User talk:Parsecboy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Nuvola apps edu languages.png
Fragmented conversations hurt my brain.

File:"Konig Albert," Promenade Deck, North German Lloyd, Royal Mail Steamers"-LCCN2002720829.jpg[edit]

This is SS König Albert, right? Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:52, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Certainly should be - she was an NDL liner. Is that your next project? Parsecboy (talk) 08:27, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Not next - I've found a disaster in the ACW generals. So many bad, poorly-documented, low-res photos... Think the whole area needs a cleanup. Plus, Wörth is about 90% done, likewise Shiloh, it's just both are such massive projects that I've been stalling on putting the half-day's work in each needs. Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:32, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Oh, I know how that goes. I got part of the way through translating for SMS Kaiser Friedrich III but then got busy and haven't mustered the energy to go back and finish. Parsecboy (talk) 23:47, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

SMS Scharnhorst[edit]

I don't think this made it onto Milhist's announcement page ... I know I didn't see it while it was at FAC. I'll keep an eye out for it next time. - Dank (push to talk) 23:49, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Dan - I'll probably run it again shortly after checking with Ian first, though I doubt there'll be an issue with that since it was archived due to no reviews, not objections. Parsecboy (talk) 12:12, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Per here I'll put it up in another day or two - I'll ping you here when I do so you can have a look. Thanks again Dan. Parsecboy (talk) 13:30, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
@Dank: - it's back up at FAC whenever you have the time to take a look at the prose. Thanks again Dan. Parsecboy (talk) 20:57, 1 August 2014 (UTC)


Recently, I spent some time in the hospital and now having a hard time catching up with latest reviewer of the FAC Mahan-class destroyer review. I wonder if you would lend me a hand once more on a few things.

This is the first one under Design. I do not agree it should be merged. But, I cannot come up with a decent response. How would you respond? "Displacement increased to 1,500 tons from 1,365 tons." this should probably be merged into the statistics in the next paragraph. I see the 1,500 figure is there already (properly with convert template

Cropping this would be a big help: Consider cropping the image at the foot of the infobox to remove the caption.

Question: How would you explain what a ship class summary is and what essentials it normally should include. And why one must review it as a summary and not as full article.

Question: In your view, should the word battles be upper or lower case? The ship took part in the Battles of the Santa Cruz Islands, Leyte Gulf, and Iwo Jima.

Thanks in advance for any help you have time to give me. Pendright (talk) 21:54, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Sure, I can take a look, but it will have to wait until morning - I have some family in town and my niece is asleep in the office, so no computer access for the moment! Parsecboy (talk) 23:50, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
Understand! Pendright (talk) 00:02, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
I'm glad to hear you're doing better!
I've cropped the caption from the photo so that's all set now.
On the displacement issue - you might move the sentence about the increase in tonnage to the first paragraph in that section, and change it to something like "The improvements in armament [and anything else that might have been added] led to a ten percent increase in displacement over the Farraguts." You could then put the specific displacements in a footnote along the lines of "The Mahans displaced 1,500 tons compared to 1,365 tons for the Farraguts." That would allow you to keep the information in the article and satisfy Wehwalt's request. I'll ping @Wehwalt: to see if he thinks this is a good solution.
I'd probably use lower case in that context, though I might ask Dank for his opinion too.
I'm not quite sure what you mean with the ship class summary question. Does that refer to Nick-D's comment about the ship summaries and whether they're up to FA standard? Parsecboy (talk) 22:57, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
That sounds OK to me. Glad you are doing better.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:01, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
It is a very good compromise, except I think the word These should be substituted with either Other or Further.
Regarding the summary question: It does not pertain to Nick D. It is a question really about what are the essential elements that should go into a summary?
Sorry I did not get back to you. I spent most of yesterday at the hospital taking tests and what not.
As always, thank you. Pendright (talk) 22:57, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Hmm, in that case I think "other" or "further" would prompt readers to question what other changes were made in addition to those described. Do your sources cover those changes? Some of it might be too technical for most readers, but some things might be worth including.
Ok, I think I know what you mean. I see the ship class articles as covering the design history (why specific choices were made and so forth, if that information is available) and specific technical information in as best a level of detail as the sources allow, with short summaries of the construction and service histories of each ship in the class. There's some gray area with regards to the level of detail that's best, since some editors prefer to include just about everything (from the displacement and engine RPMs on speed trials to the specific breakdown of standard crews) since experts will want that information and some prefer to keep the highly technical stuff to a minimum since Wikipedia is supposed to be an encyclopedia for general readers. I probably lean toward the latter category more than the former, but it's really up to you to decide what you think is useful information and what isn't.
And no problem on taking a little while to respond, take all the time you need. If anything else should come up, let me know if you are able, so I can try to address issues raised at the review page while you're away - I'd really like to see the article promoted! Parsecboy (talk) 16:31, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

I yield to your superior judgment on the compromise. For the most part then, the standard for summaries is really in the hands of the reviewer – or so it seems. Thanks for all the useful information on the subject.

