could do..? Or, if we followed the rules of heraldry, a plain green field with, say, 100 white crosses on it much like the ermine pattern in the coat of arms of Brittany? IMO anything would be better than their current half of red peach logo.
Y Napoleonic - sure, the wreathed N would be pretty a good choice, I'm working on it.
Y Polish task force - I kind of like the poster, but this shield could be just as good.
Y US of A - of course there's the CoA their eagle has on its breast, easy to do.
weaponry - no idea. There are some Coats of Arms featuring cannons, perhaps we could use one of those?
Not really get what you mean, as both the Polish and the American arms use the very same type of shield (cf. this and that). With a pretty little .blend file I got from Snargle I have also yet another rectangular shape, but I barely ever use it. I stick to the most common western shield (the pointed one) unless the arms are clearly defined to use other shields (as in the case of Poland or Finland). //Halibutt21:35, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I saw during its previous FAC that you pinpointed some weaknesses in heading, plans and things like that. Could you be a little more specific? If you have any ideas, please leave them on my talk page... (I'll get a peer review going anyway after I finish, but I would like to know beforehand :)
I see. Well, I'll probably change the plan anyway. I already made a map of the offensive, which is better than the little map in the infobox. All in all, Catalan did a wonderful job, but since he does not speak Russian, he can't access Zhukov's and Vasilevsky's memoires which contain a great deal of information about this operation.
As for the conclusion, I don't know if it can be properly sourced, in which case I'll reword it.
Oh yeah, and another question: what about all these images that are copyrighted? Isn't it a discriminating criterion for an FA?
Sorry to abuse your kindness again, but I need your opinion on a translation:
“
Анализируя причины катастрофического провала Харьковской операции, нетрудно понять, что она была организована крайне неумело. Стоит только взглянуть на карту событий. Действительно, как мог Военный совет Юго-Западного фронта рискнуть наступать на Харьков, подставляя плохо обеспеченный левый фланг фронта под удар противника со стороны Краматорска? Эта операция не сулила успеха еще и потому, что не была обеспечена ни силами, ни средствами, и это, конечно, не главное.
Основная причина нашего поражения здесь кроется в ошибках Верховного Главнокомандующего, недооценившего серьезную опасность, которую таило в себе юго-западное стратегическое направление, и не принявшего мер к сосредоточению крупных стратегических резервов на юге страны. И. В. Сталин игнорировал разумные советы об организации крепкой обороны на юго-западном направлении, с тем чтобы встретить там вражеские удары мощным огнем и контрударами наших войск. Он разрешил Военному совету фронта проводить необеспеченную операцию, одновременно затеяв наступления почти на всех фронтах. Это привело к растранжириванию многочисленных людских и материальных резервов.
Если бы на оперативных тыловых рубежах юго-западного направления стояло хотя бы несколько боеспособных резервных армий, не случилось бы этой катастрофы.
Hi Kirill, and thank you for your kind comments in my request for adminship! With a final tally of (109/5/1), I have been entrusted with adminship. It's been several weeks since the conclusion of the process, so hopefully you've had a chancetoseemeinaction. Please let me know what you think! I look forward to working with you in many areas, including WP 1.0, WikiProject learnings, and others... I appreciate your trust, and thanks again! ++Lar: t/c03:25, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I made a layout for my idea of reviewing at User:Chcknwnm/Sandbox. If you think it's appropriate it should probably go to Wikipedia:Version 0.5 Nominations/Reviews. Anyway, let me know what you think, and feel free to say that it will cause too much extra work or isn't appropriate for this project...just looking for feedback. I'll send this message to all the current reviewers to get their imput. Later, Chuck(척뉴넘)06:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thanks for the quick response. I think that we still have that problem with the current system though. I mean, there are articles that are nominated, that surely none of the reviewers will even have a passing familiarity with the subject. I think it's hard to check these articles for items specific to only that article. For instance, any reviewer can view an article on a country and notice it has no Economy section, but if there's an article on Joe Schmoe and he was the person who invented velcro, if none of the reviewers no that, that won't get noticed. Most of these articles are like that and IMO can only be checked for quality of writing, importance, and content only to the point that we know what articles on certain subjects should contain. I don't know though, let me know what you think. Chuck(척뉴넘)06:35, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Torchic FAC
