User talk:SoLando

[edit] Signpost updated for November 26th, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:40, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXI (November 2007)

The November 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot 02:44, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for December 3rd, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 10:08, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for December 10th, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:04, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for your timely recovery of Music of Israel

I wonder if we need to report this as vandalism? It seems to be a one-off by this particular person, since there are no other edits made from the URL. --Ravpapa (talk) 08:10, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Reply. SoLando (Talk) 14:19, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Someone who may interest you

Came across John Joseph Shute as the result of my current "project" to sort references to the London Gazette (a website change has broken many existing links). Thought he might interest you as "Mr King's Liverpool". David Underdown (talk) 16:01, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for directing me to the article. Quite concise....I wouldn't be inclined to classify it as a stub requiring urgent attention or expansion. I am actually tempted to expand it once I've "completed" (hah!) the recurrent Liverpool Irish project, although as an archetypal Liverpudlian that would oblige me to refrain from informing my Scouse network of Shute's Conservative affiliation ;-). Judging from a cursory glance at GB and Wyrall's history of the King's Regiment, Shute appears to have been an interesting fellow. I'll certainly commit myself to researching the man soon. Thanks again! SoLando (Talk) 21:25, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

It was even more concise before I added the detail of his miltary career and even there the Gazette gives you very much the barebones of what happened, but I susepcted there was quite an intresting story behind that. The timing of his involvemtn with 1st Volunteer Battalion suggests an involvement in the Boer war as well doesn't it? However, it can still be quite piecemeal trying to get info from Gazette searches, the scanning and OCR process means that the indexing doesn't always work out as you might expect as characters get mistranscribed - there must, somewhere be entries for his initial commissioning, and his majority, but I came up blanks on those (and without knowing roughly when they happened it's hard to narrow down the search any other way. David Underdown (talk) 10:04, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Apologies for the delay. Yeah, it's probable that Shute served in South Africa; the 1st Volunteers (5th King's) mobilised a contingent for "active service" in the Boer War. I'm personally unsure whether he accompanied his battalion to South Africa or even served in the war attached to another unit. His promotion to substantive Captain appears to have coincided with the deployment of that contingent. Intriguingly, there was an M.A. Shute who served in South Africa with a regular battalion while attached from the 5th King's (issue 27348)

What surprises me is the paucity of information pertaining to his early life as he evidently was a prominent business figure in Liverpool. There's a micro-biography located here and a copyrighted photograph of him here. Oh, and I agree that the Gazette's search facility can still be exceedingly frustrating. I once contacted the Gazette about the issues the original website contended with and received a reply reassuring me that character identification would be improved; i.e. apostrophes would be recognised :-D Shute received his DSO during the First World War; he was a major and second-in-command to John Maxwell McMaster until his succession when the latter apparently returned to England on leave in late 1915 (it's reasonable to assume that age was a factor). SoLando (Talk) 21:33, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of Indian Army Regiments

Hi Solando,

Am a Bombay Sapper and for years I have been contributing with blinkers onto Indian wildlife articles. Just discovered the lists of Indian Army Regiments which you created long ago. Gives me a 'control panel' page to work from, :-). Could you give me the references for these lists please?

AshLin (talk) 05:42, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Those lists were indeed created an exceptionally long time ago. I suspect the primary source was regiments.org. Hope that's of assistance! :-) SoLando (Talk) 11:04, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for December 17th, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 19:37, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for December 26th, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 13:57, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] trying to trick us eh?

You said you're on a "wikibreak" but you just edited, who are you trying to fool?85.178.185.62 (talk) 12:03, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

This is the internet - I'm contributing to conspriracy! ;-) SoLando (Talk) 12:19, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXII (December 2007)

The December 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:41, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Editing concerns

Are you ordering me not to edit the pages of criminal Jews? Is it still ok to edit the pages of good Jews? Graham Wellington (talk) 01:01, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Reply. SoLando (Talk) 09:44, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Offensive language

Brewcrewer used offensive language in an edit description of the following article: Douglas Rushkoff.

How can I continue editing the article with such a disgusting swear word in front of my eyes? Graham Wellington (talk) 21:35, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Reply. SoLando (Talk) 22:02, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

The video contains an interview with Douglass Rushkoff. Why is it inappropriate to include a link to that video within Rushkoff's own biography article? Graham Wellington (talk) 22:49, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Reply. SoLando (Talk) 15:53, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] wellington

Hi. I noticed you were dealing with him/her, and I appreciate it. I'm also short on time these days; I only get to get go in and go out quickly. But if this garbage (less offensive word ;-)) continues someone will have to drag it to WP:AN. Best, --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 02:01, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Reply. SoLando (Talk) 15:53, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I can't find anything on John Jamelske's ethnic/religous background. "Torah" is just the jewish/hebrew name for the Old Testament, so technically it doesn't make a difference what faith he is. But considering his history, I highly doubt pure intentions. Best, --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 00:29, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Reply. SoLando (Talk) 15:53, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] William Alfred Dimoline

Another one who may interest you slightly, and if any of your sources indicate more precisely when he was awarded the MC it might help persuade the Gazette website to let me find the relavent issue. David Underdown (talk) 13:00, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

I've scoured the first volume of Wyrall's history (1914-1915) and found no mention. Unfortunately, Wyrall's history rarely mentions individual awards, and identifies officers by name usually only when they've become a casualty. I've been contemplating initiating a list of commanding officers and notable Kingsmen for an exceptionally long time. Listy, yes, and I'm sure WP:NOT could be invoked ;-). SoLando (Talk) 15:51, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry I should have said that I'd managed to pin it down to 1918 at least. It's possible that he had actually transferred to the East Surreys by then anyway, so don't worry too much about it. David Underdown (talk) 16:48, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I can assure you it wasn't an inconvenience. I've almost realised my "final" version of the Liverpool Irish, so the Shute article could be my next victime! I've actually prepared a rough draft :-). Oh, one issue of the London Gazette suggests that Dimoline had been seconded to another unit by 1916. SoLando (Talk) 16:54, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

from the Gazettes it's rather difficult to work out what happened to him between 1916-18. He still seems to have been on the King's regimental list for a while, since he was given a regimental captaincy. Then there's a back-dated entry in a 1920 gazette giving him a second lieutenant's commission in the East Surreys from 1916. My best guess (rather originl research, but still), was that it was a it of a fiddle to get him a regular commission, rather than a territorial force commission. His medal card says he was 1/5th King's, but I don't think any of the gazettes spell that out. David Underdown (talk) 17:06, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