I believe I am down to about two responses to go - one of them is about the Cummings and I don’t get it. Here it is:

• "The ship operated off Okinawa during its invasion" What standard are you using to decide if battles referred to in the text should be piped to?

I expect to finish up the responses by tomorrow or Tuesday. I’m sure I’ll get questions on some of my answers. Many thanks to you for all your support and help, during the past two years, especially on this article. Regards! Pendright (talk) 01:49, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, and in large part Sturmvogel and I have set the standard for what should be included because we're the most prolific writers of these kinds of articles and we have similar opinions.
I think Wehwalt is asking why you sometimes don't link to specific battles referenced in the text - for instance, you linked to the Battle of Iwo Jima in the previous sentence but not to the Battle of Okinawa in the one he pointed to.
I'm glad to be able to help. Let me know if anything else comes up! By the way, I'll try to have a look at the USS Mahan article for its A-class review in the next day or two. Parsecboy (talk) 12:54, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, I will - Pendright (talk) 15:03, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
In Wikipedia jargon is there any such term as a Shaw space?
Pendright (talk) 00:57, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
Nothing I've ever heard of, no. Where did it come up? Parsecboy (talk) 01:08, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
Current review of Mahan-class -
• Shaw space needed between 1 and October. I would routinely correct this, but I am doing this offline.
Unable to locate under Shaw? Pendright (talk) 23:55, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
Pendright (talk) 01:43, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
Ah, I found it. It's fixed now. Parsecboy (talk) 11:55, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
TThanks - you should have been an auditor! Pendright (talk) 15:05, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
If time permits, could you give me some hints on how to cropp photos? Pendright (talk) 16:31, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, I just copy the image into Microsoft Paint and then delete the caption bar there. I'm sure there are fancier programs that allow you to do all kinds of editing, but that works well enough for me. There's a button on the image page here on Wikipedia that says "upload a new version" or something like that - once you click that there's a place to upload the cropped version and describe whatever changes you made. One thing you have to do is make sure you save it as the same file type as it was uploaded (so a file uploaded as a .jpeg has to be saved as a .jpeg). Parsecboy (talk) 20:42, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! Pendright (talk) 15:15, 6 August 2014 (UTC)


Hey Parsec, I thought you might find this interesting. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:29, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Ed, and quite timely given her main page appearance the other day ;) Parsecboy (talk) 20:17, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in an interview[edit]

Hi, I'd like to invite you to participate in a group interview in the upcoming August issue of The Bugle with editors who work on articles concerning World War I. We're conducting this interview to mark the centenary of the war, and it forms part of a semi-regular series of interviews on thematic topics. If you're able to participate, I'd be grateful if you could post responses to the questions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/August 2014/Interview by next Sunday 17 July. Please let me know if you have any questions about this. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 10:26, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Sure, I can give some answers in the next day or two. Thanks Nick! Parsecboy (talk) 16:21, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. I meant 10 August, not 17 July BTW: I shouldn't be typing anything with a heavy cold! (I can't even make sense of the rather simple calendar tool on my PC...) Nick-D (talk) 01:17, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
Funnily enough, my mind glossed over that when I read it and assumed you said by next weekend ;) Parsecboy (talk) 13:16, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for your responses Nick-D (talk) 10:26, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of SM U-21 (Germany)[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article SM U-21 (Germany) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of AustralianRupert -- AustralianRupert (talk) 06:41, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

List of battleships of Greece[edit]

I noticed that this article you helped take to GA is a list. I am concerned about this since lists aren't allowed to be Good Articles. I saw it failed its FLC before being taken to GAN first so I'm wondering if maybe it should just have its name changed. Just a thought. GamerPro64 04:01, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, it's apparently not long enough to be considered a "stand-alone list" by the regulars at FLC, so it's being treated as an article for assessment purposes. As for the title, I'd prefer to keep the current one so it's consistent with the other titles in the project. Parsecboy (talk) 12:12, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
All right. Though it may come under some scrutiny for it being a list with a GA tag on it in the future. But whatever works doesn't need fixing. GamerPro64 14:46, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, it has been discussed several times in the past (and so has List of battleships of Spain for the same reason). I figure that as long as someone can explain the situation, it should be fine. Parsecboy (talk) 15:12, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Prinz Eugen[edit]

I took the liberty and added some info from Koop & Schmolke. I believe these additions to be of value. Feel free to revert if you think otherwise. MisterBee1966 (talk) 11:43, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, your additions look fine to me, though I did make one small change to reduce some repetition. I'll have a look at expanding the 1945 period, probably later today. Parsecboy (talk) 12:09, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
Sure, maybe the Hansjürgen Reinicke helps? MisterBee1966 (talk) 15:12, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, I saw you had expanded the article - I'll pull the info over probably later today. Thanks! Parsecboy (talk) 15:15, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Kampfgruppe Nordmeer[edit]

