User talk:Geoff NoNick
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Western Standard
Hey Geoff! Smokin job you did on the Western Standard edits. Thanks Somena 21:29, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Centurion (Captain or Major)
Hello there,
On the Centurion page you say that the rank is the equivalent of a Captain or Major. I would have said they were much more similar to a Higher ranking NCO such as a Sergeant. Or possibly a lower ranking officer such as a Second Lieutenant. As Centurion's were the second lowest ranking officer. Loth 21:36, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
- Actually, Centurions were just the officer rank - they could command as few as 60 or as many as a few hundred men, depending on what sort of centurion they were. Usually, they comanded between 100 and 300 men, like a Captain or Major today. Geoff NoNick 20:24, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
- Centurions were suppose to be incharge of a century that was their purpose, the were not suppose to take command of any more, other ranks were reserved for that, such as Senior Centurions, Chief Centurions, Prefects, Tribunes and Legates. A normal Centurion would not usually command more than 120 men (largest size for a century). Then again the Centurion rank was very flexible, Centurions who had been inservice longer outranked newer Centurions this is why i would consider it to be more of a NCO. Only out of their valour have they proved themselves worthy for the position. Loth 23:12, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
- If they commanded groups of 120, they were analogous to army Captains or Majors who command companies of 120. Also, the rank was just Centurion not Chief Centurion or Senior Centurion - those others were positions assigned based on merit. As you say, the rank of Centurion was very flexible, which is why even trying to compare it to modern ranks is a dicey prospect at best. I have to say it's still not clear to me why you see this as being closer to a senior NCO. Geoff NoNick 15:06, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
- Centurions were suppose to be incharge of a century that was their purpose, the were not suppose to take command of any more, other ranks were reserved for that, such as Senior Centurions, Chief Centurions, Prefects, Tribunes and Legates. A normal Centurion would not usually command more than 120 men (largest size for a century). Then again the Centurion rank was very flexible, Centurions who had been inservice longer outranked newer Centurions this is why i would consider it to be more of a NCO. Only out of their valour have they proved themselves worthy for the position. Loth 23:12, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] List of Conflicts in Canada
Thought you might like to know about this page re your trouble with a certain user. 71.198.89.239 06:47, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
- Way ahead of you - I've got a Request for Checkuser in on him to confirm he's a sockpuppet of WritersCramp. Glad I'm not the only one who thought his reaction odd, though. Thanks, Geoff NoNick 12:40, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks Geoff! -- re Railroad Speeds
Thanks for the good information you added to my query on Railroad track speeds on wikipedia:Talk:Rail_transport I appreciate it. Let's hope others add to it and we can eventually develop a good widipedia page on railroad speeds. N2e 05:46, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Toby Young
If Tyoung8 is removing unsourced negative material from this article, that is fine. I think Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons trumps Wikipedia:Conflict of interest in this case. If you want to retain information in the article, please verify it by citing of reliable sources. Thank you, Kusma (talk) 13:56, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
- The article looks like it passes WP:BLP now. We should try to communicate with Tyoung8 about any problems he might see, not try to shut him out. Happy editing, Kusma (talk) 14:12, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Possibly unfree Image:RNS Overhead Campus.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:RNS Overhead Campus.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —Remember the dot (talk) 19:52, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Joseph Kony.jpg
You were at this meeting? Neat! Could you add as much detail as possible to the image description, including location and as many names as possible. Also, the date you specify (2006) and the automatically generated camera info date (May 2005) disagree. Please resolve this discrepancy. Thanks, BanyanTree 06:59, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Afghan National Army
Your opinion, and that of anyone else, is wanted here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manxruler (talk • contribs) 15:56, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Iridium phone
What phone do you have, and are you well in from the border? Towel401 (talk) 20:00, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Donnacona small.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Donnacona small.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 05:07, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] HMCS Donnacona
Corvette K-225 happens to be one of my favorite WWII movies, hence why I created the redirect in the first place. I note that HMCS Donnacona was renamed to that in 1943, the same year as the film. Do you have any information on whether that is a coincidence or on purpose? Caerwine Caer’s whines 06:19, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
- Hmmm - that's interesting. I'm afraid that I don't know much about the movie, only the real Donnacona. To the best of my knowledge it's named after the native chief Donnacona. There are a couple of other facilities and a town in the Montreal area named Donnacona, and the Canadian Navy base in Halifax, NS is called Stadacona after another Iroquois chief. I see that the film was shot at HMCS King's, the naval school at the University of King's College; it's possible that some of the officers from the new Donnacona may have convinced the production team to use her name for their fictional ship; I can't see a Hollywood writer coming up with that by himself. Anyway, it sounds like the sort of mystery that will never be solved. Geoff NoNick (talk) 14:52, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Oka Crisis
Great job finding ways to NPOV this article, and with general clean-up. I wonder if we could get Good Article status with a little work... - TheMightyQuill (talk) 00:05, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Licensing issue
Hi, Geoff - just a heads-up that I ran across Image:Donnacona.jpg, and it looks like you had erroneously tagged it with a free license. According to the Canadian military's terms, use of their images is free only for non-commercial purposes, which Wikipedia does not consider to be a free license. (See WP:CFAQ#Non-commercial licenses.) This noncommercial license is pretty typical for Canadian government websites. I changed the license on that image to {{non-free symbol}}. Cheers - Kelly hi! 23:18, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
