User talk:Otr500

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Edits to this page[edit]

I would like to ask that comments to this page conform to the following style as examples; First person to comment with no indentions.

Second person to comment like this.
Third person to comment like this.
Fourth person to comment like this.
Second person with additional comments.
Fourth person with additional comments.
  • This provides a better flow in comments and extended comments do not end up against the right side. Otr500 (talk) 09:56, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

My take[edit]

I have my beliefs just as everyone else. I am passionate concerning how and why I believe the way I do. Although lacking in formal education I believe my informal education, being somewhat equal to the lower echelon of the adequately papered intellectuals, except maybe lacking a little finesse, to be at least rounded enough to sustain my need to search for knowledge. I try to be thorough in research and my quest to obtain knowledge is only matched by my intentions to be productive in life. I do have the propensity to appear "dry" in my discussions but, as I am lighthearted in person, I strive to be dedicated to factual information. Any perceived "dryness" is unintentional but I will not hasten to be bold when called for.

I probably differ from many in that I feel it is not my direction to try to discuss, and certainly not "preach" (and I am no preacher), to anyone not willing to listen. I also feel that it is not anyone's job description to determine, try to determine, or even think about the possibility of a persons direction in the afterlife. There is one judge and I will be satisfied (like there would be a choice) with the Judge's decision. I have taken a liking to Wikipedia and the idea so adding information when I can is rewarding.
Please be understanding if there is some delay in any responses. We recently lost almost everything in a house fire and by necessity changed towns and soon will begin a new job. It is a challenge to begin to gather things all over again but we were not home so no one was hurt. Otr500 (talk) 01:00, 25 July 2010 (UTC)














Please consider what your statements about the intent of people really mean...[edit]










Recent Find a Grave edits[edit]

I just wanted to let you know that I reverted a couple of your recent edits of removing Find a Grave entries. The only ones I reverted either:

  1. The edit you made broke the link to Find a Grave and the link was creating an error (there are a lot more of these)
  2. A picture of the grave with the sourced information clearly visible is available on the Find a Grave entry validating the information.
  3. Medal of Honor recipients whose information cannot so far be gained from any other source without using original research.

I also noticed a couple were B class or better and I will attempt to find a reference. If I cannot I will have to downgrade the articles due to a lack of sourcing of the information. Also, the link you provided on the External links talk page showed a list of articles with the Find a Grave link but there are a lot of images on that list as well. Is it your intention to submit these images for deletion since they are derived from what you perceive to be an "unreliable source"? Surprising as this might be I do not think we should be using images from Find a Grave so if that is your intention I might support you on that one. --Kumioko (talk) 15:10, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

I looked at your user page today and was surprised. I estimate you would have to stop editing on Wikipedia about 10 years for me to catch up with you. This would also depend on me winning the lottery so I wouldn't be working 70 to 90 hours a week. These facts also perplexes me at times concerning some of your comments. Since I do not plan on getting into an edit war with you, but have absolutely no plans to ignore clear violations of Wikipedia policy, then I guess the next step is necessary. I left a comment on one of the edits you reverted and if you really feel you are right then we will have to pursue Wikipedia remedies for a solution. This saddens me as I really, really, really, do not want to to argue against something that I actually like. A problem with a part of your statement that I perceive to be an unreliable source, that I have provided policies to back up, are supported by consensus and many edits.
I have always heard there is more than one way to skin a cat, and glad to learn it was a metaphor, but here would be an example that did not take a lot of work and just might be one solution for your Medal of Honor recipient concerns;
  • Julius A. R. Wilke (a Medal of Honor recipient), found here on Find a Grave, lists Arlington National Cemetery as the place of burial. This is contrary to the Find a Grave entry so I researched a little. I have an emailed copy of a letter from the Department of the Army, Arlington National Cemetery, that states they have no information on the man named in the Wikipedia article. I also have an email from the man that claims to have visited "2,800 sites or 99% of the known recipients (Medal of Honor) graves in the United States", and is a member of the Medal of Honor Historical Society of the US. It is also listed that he has taken 3,014 Photos. This individual is willing to release pictures he has taken, to conform to Wikipedia GNU Free Documentation License, and help in any way he can. I would think this could be an important thing, especially concerning Medal of Honor recipients (lack of reliable sources) and the picture issue (two of your numbered concerns), where information is rare. Since this is not an area I am familiar with I would think it would be of interest to someone such as yourself. If this is so then let me know and we can proceed from there. This will not solve your concern of broken links so this is something you will have to work on because, no matter how much it is desired, Find a Grave can not be used as a reliable source. Otr500 (talk) 14:08, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

I saw the entry you made and replaced the information with the information available although it was via Find a Grave. I also appreciate you doing that research on the Medal of Honor recipients and getting the images of the graves would be great and it would be good to get them and add them to the articles but it still doesn't fix the sourcing problem. We can't, as far as I know, use an image as a source although we can use it as corroboration when we link to a site or source that contains the image. Even if we could I am not sure that it wouldn't breach the original research criteria. Adding it to the find a Grave site gets around that just as if an author added Original research to a book. --Kumioko (talk) 14:23, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

A grave marker could be cited as a reliable source (for its contents), just like you could cite a billboard or historical plaque. Their contents are 'available to the public' and thus the signs are 'published', even though the medium is typically stone or metal rather than paper. See {{cite sign}} for one standard format. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:24, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Thats interesting I never knew about that one that might be an option. I'm not sure if everyone would interpret it that way and I'm still not sure it wouldn't constitute original research but its worth looking into thanks. --Kumioko (talk) 21:43, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

I hope you don't mind I altered the format. I read this is an option (see above) to the indenting that ends up against the far right side on long discussion so I am experimenting.
If a picture was not considered a reliable source it could not be used in the body of an article. As far as I understand OR would take place if additional comments were offered that was not supported by the picture or another reliable source. To state what is in the picture would not be OR.
Kumioko, I do not have the ease of use of Wikipedia, nor the time, to undertake collecting pictures and all it entails to have them uploaded to commons. If you are interested in this then you can go straight to the horses mouth. If you are only interested in Medal of Honor recipients then possibly there is another editor with Find a Grave interests that is interested. Otr500 (talk) 08:59, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Anthony T. Kahoʻohanohano[edit]

I noticed the cite check flag you dropped. could I ask which reference you are questioning so I can fix it? --Kumioko (talk) 21:40, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

I left a message on the talk page. Let me know if what you find is consistent with what I found. Otr500 (talk) 22:08, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
I see what you mean. I added a couple of links under external links but I don't have to fix them all right now Ill go back and do it later. --Kumioko (talk) 15:49, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

April 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States[edit]

WikiProject United States logo.svg

The April 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States 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.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 01:00, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Otr500. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 April 10.
Message added 19:18, 10 April 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

SchuminWeb (Talk) 19:18, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Welcome to MILHIST[edit]

The Bugle: Issue LXI, March 2011[edit]

The Bugle.png
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 04:22, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

May 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States[edit]

WikiProject United States logo.svg

The May 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States 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.