What do you know about this? There is an article on the German Wiki de:Kampfgruppe (Kriegsmarine). I think it would help understand the context of German naval operations. MisterBee1966 (talk) 09:47, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

I know a bit - that's a good idea. Right now, one has to read all of the articles of the ships that were involved to get a picture of what was going on. It would be better to have an overview article that discusses the operations, commanders, logistics, and so forth. What title would you recommend? Parsecboy (talk) 12:06, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
I made a small start Task Force Thiele MisterBee1966 (talk) 14:57, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, I saw when you linked the article from Prinz Eugen and Deutschland/Lützow. I'd think we'd need to add sections that cover the operations the unit conducted, its logistics (bases used, tankers assigned to support if there were any, fuel shortages that I presume occurred in that late stage of the war, etc.), the major warships assigned (this could be a table with dates assigned) and probably a background section that discussed where the ships came from, the context of its creation, and so forth. It would probably also be a good idea to have a legacy section that discussed the fates of Thiele, the major warships, and potentially any impact the operations had on the strategic/operational thinking of the postwar Bundesmarine if that can be documented. Parsecboy (talk) 16:53, 13 August 2014 (UTC)


I appreciate your efforts on the cropping issue for Mahan. You certainly have a knowledgeable network. If you think I need to revisit any of my responses to your comments, please let me know. As you know, the Mahan-class article was promoted. What a birthday present - I turned 89 on August 9th. The article represents many other editors fine-tuning, but without your help there would have been no article. So, I hope a simple thank you is good enough for all that you put into it. Regards! Pendright (talk) 00:39, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, but certainly the article represents your hard work! Congratulations and Happy Birthday - what a birthday present indeed! And I look forward to seeing the Mahan article at FAC soon.
Have you thought at all about when you'd like either article to run on the main Wikipedia page? I see that this December 7th is the 70th anniversary of Mahans loss, which would be an appropriate date. I was hoping to run SMS Scharnhorst (which is currently at FAC) on 8 December this year, since that's the centenary of her loss at the Battle of the Falkland Islands, but two warships back-to-back might be too much. Let's ask @Bencherlite: his opinion (he decides what articles appear on the main page), though he's on vacation right now so it might take a little while to hear.
I'll have a look at the Mahan article soon and let you know if there's anything else I see. Congratulations again! Parsecboy (talk) 12:10, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Admiral Scheer[edit]

Is a disambiguation page required? I was looking for the warship; but the only article WP offered me was the admiral. Narky Blert (talk) 01:37, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

There may also be a problem in that Admiral Scheer and Admiral Scheer have different URLs but *seem* to point to the same text. Narky Blert (talk) 02:00, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) In that second case, it's because the first link is a redirect to the second. - The Bushranger One ping only 02:01, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Indeed, the former is a redirect to the latter - if you go to the actual location for German pocket battleship Admiral Scheer, you'll see what we're talking about.
I assume you searched for Admiral Scheer, which is a redirect to Reinhard Scheer - in that case, it seems that a hatnote like this one is appropriate. Parsecboy (talk) 12:22, 14 August 2014 (UTC)


May I ask you to review the World War II section of the article? It currently reflects everything I have on him. Thanks MisterBee1966 (talk) 12:04, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

It looks pretty good to me. It occurs to me that there might be some more details on Cerberus that could be included, though I'm not sure if they're important enough. For instance, I assume Reinicke was with Ciliax aboard Scharnhorst, and I'd assume he went with him to Z29 when Scharnhorst was temporarily disabled by the mine strike. Also, do we know of any significant activities of Z28 while he was in command? I haven't gotten down to the destroyers, so there's nothing there to crib yet. Rohwer doesn't turn up anything in the two months Reinicke was in command, but he isn't the definitive source. Whitley's German Destroyers of World War II mentions something, but it's not viewable in Google Books. Sturmvogel has the book, I think - he might be able to add anything of interest.
One question I have: is it Hans-Jürgen or Hansjürgen? The title is the latter but the first sentence is the former. Parsecboy (talk) 12:35, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Good questions, I can't answer this. The sources uses both variants. HRS, Fellgiebel (among others) use Hansjürgen, KS and Dörr use Hans-Jürgen. You find both variants in the internet. MisterBee1966 (talk) 14:30, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Looked at Whitley, nothing of note happens during his tenure in command as they're planning to move the 8th Destroyer Division to France during this period. I do have one question, though, he's a stabsoffizier and commanding Z28 simultaneously in early 1943?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 13:46, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
No, is my wording too imprecise? MisterBee1966 (talk) 14:32, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
The dates overlap, thus my confusion. His next posting was then with the Flottenkommando (Fleet Command) (6 October 1942 – 9 March 1943) where he served as 1. Admiralstabsoffizier to the chief of staff Konteradmiral August Thiele. On 17 January 1943 he took over command of destroyer Z-28 from Korvettenkapitän Hans Erdmenger. Two months later, on 11 March, he handed over the command to Fregattenkapitän Karl-Adolf Zenker
I will double check. What do you think of the idea if we were to create an article for the Kriegsmarine similar to Organization of the Luftwaffe (1933–45)? MisterBee1966 (talk) 06:33, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
That would be good, although I think that we'd need to avoid the overly broad coverage in the LW article.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:41, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Could it be that Admiral Ciliax was on destroyer Hermann Schoemann and not Scharnhorst during Cerberus? MisterBee1966 (talk) 12:59, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

