User talk:Sturmvogel 66

March contest

Congrats on an easy win! Usually Rupert and I verify, tally and hand out awards for this but I'll be away for the w/e starting this afternoon so given you're responsible for about half the damned entries, perhaps you can take my place this month... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:19, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Sure, I'll do everybody's but mine!--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:05, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Sturm. All the entries are verified. I've initialised the April contest and archived the old ones. The last tasks are to tally up the results, update the scoreboard, write up the newsletter and hand out the awards. I've tallied up the results offline in a spreadsheet and will update the scoreboard, newsletter and handout the awards a bit later (I have to go offline for a bit). Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 07:13, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Okay, its all done now. Thanks for your help and congrats on winning. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:05, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Tks guys, quick work! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:39, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations

		The WikiChevrons
		The WikiChevrons are hereby bestowed upon Sturmvogel 66 for their great efforts in the March 2011 Military History monthly article writing Contest, placing first with a total of 242 points from 34 articles. Well done! Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 08:59, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

German WWII destroyers

Good to see somebody is finally taking care of creating those articles. I created three of them a while ago because I thought it to be rather unusual and sad that there was no articles on those resonably well know ships but its not my usual field of work. Calistemon (talk) 10:32, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Not sure how far I'll take them, but I agree that it's about time that they each had their own article.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:01, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

If you'd like some help, I own some of the relevant books. Manxruler (talk) 19:05, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Sure, feel free so long as we avoid bumping heads with edit conflicts. I'm going to work on Z9 today so feel free to work on Z5 to Z8. Just let me know which ever one you're working on here and I'll do the same. I plan to get all up to speed within the 5-day DYK limit so I'll be pretty active trying to meet that goal.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:27, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good. I'll probably have time tomorrow. Manxruler (talk) 23:43, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Today's project is Z8 Bruno Heinemann.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:04, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Milhist FA, A-Class and Peer Reviews Jan-Mar 2011

		The Content Review Medal of Merit
		By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted work on the WikiProject's Peer, A-Class and Featured Article reviews for the period January–March 2011, I am delighted to award you this Content Review Medal. AustralianRupert (talk) 07:48, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Milhist March 2011 backlog reduction drive

		Military history service award
		By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your contributions to the WikiProject's March 2011 backlog reduction drive, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject award. AustralianRupert (talk) 15:28, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

		Military history service award
		By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your contributions to the WikiProject's March 2011 backlog reduction drive, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject award. AustralianRupert (talk) 15:28, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

		Military history service award
		By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your contributions to the WikiProject's March 2011 backlog reduction drive, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject award. AustralianRupert (talk) 15:28, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

		The WikiChevrons
		By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your contributions to the WikiProject's March 2011 backlog reduction drive, I am delighted to award you the WikiChevrons. AustralianRupert (talk) 15:28, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your contributions to the WikiProject's March 2011 backlog reduction drive, I hereby award you with this Tireless Contributor's barnstar. AustralianRupert (talk) 15:28, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
	For your contributions to the March 2011 backlog reduction drive, by order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators I hereby present you with this Working Man's barnstar. AustralianRupert (talk) 15:28, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For your contributions to the March 2011 backlog reduction drive, by order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators I hereby present you with this Barnstar of Diligence. AustralianRupert (talk) 15:28, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

		March 2011 backlog reduction drive
		By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your placing first in the March 2011 backlog reduction drive I award you this Golden Wiki. AustralianRupert (talk) 15:28, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Brazilian ironclads

Hi, Sturmvogel. Unless I'm mistaken, you're the editor who wrote the articles about Brazilian ironclad Tamandaré and Brazilian ironclad Brasil. I added a couple of pictures to both articles. I believe that will help you bring them to Good or Featured articles, isn't? P.S.: I'll add later a picture to Brazilian ironclad Rio de Janeiro. Regards, --Lecen (talk) 15:40, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the pictures, but I need more information on their activities after the war to improve them further.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:52, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Reviews

Thank you for your reviews of RAF Northolt and RAF Uxbridge. Hopefully RAF Uxbridge will be coming along within the next couple of days. Harrison49 (talk) 17:08, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

I'll look forward to it.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:50, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Sturmvogel 66. You have new messages at AustralianRupert's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

— AustralianRupert (talk) 23:08, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your participation in the March 2011 GAN backlog elimination drive

On behalf of User:Wizardman and myself, we would like to take the time and thank you for your contributions made as part of the March 2011 Good articles backlog elimination drive. Awards and barnstars will go out shortly for those who have reviewed a certain number of articles.