If only the collection of regimental material once stored at the Museum of the King's Regiment was as conveniently accessible as as it was when the MKR was a component of the original and now historical Museum of Liverpool Life. Oh yes, the intricacies of a contemporary officer's career can be confusing and disorientating without a substantive biography detailing the various appointments and promotions. I have a tendency to avoid that veritable minefield unless relevant and unambiguous information is available or the individual was considerate enough to publish an autobiography, such as the delightfully named Charles Harington Harington ;-). SoLando (Talk) 17:47, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

There's also an ODNB article on Harington http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/33712 - it requires subscription, but you'll probably find you can log on using the number from your library card (assuming you have one, and if not you may find it worthwhile purely for the online sources it opens up). David Underdown (talk) 09:06, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Ah, the Liverpool Central Library will be thrilled to behold my return ;-). I can only assume it is subscribed as I'm convinced it wasn't apparently aware of its entitltement to access the Times' Archive - but that's unreliable without a source! Hopefully I'll frequent the library this weekend. But don't hesitate to contribute to the article, if you're interested and so inclined. Collaboration is still the essence of Wikipedia :-). SoLando (Talk) 10:00, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I'll let you flesh out the overall structure of the article first, then see if te ODNB article adds anything, and see what the gazete throws out too. I alos found couple of passing mentions in Richard Holmes's book Tommy, includign a nice little quote about not being able to tell where Plumer ended and Harington began. David Underdown (talk) 10:34, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't expect a dramatic expansion tonight, but I'll endeavour to develeop the article into something resembling substance :-) From a cursory glance of his autobiography, he was reasonably travelled ;-). I've noted the relationship between Plumer and Harington in the introduction. If only there was a direct quote. SoLando (Talk) 11:54, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

One last thing, are you aware that (many of) the original WWI unit war diaries are available online from The National Archives, see [1]. David Underdown (talk) 17:31, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Indeed. To be candid, I was researching some of my relatives and yielded quite interesting information. But that's completely irrelevant ;-). The applicability of a war diary is debatable, IMO. Not because they constitute a primary source, as they would surely only be used to verify indisputable information likes dispositions and movements (and last time I gazed at WP:V, that was still acceptable), but because they've arguably been deprecated (in terms of writing an article) by regimental histories, et al. That has been my personal experience. Admittedly, the history of the King's Regiment and its associates have been exceptionally documented. SoLando (Talk) 18:10, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thankyou

My sincerest thanks for the barnstar. My radar has recently refocused on the VC lists again. Frankly, it is a bit of a mess at the moment, but I am trying to plough through them and amalgamate them into easy to use lists. It is always nice to be noticed. If you ever need any help, as always, just ask. Thanks again. Woody (talk) 23:12, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

I have been thinking about the best way to do that one, probably split into 4 parts. I will try and get the main British ones upto scratch first. It is a long-term goal I think. :) Woody (talk) 23:20, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

I think most, if not all recipients have articles. I am currently amalgamating the List of Victoria Cross recipients by unit into national lists such as List of Australian Victoria Cross recipients. The south African list is my next job, after that, merging the Canadian units into the nationality list. Then, hopefully, the by unit list becomes deprecated. After that, probably do the same for List of Victoria Cross recipients by campaign. The number of individual pages is quite exhausting. Woody (talk) 13:37, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I see you've started on the Aussies, Merci Beaucoup!! Woody (talk) 16:50, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

We need to decide whether to go with larger regiments in the unit such as Maratha Light Infantry, Canadian Expeditionary Force or more specific such as battalions. My initial opinion is to stick with the larger units, as they will be blue links for the most part. I doubt many battalions will have red links, or will ever be converted into blue links. Woody (talk) 20:43, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Specific battalions shouldn't necessarily be a problem, in that the vast majority had/have numerical designations. So that would allow for an unformatted rendering or piped links without table clutter, e.g. 6th Maratha Light Infantry. Entirely your discretion :-)SoLando (Talk) 20:50, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Yep, that looks good, I would go with unpiped at the moment. Woody (talk) 20:55, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Harington

The main comments on his character are, ‘a spare, highly strung man, with a charming manner and remarkable clarity of vision’, and also the mention that he was deeply religious. I've noted from the original DNB article (as opposed to the current ODNB entry) and an initial delve in the Times archive that he seems to have been involved with Toc H after the war, which bears out the religous aspect. From the later Gazette entries, one of his honorary positions was Commandant of the Army Educational Corps, and he founded and was first president of the Army Sports Control Board whilst he was DCIGS, which bears out the educational aspects. I suspect he was very much a man of his time, stiff upper lip and all, and many deeply ingrained attitudes which do seem rather dated today. He was certainly no yes man, he disobeyed Lloyd-George's instruction to give the Turks an ultimatum over Chanak, probably costing himself the chance of becoming CIGS, but avoiding the strong possibility of naother major war. Times articles also show that he opened a number of war memorials, often in public schools, and again the DNB says he was involved in runign boys' clubs after his retirement from Gibraltar. His involvement in the committee of the MCC also shows him to be a man of his times in many ways. His sporting prowess throws an interesting sidelight on his character and background (from the ODNB), "During these early years, as later, he excelled at all games, especially cricket and hockey, possibly because hunting was beyond his means. When he was in his fifties he swam the Hellespont and back and in his sixties he was still playing high class cricket." So presumably he had no real private income, which still made him something of a rarity in those days so far as the British army was concerned (though William Robertson did manage to rise from private to field marshal and in the cavalry at that). Despite this possible social handicap, he seems to have been very popular around York when he was GOC Northern Command. On his contradictions, other Times articles include quotes about him calling Franco a "Friend of Britain", and as Governor of Gibraltar being quite accomodating to the German Navy when the German pocket battleship Deutschland was attacked by the Spanish republican air force. Don't know if any of this is actually any help. David Underdown (talk) 20:33, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

