User talk:Koalorka: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 17:30, 31 December 2008

	Notice regarding conversations.
	In an effort to keep conversations together, if you begin a conversation on this page, I will usually respond here. If I left you a message, I added your discussion page to my watchlist so I'll know when you respond there.

Leave a new message.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4

This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by .

Bren Ten

The Bren Ten dimensions you asked for:

Weight

38 oz standard models
? oz compact models (must be lighter compared to the standard models, since the barrel and slide is shorter)
28 oz pocket model

Length

8.75 in standard models
7.75 in compact models
6.90 in pocket model

Barrel length

5.00 in standard models
4.00 in compact models
3.75 in pocket model

Width

1.25 in standard and compact models
1.00 in pocket model

Height

5.75 in standard and compact models
5.12 in pocket model

Effective range

50 yd (for what that is worth in a sidearm)

Good luck with converting US customary units to metric units. Do not be afraid of loss of accuracy. I think a 1 mm precision level will suffice on external gun dimensions. If you want to be accurate 0.1 mm might also be used. The parts where accuracy matters most (barrels, chambers and cartridges) are standardized by C.I.P. up to 0.01 mm precision level.--Francis Flinch (talk) 14:19, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Koalorka (talk) 00:46, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXII (October 2008)

The October 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:17, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another example?

Is this another example of the "Mexico vandal"? Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:42, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Most likely. No source, no verification, IP user... Almost guaranteed. Koalorka (talk) 12:22, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:B-25J Bomber.jpg

Do you have any information to verify the source of Image:B-25J Bomber.jpg, which is an image you uploaded. I am being challenged at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Bob Chappuis.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:45, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alternatively can you find another suitable image at flickr that would be a substitute.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:46, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here it is. Good luck with your nomination. Koalorka (talk) 23:55, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Glock pistols & MP5

It is very clear that Republic of Kosovo's police force uses the Glock 17, Glock 19 & MP5 as I have shown in a video and photos also the official website. But User talk:Koalorka who bring political and nationalistic propaganda are ruing the article by stupid remarks that Kosova is not a country. That is a whole different topic and has nothing to do with this, and maybe he should complain to the 50+ countries that recognize Kosova as a state. STOP violating the rules or you will be blocked, by admins. 82.35.32.75 (talk) 18:14, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tantal

Nie wiedziałem ze znasz język polski lepiej niż ja. Ale niech Ci będzie, jak już kiedyś pisałem bzdury i błędy na en-wiki to nie mój problem. Przy okazji zdejmij szablon merge z rkm wz. 1928 i szczeniaka bo jak widać poparcie dla twojej propozycji jest dokładnie zerowe. Nemo5576 (talk) 10:38, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A nagłówek infoboxu i podpis pod grafiką od kiedy jest zdaniem? Nemo5576 (talk) 14:05, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jakie? Jeśli to zdanie (a właściwie równoważnik zdania) to na końcu powinna być kropka :) A jeśli nie jest to zdanie (a właściwie równoważnik zdania) to powinno być małą literą bo nie ma żadnego powodu żeby było dużą. Nemo5576 (talk) 14:26, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Przypomne tylko, ze tu obowiazuja zasady j. angielskiego. From the MoS:

"Chicago Manual of Style, 15th ed., 12.32: Syntax, punctuation, and capitalization. A caption may consist of a word or two, an incomplete or a complete sentence, several sentences, or a combination. No punctuation is needed after a caption consisting solely of an incomplete sentence. If one or more full sentences follow it, each (including the opening phrase) has closing punctuation. In a work in which most captions consist of full sentences, even incomplete ones may be followed by a period for consistency. Sentence capitalization is recommended in all cases except for the formal titles of works of art." Koalorka (talk) 15:50, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Niezłe. Tylko analogicznie na pl-wiki (i na angielskiej zresztą też) powinno być mg34 bo w języku polskim i angielskim w odróżnieniu od niemieckiego rzeczowników nie piszemy duża literą. A zapis który obecnie jest w infoboxie jest po prostu mylący. i sugeruje że nazwa kbk wz. 89 jest pisana duża literą. A tak po prostu nie jest. Ale jak pisałem nie mój problem, będę miał najwyżej kolejny argument jak ktoś będzie mi opowiadał bajki o wyższości merytorycznej en-wiki :) Przypominam o zdjęciu pewnych szablonów z pewnych artykułów. Skoro po kilku miesiącach pies z kulawą noga nie przyznał Ci racji, to chyba ich istnienie jakichś nienaruszalnych reguł nie narusza. Nemo5576 (talk) 16:15, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, mogę być i nikim ;) Nemo5576 (talk) 17:15, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIII (November 2008)

The November 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 16:50, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Flag icons

Hi. I disagree that names of countries need icons next to them. MOSICON says they should “help the reader rather than decorate,” and specifically‘’’ to “provide additional essential information or needed illustration”.