I nominated the article for DYK. MisterBee1966 (talk) 13:29, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Assuming I correctly understand HRS, Ciliax and his staff started Cerberus on Scharnhorst, following the mine hit they switched to Z29, and then later to Hermann Schoemann. Do you confirm? MisterBee1966 (talk) 18:13, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Do you think he qualifies for Operation Majestic Titan (Phase IV)? MisterBee1966 (talk) 15:50, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

I'd think probably not - the closest connection would be his role during Cerberus, but that's a little thin I think. Parsecboy (talk) 00:25, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of SM U-21 (Germany)[edit]

The article SM U-21 (Germany) you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:SM U-21 (Germany) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of AustralianRupert -- AustralianRupert (talk) 11:22, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of SMS Sankt Georg[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article SMS Sankt Georg you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:41, 16 August 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)

Your GA nomination of SMS Kaiser Karl VI[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article SMS Kaiser Karl VI you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MisterBee1966 -- MisterBee1966 (talk) 10:02, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of SMS Sankt Georg[edit]

The article SMS Sankt Georg you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:SMS Sankt Georg for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 13:02, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Article Deletion[edit]

Hello Nate, it's been a while and I hope you are well. May I ask you if it is appropriate to nominate my own page for deletion? If I'm honest, I am not that notable a person and the books that I wrote were as a co-editor, actually. So I could not call myself an author, if I'm honest. My page has been a stub for years and not likely to grow: Would you be able to propose this page for deletion, with no objections from me? Or tell me how to do so, if you don't mind? My work is such that I rarely get on to edit much here these days but would hope to be more active again in future years. Much obliged, All the best, Patrick bigpad (talk) 01:25, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Patrick, good to see you're still around. I think your easiest option would be with the {{prod}} template (it's explained here) - it'll take a few days but you won't have to deal with the WP:AFD process, which would likely take longer. You just have to add a reason to delete the page, which I'll leave up to you to decide how to word.
Let me know if there's anything else I can help with. Regards, Parsecboy (talk) 12:25, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK for SM U-21 (Germany)[edit]

Thank you for the new content Victuallers (talk) 12:03, 29 August 2014 (UTC)


I’m scheduled for cataract surgery on Sept 2nd. So, I’ll be out of commission for s short while. Yesterday, a new reviewer showed some support for the Mahan article. I can handle all of his comments, except the following one: Throughout the text, you should have "|alt=" for all of the images, to assist persons who are unable to see the images. Pendright (talk) 14:23, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Good luck with the surgery, hopefully everything turns out well. He's asking for alt text for screen readers - I'll take care of it in the morning. Regards, Parsecboy (talk) 19:45, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Today's Featured Article: Notification[edit]

This is to inform you that SMS Kaiser Wilhelm II , which you nominated at WP:FAC, will appear on the Wikipedia Main Page as Today's Featured Article on 14 September 2014. The proposed main page blurb is here ; you may amend if necessary. Please check for dead links and other possible faults before the appearance date. Brianboulton (talk) 23:12, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Brian, I've made a slight correction (actually it pointed me to fixing a small error in the article itself!) Parsecboy (talk) 12:09, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Mbunda Kingdom[edit]

Hi Parsecbody. Thanks for your suggestion to post to the COI noticeboard. I would be wasting my time posting it on the talkpage as it is frequented by no more than a handful of people, of which the two main ones initially tried to help the authoring editor and then basically just gave up. Secondly, it is not one article we are talking about, the editor has over the past year of so included Mbunda related section in a myriad articles where before the term had never been mentioned. Do you have any other suggestion of where I could post where I would reach a large number of key editors with vast experience on history issues? Your assistance would be greatly appreciated. PS: I would have offered you a beer, but you deleted my post, so now I'll give it to thefirst beggar that comes along! ;-) (that's suppoed to be a smiley) Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 13:04, 2 September 2014 (UTC)