The parentheses was another attempt at clarification. Saying "the nickname was assigned to him" (or whatever the precise wording was) has grammatical issues since "him" could be taken to be Harrington (with a double-r) since he's been the subject of the sentence up to that point, so I changed the woring to Harington, but then thought the subtlety of the spelling might be overlooked, so to make it completely clear thought it should be pointed out. Maybe I was worrying unnecessarily, but since even you had managed to type Harrington, rather than Harington, in a later para... David Underdown (talk) 17:13, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Haha, the double-r would appear to be inexplicably instinctive to many; the error has befallen a few established scholars if GB is to be believed ;-). I've experimented with possible variations and consider the following revision to be a satisfactorily understated alternative:

Fellow officers from his battalion assigned Harington the nickname after learning of the conviction of Timothy Charles Harrington, an Irish nationalist and member of parliament, while en route to Aden.

Does that revision completely eliminate ambiguity? SoLando (Talk) 17:31, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

That's probably the best solution. May be worth keeping an html comment in there as well to highlight that there really is supposed to be a difference in spelling. We perhps ought to start putting these sort of content issues on the article talkpage, where they'll be more visible to others. David Underdown (talk) 17:35, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Quite how someone who's "an admin with over 50 000 edits so I understand how referencing works and this one doesn't cut it." referring to a reference in William Denis Browne on a similar topic to that we've just been sorting out on Harington has never come across the ODNB before, let alone so fundamentally misunderstanding WP:V beats me. I've never been so tempted to throw in a link to WP:DICK when talking to someone on Wikipedia. David Underdown (talk) 15:34, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh boy, I'm tempted to go back to bed and submit to my cold ;-) Has this been resolved? SoLando (Talk) 15:43, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Well he seems to ahve thrown in the towel on Harington and Denis Browne, and I don't have the time or energy to go through the vast number of edits he's made via AWB to see if he's been equally unthinking on other articles. Still if it means that he finally understands WP:V properly, and has learnt what the ODNB is, there's some gain from it... David Underdown (talk) 15:46, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for January 14th, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:02, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Greetings and other things ...

I've been thinking very hard about your comment on my talk page a week or so back. Assuming you still think it's good idea (and I really don't mind if you don't), I'd like to go for it. My concern so far is that I'm primarily a content editor, with a bit of dabbling in project organisation (Tag & Assess, for istance) and I wouldn't want that basic mix to change too much. However, I have done vandal-fighting and went through a spell of CSDing from NPP during lulls.

The other thing is to ask whether you fancy cooperating on List of Welsh Victoria Cross recipients to get it to featured list. The basics are there already so it's just adding loads of bells, whistles and references :)

--ROGER DAVIES ^talk 16:21, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Coincidentally, Woody has just this minute come along with what seems like a better idea for the Welsh VCs so scratch that suggestion!--ROGER DAVIES ^talk 16:41, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I would encourage pursuit of adminship and would unhesitatingly endorse as a nominator/co-nominator/third nominator, etc. I suspect, however, that I'm not a particularly "glamourous" (!;-) broom handler. Becoming an administrator isn't as profound a change as some might be inclined to believe. Yes, you have access to the various privileges thereof and your status/image/reputation within the community can be fundamentally altered ;-). But unless you proactively pursue as a primary activity the most "demanding" responsibilities - conflict/dispute mediation/resolution, tendentious/disruptive users, et al - content editing, etc can still remain your primary focus. Countering vandalism and moderating new pages, closing AFDs, et al isn't so time consuming that it would be detrimental to your preferred method of contribution. That is unless, like me, you're still burdened with dial up. I hope that was coherent and helpful :-).

And here would have existed a second paragraph. ;-) SoLando (Talk) 17:04, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

... That was very helpful, thanks. My thought, if successful, is to use the tools basically during lulls between regular editing, when I tend to do NPP or RC anyway. I see it really as an extension of that. By the way, how on earth do you manage with dialup? Multi-graphic pages must be a nightmare. --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 17:16, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree with what SoLando says completely, you can let the admin work take over if actively seek it, or you can just carry on as normal but clear out a few backlogs and delete some "teh teacehr is a G*yb*y" pages. ;) I have created User:Woody/Sandbox/Roger for your ramblings SoLando, place them where you want on the page (within reason). When you have answered the questions Roger, and you feel ready, then transclude it. (give me a note when you do, I don't want any of those pesky "beat the nom" supports. :). Woody (talk) 17:16, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I wonder why is typing "poo" so popular among the vandal classes. I had a, um, run of "poos" a week or so back. It amazed me that they all seemed to think (if that's the right word to use) so much alike.

Re the template, I'll do replies off-line in advance and paste it all together when I get back to London on Monday evening. Probably best is if I message you to transclude it. What does "beating the nom" mean, by the way? I've seen it loads of times and always puzzled... --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 17:16, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Example: First support - beat the nom! WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! I've resigned myself to not being one of the first two to register support for your nomination :-(

Regarding the various manifestations of the destructive editor, I "prefer" the basic form of vandalism. Over three-years ago, before I had become a sysop, I incurred the wrath of a vandal who associated my account name with Star Wars and repeatedly inserted it into various articles. Oh the hilarity. And I have every ambition of discarding dial up before December ;-). SoLando (Talk) 17:57, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Just to let you know that it has now been transcluded. :Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Roger Davies Woody (talk) 15:52, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for January 21st, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 00:37, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Graham Wellington (talk · contribs)

Hi. I think that his latest comment put it over the top. So, per your suggestion: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#the final touch?. Best, --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 19:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I've had to incorporate a condensed version of my report into my response. I should have stayed online! SoLando (Talk) 22:42, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for January 28th, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 04:21, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Great War in Ireland

Thanks for clarification on Canadian Irish, have discovered that there was also a non-Canadian Leinster Regiment. Have also just added The Irish Regiment of Canada. See also Irish regiment. I wonder of the Leinster Regiment (Royal Canadians) is correctly or wrongly titled under 16th (Irish) Division ?. Perhaps you have some insight ? Greetings, Osioni (talk) 20:51, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

If I recall correctly, the Leinster Regiment did maintain a relationship to some degree with Canada (or its government), perpetuating the traditions of its predecessor which I believe was formed there. But I'm confident its personnel composition was predominantly Irish, augmented per convention by soldiers from England/Scotland/Wales. Google Books should, reliably as ever, yield the relevant information.

