User talk:Labattblueboy/Archive 2
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Labattblueboy. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
Messines barrage map
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Battle_of_Messines_-_plannig_map.jpg
Do you mind editing the typo ("plannig") to 'planning' please as I've failed to find a way to do it. Thanks.Keith-264 (talk) 09:48, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks, I think the map works very well here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Keith-264/sandbox2 which has a revision of the Messines page (I hadn't realised it was GA class until I altered my laptop settings so I've tried to consolidate all the piecemeal changes....) which is nearing completion.Keith-264 (talk) 14:34, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Tenedos/Bozcaada
Thanks for your comments on the Tenedos/Bozcaada discussion. I'm seriously working hard here on forging community consensus about the name (as opposed to just defaulting to the status quo because of lack of consensus) of the island. In the spirit and letter of Wikipedia Naming Guidelines, that is the primary goal. I hope you will read my newest attempt at consensus-building, which is respectful and progressive. If you have any comments, they will be greatly appreciated. AbstractIllusions (talk) 13:17, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 14:33, 23 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Nikthestoned 14:33, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
Hey there
Hi. With tongue partly in cheek, and for no one in particular as audience, I've illustrated the problem of source counting at Talk:Renée Zellweger. If we go source counting for how many sources have wikipedia-quality fonts we have to give an English name to Renée Zellweger and dozens of other American actors and singers as well. Also, the Vietnamese alphabet is based on Portuguese and already "given" to the Vietnamese by westerners, it's not the original Chinese-based script. We don't on en.wp romanize scripts which are already romanizations, check out Hagåtña. I'll hope you'll reconsider allowing those Vietnamese gods to be restored after the undiscussed move. At least if there's going to be an RM it should start from the way the article was. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:48, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
- Hi, :) I'd like to reply on a couple of things, but first, so that I don't waste your time, have you ever been in a discussion on diacritics before? Are you familiar with Prolog's user page of diacritics? In ictu oculi (talk) 17:04, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
- No discussion on diacritics specifically, and I can't say that it's a topic that interests me greatly. I am more than happy to discuss the issue but you will find that my opinion regarding requested moves is more often then not guided by the convention of style guide that provides direction on a given subject. When no policy guidance exists to the contrary, the common name is the preferred option. The development of a Vietnamese naming convention that would provide guidance on diacritics for Vietnamese names may be the best venue for avoiding these issue in the future.--Labattblueboy (talk) 20:07, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
- Okay so you're coming out of the blue and not aware that in this case the convention of style guide WP:DIACRITICS that provides direction on a given subject has been slowburn edit warred so what is on top is in opposition to 100% of French Polish etc articles. Look in the history and you will see a succession of editors trying to change it to something that doesn't contradict the way en.wp's 4 million articles actually are. Also we've just had several long votes on Vietnamese diacritics Talk:Ca Mau and so on, and an RfC where 23 vs 16 were in favour of diacritics. Ultimately you should express your own view. If you personally are against e.g. Talk:Renée Zellweger or against a Vietnamese god have native spelling express what you want... since the guidelines express only the personal view of those whose edits are on top at the moment.
- The essay on the typological issues is at User:Prolog/Diacritical marks In ictu oculi (talk) 00:22, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
- Hi did you have a look? ... the question now really, when all other A-Z languages have accents, why discriminate against Vietnamese? In ictu oculi (talk) 14:02, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
- No discussion on diacritics specifically, and I can't say that it's a topic that interests me greatly. I am more than happy to discuss the issue but you will find that my opinion regarding requested moves is more often then not guided by the convention of style guide that provides direction on a given subject. When no policy guidance exists to the contrary, the common name is the preferred option. The development of a Vietnamese naming convention that would provide guidance on diacritics for Vietnamese names may be the best venue for avoiding these issue in the future.--Labattblueboy (talk) 20:07, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXVII, August 2012
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:59, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Military history coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject has started its 2012 project coordinator election process, where we will select a team of coordinators to organize the project over the coming year. If you would like to be considered as a candidate, please submit your nomination by 14 September. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact one of the current coordinators on their talk page. This message was delivered here because you are a member of the Military history WikiProject. – Military history coordinators (about the project • what coordinators do) 09:23, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi
Support I don't particularly care about the diacritics one way or the other, but "city" is not required in the title. This article was moved by In ictu oculi while a number of requested move discussions on Vietnamese names were/are taking place. The reasoning for the move may very well be valid but the execution was not appropriate, and certainly not uncontroversial.--Labattblueboy (talk) 04:59, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
- This is a little one-sided, you could have noted that it was restoring an undiscussed move made counter RM decision on town names? In ictu oculi (talk) 05:25, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
- You're also unaware of the rest of the background, IPs, removing notice of failed RM, etc. In ictu oculi (talk) 05:33, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
- Moving/reverting names with diacritics is not uncontroversial. These are disruptive edits and should not continue. Both you and Kauffner need to stop doing it.--Labattblueboy (talk) 12:33, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
- As I said, you're also unaware of the rest of the background, IPs, removing notices of failed RM, etc. Whatever you might think, it seems many editors would consider that there is a difference between (i) making an undiscussed move counter a RM, and (ii) reverting such a move. But if you don't agree you're welcome to differ. As for "city", by all means try moving the article back to the original full Vietnamese form but without city. This would be a solution that should make almost everyone happy. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:26, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
- I am very likely missing some of the background, however the little I have seen leaves me nothing but displeased. I would be entirely fine with removing city for the title and leaving this article where it stands until a broader solution is decided upon.--Labattblueboy (talk) 03:08, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
- I'm pretty displeased myself, but not as much as some. Whose name you won't see at Talk:Lac Long Quan because of being disillusioned with the attitude to Vietnamese on en.wp. I'd hope that now that you know that there were 1600 undiscussed moves and a majority RfC in favour of restoring them, you would you at least revisit your opposition (specifically your opposition to restoring undiscussed moves at Talk:Lac Long Quan, Talk:My Linh) and treating Vietnamese names as we treat all other Latin alphabets. Because at the moment you're opposing that and supporting unique treatment for Vietnamese. In ictu oculi (talk) 10:15, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
- There being a majority is not a valid argument (WP:MAJORITY / WP:VOTE) and if I remember correctly the RfC conclusion was no consensus. My view is that without any specific guidance to the contrary, the common name, whether it employ diacritics or not, should be the name employed. Naturally, I would support expanding that to include cases where disambiguation between two names is required and the best way to do so is via diacritics. SA good number of the 1600 articles (I'm not sure that's an accurate number, I only did a spot check) you mention have been moved a number of times in their history, so it's not easy to identify which is the most stable or appropriate name. With that in mind, I likely won't change my mind at Talk:Lac Long Quan because the data was rather conclusive. For Talk:My Linh, I would be willing to reconsider if information showing that the diacritic name is the most common name in English sources. That situation is a case where each should likely be evaluated individually. If a naming convention was developed for Vietnamese names I would naturally support that concluding guideline, but in this case there isn't one. --Labattblueboy (talk) 15:40, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
- Hi, well what's the point of advocating a RfC if the majority won't be listened to anyway? (Which is of course what has happened). But thanks for raising the two other points:
- (i) There was a large uncontroversial and largely self-generating set of moves to upgrade spellings across the whole of Wikipedia 2006ish as Wikipedia upgraded from ASCII. That goes across all Latin-alphabet languages, Polish, Maltese, Turkish, Vietnamese. We're talking 100,000s of "moves" which weren't considered "moves" since it was a font upgrade issue. I'd be very surprised if you can show me any articles moving in the other direction. Do you have an example?