 
. --Kumioko (talk) 15:47, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Removal of find a grave[edit]

I noticed that you removed Find a Grave from a couple of articles that were on my watchlist and wanted to let you know I just reverted a couple. If there is a better reference of the information then I agree, by all means replace the find a grave link but removing it from articles with only 2 links or causing an article to be unreferenced (though by it a weak reference) is not, IMO, a good way to improve the pedia. --Kumioko (talk) 03:10, 10 May 2011 (UTC) :I have been correcting articles that I will follow up on (placed on my watch list), have stated my intentions, have followed up on some (a large task), and I have explained what I am doing and asked for assistance.

Through many edits where policies and guidelines were disregarded articles have been created. Those that created many are long gone and the articles just sit taking up space. If a person is only notable for one thing and there are no (or even one) reliable sources or references then notability is an issue. I had no current plans to even consider seeking removal of articles but the Find a Grave project has no plans to correct problems that now exist. You can not seem to decide about retiring but seem to have no plans to edit. You have stated that you reverted articles and I will review this. If you reverted good faith edits against Wikipedia policies, guidelines, and consensus I will issue a warning on your retired talk page.
I have undertaken a monumental task of correcting articles that have improper references and have Wikipedia policies, guidelines, and consensus to back up my edits. I also plan to (and currently do so) revisit articles at a point to seek improvements. I have recently done this (Willard Brown) as a direct result of my project concerning Find a Grave. I will not be daunted by setbacks as the Find a Grave project was allowed a few years to create unacceptable articles. Some members or proponents have weighed in on keeping the "status quo" with no plans for any corrections.
I have chosen to use what I feel is an exemption to use Find a Grave as an external link (compromise) even though there are many that are against it. Those that are have not raised any objections so I continue to do so. It is not my job to stop what I am doing to correct links so if one is constructed to require a lot of work I have deleted it. You had the option to place the link under an external links section.
Reverting and placing back as a reference is against long established policies, guidelines, and consensus and thus I must act accordingly. Please be advised again (as many times before) that Find a Grave is not considered reliable as a reference not even, "though by (I assume be) it a weak reference ". This has been established beyond controversy, reaffirmed more than once, and you choose to continually ignore this. I have stated that I do not support banning Find a Grave, as long as it is not detrimental to Wikipedia, just fixing the errors and mistakes. You have stated that this has been tried before but I was not involved and I feel I can prove the Wikipedia project, without corrections to follow Wikipedia policies, guidelines, and certainly consensus, is more harmful than good to Wikipedia. I have repeatedly taken the path to avoid such a confrontation but actions in defiance of Wikipedia standards will leave me no choice.
I really do not care if an articles will be lacking if Find a Grave has to be used as a weak reference to prevent not having references. Since Find a Grave can not be used as a reference without violating policies, guidelines, consensus, and even the Find a Grave project instructions, then an article probably does not meet the criteria for space on Wikipedia. Correcting the articles places them in the proper category for eventual work or removal. If you want these articles then find references that are out there. This will be a little more work than creating unreferenced articles but will be worth it in the long run.
I feel sad that you choose to take a cowboy position of no compromise, continued circular arguments, and what I consider a "do or die" stance with regard to your continued defiance. A good way to improve the pedia will be to provide sources and references for lacking articles, or to remove these from the site, not circumventing all that Wikipedia stands for to further a cause by blatantly disregarding policies, guidelines, and consensus, or by using unreliable sources and references while hiding them under an external link.
I would hope that you would not underestimate my determination in what I have undertaken and maybe you should not retire but stick around for the inevitable challenge that will be forth-coming. Otr500 (talk) 05:38, 10 May 2011 (UTC) Placed on hold at this time. Otr500 (talk) 05:50, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXII, April 2011[edit]

The Bugle.png
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:21, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Problem edit[edit]

Hi, can you take another look at this edit it appears to have added some characters to the end of reference 3. Is it some code for the publication or just a slip of the finger? Keith D (talk) 18:00, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you so very much. I am still laughing at that slip. I was getting my grandson something to eat and the only thing I can figure is that he wanted to help edit. Otr500 (talk) 20:00, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

"African American" vs. "African-American" vs. "African–American"[edit]

The phrase "African American" (with no hyphen) is a noun. The phrase "African-American" (with a hyphen) is an adjective. In the past, there has been some confusion in terms of naming Wikipedia articles, but I think they've been straightened out for the most part.

Nobody should be confused by "African-American" (with a hyphen) into thinking it has anything to do with relations between Africa and America. That would be signified by "African–American" (with an en-dash).

If you have a problem with Wikipedia's long-standing naming convention concerning African Americans, please start a centralized discussion instead of leaving similar messages on the Talk pages of many articles. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:42, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply and advice. I do not have a problem with any naming convention of course I really didn't know there was one concerning African Americans. I guess it just takes some figuring out; "African-American naming convention", and "the naming convention concerning African Americans". So where would African American Civil War Memorial place in all of this?
I have somewhat of a different view. I have Irish ancestry but regardless of that I am American. To me, no matter what the sentence placement, I prefer to use Irish-American when the need arises. Although only a vague hope it would be a monumental time when there would be less need (other than historic) to micro define ethnic groups, that are all considered American, and to eradicate ethnocentrism. Concerning your advice I will reply that there are several reasons I did what I did that is certainly acceptable by Wikipedia policies and guidelines. I need not go any farther because your reply was sufficient to cover my questions and or concerns. There is a discussion going on at WP:Manual of Style#dash drafting. Otr500 (talk) 06:21, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

No solution[edit]

Just when someone makes sense of something and appears to know what is going on a bomb is dropped. I thought what Shabazz said was valid, although there was no reference as to where the information was obtained, so I referenced this (here);
  • Concerning titles please comment on these quotes;
  • "The phrase "African American" (with no hyphen) is a noun. The phrase "African-American" (with a hyphen) is an adjective. In the past, there has been some confusion in terms of naming Wikipedia articles, but I think they've been straightened out for the most part."
  • "Nobody should be confused by "African-American" (with a hyphen) into thinking it has anything to do with relations between Africa and America. That would be signified by "African–American" (with an en-dash)." Otr500 (talk) 8:54 am, 29 May 2011, Sunday (14 days ago) (UTC−5)
This actually made sense but a reply indicates that it is false meaning the whole discussion was flawed especially since it appears not one person has a real idea what should be, or is an appropriate us of hyphen, en-dashes, or en-dashes. The reply was;
  • Neither is discussing the English language as it actually exists anywhere. Both are efforts to create a dogmatic Newspeak, and if both are genuine quotes from our talk pages (neither shows up on searching), the editor responsible should be ignored until he goes to play on the Newspeak Wikipedia, with its much simpler Manual of Style: "Hyphens are ungood." Septentrionalis PMAnderson 12:44 pm, 29 May 2011, Sunday (13 days ago) (UTC−5)
So much for figuring things out and certainly for "...but I think they've been straightened out for the most part." Otr500 (talk) 09:12, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Guy Gabledon[edit]

I just noticed the edit you made to Guy Gabeldon removing the retrieved as dates from the external links. I am not going to revert it but I do not think that this edit was helpful. Regardless of what the "Standard" is for external links I have found that it is frequently helpful to have the retireved date on links (citation or otherwise) especially when those links are using the archiveurl parameters and the rules do allow it. I also think that the comment you left on the talk page was meant for another article. Cheers and happy editing. --Kumioko (talk) 15:24, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