Titled? Are you referring to the battalion/regiment's designation or placement within the OOB of the 16th Division? Regards, SoLando (Talk) 23:38, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:HMS Colossus (Colossus class light fleet carrier).jpg

Since the ship was built in the UK more than 50 years ago there should be some crown copyright pics of it on which the copyright has expired.Geni 17:29, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Certainly. But until an available PD alternative is identified, that FU image is irreplacable in accordance with WP:FUP and therefore immune from being "botted" (a self-created word......I assume ;-). Unfortunately, there are so few resources online........the most extensively used being the Imperial War Museum's website. Regards, SoLando (Talk) 18:17, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Realisticaly we know that such an image will exist somewhere. Thus the image is replaceable.Geni 20:08, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Indeed. But until the availability of a policy-compliant image is conclusively established, the aforementioned FU illustration isn't replaceable in the strictest sense as the existence of a PD alternative is purely hypothetical despite the high probability. I'm not particularly surprised by the apparent scarcity of images of Colossus explicitly licensed under Crown Copyright: she/it (;-) was in commission for just two-years. Regards, SoLando (Talk) 21:14, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIII (January 2008)

The January 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:13, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you spam

		My RfA
		Thank you very much, Joel, for your nomination and support in my RfA which I really appreciate. It closed at 83/0/0. I was surprised by the unanimity and will do my best to live up to the new role. All the best, --ROGER DAVIES talk 16:49, 5 February 2008 (UTC) The patio at the Partal Palace in the Alhambra, Andalucia.

[edit] Signpost updated for February 4th, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:43, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Footy

Hi there Joel, in answer to the first question, no. There is no formalised struture or review system. It is given out occasionally to articles such as James Milner which isn't FA standard, but it is better then GA. I think the project as a whole is going for FAs now. We do have a burgeoning list of Featured content. The Villa Featured Topic is almost done now, one history at FAC and about to have one at FLC. I would be happy to help with any Liverpool ones, it is my second club after all. With regards to Harington, good work, I have given it project banner tags on the talk page. I seem to have neglected the VC lists after getting one through FLC. I will work on the Irish ones next I think! Woody (talk) 15:15, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Reply. SoLando (Talk) 15:27, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I have currently got "campaigns" under construction in my sandbox, but I reckon I could get the table for the Irish one done at the weekend. Don't worry about the tagging, most of the RN ships in my watchlist popped up during the drive as N (assessed for WPMILHIST)!!!

The Footy project has been going through steady revamping for a while now. I revamped the main page a while back and there are several MoS's now in place and standardised navboxes etc. That and the featured content output is up incredibly in the last year.!! Hopefully we can add a few more Liverpool ones to that list... Woody (talk) 15:40, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Reply. SoLando (Talk) 15:52, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

The tables are easy enough to create, just need a good source, and a bit of freetime. I have got one lined up for the Irish list and my CTRL+C and CTRL+V fingers ready to go. I suggested a standalone review bit a while back, but most people said they didn't want to be removed from the current peer review process (though PR has changed since I suggested that). Good old Berger, Villa player extraordinaire! I am thinking about taking a VC recipient upto FA, just don't know which one yet. Woody (talk) 16:04, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Reply. SoLando (Talk) 16:20, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Military history WikiProject coordinator elections

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 14! Kirill 17:01, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:HMS Ark Royal (aircraft carrier 1970s).jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:HMS Ark Royal (aircraft carrier 1970s).jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 23:18, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:HMS Queen Elizabeth (Queen Elizabeth-class battleship).jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:HMS Queen Elizabeth (Queen Elizabeth-class battleship).jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 23:42, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for February 11th, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 13:59, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Milhist coordinators election has started

The February 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fifteen candidates. Please vote here by February 28! --Eurocopter tigre (talk) 16:26, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Criticism

Hey! Why are you repeatedly changing my contributions (to the articles Armenian National Committee of America, David Mayer de Rothschild, and Bilderberg Group), and saying that I don't provide references and reliable sources? I have provided 5 sources on each of them, so don't try to cover up the truth! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.229.25.221 (talk) 01:37, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Cover up the truth? Wikipedia is indeed a website, but it isn't a vehicle for conspiracy/minority theory and personal opinion. What you consider truth can be, and is, perceived as minority theory (at a diplomatic minimum!). Policy is intrinsic to the project and each article is required to comply with the relevant content policies that I and others have directed you to on your talk page (WP:V, WP:NOR, WP:NPOV being the most pertinent, and apologies for the alphabet soup!) Your "sources" are unreliable and your additions inherently partisan and, to be candid, disreputable. Your contributions will continue to be reverted if your edits are in violation of policy. Regards, SoLando (Talk) 14:36, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sources

Why don't you provide sources? And who gave you the authority to discredit a well established and respected web site such as PrisonPlanet.com? Please stop inserting your POV end reverting changes that are backed up with references and documented facts. For the sake of the credibility of Wikipedia.org Screwed-n-chopped (talk) 01:22, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Prisonplanet is an inherently unreliable site maintained, I believe, by a man (Alex Jones) described by established sources as a "conspiracy theorist". Would you provide reliable evidence to disprove that? Or will that be rebuked with the defence: "But they're the establishment"? ;-) The site is in violation of policy and must not be used to support highly controversial, conspiratorial additions to articles on Wikipedia. Wikipedia isn't in the business of promoting any form of propaganda and providing undue, even undeserved, coverage to minority theories and viewpoints. I'm not obligated to provide a single source to justify my removal of the content you added. It is incumbent upon the editor who has inserted text into an article to substantiate their additions when challenged. As has been stated, you will be blocked if you continue to reinsert such material. I urge you to review your contributions and respect that they are incompatible with the policies you have been directed to familiarise yourself with. Regards, SoLando (Talk) 09:30, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:HMS Ark Royal (aircraft carrier 1970s).jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:HMS Ark Royal (aircraft carrier 1970s).jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it may be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 07:00, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Berger et al