Hey Kirill, I was wondering, if you weren't too busy, if you could perhaps take a look at Torchic's current FAC. I remembered how helpful you were last time, and discussion has gone slightly.. off course. If you could spare a minute to share your opinion it'd be great. Thanks, HighwayRainbow Sneakers15:37, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Good to see the Battle of Wake Island selected for collaboration. In antcipation, I added a few pictures, and began some edits. Noticably missing is an article on the Commanding officer, Winfield S. Cunningham. I've started that article in my sandbox2, but it will take a while to get it ready. —ERcheck @ 21:29, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Military history CfD
Hi there. I was wondering if you would have time to comment on this CfD concerning the history of World War 2 (specifically city bombing and destruction in WW2)? Thanks. Carcharoth21:59, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Cartography department
Hi Kirill,
The cartography department still needs an enormous amount of work. I am thinking about making a list of all wars, campaigns and battles, before maps can be made for them. Problem for me at the moment is that i have an awful lot of stress because of deadlines. I don't know what work i will do after my study, but it could be that i have even less time for this. I am thinking about focusing on a single subject, to make it really good. Maybe the Second World War or the Roman Empire. I could make maps of all battles, civil wars, military campaigns. Maps could be a good advertisement for Wikipedia. At the moment the maps on the entire internet are worse then the historical atlases from the libraries. While the internet could be far better then a book.--Daanschr08:06, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Kirill, I just put a note on User:Hossen27's talk page concerning the Australian task force. He is the creator of the Portal:Military of Australia. Could I offer this suggestion: On your recent WPMILHIST talk page comment on ADF -- perhaps a more gentle wording? If our colleagues from the Australian side come over to check out our talk page, it might taken as less than welcoming. —ERcheck @ 03:04, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I was a bit bold in suggesting to Hossen27 that he might be interested in leading an Australian task force ... but, he seems to have a lot of energy; and, I'd crossed paths with him before on the portal proposal page. —ERcheck @ 03:07, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I hope you didn't take my comment above as too critical/harsh. ... I didn't go to the creator of the Australian WikiProject ... as per your link, he/she was the one who said thanks but no thanks. I can understand the sense of ownership that might be held; but, I hope that there will soon/eventually be a collaboration or at least a cooperation between the two WikiProjects — afterall, we both have the same objective — improving Wikipedia and its coverage of military topics. (See my "outreach note".) —ERcheck @ 03:19, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hossen27 is a member of our WPMILHIST project, he has a strong enough interest/motivation to start a portal, so inviting him to take a role in the Australian task force (and possibly doing outreach) is a natural extension of his interests and talents. —ERcheck @ 03:33, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It is unfortunate that there is not a cooperative effort between the projects. The ADF project has only seven participants signed up and just at 2 months running time; it could benefit from joining with a larger community. At least two of their members are also on the WPMILHIST active list. The response on the WPMILHIST talk page was only by one of their members, albeit the person who started the ADF project. It would be nice if he would take the discussion to his project talk to see if he has consensus. Their current project and response to requestes to work together does bring up two additional issues:
The response does bring up a bigger issue — What do we do about Australia-related articles? I suppose that if we come across Australian articles on their Army, Navy, Air Force, we leave them alone. How about military personnel? Are they a part of {{WPMILHIST}} or the {{ProjectADF}}, or are they orphaned?
Categorization: Note on their talk page, they are discussing categorization and following the model of the RAF. If we come up with changes to categorization and they have based their model on the old approach, there will be one country that is inconsistent with all the rest.
I just heard back from Hossen27, who is now back from his break. He seems interested in an Australian task force. It think this would be great. —ERcheck (talk) @ 12:08, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hossen27 left me another note — he's interested in having a go at the Australian task force in the next few weeks. I asked him to coordinate with you to set things up. So, I expect you'll be hearing back from him soon. —ERcheck (talk) @ 03:36, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Kirill, Being relatively new to the Military history project (certainly without the Battles/Wars history), I didn't know if there had been a discussion on categories for military awards. I didn't want to start a discussion that had already been settled. (Or is it something that should wait on the larger category discussion that is ongoing?)