  • Have to agree with Kumioko on this one. In regard to PFC Guy Gabledon MoH nomination, I can't understand it either, I believe that it is all politics. I have worked with various organizations to have his medal upgraded to the MoH, I even recently wrote to Pre. Obama, but nothing so far. Another case that comes to mind is that of Maj. Herman Bottcher. I once spoke to two former soldiers who served in different units with him and they both agreed that Bottcher was the bravest man that they ever knew. Tony the Marine (talk) 16:33, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
I can see your point Kumioko. Would I be correct that these dates would have no actual importance to the casual reader? Using archiveurl parameters while still having some form of article consistency, and at the same time following guidelines that appear to have consensus since not being contested, could be accomplished using "hidden comments" that would suffice to satisfy all. We can go this route, unless you and Tony have valid reasoning in having these dates visible on the article page, in which case we can seek a guideline change. I added back the dates per above, if I did it correctly, so tell me what you think? Otr500 (talk) 02:31, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
I suppose that would be ok although I don't think I would invest much time in going through the articles to make the dates into hidden comments. They really don't harm anything by being there. --Kumioko (talk) 03:07, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
It is actually the first article that I recall seeing this on. I don't intend on looking for articles formatted as such but if I run across any I may do this. You are right and it probably doesn't really hurt anything ----but---- it is in the guidelines. I realize that this may not be that important to some but it is just the way I am.
When I make edits I look for potential improvements that will enhance the article. When there are guidelines I really try to observe them. Articles I start I have resolved to begin at start and not stub class when possible and I do not want to begin or even work on articles that I think are never going to be anything but a stub. This does not mean I will not make mistakes as that will be a given, but I really think, even though consensus can actually change daily, that some form of consistency does make a better encyclopedia. I do like "retrieval dates", and especially "access dates" that are somewhat current, as this means someone followed a link and this means it is obviously a good one. Otr500 (talk) 03:31, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIII, May 2011[edit]

The Bugle.png
To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:16, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

June 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States[edit]

WikiProject United States logo.svg

The June 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States 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.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 22:22, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

List of United States Military Academy alumni (Union Army)[edit]

Hello! In this edit to List of United States Military Academy alumni (Union Army), you added a ref name of "Chief of Ordnance" with two new entries on the list, but no source was included. Could you revisit the article and add the source you intended? Thanks~ - Salamurai (talk) 07:29, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, sorry for the delay but worked 107 hours so have been busy. If not called out I will look at this tomorrow because I do see I also need to correct the box. Otr500 (talk) 07:00, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Yes check.svg Done and repaired another while I was at it. Otr500 (talk) 23:15, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

US National Archives collaboration[edit]

US-NARA-Seal.svg
United States National Archives WikiProject
Would you like to help improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to the National Archives and its incredible collection? This summer, the National Archives—which houses some of America's most important historical documents—is hosting me as its Wikipedian in Residence, and I have created WP:NARA to launch these efforts.

There are all sorts of tasks available for any type of editor, whether you're a writer, organizer, gnome, coder, or image guru. The National Archives is making its resources available to Wikipedia, so help us forge this important relationship! Please sign up and introduce yourself. Dominic·t 15:22, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIV, June 2011[edit]

The Bugle.png
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 23:42, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

July 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States[edit]

WikiProject United States logo.svg

The July 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States 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.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 13:14, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Stub tags[edit]

When adding a stub tag to an article such as Populus heterophylla, please remember to put it at the end after everything except inter-wiki links (per WP:LAYOUT): it saves the time of the stub-sorter who otherwise has to move the tag to the right place while stub-sorting it. Thanks. PamD (talk) 08:11, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Otr500 (talk) 00:02, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Luis Barbero[edit]

Hi Otr500. I've replied on the talkpage of Luis Barbero regarding the issues you raised. Hope this helps! Thanks. Lugnuts (talk) 11:36, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXV, July 2011[edit]

The Bugle.png
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 22:49, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

September 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States[edit]

WikiProject United States logo.svg

The September 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States 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.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 03:12, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks...[edit]

...for updating the EOBR article. I was planning on expanding it but I started driving local and got burnt out on article editing and as you can see it has been sitting around for years with no work. --ErgoSumtalktrib 00:03, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Well thank you. I plan to do more on several others but worked 89 hours last week. After 17 years I sort of went local, in the oilfield industry, but actually get paid more when I don't drive. Stand-by time, with oilfield exemptions and a 24 hour restart, make it nice. Otr500 (talk) 00:11, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVI, August 2011[edit]

The Bugle.png

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 18:29, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVII, September 2011[edit]

The Bugle.png

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 02:37, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVIII, October 2011[edit]

The Bugle.png

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 08:36, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

December 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States[edit]

WikiProject United States logo.svg

The December 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States 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.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 01:25, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIX, November 2011[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:58, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Riverstone Holdings, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Desert, California (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) 11:01, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Will Rogers Shrine of the Sun, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Cripple Creek and Native American (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) 10:57, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Norris-Penrose Event Center, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Native American (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) 10:51, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Military Historian of the Year[edit]

Nominations for the "Military Historian of the Year" for 2011 are now open. If you would like to nominate an editor for this award, please do so here. Voting will open on 22 January and run for seven days. Thanks! On behalf of the coordinators, Nick-D (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:00, 16 January 2012 (UTC) You were sent this message because you are a listed as a member of the Military history WikiProject.

January 2012 Newsletter for WikiProject United States and supported projects[edit]

WikiProject United States logo.svg

The January 2012 issue of the WikiProject United States 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.

 
--Kumi-Taskbot (talk) 18:26, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXX, January 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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] 00:30, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Reliable Source Response[edit]

I wanted to personally thank you for responding to my message on the reliable source noticeboard. I'm new to Wikipedia, and I'll take your suggestions to heart as I learn the ropes. I do contend that the value of International Futures is beyond a mere interesting bit of trivia. Policy is made through calculated analysis of potential futures, and this model is the largest integrated model in the world, spanning more issue areas than any other in the world. That being said, I appreciate your opinion. I do have one further question that you may be able to help with. As I mentioned in my first message, I was directed to the noticeboard to seek consensus at the suggestion of another seasoned veteran of Wikipedia. Ultimately, is there a listing of reliable sources if the source does achieve consensus? Is there a next step? Thanks again for taking the time to work with me. (Shredder2012 (talk) 15:54, 24 January 2012 (UTC))