- (ii) As for most common. en.wp does not follow "most common." The full spelling is never the most common in English sources, because of multiplicity of html/paperback/newspaper sources. This goes for Chloë Grace Moretz onwards, which is why every en.wp article has diacritics despite the most common sources not doing. Again can you show an example to substantiate that diacritics are most common for any article? We don't follow "most common" for Chloë Grace Moretz, Lech Wałęsa but you say we should for Mỹ Linh. Why pick on just one language? Is it, as one User suggested because Vietnamese are Asian? In ictu oculi (talk) 00:40, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
- RfC are not about majority vote but quality of argument, so let the majority argument go, it won't get you anywhere. Unless some naming convention provides direction to the contrary (take WP:IMOS or WP:NC-KO as examples) we do most often employ the common name in requested moves. The lack of an agreed upon naming convention for Vietnamese names is why there is inconsistent use of diacritics in that language category. Opposing the use of diacritics in a given case does not mean someone is discriminating against Vietnamese or Asians in general.--Labattblueboy (talk) 16:40, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
- Labattblueboy
- re. "RfC are not about majority vote but quality of argument, so let the majority argument go, it won't get you anywhere."
- The relevance is that you arrived on this subject telling everyone that we should have one. The point of mentioning it is you raised it. Now that you know there was one.
- re. "Opposing the use of diacritics in a given case does not mean someone is discriminating against Vietnamese or Asians in general."
- Who is opposing the use of diacritics in a given case? This is exactly the point. 100% of Europeans have diacritics on en.wp, 100%, and some Users are against all Vietnamese names in titles. There is no "given case" - I have tried to submit this fact for your attention three times now, and you don't seem to believe it. At this point I'm going to ask you if you don't believe me, then find out for yourself, go and search en.wp to find a non-Vietnamese article which has been diacritic stripped. Happy hunting.
- Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 18:00, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
- I should have clarified that maybe an RfC at a different location or of broader context would have been more appropriate. As you put it, other languages and cultural groups do employ diacritics and it is possible the results would be different if a wider net was cast. There are always people who oppose diacritics for any language, it doesn't make them racist, it just means they disagree with their general usage. WP:ARMEN, WP:NC-CHINA (for tone marks) and even a bit of WP:HE provide instances where diacritics are not to be employed but equally provide context on when they should. A prominent example that comes to mind is Qur'an rather than Qurʾān, but going through the archives of WP:UE would surely produce more--Labattblueboy (talk) 19:34, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
- Hi, thanks for this reply. It's nice to see that you are taking the subject seriously and sincerely and appears you have evidently read Prolog's essay/resources I linked above or something very similar.
- No, opposition to diacritics doesn't have to be racist (you mentioned the r-word, not me, xenonymophobic would be more neutral), that was one endearing thing about GoodDay, the extremely anti-diacritic editor who got blocked recently. I liked that he also went for Zoë Baird, which showed he wasn't motived by feelings against foreigners. However you will see "foreign thingys" "invasion of foreign editors" and similar sentiment around the park.
- And indeed most editors who are against Vietnamese names are also against Czech or even French, it's just that for whatever reason there is now consensus on European names.
- The difference between Armenian/Chinese/Hebrew/Arabic/Russian and French/Czech/Turkish/Vietnamese/Maori/Croatian is that French/Czech/Turkish/Vietnamese/Maori/Croatian are Latin-alphabet, not romanizations. Admittedly Turkish/Vietnamese/Croatian did "start" as romanizations, but now they are not, they are as Latin as Croatian and more Latin than Icelandic.