Hey there SoLando, I should be free this weekend to have a butchers at Berger. I will also go at the Irish recipients list. I haven't had a free weekend in February to get some serious editing in. Though I did manage to get History of Aston Villa (1961-present) to FA. I will see whether I can find any good sources. There was some recent comment about a move as well. Hope all is good. RegardsWoody (talk) 17:27, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for February 18th and 25th, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:52, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] thank you

		Milhist Coordinator elections
		Thank you very much for your support in the recent Military history Wikiproject elections. I went into it expecting to just keep my seat and was astonished to end up with the lead role. I anticipate a rather busy six months :) --ROGER DAVIES talk 13:48, 29 February 2008 (UTC) Haut-Koeningsbourg castle, Alsace.

[edit] Thanks

Hello SoLando. Thanks for your support at the Military history elections. With your aid I was able to commision this ship to help plunder the coast of Military history for the third time. Na, just kidding. If you ever require any astance all you have to do is ask and you will see my ship on the horizon. Kyriakos (talk) 14:03, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

		Milhist Coordinator election
		Thank you very much for your support in the recent Military history Wikiproject election. I'm more than happy to serve the project for another six months! --Eurocopter (talk) 16:02, 29 February 2008 (UTC) Russian-Circassian War

[edit] Irish VC recipients and thanks

Hi there SoLando, thought you would be interested to know that List of Irish Victoria Cross recipients is up and running. I have completed the basic structure. There are some sortable issues that will need to be fixed, and I haven't completed the units but it is getting there! A little thanks for your support at the MilHist elections, I am now a coordinator, more backlogs to clear! I will have a look at Berger now. Hope all is good. Woody (talk) 21:02, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey Woody! Congratulations on the successful election. I'm now investigating whether those red links can be converted into redirects :-). I wonder how accurate it would be to redirect Cape Police to the modern incarnation of the country's law enforcement organisation, the South African Police Service? Regards, SoLando (Talk) 21:16, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, not very accurate in my opinion. That article does not not discuss anything since apartheid and as such isn't related to the Cape Police, part of the South African Forces during the Second Boer War. I am ploughing through the other units, most have redirects available. Regards Woody (talk) 21:59, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Definitely true, but the article for its Apartheid-era predecessor has......problems. Ahem ;-). I was hoping there would be an article on Law enforcement in South Africa. Instead, it redirects to the South African Police Service which has no history section. I was intending to fill in some of the blanks but you're probably in the process of doing that. Keep at it :-). Regards, SoLando (Talk) 22:06, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Filling in blanks but leaving the posthumous stuff to another day! Woody (talk) 22:29, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Blanks filled now and the Lead is growing. I am now wondering whether to expand it above those who were born in Ireland. This page (now redirected) is actually quite good at providing rough numbers for it. This reference also has them listed, as do the National archives. What I am wondering is, do we expand the current narrow scope to include naturalised recipients to follow the format of the other lists? Woody (talk) 21:00, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

If it's verifiable: absolutely. Were Johnson Beharry to apply and be approved for British citizenship, I would imagine that would be accommodated on the list by nationality. I hope I've understood your question correctly. I had a blood rush when I encountered this!!!!!!!!. I just couldn't resist the urge to respond :-/. Regards, SoLando (Talk) 21:09, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Thought so, am working on it now. That stub looks good! Need a few more now! (Hint hint). I am going to try and complete the list today and go for posthumous tommorrow. I think all the sortable issues have now been fixed. Woody (talk) 21:59, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I reckon we can pipe/redirect most of the Bengal ones to Bengal Regiment for the time being. Thoughts? Woody (talk) 22:04, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

No objections as most of these regiments wouldn't be viable as independent articles. With some attention, it could eventually function as a "hub" that just might facilitate growth for potential articles. Great work! SoLando (Talk) 22:19, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Great minds think alike. That wee stub intrigued me and I might make it one of my pet-projects! Woody (talk) 22:26, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Heh. I'll be there if assistance is sought - and even if it isn't ;-). SoLando (Talk) 22:28, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIV (February 2008)

The February 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 08:08, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for March 3rd, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:34, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Favour

I'm off for two weeks over Easter and I have just realised that I have left an FLC open. List of Victoria Cross recipients of the Royal Navy is up and frankly, I don't think there should be many problems. The only one is whether to include ranks or not. Your opinion on that would be much appreciated. If you don't have enough time to take it on, then please just ignore me! Regards, Woody (talk) 12:01, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Now on my watchlist :-). I've commented at the FLC. Hope the two weeks are stress-free and enjoyable :-). Don't mention the Arsenal ;-). SoLando (Talk) 16:40, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 7th Infantry Division (Pakistan) issue

I am hoping that this get resolved pretty soon and the article improved on one of the most important formations of the campaign in Burma, and the Indo-Pak Wars. I am of the opinions that mrg3105's arguments have no merit and this should be resolved asap preferably with a mergeing.58.65.163.248 (talk) 11:42, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Discussion should be centralised at the AFD. I too am seeking a resolution and, like all participants irrespective of position, am hopeful that can be achieved without discord. SoLando (Talk) 11:48, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Stig Inge Bjornebye

Hi, I've reviewe the article and put it on hold, as the issues I have are only minor, only other gripe is there is no image, i'm sure you could find one at flickr's creative commons, but this is not required for the article to pass. Hapy editing NapHit (talk) 18:36, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for reviewing that article. I'll examine and respond to it soon. SoLando (Talk) 18:42, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Flow

Will they make the article "flow" for me then, or will I still have to do that? I just find it so confusing lol Ryan4314 (talk) 21:37, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Reply. SoLando (Talk) 21:43, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Sweet, I'll put in a request a little later tonight maybe, it feels a bit like cheating though. But Wikipedia is comminity project, working 2getha n all that.