Thank you for your comments. Our very lives are affected by International Futures. You are thinking about this a little backwards. I do not want to even think about creating a proverbial monster but spend some time just looking Wikipedia over.
You have added the link to the Angola article in December. The edit was not reverted nor did I see anything on the talk page. At this time (remember consensus can change) consensus already approves the addition, at least in this article. If the same applies to other articles you already have achieved consensus by silence there also. Being bold, as in your edit, is one thing encourage on Wikipedia. There is even a process referred to as bold, revert, discuss (BRD) as a way to improve articles. However, if the site is argued against on an article you may just have run into local opposition. This is why a good edit summary as well as possibly a prior link introduction on the talk page can be a good thing. Some editors (groups, cabals, whatever), seem to demand prior discussion (not in the "rules" I have read) and this brick wall will be very tall.
BRD would include adding content or the link (in this case), possible reversion (or deletion), and discussion on the talk page. PLEASE! Do not ever assume anything bad, or against you, or even the link. You have included the link in "External links" and you will find editors that do not want (will fight) external links (mare than two or three if any) in an article they are involved in. If the article is rated high enough with a certain number of major contributors, they will have broad consensus to effect control of content. This is not a bad thing as you will not want to see an article you helped get to WP:FA get demoted for such a reason.
I will make this very easy for you. As for as I know, and at this time without digging deeper, there is no reason that the site can not be used as a source for relevant material. I can also not see where the site, again where relevant, can not be used in a "See also" section. It can be used in an external links section because that is the nature of the section. However, one thing to remember is that content or links that can be used as a source or reference should be used and not simply placed in an "external links" or even a "See also" section.
You stated you are new to Wikipedia so I would like to welcome you and hope that you will be a contributor and not one that just adds links or references or templates and certainly in some mass form. I am a contributing editor but became involve in reference and external links by necessity of circumstances. It is an uphill "battle", if you will, and I have studied extensively on these areas and still yet that does not mean much. You will find articles are "protected" by individuals as well as groups. This in itself is not a bad thing, and you will learn this first hand especially when you are a major contributor to an article, but if the editors involve are not open to discussion or if they (one or more) exhibit ownership that goes beyond "protection" of an article, you will hit a brick wall. This does not mean progress can not be accomplished but that any progress will not be easy.
You will also find editors that have their own ideas this sometimes actually works to the detriment of expanding a great encyclopedia. If someone edits any article I am involved in I welcome this. If they "cowboy" in I would not be pleased but as long as article expansion with encyclopedic content is achieved I think this is a good thing. The editor that suggested you find out about the link you are concerned with (I haven't looked) is either supportive, objective, open to new ideas, or all three, but at any rate seems fair.
As an editor you should really not add links (you can but just a suggestion) that you are not actively editing or plan to edit. This prevents being labeled a "fly-by" editor or someone just adding frivolous links. This is why I suggested alternative methods of adding links. Unless there is reasons against you can add a link to a "See also" section and use this to keep track of the article for future reference. You can also seek input on the talk page which will give feedback as well as place the article in your "My contributions". You will learn a lot by trial and error but don't take things personally. That happened to me and it can be detrimental. I just decided I will do what I can, pick any "battles" I feel are worth fighting, and not worry about the rest. Remember that there are venues for seeking "outside help" and learn how to use these. Don't be too hard headed or hot tempered, always try to assume good faith even when it seems to the contrary, and seek resolution as apposed to extended, and sure be be circular, arguments.
  • Make good contributions, have fun, and remember that Wikipedia practices editorial reviews by consensus. You may be in the "majority", maybe not, and you just might not find a consensus (even if it appears to be a fantastic idea, thought, or contribution), might not materialize. Otr500 (talk) 18:11, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the advice and words of encouragement. The learning curve on Wikipedia can be a bit steep, as the rules of the road can sometimes be unclear. It's good to know that editors like you are welcoming. If I could, I'd like to get in touch with you if I encounter any bumps in the road. Cheers. (Shredder2012 (talk) 22:10, 24 January 2012 (UTC))
You can get in touch with me any time you want. I work erratic and sometimes long hours but I try to not miss a 2nd day in a row. While I have my opinions like everyone else, and like all but one person ever I can be wrong at times, I strive to be fair.
There are some that say we don't actually have "rules" as the idea that consensus can change means any "rules" can also. I consider that the only concrete rules we have are concerning WP:BLP's, WP:COPYVIO's, and WP:AGF. The first two are by necessity for legal reasons and the third is to keep peace considering Wikipedia is run by a consensus of editor-in-chiefs.
I have a pretty varied interest spectrum but my advise would be to focus on what you like to do that keeps you returning to Wikipedia. Otr500 (talk) 09:26, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Hualapai people, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page William Hardy (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) 10:57, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

USRD WikiProject Newsletter, Winter 2012[edit]

USRD Newsletter header.svg
Volume 5, Issue 1 • Winter 2011 • About the Newsletter
This edition is going out to all USRD WikiProject members (current, former, or potential) in addition to other subscribers as part of a roll call to update the participants list. Anyone that would like to continue to receive this newsletter in the future needs to update the subscription list if they are not already subscribed.
Departments
Features
State and national updates
ArchivesNewsroomFull IssueShortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS
Imzadi 1979  22:12, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXI, February 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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] 10:17, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for Mar 2[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Canon de 105 mle 1913 Schneider, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ansaldo (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) 11:07, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXII, March 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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] 02:30, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXIII, April 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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] 00:31, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXIV, May 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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] 15:11, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

GOCE July 2012 Copy Edit Drive[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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] 19:18, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXVI, July 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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] 09:41, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 20[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Transportation Security Administration, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Young Turks (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) 12:03, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 28[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Transportation Security Administration, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Japanese and Federal (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) 13:48, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXVII, August 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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] 01:07, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Military history coordinator election[edit]

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 projectwhat coordinators do) 09:39, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXVIII, September 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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] 20:53, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXIX, October 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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) 02:54, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXX, November 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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) 01:28, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle[edit]

Decemmber 8 - Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle - You're invited
Seattle Public Library
  • Date Saturday, December 8, 2012
  • Time 10 a.m. – 3 p.m.
  • Location Seattle Public Library Meeting Room 1 on Level 4, Central Library, 1000 4th Avenue, Seattle WA, 98104
  • Event An editathon on Seattle-related Wikipedia articles with Wikipedia tutorials and Librarian assistance on hand.
  • Hashtag #wikiloveslib or #glamwiki.
  • Registration http://wll-seattle.eventbrite.com or use on-wiki regsistration.

Yours, Maximilianklein (talk) 03:28, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXI, December 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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) 09:08, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

The Center Line: U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter, Winter 2013[edit]

The Center Line header.svg
Volume 6, Issue 1 • Winter 2013 • About the Newsletter
Departments
Features
State and national updates
ArchivesNewsroomFull IssueShortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS
EdwardsBot (talk) 19:49, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXII, January 2013[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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) 13:05, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXIII, February 2013[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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) 07:19, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXIV, March 2013[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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) 03:50, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 23[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited El Camino Real de los Tejas National Historic Trail, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sabine River (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) 12:07, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXV, April 2013[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

The Center Line: Spring 2013[edit]

The Center Line header.svg
Volume 6, Issue 2 • Spring 2013 • About the Newsletter
Departments
Features
State and national updates
ArchivesNewsroomFull IssueShortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS
EdwardsBot (talk) 22:25, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 5[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited United States Lighthouse Service, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Department of Treasury (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) 16:47, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

On names of US lighthouses[edit]

Lighthouses in the US are invariably named "placename Light", not "Lighthouse", by the governing authorities. Please at least discuss this with others before overriding this convention. Also, the cut-and-paste move of Sabine Pass Light creates a disruption in the article history. If you cannot accomplish a proper move yourself, use Wikipedia:Requested moves to ask an administrator to do it for you. Thank you for your work. Mangoe (talk) 12:48, 9 May 2013 (UTC) I answered at Talk:List of lighthouses in the United States. Otr500 (talk) 09:15, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXVI, May 2013[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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) 13:08, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Love history & culture? Get involved in WikiProject World Digital Library![edit]