- 19thC script: Ђуро Даничић, 吳士連, مصطفى كمال أتاتورك
- 20thC script: Đuro Daničić, Ngô Sĩ Liên, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk
- New York Times: Duro Danicic, Ngo Si Lien. Mustafa Kemal Ataturk
- Chicago/academic: Đuro Daničić, Ngô Sĩ Liên, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk
- Vietnamese is already romanised, there is no romanization like exists for Russian. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:58, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
- I should have clarified that maybe an RfC at a different location or of broader context would have been more appropriate. As you put it, other languages and cultural groups do employ diacritics and it is possible the results would be different if a wider net was cast. There are always people who oppose diacritics for any language, it doesn't make them racist, it just means they disagree with their general usage. WP:ARMEN, WP:NC-CHINA (for tone marks) and even a bit of WP:HE provide instances where diacritics are not to be employed but equally provide context on when they should. A prominent example that comes to mind is Qur'an rather than Qurʾān, but going through the archives of WP:UE would surely produce more--Labattblueboy (talk) 19:34, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
- Labattblueboy
- RfC are not about majority vote but quality of argument, so let the majority argument go, it won't get you anywhere. Unless some naming convention provides direction to the contrary (take WP:IMOS or WP:NC-KO as examples) we do most often employ the common name in requested moves. The lack of an agreed upon naming convention for Vietnamese names is why there is inconsistent use of diacritics in that language category. Opposing the use of diacritics in a given case does not mean someone is discriminating against Vietnamese or Asians in general.--Labattblueboy (talk) 16:40, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
- There being a majority is not a valid argument (WP:MAJORITY / WP:VOTE) and if I remember correctly the RfC conclusion was no consensus. My view is that without any specific guidance to the contrary, the common name, whether it employ diacritics or not, should be the name employed. Naturally, I would support expanding that to include cases where disambiguation between two names is required and the best way to do so is via diacritics. SA good number of the 1600 articles (I'm not sure that's an accurate number, I only did a spot check) you mention have been moved a number of times in their history, so it's not easy to identify which is the most stable or appropriate name. With that in mind, I likely won't change my mind at Talk:Lac Long Quan because the data was rather conclusive. For Talk:My Linh, I would be willing to reconsider if information showing that the diacritic name is the most common name in English sources. That situation is a case where each should likely be evaluated individually. If a naming convention was developed for Vietnamese names I would naturally support that concluding guideline, but in this case there isn't one. --Labattblueboy (talk) 15:40, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
- I'm pretty displeased myself, but not as much as some. Whose name you won't see at Talk:Lac Long Quan because of being disillusioned with the attitude to Vietnamese on en.wp. I'd hope that now that you know that there were 1600 undiscussed moves and a majority RfC in favour of restoring them, you would you at least revisit your opposition (specifically your opposition to restoring undiscussed moves at Talk:Lac Long Quan, Talk:My Linh) and treating Vietnamese names as we treat all other Latin alphabets. Because at the moment you're opposing that and supporting unique treatment for Vietnamese. In ictu oculi (talk) 10:15, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
- I am very likely missing some of the background, however the little I have seen leaves me nothing but displeased. I would be entirely fine with removing city for the title and leaving this article where it stands until a broader solution is decided upon.--Labattblueboy (talk) 03:08, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
- As I said, you're also unaware of the rest of the background, IPs, removing notices of failed RM, etc. Whatever you might think, it seems many editors would consider that there is a difference between (i) making an undiscussed move counter a RM, and (ii) reverting such a move. But if you don't agree you're welcome to differ. As for "city", by all means try moving the article back to the original full Vietnamese form but without city. This would be a solution that should make almost everyone happy. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:26, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
- Moving/reverting names with diacritics is not uncontroversial. These are disruptive edits and should not continue. Both you and Kauffner need to stop doing it.--Labattblueboy (talk) 12:33, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
Polygon Wood map
Is this available to add to the PW page? Thanks.Keith-264 (talk) 12:01, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 19:56, 22 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Sorry! Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 19:56, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXVIII, September 2012
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project and/or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Nick-D (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:45, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
messines
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Peer_review/Battle_of_Messines/archive1#Battle_of_Messines
at ACR or FAC, there might possibly be a question raised about the source for "File:Battle of Messines - planning map (cropped).jpg". Currently the source is the generic "www.awm.gov.au", but at ACR or FAC, they will probably want a direct link (if one exists), or a book with a page number; "File:Battle of Messines - Map.jpg": probably has a similar issue, in that its listed source is the generic "www.dean.usma.edu";
Greetings Labatt, these comments were made during the peer review for the Messines page. Are the maps your contributions? They look like they're from the AWM so if so, are there any more detailed citations available? ThanksKeith-264 (talk) 12:51, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXIX, October 2012
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Nick-D (talk) and Ian Rose (talk) 02:43, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXX, November 2012
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 01:39, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Maps
I've been looking at the maps you've uploaded and put several onto the 3rd Ypres pages. I don't suppose there's anything showing the Gheluvelt plateau/Menin ridge is there? Thanks. PS Messines is in for an A-class review.Keith-264 (talk) 22:13, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXI, December 2012
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:20, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Environmental impact of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill
Hi, Labattblueboy. According to the page editing statistics you have been among the most active editors of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill article. There is a request for comments if the Environmental impact of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill was split correctly from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill and if it should be merged back there. Related sections for this discussion are also this and this. Your comments are appreciated. Thank you. Beagel (talk) 16:05, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXII, January 2013
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:17, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Advert tag in MacKeeper
I am replacing the tag because the article makes no mention of its widely known problems, and is styled like an advertisement. FrankDev (talk) 03:51, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Deepwater Horizon oil spill