Reply. SoLando (Talk) 21:52, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Of course not, although I'm gonna make 1 last set of major changes right before I put the request in (just remembered i need to add some more info), but I'll put a notice up on the talk page when I do it, about why. Ryan4314 (talk) 21:58, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou so much Ryan4314 (talk) 16:09, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] re: Woody's BCAD

There certainly wouldn't be any objections from me and as you two sometimes seemed joined at the hip, I don't suppose there'll be any from himself either :) --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 19:00, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

People often mention BCAD assessment but there's no official form of words. Thanks :) --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 19:07, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

The test is whether it answers questions that the general reader will pose. This means it covers, say in battle terms, who fought, where, when, how many on either side, and who won. In reality, if nothing really blindingly obvious is missing, pass it. The wording for the criterion does need improving. Any thoughts would be welcome. --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 20:29, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

You may find this helpful. --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 20:33, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

You're right. It's what the lawyers call the fruit of a rotten tree. If the article isn't sufficiently sourced, you can't make a reasonable judgement about accuracy and comprehensiveness. Other editors are being tough about B1 and that's absolutely the right course of action. --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 20:39, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Let's talk about specific text changes. What do you specifically propose? In the meantime, assess as you think best. I have ever confidence in your sound judgement and level head :) --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 20:51, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Random Hi

Thank you for the kind words. Being off the site for school is the best thing for me, but it kills me a little inside each day I know I am not on here. I am glad to hear you like my contributions, I try my best to entice people to read the articles I write, especialy if they do not usually cruise through the particular area. Judging from what you said, I must be doing something right :) TomStar81 (Talk) 07:28, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] B-class criteria

For your information, I raised the B-class issues we've been discussing, along with others, here :) --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 09:56, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Excellent, I'll go review the discussion. Thank you :-). SoLando (Talk) 17:34, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

It's very brief. You can comment there yourself, you know :) Non-coordinators aren't banned or nuffink. --ROGER DAVIES ^talk

I'm ashamed to say it, but I slept in for much of Monday and Tuesday. Damn, I shouldn't disclose these things :-D. I'll muse on whether I can bring anything additional to the discussion. I really appreciate you raising the issue. Thanks, Roger :-) SoLando (Talk) 12:27, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

When I was a student, my father always used to accuse of leaping out of bed with a glad cry at the crack of noon :) --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 13:30, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Haha. These truly are the days of glory ;-). SoLando (Talk) 13:32, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] At Liberty to troll

Haha, well thanks for the note of appreciation. I actually had decided that I'm an ass for responding, and for jabbing back; I almost responded without a petty shot, but I didn't clear that hurdle entirely.

I'm glad you're out there as an enforcer. I revert two or three times, then I start to picture a giggling spastic 12-year old on the other end, lose interest, and move on. Cheers, DBaba (talk) 17:21, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Warn yourself for misrepresenting history.

And keep up with self admiration. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bilinski (talk • contribs) 17:29, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Reply. SoLando (Talk) 10:30, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for March 24th, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:15, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Something for you

		The Content Review Medal of Merit
		In recognition of your much appreciated reviews of military history articles, I am delighted to award you this Content Review Medal. --ROGER DAVIES talk 06:17, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, Roger! Judging by the list you've compiled at MHC, I'm honoured to be in such great company :-). To be candid, I haven't contributed to many reviews.....so I'm surprised :-D. That can be attributed to procrastination and err...."other things"....really! ;-) Anyway, ironmongery is always welcome! Really appreciated. SoLando (Talk) 07:45, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for March 31st, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 22:05, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

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

The March 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:42, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Check in

Hey there SoLando, lots of Victoria Cross going on today! Victoria Cross is on the main page as TFA, (and has survived a few attacks), List of Irish Victoria Cross recipients is up at FLC and I have started the Indian Army one. It is there where I am in need of some input. Do you think that it should be default sort by Unit (as in the Navy list) or by name (as in the other lists)? Now I have to go try and find articles for those red-links! Warm Regards. Woody (talk) 18:22, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey, Woody. Welcome back! Congratulations on the FA, FL, FA, FL! :-D There've been a few missed opportunities to revert the vandalism. Blame it on the dial-up (still!). Monitoring main page TFAs is impossible at times :-/. Have you completed your BCAD range?

As the recipients are the primary focus of these VC lists, the table should probably be organised by name. Oh, do you have access to a newspaper archive(s)? I've been expanding HMS Liverpool (C11) but the paucity of available information on the ship's post-war activities is...noticeable. I've been intending to take advantage of the library's subscription to the Times archive but, per convention, have been repeatedly distracted. Regards, SoLando (Talk) 18:47, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Yep, I've got access to archives. I will take a look for you. The newish Military Logistics page has a few other people listed who have access as well for future reference. Yep, got the BCAD range done, slightly depressing how badly referenced most of them were!

The TFA had a concerted attack early this morning, even got protected, but thankfully it has been quiet. Always nice when no-one criticises the article!

I will do it by name, you are right, does seem strange to have it by unit given the intended focus of the list. Once I have done the Indian Army, onto the Scots! Regards. Woody (talk) 19:00, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

That would be appreciated! My original intention was to submit a request but I convinced myself that I'd get round to utilising the library's subscription by now :-D. Predictably, circumstances have precluded that.

There've been a number of FAs which have usually been magnets for targeted vandalism only to almost "ignored" while featured on the main page. So be proud! ;-). SoLando (Talk) 20:00, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

It does feel strange to go to the main page and see an article you have worked on right in front of you.