World Digital Library Wikipedia Partnership - We need you!
WorldDigitalLibraryLogo2.png
Hi Otr500! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! SarahStierch (talk) 22:29, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXVII, June 2013[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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) 08:45, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXVIII, July 2013[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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) 16:09, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 4[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Chuck Connors, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Kamala Devi and Branded (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) 23:09, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Fixed: YesY. Otr500 (talk) 04:36, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

The Center Line: Summer 2013[edit]

The Center Line header.svg
Volume 6, Issue 3 • Summer 2013 • About the Newsletter
Departments
Features
State and national updates
ArchivesNewsroomFull IssueShortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS
EdwardsBot (talk) 22:20, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXIX, August 2013[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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) 00:45, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 14[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited USRC Woodbury (1837), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Veracruz, Mexico (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, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Green tickY Fixed

Kurdish separatism in Iran campaignbox[edit]

Hello Zirguezi, since you were active on the Kurdish Iranian topic in the past - i would like to notify you the following: Recently an article Kurdish separatism in Iran was forced a split into new Rebellions in Iranian Kurdistan; In addition, the campaignbox was as well split [1]: from template:Campaignbox Kurdish separatism in Iran into the new template:Campaignbox Kurdish–Iranian conflict . I proposed to remerge the campaignboxes via a community consensus, with the rationale that the split of articles was made artificially and without any real need (the user who did it, had wanted to rename the Kurdish separatism in Iran article, but when failed - he started a "competitive" article). You are welcome to express your opinion at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2013_September_3#Template:Campaignbox_Kurdish.E2.80.93Iranian_conflict.Greyshark09 (talk) 14:31, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator election[edit]

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] 16:38, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXXX, September 2013[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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) 00:43, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 21[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sabine Pass, Port Arthur, Texas, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page San Jacinto (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) 12:36, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Green tickY Fixed

Disambiguation link notification for October 5[edit]

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.

Constitution of Louisiana (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Civil law, Richard Johnson, Josiah Quincy and William Giles

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:43, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Green tickY Fixed

Disambiguation link notification for October 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Constitution of Louisiana, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page University of Louisiana (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) 10:56, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Green tickY Fixed

The Bugle: Issue XCI, October 2013[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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) 23:28, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

The Center Line: Fall 2013[edit]

The Center Line header.svg
Volume 6, Issue 4 • Fall 2013 • About the Newsletter
Departments
Features
State and national updates
ArchivesNewsroomFull IssueShortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS
EdwardsBot (talk) 03:11, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCII, November 2013[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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) 06:35, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCIII, December 2013[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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) 00:34, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCIV, January 2014[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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) 13:46, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

The Center Line: Winter 2013[edit]

The Center Line header.svg
Volume 7, Issue 1 • Winter 2014 • About the Newsletter
Departments
Features
State and national updates
ArchivesNewsroomFull IssueShortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:15, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Reasons for lack of editing[edit]

I have slowed down editing on Wikipedia as lack of edits will show. The reasons are what can be referred to as "mythical":

  • 1)- Guardian editors; These are mythical editors with good intentions but if they alone do not like something in an article, even if relevant and sourced, it will be reverted, resulting in unnecessary complications.
  • 2)- What I call a Cabal even if I am assured they do not exist so are mythical. I have had the displeasure of meeting such a mythical group (I may have only been dreaming) that I (my personal opinion) feel can be humorously referred to as "The Knights of NPOV Cabal" or "The Never Finishes an Article Cabal". It is my opinion, and with considerable proof, they (if they were to exist) rename articles in violation of Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines, only creating a majority of stub articles with many being misnamed. Pages of evidence to the contrary will result in pages of verbiage, and any attempt to change this will be a battle. Some editors just want to edit. Sure, knowing there is irrefutable evidence, I "could" battle through the process but finding the Wikipedia mythical room is complicated.
  • If you are some of these editors, that belong to the mythical secret project Cabal that does not exist, you know who you are. I know, that you know, that you are wrong. "If" I were to get the time and will to "do battle", I would even try to expose these editors if only you were not so mythical. This would only be after enough editors (OMG would that also be a Cabal?) have had enough of something that is presented as not being actual, while in reality really is, yet is referred to as mythical because Wikipedia protocol is to deny it, and attempts to do something about it is complicated. There is not even a real Wikipedia protocol to attempt to deal with naming conventions of projects gone awry, that blatantly disregard Wikipedia even in article naming (as a group), to try to address this without a long term battle. If something is wrong it should not be so hard to correct without mythical editorial bloodshed.
  • See; Even trying to explain it is comical so there is really nothing short of confrontation that can resolve it. I may not be editing articles but I feel better. "IF" someone takes offense at any of this, or tries to make an issue of any, OR becomes tired of some of the same things and would like a change, let me know (tag it) or join in, as I can provide links to substantiate any of the above "mythical" information. If you are one of the "mythical" editors misnaming articles all over Wikipedia, and would like to report me, this would be a good reason to "do battle" to expose you. Since you are "mythical" I can not imagine how you could possibly be insulted. My mythical thanks, Otr500 (talk) 04:00, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation[edit]

Your upload of File:Beauregard Parish Jail caption2.JPG or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 12:56, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCV, February 2014[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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) 23:53, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCVI, March 2014[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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) 12:32, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Request for comment[edit]

Hello Otr500, I'm here onbehalf of WP:ORPHAN in which you are also a participant. So, we want your opinion to a WP:ORPHAN related matter. It is a proposal by Technical 13. Please have a look here. Your opinion (i.e support, oppose etc) are very much appreciated there. Thank you. By Jim Cartar through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:02, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Backlog drive[edit]

Wiki letter w.svg

Hello Otr500,

WikiProject Orphanage is holding a month long Backlog Elimination Drive to de-orphan articles which have orphan tags!
The goal is to eliminate the backlog of orphan articles. There are currently 124905 articles which have orphan tags. The drive is running from April 12, 2014 to May 12, 2014.

Awards will be given out for all editors participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive. To add your name in the participants list click here.
So start de-orphaning articles! Click here to see the list of articles need de-orphaning. Visit Suggestions for how to de-orphan an article to know more!

Thanks. Opt-out Instructions by Jim Cartar on behalf of WikiProject Orphanage through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:21, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Green tickY Added name to list.

The Bugle: Issue XCVII, April 2014[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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) 14:55, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Kindness Barnstar Hires.png Barnstar for de-orphaning articles
Thank you for your efforts to de-orphan articles, Although we are unsuccessful to make a dent on the huge backlog, but your efforts to de-orphan articles are very much appreciated. Happy editing! -- From: Jim Carter onbehalf of WikiProject Orphanage through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:24, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
My first barnstar: Thanks.

The Bugle: Issue XCVIII, May 2014[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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) 22:46, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 30[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Livonia, Louisiana, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Indian (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) 08:54, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Green tickY: Done

The Center Line: Spring 2014[edit]

The Center Line header.svg
Volume 7, Issue 2 • Spring 2014 • About the Newsletter
Departments
Features
State and national updates
ArchivesNewsroomFull IssueShortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:05, 8 June 2014 (UTC) on behalf of Imzadi1979

Disambiguation link notification for June 8[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ashland Plantation, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Gonzales and Alexander Stewart (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) 08:57, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

  • Green tickY: Done

Disambiguation link notification for June 15[edit]

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.