Hi, Labattblueboy. You have been an active editor on Deepwater Horizon oil spill and/or its related articles. During some last months there has been an active development of cleaning up that article by splitting off large sections into separate articles. A Deepwater Horizon series were created (all the articles accessible by Template:Deepwater Horizon oil spill series. You are invited to assist by cleaning-up and copy-editing these articles. There are also ongoing discussion concerning additional split-offs. You could see split-off templates at the article's page and find discussions at the talk page. Your input would be useful for building consensus on these issues. Thank you. Beagel (talk) 23:26, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXIII, February 2013
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 07:34, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Nomination of Jenna Rose for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jenna Rose is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jenna Rose (4th nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
You had been involved with the discussion the first time I nominated this article to Afd. I have nominated it for the fourth time, and I hope you may review and possibly contribute to the current one. Thanks Rogerthat94 (talk) 10:06, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
1971 Bangladesh atrocities
You recently comment on a RM on the article 1971 Bangladesh atrocities. The discussion was closed and the article moved to the previous title by another editor per WP:RM/TR. A new RM has been initiated and can be found here Darkness Shines (talk) 16:25, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
Inter Milan RM
I feel you have missed the point of the RM. I am not suggesting that F.C. Internazionale Milano is the most common name for the club; I am merely pointing out that the club's short names – "Internazionale", "Inter" and "Inter Milan" – all have issues that make them unsuitable as titles for the article. As you pointed out, "Internazionale" is unsuitable because it is simply the Italian word for "International" and therefore rather ambiguous; "Inter" is equally problematic as it is merely short for "Internazionale"; finally, "Inter Milan" is not suitable as it has not yet been proven that, globally, it is more of a prominent nickname than either of the other two – it may be popular in the Anglosphere, but even though this is the English Wikipedia, we are not bound by what is produced by English-language sources; certainly in Italian, "Inter Milan" is never used. As I have mentioned in the RM, we have done something similar with the association football article, since neither "football" nor "soccer" was an appropriate title. I hope you understand the purpose of this RM now and why I selected the target title as I did. Besides, the article had been located pretty stably at F.C. Internazionale Milano since 2006 until that flawed RM came up last year. – PeeJay 18:20, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
- If you're suggesting that Internazionale Milano is not the common name than its likely not the most appropriate title. What the team is named in other languages is largely irrelevant; it only matters what the team is named in English sources. The article titles will often be the official name but not always. I appreciate that Inter Milan is not really a proper translation but it is nonetheless the most common name in English and consequently the most appropriate title. Alas, it’s common enough for subjects to have different names across languages, so the translated differences are not something of concern because it doesn’t result in ambiguity.--Labattblueboy (talk) 15:05, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXIV, March 2013
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 04:04, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXV, April 2013
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:28, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXVI, May 2013
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:22, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
Tech RM
Hi L, I posted under one of them
- Procedural close - sorry L, but really these should be at technical moves, and reverted automatically by WP:BRD. We shouldn't have to cite the 23:10 (excluding 6 canvassed votes) majority of recent RfC to restore the articles.
Thanks, know you mean well here, and I'd personally like these restored, but if we wanted a full WP Vietnam RM, we can pick more important articles from among the 1500 articles already undiscussed moved. WP Vietnam is short of editors and general tiredness already. In ictu oculi (talk) 23:26, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXVII, June 2013
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 08:59, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 15
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cartographer (E.S. Posthumus album), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Epiphany (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:08, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
By the way
If it's okay to ask, may I ask what your particular interest in Vietnam is? In ictu oculi (talk) 07:46, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
- In Vietnam itself, none really. I do eat Vietnamese a fair amount just on account of the neighbourhood I live in, buy that's largely beyond the point. My interests in the topic only developed because Vietnamese diacritic centric moved request started showing up at WP:RM on a disproportionate basis from others and my involvement has largely flowed from there.--Labattblueboy (talk) 16:34, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
- Hmm, okay. Just wondering since you didn't take part in the Vietnamese diacritics RfC. It's only disproportionate since so many articles - pretty well the entire article corpus - was undiscussed moved. With the, now history, Hockey and Tennis issues it was only 300 plus 50 articles which were created not moved. In ictu oculi (talk) 23:43, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
- Well there hasn't been an RfC on the topic for some time now. The RfC was certainly before I became at all engaged. I would much rather there be a consensus from that community but thems the breams sometimes.--Labattblueboy (talk) 02:29, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
- Hmm, okay. Just wondering since you didn't take part in the Vietnamese diacritics RfC. It's only disproportionate since so many articles - pretty well the entire article corpus - was undiscussed moved. With the, now history, Hockey and Tennis issues it was only 300 plus 50 articles which were created not moved. In ictu oculi (talk) 23:43, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi, unfortunately the fact that an RM has had previous moves is relevant, though I did initially place the RM template without mentioning it. FWIW here is the timeline:
- 04:51, 6 October 2011 Kauffner locked move using ({R to alternative} template)
- 05:36, 11 August 2011 Kauffner moved Nguyễn Trãi to Nguyen Trai over redirect: Drop Vietnamese diacritics as there is virtually no use in published English. See Britannica, discussion at Talk:Ngo Bao Chau)
- 19:59, 5 August 2011 Scarfaced Charley reverted Nguyen Trai to Nguyễn Trãi
- 16:50, 28 July 2011 Sphilbrick (i.e. Kauffner by db6 "uncontroversial move") (moved Nguyễn Trãi to Nguyen Trai: Move Vietnamese name to non-diacritical form per discussion at Talk:Ngo Bao Chau, Britannica, WP:UE, and official use by the Vietnam News Agency.) -........ but where is the discussion about Nguyễn Trãi at Talk:Ngo Bao Chau?
Also 28 July-07 Aug Talk:Cần Thơ RM demonstrates that this wasn't an uncontroversial move even in July-August 2011. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:53, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXVIII, July 2013
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:35, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
A pie for you!