Two items that have come up:
I noticed that there is an inconsistency in the category naming — for example, "Recipients of the Legion of Merit" versus "Navy Cross recipients".
There is an apparent inconsistency on which awards have categories. For example, there is a category for Legion of Merit recipients but not for the higher award of the Silver Star.
There is a "Recipients of the Purple Heart medal", which though lesser in precedence, is a category that is widely used for both those who are notable for their military careers and those who are notable for another reason.
As you noted, the categorization of people is currently an active discussion. Since the awards topic has not yet come up, I will raise it — but after the people/personnel categorization has concluded. Thanks. —ERcheck @ 00:22, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have begun editing and expanding the auxiliary fights surrounding the Battle of Little Bighorn, including the Battle of Slim Buttes. Please feel free to take a look and tag it as appropraite for the Wiki Military History Project. Also, feel free to look at any of my military bios or battle sumaries (a list in on my user page). I have joined the project team and will remain active editing Civil War and Plains Indians topics. Scott Mingus01:00, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Also, how would I go about getting articles rated (as in stub, start class, good, FA etc etc)? I have a few articles I know of that I think are okay, but I cannot seem to find the page on which to get someone to rate them? I noticed some of the military articles have been rated on their talk pages, so wondered if you could explain... Thanks, Spawn Man11:59, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You wrote: "The only concern I still have is the image credit on the selected pictures.". Sorry, but I still can't understand the problem. Thanks. NCursework10:28, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for helping out. :) What to do if an image is from Commons? Should I put a Photo credit: Wikimedia commons link to the featured picture template? NCursework16:46, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
JFHQ-NCR
Hi, I just finished (more or less) the article on Joint Force Headquarters National Capital Region. I realize the Military History Task Force focuses on the historical side of the military, but I was hoping this might be weaseled in somehow, even if it is a 21st Century creation. My ultimate goal is to submit it to people with specifically military knowledge (as opposed to the general peer review), but this is the only military-specific group out there. So does it count as semi-historical or am I out of luck? Thanks! ScreaminEagle20:27, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Should I copy edit this article: Portuguese Colonial War?
This article, Portuguese Colonial War, is on the copy edit To Do list so I started the job. But now that I've look through the Military history WikiProject sections, I'm wondering if I should have one of your experts take over. Would that be the right thing to do? None of your lists of Departments, Coordinators etc. seem to be covering this kind of war.
The war is very interesting, and although it's obviously been translated from Portuguese, I can figure out some of the mysterious parts by going to other Wikipedia websites. Below is the status of the article as posted on its discussion page.
Portuguese Colonial War is part of the Military history WikiProject, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of military history. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.This article has had a peer review by the Military history WikiProject, which has now been archived.
The article itself does not look complicated, so even though I'm not a military expert, I believe I can do it. It would be helpful to consult with someone who can read Portuguese though.
I'm back sourcing Second Battle of Kharkov atm according to the peer review. However what I need is an outside view of all those inline citations, as I'm immersed too deep in those... <_<
Can you please take five minutes to read through the article and drop {{fact}} in places that you consider appropriate?
OK, all your quotes were taken care of. Some points that were too POV or risky in my opinion were removed (esp. in Conclusion section). Do you have one should leave this in Peer Review, or can we get it to FAC straight away? :)) Cheers, Grafikm(AutoGRAF)20:33, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What do I do with the Portuguese Colonial War now?
I've done what I can with it. Should just remove the copyedit tag and let it fall back into the Wikipedia waters (from whence it came) or do I refer it on for some review at this military site?
KarenAnn20:48, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Kirill Lokshin/Archive 1, thank you for participating in my RfA. It passed with an amazingly unopposed 77/0/1. Thanks for the support everybody! If you see me doing anything wrong, want to ask me something, or just want to yell in my general direction, leave me a note on my talk page. I promise to try and knock outWikipedia's problems wherever I may find them!
Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my userpage. 
18:04, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
07:33, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
- Talk 23:48, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
21:44, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
FOR LET? 07:27, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
SoothingR 21:00, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
??? ??? ??? 20:39, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
British task force - of course the Royal Arms
_closeup.jpg){kind=link}
We are here to build an encyclopedia!