In terms of articles on the Liverpool, paucity is the right word. I am having trouble trying to find anything. I have checked the times archive and found 3 articles. One you have listed, one I have added, the other one is virtually a duplicate of the first one. I searched the Times digital archive 1785-1985 for H.M.S [AND] Liverpool, HMS [AND] Liverpool, Liverpool [AND] Navy. Can you think of anything else? Most of the other archives ar only active from 1990. Woody (talk) 21:02, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

That is surprising! I had anticipated there'd be greater coverage, as Liverpool functioned as flagship at some stage in its deployment. Perhaps "Liverpool Cruiser", "Liverpool Mediterranean", and "Liverpool flagship". Can you verify that Liverpool transported Mountbatten to Yugoslavia in 1951? I've yet to identify an adequately reliable source for it. I'm really grateful for your support and the information you've added. What can I possibly say that could convey that via text? :-D SoLando (Talk) 00:19, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Harington II

Reply. SoLando (Talk) 06:58, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Excellent, if you're that interested it means I can entice you to come over to Wikisource and help collect Public Domain texts written by and about Harington! I see the New York Times has this beautiful profile and this news story that would make absolutely splendid additions to both s:The New York Times and s:Author:Charles Harington Harington! Trust me, you'll like it over there, ten times the fun and a tenth the drama of WP! Sherurcij ^{(Speaker for the Dead)} 07:07, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Reply. SoLando (Talk) 07:52, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] HMS Cardiff "A" review

Hi, as a former contributor to HMS Cardiff's peer review, I thought you maybe interested to see I've nominated the article for an "A" class review [Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/HMS Cardiff (D108) here]. Don't feel pressured to vote, a mere comment on the articles progress (or lack of) since you last night would be muchly appreciated. Ryan4314 (talk) 15:14, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for reminding me. I've been distracted of late and was unable to devote any time to copyediting the article. Prose "experts" should be relieved! ;-) SoLando (Talk) 15:48, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

LOL thanks for looking after me (re the edit correcting the conversions). Ryan4314 (talk) 20:08, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

No probs. The article is grrrreat and really does have the potential to attain FA status. I've been reluctant to support the article because of the number of edits I've made to the page. But I will :-). SoLando (Talk) 20:25, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

WOW, do you actually think it could make FA!? I've been worrying that there isn't enough data/text to make the grade. Ryan4314 (talk) 20:35, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Absolutely! There isn't an established, recommended minimum size. So long as comprehensiveness is demonstratative and the article adheres to FA criterion, the length of HMS Cardiff shouldn't impair the prospect of promotion. WP:TROP has produced "small" FAs and an FA which I was the primary contributor to is of comparable size. Roger Davies and Woody were instrumental in its promotion (Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Issy Smith). If the availability of sources is limited and there are no omissions, glaring or otherwise, that can't be addressed because of a paucity of reliable sources, then the article would likely be judged to be comprehensive under those conditions. SoLando (Talk) 21:43, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

OIC, that's great about the Issy Smith article. The A-class review has given me a great list of things to tackle. Ryan4314 (talk) 06:30, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for April 7th and 14th, 2008.

Sorry, it seems that the bot quit before completing its run last week. Here is the last two weeks' worth of Signpost. Ralbot (talk) 09:13, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:13, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] News! Tag & Assess 2008 is coming ...

Milhist's new drive – Tag & Assess 2008 – goes live on April 25 and you are cordially invited to participate. This time, the task is housekeeping. As ever, there are awards galore, plus there's a bit of friendly competition built-in, with a race for bronze, silver and gold wikis! You can sign up, in advance, here. I look forward to seeing you on the drive page! All the best, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 13:19, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

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

[edit] Military Reserves Page

I was wondering if you would be interested in this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_reserve_force

I have added to it. Would love to have your imput. I feel that the articles on "military basics" such as the linked one are in need of improvement.

58.65.163.248 (talk) 21:01, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey there. The article definitely needs extensive work; unsourced and sparse in its content (that could be addressed by splitting off the list and converting the section into prose; summary style?). I do have an interest and will contribute if there's an opportunity to do so. In saying that, Buckshot06 (talk · contribs) would be the ideal person to approach (and consider sounding out other interested editors at the MILHIST project). SoLando (Talk) 22:29, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for April 21st, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 16:36, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] HMS Liverpool

Hmmm that's interesting. Colledge indicates seven commissioned HMS Liverpools and another (the fourth) being ordered but later cancelled before being launched. I've altered the list page to indicate this, and since this is in keeping with the RN website I think we've cleared up the discrepancy. Does this look all right? Benea (talk) 13:49, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] HMS Cardiff Featured Article Candidate

Hello, this is a generic message, as a contributor to a previous review of HMS Cardiff, you may be interested to know that I plan to submit her for an FA review. Would you mind taking a quick look at the article and letting me know if you think it's ok, would be muchly appricated, cheers. Ryan4314 (talk) 13:06, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Do me a favour plz mate, can u close Cardiff's peer review so I can nominate her for FA! Cheers, Ryan4314 (talk) 17:47, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about my unresponsiveness. I haven't been particularly active; a "severe" cold has really curtailed my editing. I'll check the article out later and see how it's improved. My fingers are firmly crossed for a successful FAC :-). SoLando (Talk) 09:10, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Much appreciated mate. Ryan4314 (talk) 16:23, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

How do u think the FAC is going so far, any advice? Ryan4314 (talk) 13:57, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Furthering a question I asked here, will my FAC be "archived" if no adds a bold Support tag? Ryan4314 (talk) 18:52, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

I recall that an FAC can be "restarted" by Raul654 (talk · contribs) or SandyGeorgia (talk · contribs) without being formally archived. I rarely frequent FACs (I never feel I have enough time to review an article to support or oppose) so if you're unsure just ask one of the aforementioned users. I do hope the FAC generates more interest (of course, supports). SoLando (Talk) 19:19, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

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

The April 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:19, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Julin Szukalak

(copied from user talk:Woody)

I've listed this for speedy deletion, Julin Szukalak but it might be best if you do the deed, since you won't be taken in by the claims about this supposed VC recipient. I'll copy this to Solando as well. I haven't yet warned the creator of the article, but that probably ought to be done as well. David Underdown (talk) 11:42, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Big favour