|
For mapping out the 16 vs 28 sources with or without Vietnamese fonts which cover Nguyen Trai. That was the first diligent and balanced attempt I've seen from anyone for a Vietnamese biography. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:55, 4 August 2013 (UTC) |
Discussion at Talk:Microsoft Minesweeper#Requested move (again)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Microsoft Minesweeper#Requested move (again). Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 22:09, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
Discussion at Talk:MacKeeper
I don't believe that "copy editing" is sufficient to remove the fundamental conflict of interest. One of the authors who made substantial contributions to the text of the article admitted to a connection to the company marketing the product. Another has a "disclaimer" - he "... in the past worked as a consultant for IT and Security Companies and may edit those pages from time to time" - when he has only ever edited one page not related to Zeobit, Kromtech, PCKeeper or MacKeeper. The only way to remove the conflict of interest is to start again or to get people to openly declare their connections and revert the edits of those with COIs. Otherwise, I believe we need to keep the WP:COI tag in place. Let's open a discussion and find a real consensus. Fiachra10003 (talk) 00:55, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
I saw you jumped right in and undertook some maintenance, updating and improving Commonwealth War Graves Commission after I nominated it for GA-review (though I realize your edits might not have been connected to any future review). I decided to nominate the article after a brief exchange with User:Carcharoth, where he confirmed his original interest in reassessing the article, though he was unable to say that he would definitively be the one to do the review - if it gets done at all anytime soon... My point in writing this message was just to thank you for attending to the article so quickly. It's great to see there's genuine interest and I hope that the end result is the promotion of this article to GA-status, however far away (or close) that might be. Since you're a principle contributor to the article, I have a question: would you be the one who could organize an ad-hoc "peer" review of it while you're waiting for someone to start the formal review process? Not sure if you'd thought about that or not, or what relationships, if any, you have w/ other contributors to the article. Maybe there aren't any other active contributors? idk. Anyway, I just hope it goes well and that the article is promoted, Cheers. Azx2 06:28, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 15
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Commonwealth War Graves Commission, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page British Expeditionary Force (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:05, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXIX, August 2013
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 00:10, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
RfC relating to Vietnamese geo article titles
Since you participated in either the previous RfC or in a recent related RM you may wish to be informed of Talk:Gia Bình District#RfC: Should non-exonym Vietnam geo article titles have Vietnamese alphabet spellings?. Thank you. In ictu oculi (talk) 11:37, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
Link to COH
The old link to the COH isn't working but this one is http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dhh-dhp/his/docs/CEF_e.pdf Keith-264 (talk) 23:14, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
WikiProject Military history coordinator election
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Kirill [talk] 17:09, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXXX, September 2013
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 00:00, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
Greetings. Because you participated in the August 2013 move request regarding this subject, you may be interested in participating in the current discussion. This notice is provided pursuant to Wikipedia:Canvassing#Appropriate notification. Cheers! bd2412 T 21:31, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue XCI, October 2013
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:44, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Discussion of interest
A discussion you may be interested in is this RFC, a proposal to make the second comma in a date/place optional. United States Man (talk) 06:03, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
I didn't handle it right. I was thinking of splitting the Wil-Cox Bridge content into its own article if its historic status justifies a separate article. Only then would the move be appropriate, with the necessary changes in content.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 15:19, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue XCII, November 2013
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 05:48, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
Talk:Eskimo
Hi. As proposer you didn't comment on the previous section 4 options. Indigenous People of the Arctic, Indigenous Peoples of the Arctic, Indigenous People of the North American Arctic, Indigenous Peoples of the North American Arctic. Do you have an opinion on the pre-RM discussed titles? In ictu oculi (talk) 02:06, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue XCIII, December 2013
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 00:14, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Basra Memorial, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.cwgc.org/find-a-cemetery/cemetery/88400.
It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.
If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) MadmanBot (talk) 01:37, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for December 29
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
- Alamein Memorial (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Alamein
- Commonwealth War Graves Commission (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Robert Fox
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
Allegiance
Hi, just a question here. I noted you have changed the "allegiance" designation in a number of articles' infoboxes. Can you point me to the discussion that the changes were made due to consensus via MILHIST discussion. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 16:55, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
- Bzuk, the reverts were to undo edits by User:Bardrick in which the user broadly included the term "British Empire" in place of the allegiances content that was previously there, often the name of one "dominion" or another,(Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Bardrick_amendment_of_allegiance_field_on_military_biographies) and was subsequently blocked for doing so without consensus. The edit was simply to return the article to its previous baseline. Discussion on the topic located at Talk:Arthur_Currie#Flag_of_allegiance and Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Military_history#WP:MILMOS.23FLAGS_and_WWI_flags_of_Commonwealth_dominions. Better to place multiple allegiances (Canada and UK in this case) rather than simply "British Empire".--Labattblueboy (talk) 21:42, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue XCIV, January 2014
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:27, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue XCV, February 2014
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:33, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
I'm sorry that I didn't understand "...I take this to mean it should be located at K’omoks until a requested move chooses otherwise..." at Talk:Comox people#Articles moves. I figured that I must protect the version name before the war began otherwise it would freeze a name in place that would be unsatisfactory to one of the two editors. It seemed fair. Do you feel I should have done otherwise? Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:48, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue XCVI, March 2014
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:08, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Canadian National Vimy Memorial reversion
Do you know who "Denise Thomson" is? The source's author is cited as "Denise Thomas"; the attribution in the article text is to "Denise Thomson". Are these supposed to be the same person? If the article can't even get her name right, why should readers put any stock in the assertion being made? Attributing a position to an unknown person using a source that can't be checked without difficulty (link in the citation doesn't actually work) is not exactly helpful. Prefacing her name even with something as simple as "Canada historian" (assuming she is one) would give some slight weight to her position. If she can be described more precisely (university? notability?), that would be better. If you can clarify/fix this issue, please do so. Otherwise, kindly restore my {clarify} tag. - dcljr (talk) 06:20, 2 April 2014 (UTC) Source is in fact Thomson, corrections made to tags and to ref section. I've also included historian with the name.--Labattblueboy (talk) 20:06, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue XCVII, April 2014
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 14:34, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Commonwealth War Graves Commission
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Commonwealth War Graves Commission you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. 
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Nick-D -- Nick-D (talk) 07:10, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
- I've just posted my review of this fine article. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 02:02, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Problems with upload of File:TheTONSeal.gif
Thanks for uploading File:TheTONSeal.gif. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.