But it's good that this is coming up. The guideline is not specific enough, and both my interpretation and yours may be valid ones. I'd like to settle this question once and for all, so we can stop revert-warring over this. We need to get the community to form a consensus, either about this type of use of icons in general, or this specific application of them in infoboxes. I've started a discussion thread at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#Flag icons guidelines. Please let's discuss there. —Michael Z. 2008-12-12 17:01 z

Undid change as of 06:57, 21 December 2008

Hi. I just undid your [change as of 06:57, 21 December 2008 to the article Fallschirmjäger. A photograph shouldn't be removed, based on a single users definition of inappropriate content, as per WP:NOTCENSORED. For the same reason WP:IUP doesn't mention anything about appropriate or inappropriate content of photos. Kind regards Hebster (talk) 12:30, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Laser pointer/sight

If these devices are actual useful gun sights is mostly dependant on the point of view of the person you ask this question. Some feel they best belong in dramatic action movies, since there are less complex low light situation sights available. On the other hand lots of sellers of aiming aids and "tactical" kit try to convince you they are a must have for low light situations and making “bad guys” scared. Since these devices are available for lots of contemporary hand gun models, I suppose there is enough clientele for them. --Francis Flinch (talk) 18:52, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Francis, I'm not questioning the utility of the device, just the terminology. Is it actually a "gun sight". I've alsways considered pointers to be an aiming aid. Koalorka (talk) 19:56, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Koalorka, The first internet dictionary I found and tried defines laser sight as: a device on a firearm that uses a laser to pinpoint impact (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/laser%20sight). Laser pointer was defined as: a small pointing device that emits an intense beam of light and used during presentations to point out items on visuals (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/laser%20pointer). I am no language specialist and can not judge the quality of this online dictionary, but it indicates laser sight and laser pointer have different meanings. When you use this online dictionary the “Nearby Entries” list lots of other laser related language concepts too. --Francis Flinch (talk) 13:22, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LAF as user of Minimi

Hello, You have undone my modification in which i included Lebanon as an operator for the FN Minimi Have a look at these photos

Please when you see the source and find them okay, undo you chages Thank you --Zaher1988 · ^Talk 21:59, 27 December 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Sorry. Have a look here

Thanks --Zaher1988 · ^Talk 08:56, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have no way of identifying which nationality the soldiers in your images belong to. We need a published source for the information, not a few randomn photos, but I will retain Lebabon on the list so long as you can find that source in a realistic amount of time. Koalorka (talk) 20:06, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, these soldiers are from the Lebanese Navy SEALs, these photos are available on the Lebanese Army pictures thread on MP.net, the largest thread on the internet featuring Lebanese army photos... --Zaher1988 · ^Talk 22:04, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Dude", it doesn't matter. Go see what is considered a source in Wikipedia. Koalorka (talk) 00:22, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

mm I can't find a document with the LAF equipment in details, the only sources for us are the photos because the Lebanese Army does not publish such details. Many operators in the list are not referenced btw. What do you suggest??? thank you:) --Zaher1988 · ^Talk 09:46, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We will retain Lebanon on the list of users based on those photos and attempt to find a source. Koalorka (talk) 16:31, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you:)--Zaher1988 · ^Talk 19:57, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Peiper photo!!

Please, stop changing the photo in this thread. I have written large portion of this article and included this excellent photo of Peiper... It is one of the best known originals by Hoffmann, which appeared in 100s of magazines and publications. You are welcome to included your photo elsewhere in the article, but removing images of others is vandalism... Another change will likely result in the suspension of your editing privileges. regards, maria

The photo is a poor portayal of the man himself that's why I introduced a portait-type image. Youa are welcome to use your image in the text below. Koalorka (talk) 00:52, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits, such as those you made to Joachim Peiper. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing.

- - This is the second time you changed my image. According to my colleagues, you also changed their images 3 and 2 times. That is the seventh time you did this and therefore were reported to administrators!! The original image by Hoffmann was in this thread since 2004. I reloaded it in 2008. The photo has higher resolution than yours by a mile - 600dpi to yours 72dpi. It is made on special high quality paper and therefore it appears as if it had ripples on it. However, it is absolutely arrogant and downright wrong to change photos in the articles in this fashion. I contacted an administrator for help in this matter. Mariaflores1955 (talk) 17:30, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 14:26, 31 December 2008 edit Mariaflores1955 (talk \| contribs) 2,337 edits →‎Peiper photo!! ← Previous edit		Revision as of 17:30, 31 December 2008 edit undo Mariaflores1955 (talk \| contribs) 2,337 edits →‎Peiper photo!! Next edit →
Line 148:		Line 148:

	[[Image:Stop hand nuvola.svg\|30px]] This is the '''last warning''' you will receive for your disruptive edits{{#if:Joachim Peiper\|, such as those you made to [[:Joachim Peiper]]}}. If you [[Wikipedia:Vandalism\|vandalize]] Wikipedia again, you '''will''' be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy\|blocked]] from editing. {{#if:\|{{{2}}}\|}}<!-- Template:uw-vandalism4 -->		[[Image:Stop hand nuvola.svg\|30px]] This is the '''last warning''' you will receive for your disruptive edits{{#if:Joachim Peiper\|, such as those you made to [[:Joachim Peiper]]}}. If you [[Wikipedia:Vandalism\|vandalize]] Wikipedia again, you '''will''' be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy\|blocked]] from editing. {{#if:\|{{{2}}}\|}}<!-- Template:uw-vandalism4 -->

			*** This is the second time you changed my image. According to my colleagues, you also changed their images 3 and 2 times. That is the seventh time you did this and therefore were reported to administrators!! The original image by Hoffmann was in this thread since 2004. I reloaded it in 2008. The photo has higher resolution than yours by a mile - 600dpi to yours 72dpi. It is made on special high quality paper and therefore it appears as if it had ripples on it. However, it is absolutely arrogant and downright wrong to change photos in the articles in this fashion. I contacted an administrator for help in this matter. [[User:Mariaflores1955\|Mariaflores1955]] ([[User talk:Mariaflores1955\|talk]]) 17:30, 31 December 2008 (UTC)