Chretien Point Plantation (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Confederate, Thomas Green, Big house and Cavalry Division
Abe Hawkins (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Freeman

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Green tickY: Done

The Bugle: Issue XCIX, June 2014[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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) 15:37, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 22[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Lacassane Company, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Conservation and Casitas (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) 08:52, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Green tickY: Done

Proposed deletion of The Lacassane Company[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article The Lacassane Company has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Is this company notable?

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Plantdrew (talk) 04:10, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 30[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Carter Plantation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Spanish (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) 08:57, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Redirect[edit]

Hello. I've undid your blanking of Magnolia Lane Plantation because you didn't give a valid reason in the edit summary. If you wish to delete the redirect, please nominate the redirect under one of the speedy deletion criterion or nominate the article at RfD. Also, you don't have to sign your edit summaries with four ~s. Thanks. KJ «Click Here» 07:24, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you as I did not intend to leave a blanked page but fell asleep while adding content to the article. I removed the redirect again but not in contest of your edit but in order to add content and correctly list the article. I did not know about not signing the edit summary as there is insufficient liking on this information and I just never saw it so thanks again. Otr500 (talk) 13:37, 1 July 2014 (UTC)


Deletion of "List of Playboy Playmates of X"[edit]

Regarding your comments ending with [2]: I really don't understand the details and extent of your concerns. I'm starting to put together the AfD. I wish you could explain yourself more clearly so I could determine what, if anything, should be added. --Ronz (talk) 16:12, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for this reply and your intended direction. I started out with "I am not up to speed on this yet, nor the relevant discussions, and know there are a lot of affected links.", and that is exactly what I meant.
While you clarified your position concerning your opinion your total possible involvement was still not entirely clear until now. My reasoning on this is that if a person is the only one in a burning building and "only" shouting, "fire; put it out", then it is likely the building will burn down. In reality there has to be a beginning to get to an end and this has not happened. Your comment about putting together an AfD makes it apparent you have grabbed a fire extinguisher.
I got involved in a deep problem with Find-a-Grave being inappropriately added to every bio of a deceased person on Wikipedia as an external link and oftentimes used as the only source or reference. It seemed to me to be a horrible "battle" to right something that was so clear. A good thing that resulted, with all it's current flaws, was the Wikipedia:External links/Perennial websites, and a consensus to stop the "project" from inundating every like article. There is still much to do but it seems it is far more easier to find bored editors to plunge into a project than to gather support to stop and reverse it.
I have been researching as many of those "List of Playboy Playmates of..." that I can. My initial thought is, aside from the fact that I do not mind there being actual Playboy "article" coverage on Wikipedia, is that:
  • 1)- the "lists" I ran into are not actually "lists" but articles classified as lists. Those that have argued for keep (and thus far successfully) have done so with ridiculous reasoning.
  • 2)- The "lists" are biographical in nature and any people covered by an article that are living --- are BLP's.
  • 3)- Using the "fact" that the articles are lists has allowed, as you pointed out concerning the Wikiproject proposal, "these articles were created to get around the decision". What I can find is that it "just worked" because it is not a real way around the policies and guidelines.
  • 4)- These "list's are not just of "people", as the titles suggest, but all are "playmates of the month" so the titles are misleading.
A list is still an article and subject to Wikipedia criteria for inclusion. An example of how these "lists" have survived is an AfD on List of people in Playboy 1990–99, found here. The two most notable are, "this is not an instance where Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Lists of people applies since this is not a stand alone list but a list based on magazinecontent." The second; "In any case, the vast majority of names are blue links and therefore prima facie notable.". The first is most amusing because as I understand it there are lists within articles and "stand alone" (separate article titles) lists but apparently a third is a "list based on magazine content".
Wikipedia:Avoiding harm#Pseudo-biographies covers two instances covering a biography "article". A)- "An article under the title of a person's name should substantially be a full and balanced biography of that person's public life. B)- "If the person is notable only in connection with a single event, and little or no other information is available to use in the writing of a balanced biography, that person should be covered in an article regarding the event, with the person's name as a redirect to the event article placing the information in context." This does not mean redirect to a "list".
You are putting together an AfD so if you would like to let me know what you are including (one in particular or more than one) I will be glad to let you know the level of my support. So you will be clear on my concerns: I am open to solutions that help build a better encyclopedia and presently these articles do not do that. A major concern is that all the article titles that were created as redirects to lists only will have to be dealt with. My initial (possible cursory) thoughts are that "List of Playboy Playmates of the Month" would not be bad if all the inappropriate blue links, that did not correspond to an actual article (or actual event article; so no list redirects), were deleted. This seems complicated as each link is now considered an article (even though redirected) thus subject to certain deletion policies. Do you have an idea concerning these? Any names on the list (after improvements) with actual links to actual articles would be referenced as many are WP:NOTABLE as well as the Playboy playmate events. As I said, improvements are needed, and I will support a move in that direction as long as you are willing to be negotiable to a point. Otr500 (talk) 21:49, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. There's a lot here to digest... Yes, the cleanup of all the redirecting articles and direct links is going to be a chore. Gimme some time to review your comments further. --Ronz (talk) 23:22, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
I was going to reply at Talk:List of Playboy Playmates of 2014 but will here:
I did a quick (accuracy not guaranteed but somewhere close) calculation. There are approximately 735 affected articles (related to the "lists") and I sampled 386. A 35% (average) of article titles (to Playmates) were linked to actual articles and 65% (average) were redirects to lists. This could mean there are approximately 477 articles that would be affected by a mass deletion.
  • An article can not just be blanked and once a redirect target article is deleted would not a speedy delete or AfD have to be initiated for each article title? The actual total would not change but the manageability would be eased on using selected AfD's. This is why I made mention of needing a place to start.
I would also like to ask your opinion. Many article names (playmates) that redirect will show a picture of another model. An example is years 2010-2012. If one hovers over the first link a picture of that model appears. The same picture appears on each link in that line for the three years. I assume Playboy pictures hold copyrights so is there some free use rationale that allows the use on Wikipedia? Is there no legal problem (WP:COPYVIO) with a picture being attributed to the wrong person? I have some information on several of these articles that I can post here for you to review and some of the info may help if you like. Whatever you decide just let me know. Otr500 (talk) 00:30, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
I cannot find what you're referring to. Hover over which specific link where exactly? --Ronz (talk) 17:30, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
It is located at the link ""An example is...". Maybe it is just my browser. I have Google Chrome. When I go to the link I posted and hover my mouse over any of the playmates a picture appears. If the article does not have a picture, and certainly if it is a redirect, the picture of another Playmate is shown. Anyway, if it does not do it for everyone I suppose it must not be a problem. Thanks, Otr500 (talk) 23:52, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
I'm lost. We're talking years 2010-2012? All I see is a table by month and year of names. There is no "An example is..." of any sort that I see. Placing the mouse cursor above any of the names gives the name of the article that the link goes to eg "Jaime Faith Edmondson" gives Jaime Faith Edmondson, "Anna Sophia Berglund" gives List of Playboy Playmates of 2011. Maybe you have some special browser plug-in? --Ronz (talk) 15:45, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
That's what I figure. I do have Power Zoom, an extension that allows me to view Wikipedia enlarged pictures when hovered over, but I did not know it would "create" pictures. On another note; Have you made any decision on a direction with the Playboy related article lists? Otr500 (talk) 16:18, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue C, July 2014[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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)

Disambiguation link notification for September 3[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pillow Place, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Clifton Place. 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) 09:39, 3 September 2014 (UTC)\

Green tickY: Done

Talk:Sabine Pass Light‎[edit]

In Talk:Sabine Pass Light‎ you have made a move request with an initial edit of 9,264 bytes (which can be seen as an addition to your contributions to last years request where you contributed over 16,000 bytes). Which means that you have contributed over 20,000 characters (at 80 characters a line that is about 250 lines), about 10 pages worth of A4, to the question of what is the best name for the article.