To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 04:05, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
April 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Tohono O'odham Nation may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- the [[San Xavier Indian Reservation]], surrounding the 18th century [[Mission San Xavier del Bac]]].{{sfn|Fontana|1998|p=36}}{{sfn|Native Peoples A to Z|2009|p=1988}}{{sfn|Pritzker|2000|p=100}} In
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 05:51, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
File source problem with File:SarajevoRose.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:SarajevoRose.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.
If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.
Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:32, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue XCVIII, May 2014
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:24, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Commonwealth War Graves Commission
The article Commonwealth War Graves Commission you nominated as a good article has failed 
; see Talk:Commonwealth War Graves Commission for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Nick-D -- Nick-D (talk) 10:41, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Congratulations on the recent GA, well done! I have nominated the article for Did you know, which will hopefully result in the article appearing on the main page. Thanks, Matty.007 18:57, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
DYK for Commonwealth War Graves Commission
 | On 26 May 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Commonwealth War Graves Commission, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Commonwealth War Graves Commission commemorates 1.7 million deceased Commonwealth military service members in 153 countries? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Commonwealth War Graves Commission. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
— Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:43, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue XCIX, June 2014
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:15, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Disruptive Edits
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at MacKeeper. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted or removed.
- If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
- If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive, until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. Let's work together on this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OKNoah (talk • contribs) 03:24, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Vimy Memorial - Canon.JPG
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Vimy Memorial - Canon.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:35, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Vimy Memorial - Breaking of the Swords.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Vimy Memorial - Breaking of the Swords.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:35, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Vimy Memorial - Sympathy of the Canadians for the Helpless.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Vimy Memorial - Sympathy of the Canadians for the Helpless.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:35, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Canadian National Vimy Memorial - Mother Canada.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Canadian National Vimy Memorial - Mother Canada.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:36, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Vimy memorial from the north side of the face.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Vimy memorial from the north side of the face.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:36, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Canadian National Vimy Memorial - female defender (full colour).JPG
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Canadian National Vimy Memorial - female defender (full colour).JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:43, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
Possibly unfree File:Pozieres British Cemetery and Memorial.JPG
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Pozieres British Cemetery and Memorial.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:46, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Arras Memorial and Faubourg-D'Amiens Cemetery.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Arras Memorial and Faubourg-D'Amiens Cemetery.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:46, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Arras Royal Flying Corps Memorial - full view.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Arras Royal Flying Corps Memorial - full view.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:47, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Normandy American Cemetery and Memorial.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Normandy American Cemetery and Memorial.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:48, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Château-Thierry American Memorial Aisne-Marne Panorama Night.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Château-Thierry American Memorial Aisne-Marne Panorama Night.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:49, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:American Aisne-Marne Memorial - face détail.JPG
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:American Aisne-Marne Memorial - face détail.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:51, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Arras Memorial - globe.JPG
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Arras Memorial - globe.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:52, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Arras Memorial and Fauberg-D'Amiens Cemetery - right side.JPG
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Arras Memorial and Fauberg-D'Amiens Cemetery - right side.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:55, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Neuve Chapelle Indian Memorial.JPG
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Neuve Chapelle Indian Memorial.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:56, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue C, July 2014
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 03:47, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CI, August 2014
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:23, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Discussion at Talk:Magnifier (Windows)#Requested move 23 August 2014
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Magnifier (Windows)#Requested move 23 August 2014. Thanks. Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 16:52, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CII, September 2014
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 02:24, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:MacKeeper screenshot.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:MacKeeper screenshot.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 13:55, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
WikiProject Military history coordinator election
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:06, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CIII, October 2014
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 14:32, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CIII, October 2014, Redux
|
NOTE: This replaces the earlier October 2014 Bugle message, which had incorrect links -- please ignore/delete the previous message. Thank uou!
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 01:52, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CIV, November 2014
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:27, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
Nominations for the Military history Wikiproject's Historian and Newcomer of the Year Awards are now open!
The Military history Wikiproject has opened nominations for the Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year. Nominations will be accepted until 13 December at 23:59 GMT, with voting to begin at 0:00 GMT 14 December. The voting will conclude on 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:35, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Nominations for the Military history Wikiproject's Historian and Newcomer of the Year Awards are now open!
The Military history Wikiproject has opened nominations for the Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year. Nominations will be accepted until 13 December at 23:59 GMT, with voting to begin at 0:00 GMT 14 December. The voting will conclude on 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:41, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
This message was accidentally sent using an incorrect mailing list, therefore this message is being resent using the correct list. As a result, some users may get this message twice; if so please discard. We apologize for the inconvenience.
Your GA nomination of First Battle of Passchendaele
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article First Battle of Passchendaele you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Djmaschek -- Djmaschek (talk) 21:01, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
Voting for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year now open!