Hi Joel. Can you please do me a big favour and cast your eye over Brian Horrocks? Roger Davies has suggested it needs an experienced editor to give the copy a "prune". Will you have a little time to spare? It's not a problem if you're busy. Cheers. Leithp 06:18, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Glad you're giving it a crack, Joel. My comments are at the A-Class review. Thanks, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 16:16, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Much appreciated! Leithp 16:21, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

No probs. SoLando (Talk) 17:33, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Awesomeness
		Your future's so bright I gotta wear shades --ROGER DAVIES talk 10:20, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Certainly a bright shade of red. Thank you ;-). SoLando (Talk) 13:31, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for May 2nd and 9th, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:42, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for May 12th, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:44, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New page for MILHIST copy-editors

The coordinators have decided to make it easier for copy-editors to watch the new requests by creating an own page for this purpose. On Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Logistics/Copy-editing/Requests all new and old requests are listed. Please add this page to your watchlist. Wandalstouring (talk) 11:51, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] User talk:24.27.151.226

Hello. Just curious as to why you keep reverting User talk:24.27.151.226. Thanks, Kralizec! (talk) 22:41, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

This ip belongs to a group of trolls/vandals which have engaged in a disruptive campaign racist and anti-semitic in nature. The ips (24.27.151.226 (talk · contribs), 65.30.76.58 (talk · contribs), 24.27.130.12 (talk · contribs), 65.27.38.203 (talk · contribs), 64.126.23.130 (talk · contribs) 64.126.34.118 (talk · contribs)) have all been blocked for 3 months because of disruption and harassment. They've repeatedly blanked their talk pages when blocked, regardless of whether they're blanking warnings, ip identification, or block notices. While it is a common courtesy to leave anon' talk pages blank, I feel the length of the block and contrib' history merits retention. Regards SoLando (Talk) 22:56, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the info. I was the previous admin to block this IP, and I figured there had to be a good reason why we were not letting the IP remove messages from its talk page as per the WP:USER guideline. Thanks again, Kralizec! (talk) 12:00, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Jewish Russian-American Regina Spector in the biography lead

Hi there. Thanks for the note, but I respectfully continue to find your deletion, and the reasoning behind it, unsupported by a rational reading of either the article or WP:NAMES (which is technically a redirect as things stand now, but I read the recommendation it pointed to thoroughly anyway, the first time you alluded to it in the edit summary).

Regina Spektor would not have become and American un-folk singer, or even an anglophone, had her family not been Jewish and she, Russian-born, Russian-resident, through her early childhood. Her entire output and life path both owe their course to her Jewish-Russian ethnicity no less than, to use your example, the African-American Collin Powell. Perhaps you don't realize this, but contemporary Russians don't emmigrate as a rule from Russia. Russian Jews do, however, and this is why they are disproportionally represented in the Russian diaspora in the USA and Israel, or more generally, in the world. This alone suffices to inject her ethnicity into the lead.

If you find the clarity of the article wanting on this score, kindly edit that to your satisfaction, but please don't obliterate it in the lead. To me, the article is clear enough. Two experienced editors, well-versed in the subject matter, already took issue with your removal of exact characterization quoted the title of this section/missive. Accordingly, I think you really have no basis for insisting on your edit. And, the Wikipedia guidance page you would have us study, calls itself just a recommendation, and is meant to help readability, not hinder it. I suggest that it is trumped in this case by another Wikipedia rule, that of applying common sense. Furthermore, I have already returned this text more than once to the lead, usually on account of vandalism, and I intend to see to it that it stays there, even if it takes a Request for Comment process, which, I think, would be gross overkill, because the issue is a no-brainer.

In sum, the article does state the circumstances of her family's emigration, the circumstance of her religious/ethnic-based upbringing and schooling, and anyone even remotely acquainted with the sources used in the article, let alone her music and statements she has made on record [sic], would immediately perceive that the lead-emphasized ethnicity of this notable person is central to her artistic output, and in that capacity, to her notablity. Best Wishes, --Mareklug ^talk 12:51, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Reply. SoLando (Talk) 16:17, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Please actually read the sources provided in the article (there are many), or read the text of the article, and you will see that her ethnic origin as a Russian Jew is central to her life and work. Badagnani (talk) 22:21, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Reply. SoLando (Talk) 22:27, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for May 19th and 26th, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:35, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion review for Gabriel_Murphy

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Gabriel_Murphy. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. 69.76.132.152 (talk) 04:43, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

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

The May 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:07, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] More favours

Can I get another favour and aske you to cast your eye over Brian Horrocks again? The FAC seems to have halted on the thorny field of criteria 1A. I'm obviously blind to the problems, so I'd be grateful if I could borrow your eagle eyes.... Leithp 14:43, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Image:HMS Norfolk (County class cruiser).jpg

I removed the tag, as frankly, it was incredibly wrong. Woody (talk) 12:52, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, Woody. No need for the notification, then ;-). SoLando (Talk) 15:01, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for June 2, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:57, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bjbot

It wasn't incorrect, I fixed it! ;) Someone uploaded a copyvio on commons and replaced the image in the article. It was then swiftly deleted on commons and delinked from the article, leaving a nice hole, which I then replaced by reverting all the recent changes. Job done. Hope all is good. Woody (talk) 13:33, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Ah, it's comforting to know Bjbot hasn't gone all Betacommand (I should have checked the article history. Meh!). Thank you, Woody. Well, my cough-cum-cold has the potential to transform me into a delirious insomniac ;-). Assuming you see this reply, could you scrutinise Brian Horrocks for Leithp (or approach someone) to address the "issues" (bah!) which have been raised at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Brian Horrocks? SoLando (Talk) 13:49, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

I presume you mean the 1(a) opposes? Whilst I personally see the use of commas as a personal thing, and not an obligation like Tony, the comments by Jrp are all actionable. The only way to pass FAC now is to find an extraordinary copyeditor, I will try and look for one... Woody (talk) 14:44, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Indeed. I'm actually unsure whether some of Tony's earlier comments about the effective accessibility of the text (and redundancy) have been addressed, to an extent. Judging by the second oppose, it hasn't. The article needs fresher, fresh eyes ;-). SoLando (Talk) 14:57, 9 June 2008 (UTC)