Given the above, I think you should consider if your most recent posting to the page, which at 4,007 bytes (about 8 times the size of the posting by Nyttend) was on reflection a wise course of action. Do you think that reply of about 2 pages of A4 was necessary or helpful (as a closing conscientious admin is expected to read it). Perhaps in future you will consider the advise in WP:TALK "Be concise", as very long answers tend to be counter-productive.

-- PBS (talk) 13:30, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your advice. It probably won't matter but: You might have noticed that in the initial request, after I posted intent and waited 7 days to change the name (I screwed it up), I changed the name. I worked on an article that sat since 2006 and the name was changed back because a project chose another name. An RM was started, I had stated my case, another edited did a better job even with additional persuasive comments, and 6 opposes after that is when I began to wonder what in the world was going on. I still edited the article and made improvements and, it appeared to me, to show me who could and couldn't edit on Wikipedia, my edits were reverted and incorporated as a glorified stub. That was enough. I had edits revered (changed), was told there was a not a snowball chance the name would be changed, and so I waited over a year. I thought I would try again so I presented my case. The RM said not to be vague so I put a lot into trying to be persuasive the first time. My one reply (oppose) was like the last--- "If you disagree with the naming convention, try to get the convention changed.".
I know that "votes" are not suppose to be counted, just what evidence is presented, but in the real world it seems they are related. This time (day 7) is 1 with support and one against, = no consensus.
To tell you the truth I just figured, since nobody had taken interest in 6 days (now 7), I had listed the RM in several places in accordance to Wikipedia policy, and I was going to be working all day with the last RM was closed the way it was anyway, that there was not going to be any chance of it going through. The one case I saw where a name change was allowed it was noted this was an exception. I had resigned to continue not to work on lighthouse articles so just vented.
What I didn't know, and just found out, was that one "proof of name" that is accepted according to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names) was the GNIS that lists Sabine Pass Lighthouse (historical) (1980 and 1983) here as a consistent past and present name. All I presented, and I didn't find this information. Go figure right?
Anyway I do not plan to edit lighthouse articles now, and maybe not in the future, so they (the lighthouse project) can name everything "light" if they want to. I "had" interest in all lighthouses but to have to battle so much for something so simple and clear on one article, it is just not worth it. Wikipedia can just have 20 year old stub "light" articles and I will just work on other NRHP, and history articles.
I do so appreciate your investment of time and advice. Otr500 (talk) 21:47, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
Your reply which is double my initial suggestion, indicates to me that you do not "get" what I mean. You can make your point much more succinctly. Verbose off! See here, here and here -- PBS (talk) 20:07, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Ordinals in USAF articles[edit]

Since you have participated in past discussions on the use of ordinals in U.S. military articles, you may be interested in the move request I started at Talk:132d Fighter Wing. —innotata 04:34, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

On making military unit articles more consistent[edit]

Here's an expansion on my reply at Talk:132d Fighter Wing, with some stuff about what I'm working on. First, you've been able to describe why we should use what happen to be the common names, and how we follow or don't quite follow official usage quite well. I definitely agree with you that we can make improvements as we go. I also am not for making standardising moves on a blanket basis, so I'd support doing this with classes of articles or individual articles (hence my current move request for Fighter Wings only, all of which I checked). And ordinals aren't the only renames some need, I'm sure. Anyway, as SchreiberBike, who has done a lot of work on standardising style in the past, has expressed interest in working on ordinals in U.S. military units, I'll probably keep track of discussions on U.S. military units, but step out myself. Actually, I came across this matter while working on standardising and correcting articles on other countries' militaries, which I'm more interested in contributing to, since there's less about them on Wikipedia. I started this effort because I'd like to start expanding our coverage of units, formations, and personnel in countries like Afghanistan and Ukraine, which I hope will be useful for rather obvious reasons. I've learned about military organisation and how to write about military topics, corrected plenty of misinformation, expanded and created articles with the basics, and so on; I found out about the incredible story of Irene Morales while improving categorisation (and take a look at the article I wrote on her), as well as creating Sikkim Scouts, and (earlier) 2nd Dragoon Regiment (France). So that's exactly what I'm doing. Anyway, thank you for all your work on style but more importantly on content. —innotata 06:32, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

I hope you can take a little time (or SchreiberBike) to insert content and some of the references you listed in the 132d Fighter Wing article.
The "vote" (if you will) is not in yet and does not have to go the way of logic. I have seen closures that use the rationale that references do point out the reasoning to allow a move. I "just" found out I have an early call to work in the morning and may--or may not-- get back early. If I do I will look at that article next. Thanks, Otr500 (talk) 04:26, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Copying from U.S. military sites[edit]

I thought I'd let you know it is allowed to copy or closely paraphrase text from U.S. military websites and publications, as long as you attribute it (see Template:Citation-attribution). U.S. federal government works have no copyright so the only issue is plagiarism. That said, it probably isn't the best idea in most circumstances, due to neutrality and the different style of writing, etc. So, you can choose to add attribution, or remove the text where you see it. I leave it to your judgment, just letting you know this choice exists. —innotata 02:52, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes--and attribution should be clear. Copy/paste is actually direct plagiarism (word-for-word) in the absence of copyvio or attribution and not good editing. To swap mid-sentence from normal practices of editing to copying or copy/pasting text just should not be done. An editor (my beliefs) should not "mix it up" within a sentence, as this allows a lot of latitude to creep in OR. Reality is that all content on Wikipedia is a form of plagiarism as it is OR if not referenced somewhere. The difference is to use content not "directly" copied word-for-word from a source to blatantly show direct plagiarism.
Using This article incorporates public domain material from websites or documents of the Air Force Historical Research Agency, in the reference section is not a blanket authorization to copy/paste right?. The template you referenced can be placed at the end of a sentence, lacking any other "source specific template", to show "sentences or a paragraph that incorporates text from a source that is not under copyright". It can, and I think should be, placed within ref tags.
I do have a method to my madness. Content on many of these article were added to by an editor that has been banned and some not active, thus comments on the talk page will go unanswered. I do not have time to stop, investigate these things to determine this, correct every instance, then take the next step of contacting the editor, so I hid the content, in lieu of sending it to the talk page, so I can look at it later. I hope I clarified my actions and I do appreciate your comments. Otr500 (talk) 04:10, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
You can either have attribution at the end of an article incorporating some copied text, or after each sentence that has some elements copied. Personally I prefer the second, but giving attribution once is more popular and some people prefer that; it's customary for the USAF HRA and such sources we've copied from a lot before. I totally agree, I just wanted to point out that it would work to keep some of the copied text if you decide to. —innotata 04:16, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
Gotcha. Otr500 (talk) 04:28, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
IF that works without being contested thus far I can use the time to look at other areas and come back to any "direct" copying as I do not like it even if it is easier. Night-- Otr500 (talk) 04:32, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CII, September 2014[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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) 02:25, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator election[edit]