Nominations for the military historian of the year and military newcomer of the year have now closed, and voting for the candidates has officially opened. All project members are invited to cast there votes for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year candidates before the elections close at 23:59 December 21st. For the coordinators, TomStar81
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:32, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CV, December 2014
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:51, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of First Battle of Passchendaele
The article First Battle of Passchendaele you nominated as a good article has passed 
; see Talk:First Battle of Passchendaele for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Djmaschek -- Djmaschek (talk) 21:01, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
- Please see my Post GA Review comment on the talk page. Thanks. Djmaschek (talk) 21:16, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Passchendaele map Comment
Apparently maps and drawings should be uploaded as png not jpg so I redid it yesterday as a png and nominated the original for speedy deletion [1] see here for the replacement.Keith-264 (talk) 17:06, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
![[1]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map_showing_wet_areas_near_Passchendaele_village.png){kind=link}
Nomination of List of performances at The Little Theatre on the Square for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of performances at The Little Theatre on the Square is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of performances at The Little Theatre on the Square until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:26, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
WWI memorial images
Hi there. As I've now got more free time than I did last year, I've returned to the topic of memorials and images of those memorials (mostly WWI ones but also other ones as well). I started by going to Commons and requesting undeletion of images of memorials designed by Lutyens as those are now public domain (as of 31 December 2014, the end of the 70th year since he died on 1 January 1944) so the absence of FoP in France no longer matters. For that discussion, see here and here. However, I only just now became aware of this discussion and the other ones on that page. What I am going to try and do is document the discussions that have taken place regarding these images. I am going to ping User:Skeezix1000 as well. Ultimately, my aim will be to try and get at least one image of each memorial present under fair use, even if nothing else is possible, and also to try and get a readable summary of the entire debate up to the present (with the intention of getting further review and possibly a final resolution). Does that sound like it would be possible and is it something you (and maybe Skeezix) would be willing to help with? Carcharoth (talk) 20:52, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Crosses of Sacrifice
While categorising lots of Crosses of Sacrifice on Commons, I came across this one in Weymouth, Massachusetts, USA. I am assuming this is one of the non-CWGC ones, but was wondering if you would be able to shed any light on this? While doing that categorising, I came across several historical pics of unveilings and even an old picture of a construction of a Cross of Sacrifice, so I'm going to add those pics to the Cross of Sacrifice page. Carcharoth (talk) 01:24, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Carcharoth: Interesting. Pro Patria is the motto of the Royal Canadian Regiment. It's certainly not a CWGC cross of sacrifice as there is no CWGC cemetery in Weymouth, Mass. Given it's proximity to Boston (and Boston's historical shipping link with Halifax, Nova Scotia and St. John's Newfoundland it's more than likely a memorial to men that joined the Canadian military before the US joined either war.--Labattblueboy (talk) 16:13, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've left it in the Commons category, as that doesn't (yet) distinguish between CWGC crosses of sacrifice and other ones (that copy or follow the CWGC design). I spent some time on Commons yesterday putting lots of images in that Crosses of Sacrifice category and in the Stone of Remembrance category as well. Presumably the Cross of Sacrifice at Beechwood Cemetery is a CWGC one? In the process of that image work at Commons, I came across some interesting images of official wreath-laying and early construction and so forth. I've mostly added those to the en-WP articles. While sorting through all that, I came across Commons:Category:Croix du Sacrifice. I tried to find something about this memorial on Wikipedia, but nothing yet that I can see. Should it be somewhere on Canadian war memorials? While looking through that list, I also tried to find pictures for the Monument des Braves, Shawinigan and the Monument aux braves de N.D.G., but got distracted by finding Commons:Category:Monument aux Braves (Québec) which seems to be something else again... I have now worked out where that Cross of Sacrifice is - it is in Quebec City at the entrance to the Plains of Abraham, so I'm going to add one of those images to that article. More here. Carcharoth (talk) 23:31, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Carcharoth: Interesting. Pro Patria is the motto of the Royal Canadian Regiment. It's certainly not a CWGC cross of sacrifice as there is no CWGC cemetery in Weymouth, Mass. Given it's proximity to Boston (and Boston's historical shipping link with Halifax, Nova Scotia and St. John's Newfoundland it's more than likely a memorial to men that joined the Canadian military before the US joined either war.--Labattblueboy (talk) 16:13, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CVI, January 2015
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:27, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of SAMPA
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on SAMPA, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. JSpung (talk) 14:20, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CVII, February 2015
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:50, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CVIII, March 2015
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:36, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Mackeeper-logo.png
Thanks for uploading File:Mackeeper-logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:57, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CIX, April 2015
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 06:33, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CX, May 2015
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:03, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello from the team at Featured article review!
We are preparing to take a closer look at Featured articles promoted in 2004–2010 that may need a review. We started with a script-compiled list of older FAs that have not had a recent formal review. The next step is to prune the list by removing articles that are still actively maintained, up-to-date, and believed to meet current standards. We know that many of you personally maintain articles that you nominated, so we'd appreciate your help in winnowing the list where appropriate.
Please take a look at the sandbox list, check over the FAs listed by your name, and indicate on the sandbox talk page your assessment of their current status. Likewise, if you have taken on the maintenance of any listed FAs that were originally nominated by a departed editor, please indicate their status. BLPs should be given especially careful consideration.
Thanks for your help! Maralia (talk) 19:19, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
COI Warning re MacKeeper
Hello, Labattblueboy. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you have an external relationship with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article MacKeeper, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.
All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.
If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:
- Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
- Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
- Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.
Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies. Note that Wikipedia's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.
For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. MissPiggysBoyfriend (talk) 04:58, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
- @MissPiggysBoyfriend: You are more than welcome to push the subject with whomever you like. Any search of my account history or location would quickly show I have no link to the company.--Labattblueboy (talk) 11:28, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
- I wouldn't take Piggy's claim seriously, this is the second time the user believed another user had a "conflict of interest" in this article, alone. You are getting this since you disagreed with MissPiggysBoyfriend, even though you have been here for nine years and should be respected a little more for your veteran status. Take care. TheGracefulSlick (talk) 23:39, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXI, June 2015
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:38, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXII, July 2015
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:34, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXIII, August 2015
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:45, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited August Jack Khatsahlano, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stawamus. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:28, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXIV, September 2015
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 05:09, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
WikiProject Military history coordinator election
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 29 September. Yours, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:20, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXV, October 2015
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 21:46, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
Clarification, the Author listed here is the Architect? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:15, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for November 16
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited St Symphorien Military Cemetery, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hainaut. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:59, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXVI, November 2015
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 03:25, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Nominations for the Military history WikiProject historian and newcomer of the year awards now open!
On behalf of the Military history WikiProject's Coordinators, we would like to extend an invitation to nominate deserving editors for the 2015 Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards. The nomination period will run from 7 December to 23:59 13 December, with the election phase running from 14 December to 23:59 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:05, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
Season's Greetings
To You and Yours!
FWiW Bzuk (talk) 21:39, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of St Symphorien Military Cemetery
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article St Symphorien Military Cemetery you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hchc2009 -- Hchc2009 (talk) 10:40, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXVII, December 2015
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 05:06, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
DYK nomination of St Symphorien Military Cemetery
Hello! Your submission of St Symphorien Military Cemetery at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Manxruler (talk) 03:35, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
- There are further issues with this nomination, and action is needed. Please stop by at your earliest convenience. Many thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 18:24, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
- Please see new note on your DYK nomination. Yoninah (talk) 23:10, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
File from the NLS Collection
Hi, I've seen the image that you have downloaded it in a resolution of 2.359 × 1.833px.
The original is only the possibility to download it at 1000px down.
Can you tell me how to do that? Is there perhaps a FAQ in which is found? Sorry about my bad English. Thank you and a happy new year. --Knochen ﱢﻝﱢ 09:22, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of St Symphorien Military Cemetery
The article St Symphorien Military Cemetery you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold 
. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:St Symphorien Military Cemetery for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hchc2009 -- Hchc2009 (talk) 11:01, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Labattblueboy reported by User:CombatWombat42 (Result: ). Thank you. CombatWombat42 (talk) 22:24, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
- Labattblueboy, I really wouldn't worry about this too much just yet. Definitely be aware of 3RR and don't engage in edit warring, but this template is a lot more scary than what's going on here. See my comments on the AN3 noticeboard if you want to. J♯m (talk | contribs) 05:20, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
- Yowza. I've only gotten back to June... you'd think there would be an easy answer here, but there often isn't. I'm not going to make any comments on the AN3 page at this point; it's deeper than I want to get into. I will however post a brief history. J♯m (talk | contribs) 05:44, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
Stay off my talk page.
Stay off my talk page. CombatWombat42 (talk) 16:14, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- @CombatWombat42, the process requires you be informed. Take that issue up those that reached that decision. Nevertheless, you've been advised.--Labattblueboy (talk) 16:26, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- Seeing as you violated the scale and audience part of WP:APPNOTE, I'm not sure you know what you are talking about. CombatWombat42 (talk) 19:10, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- If you truly feel that that is the case you are certainly free to refer the topic to WP:ANI.However, I don't edit in bad faith and I trust any review would find the same.--Labattblueboy (talk) 16:40, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
- Seeing as you violated the scale and audience part of WP:APPNOTE, I'm not sure you know what you are talking about. CombatWombat42 (talk) 19:10, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- @CombatWombat42, the process requires you be informed. Take that issue up those that reached that decision. Nevertheless, you've been advised.--Labattblueboy (talk) 16:26, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
DYK
Hello! Your submission of St Symphorien Military Cemetery at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! North America1000 06:45, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
- Please see new note on your DYK nomination. Yoninah (talk) 00:10, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
- Hi again. Several (!) editors promoted this while we were in the middle of our discussion about the image. I've reopened the nomination and have answered your question about the image, as well as posted two images we could use. Yoninah (talk) 17:58, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for January 24
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hanoi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Paris of the East. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:53, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Incomplete DYK nomination
Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/St Symphorien Military Cemetery at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 07:12, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXVIII, January 2016
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:23, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
DYK for St Symphorien Military Cemetery
| On 6 February 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article St Symphorien Military Cemetery, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the men believed to be the first and last Commonwealth soldiers killed in action during the First World War are buried in St Symphorien Military Cemetery? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/St Symphorien Military Cemetery. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXIX, February 2016
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 14:14, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXX, March 2016
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:15, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXXI, April 2016
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 01:38, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXXII, May–June 2016
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:05, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXXIII, July 2016
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:44, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
Commonwealth War Graves Commission (template and article)
I went ahead and created Template:Commonwealth War Graves Commission. Do you think that is a good way to organise it, or are there better layouts? I added it to the article - do you think that article can be pushed to the next stage soon with a bit more work? I also popped in briefly to the FAC review for the Vimy Memorial article and added to that. Carcharoth (talk) 22:06, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXXIV, August 2016
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 07:57, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXXV, September 2016
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:27, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
Military history WikiProject coordinator election
Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway, and as a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 23 September. For the Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:00, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXXVI, October 2016
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 14:18, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
South of the Border
I found an interesting article in a local newspaper about this campy place. Since it was by a Washington Post reporter, or at least it appeared there, I thought it would be worthwhile to try to incorporate some of the content into the article. I'm sure others could do it better, though. You seem interested in the subject.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:05, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXXVII, November 2016
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:30, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, Labattblueboy. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Sorrel
Added a casualties section you might want to look over. Since I'm in the vicinity I am thinking of adding the German account in the OH, interested? Regards Keith-264 (talk) 11:26, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXXVIII, December 2016
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 14:09, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
File:Monument of Missouri.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Monument of Missouri.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:32, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
Merry, merry!
From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 22:33, 25 December 2016 (UTC) 
Voting for the Military history WikiProject Historian and Newcomer of the Year is ending soon!
  
|
Time is running out to voting for the Military Historian and Newcomer of the year! If you have not yet cast a vote, please consider doing so soon. The voting will end on 31 December at 23:59 UTC, with the presentation of the awards to the winners and runners up to occur on 1 January 2017. For the Military history WikiProject Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:01, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
This message was sent as a courtesy reminder to all active members of the Military History WikiProject.
2016 Year in Review
|
The WikiChevrons | |
| For your contributions to the Featured Article Canadian National Vimy Memorial, you are hereby awarded the WikiChevrons. Congratulations! For the Military history WikiProject Coordinators, TomStar81 (Talk) 07:14, 3 January 2017 (UTC) |
|
The World War Barnstar | |
| For your contributions to the Featured Article Canadian National Vimy Memorial, you are hereby awarded this World War Barnstar. Congratulations! For the Military history WikiProject Coordinators, TomStar81 (Talk) 07:14, 3 January 2017 (UTC) |
The Bugle: Issue CXXIX, January 2017
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:07, 7 January 2017 (UTC)