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] 22:07, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

September 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Richard Norton (actor) 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:
  • ] in 1993, and with [[Jackie Chan]] in 1997, [[Inside Kung Fu]], MA Training published 1988 to 2000), Martial Arts & Combat Sports (published 1999 to 2002), and Martial Arts & Combat Sports.<

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:47, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 25[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cajun cuisine, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sage. 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) 09:16, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Green tickY: Done

The Center Line: Summer 2014[edit]

The Center Line header.svg
Volume 7, Issue 3 • Summer 2014 • About the Newsletter
Departments
Features
State and national updates
  • None submitted
ArchivesNewsroomFull IssueShortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Imzadi1979, 21:50, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Interview for The Signpost[edit]

This is being sent to you as a member of WikiProject Orphanage

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Orphanage for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Thanks, Rcsprinter123 (interview) @ 18:29, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

  • Green tickY Done: Answered interview questions. Otr500 (talk) 02:17, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CIII, October 2014[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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)

RM notice[edit]

You might be interested in the 12-article move discussion at Talk:Aspromonte (goat)#Requested move 07 November 2014, since it raises the same question on which you had previously given a fact- and policy-based rationale in very similar requested moves discussions.  — SMcCandlish ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ʌ≼  15:33, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Italian goat breeds[edit]

Hi! I see you've made a change in a large number of articles to the number of Italian goat breeds of limited distribution for which the Associazione Nazionale della Pastorizia maintains a registro anagrafico, or non-genealogical herd book. Unfortunately you seem to have miscounted them. There are forty-three, as can be clearly seen in this document, which lists them along with the eight national breeds for which it maintains a stricter genealogical herdbook. Would you be kind enough to fix those articles? Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:47, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Thanks for the message. I will not make any more changes until a determination can be reached. I will list my reasoning and we can go from there. The reference I was going by, and the one you referenced, Associazione Nazionale della Pastorizia, states: It maintains genealogical herdbooks for seventeen principal indigenous breeds of sheep and eight goat breeds, and also maintains less stringent herdbooks for forty-two autochthonous sheep breeds and thirty-three goat breeds of limited distribution.. There is a goat count in a reference that is in conflict with a direct link that states thirty-three, there may be a reason why the total number wasn't used. I went by the information on a link, that appears to be the authority that maintains the registry, and the provided inline link in the article. What is plainly stated without adding anything up is the number thirty-three. In other words the count is plainly stated. There is a list and the count does add up to forty-three. Questions would be:
  1. Why does the Wikipedia article, that makes it appear to be of authority, use thirty-three when there are plainly a count of forty-three breeds listed?
  2. Is minor breeds not counted or is there some breeds that are extinct?
  3. Is the information in that link that is on the article and now that you and I have referenced again (the authority on the subject) wrong?
  4. Is the information on that link from them or has some editor corrupted Wikipedia with false information?
I will look at this, and I hope you will also, but unless you are stating the authority that is listed as an in-line link is flawed, or they can't count, we need to come to a conclusion before we make any changes or revert what is stated so very much plainly in the registry authority.
I am going down the list and as you can see I am adding alternate names, any synonyms I can find, other common names, moving names up to the beginning of the lead, and looking for other references. Maybe we can determine why the count of the breeds listed does not agree with the number as stated in the registry authority.
NOTE: Some of the names listed in the link you provided might (possibly) be duplicates or alternate names. My rationale for this would be the breed Valgerola listed in the reference. According to the article Orobica (one of the eight) they are the same. If that is true then the bottle of beers on the wall has just dropped to 42.
    • IF** what is stated at that link is wrong then that MUST be corrected as it is very VERY misleading and is very much splattered on pretty much EVERY single article about Italian goats. We need another link (or more) to clarify this. I am sure you will agree about this? I trust you will look into this and help me straighten it out. Otr500 (talk) 08:37, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CIV, November 2014[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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)

Disambiguation link notification for November 29[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Crescent Plantation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Santa Gertrudis. 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) 09:10, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Green tickY: Done

Nominations for the Military history Wikiproject's Historian and Newcomer of the Year Awards are now open![edit]

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![edit]

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.

Voting for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year now open![edit]

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) 00:33, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 15[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Toggenburg (goat), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Werdenberg. 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) 09:56, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

December 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Bryde's whale 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:
  • '''Bryde's whale''' or '''Bryde's whale complex''' ({{IPAc-en|ˈ|b|r|uː|d|ə}{{respell|BREW|də}}) putatively comprises two species of [[rorqual]] [[baleen

Green tickY: Done


  • in Bryde's whales from the central western North Pacific and Baja California Peninsula. SC/56/PF15). ''Unpublished report to the Scientific Committee of the International Whaling Commission''.</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:07, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Jens Voigt[edit]

Thanks for picking it up on GA, take your time and Merry Christmas :) Mattsnow81 (Talk) 00:51, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

You are welcome. are you and/or any other editor(s) going to be available for any discussion or do you just want a decision and deal with it then? Otr500 (talk) 10:31, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
I'll be available for discussion :) I think Lugnuts and User:7&6=thirteen will be interested as well. Where will the discussion take place? (I'm new to GA) Mattsnow81 (Talk) 17:35, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
I suppose Talk:Jens Voigt would be more appropriate so I will reply there. Otr500 (talk) 20:19, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
I read your critique so far, very good thanks, I'll bring the changes necessary in a few days, I'm pretty busy at the moment :) Mattsnow81 (Talk) 03:34, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
I understand and there is Christmas around the corner. Otr500 (talk) 03:38, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
Sorry for being so slow! I'm moving at snail pace, I have a hectic schedule right now. I should be more available after 1st January. Mattsnow81 (Talk) 05:22, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
I'll be taking a wikibreak, I think you'd better make a decision whether it is a good article or not, as nobody else is stepping in to help. Happy New Year :) Mattsnow81 (Talk) 07:07, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. If you agree with concerns I listed you could have just removed the nomination and I would have closed it as withdrawn. I will close it later today. Otr500 (talk) 08:58, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CV, December 2014[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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)

The Center Line: Fourth Quarter 2014[edit]

The Center Line header.svg
Volume 7, Issue 4 • Fourth Quarter 2014 • About the Newsletter
Departments
Features
State and national updates
ArchivesNewsroomFull IssueShortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Imzadi1979 (talk · contribs) 10:38, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 27[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pembina Territory, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages British, Treaty of Washington and Northern. 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) 09:39, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 13[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Richard H. Keith, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Bowman (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) 09:26, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CVI, January 2015[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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) 13:28, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 26[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Paterson, New Jersey, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page British (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) 09:37, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CVII, February 2015[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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 Center Line: Winter 2015[edit]

The Center Line header.svg
Volume 8, Issue 1 • Winter 2015 • About the Newsletter
Departments
Features
State and national updates
ArchivesNewsroomFull IssueShortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Imzadi1979 (talk · contribs) 18:37, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CVIII, March 2015[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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)

Disambiguation link notification for March 30[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kissel Motor Car Company, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page William Ruger (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) 08:59, 30 March 2015 (UTC)