During the backlog drive, in the month of March 2011,

• 522 GA nominations were undertaken.
• 423 GA nominations passed.
• 72 GA nominations failed.
• 27 GA nominations were on hold.

We started the GA backlog elimination drive with 378 GA nominations remaining, with 291 that were not reviewed at all. By 2:00, April 1, 2011, the backlog was at 171 GA nominations, with 100 that were left unreviewed.

At the start of the drive, the oldest unreviewed GA nomination was 101 days (Andrei Kirilenko (politician), at 20 November 2010, reviewed and passed 1 March 2011); at the end of the drive the oldest unreviewed GA nomination was 39 days (Gery Chico, at 24 February 2011, still yet to be reviewed as of this posting).

While we did not achieve the objective of getting the backlog of outstanding GA nominations down to below 50, we reduced the GA backlog by over half. The GA reviews also seemed to be of a higher quality and have consistently led, to say the least, to marginal improvements to those articles (although there were significant improvements to many, even on the some of the nominations that were failed).

If you would like to comment on the drive itself and maybe even make suggestions on how to improve the next one, please make a comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Good articles/GAN backlog elimination drives/March 2011#Feedback. Another GA backlog elimination drive is being planned for later this year, tentatively for September or October 2011. Also, if you have any comments or remarks on how to improve the Good article process in general, Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles can always use some feedback at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Good articles.

Again, on behalf of User:Wizardman and myself, thank you for making the March 2011 GA backlog elimination drive a success.

MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 21:52, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Hood]] ==

About the HMS Hood, the tv series Dogfights, episode "Sink the Bismarck", the narrator says "As Hood slides beneath the waves, her forward turret fires a final defiance salvo before slipping into darkness". AOCJedi (talk) 03:34, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

That really isn't good enough. Find a book that says that that happened and we can discuss it. TV is all about sensationalism.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 03:41, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

I've seen that episode also, and it does say that about Hood, but I have to agree with Sturmvogel on this one; a television series that has problems keeping its facts straight does not a reliable source make... Magus732 (talk) 15:26, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

French cruiser Sully

Hello

I just translate your article French cruiser Sully. My problem is that its really diffrent than Gloire class cruiser. Diffrent armour, diffrent previous version (Gueydon vs Dupleix). Can you compare that article and try to fix diffrences? PMG (talk) 20:02, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Also - what power it have? 20,500 ihp or shp? Because in text there is like this and like this. 02:22, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Good catch, it should have been ihp. I've fixed it now. I'll have to check my references, but I'm pretty sure that she's counted as one of the Gloire-class cruisers, even if she had a different armor scheme.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 05:30, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Any changes? PMG (talk) 02:37, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Everything I have shows her a member of the Gloire class. What's your source for believing differently?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 03:48, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Compare French cruiser Sully and Gloire class cruiser. Its just internal problem on en.wiki - I don`t have sources. But if Sully is a GA then its just strange for me that nobody compare that ship with class article. Difrrent Displacement, diffrent engine power, torpedo tubes, belt and deck armor. I am not talking about lenght and beam because its probably just problem with conversion. So, yeah - 99,9 % that Sully is ok if you have sources (and you have so many GA that for sure you have). But then - nobody compare it with class article? PMG (talk) 22:47, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

FTC

Hey Sturm. I was planning on closing some nominations for FTC but I don't have any time to close them right now. Can you do some of the closings for the week? GamerPro64 (talk) 01:46, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Sure, I can get to them on Thursday or Friday.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:56, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks man. GamerPro64 (talk) 02:17, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

March 2010 GAN backlog elimination drive award

		The Good Article Reviewer's Medal of Merit
		For reviewing 20 or more Good article nominations during this past March 2011 GA backlog elimination drive, I hereby award you The Good Article Reviewer's Medal of Merit. Great job! –MuZemike 17:35, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for German destroyer Z8 Bruno Heinemann

The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Newsletter column on FAC reviewing

We'd like to put a column in the Bugle encouraging people review at FAC, or at least to assist the frequent FAC reviewers. Is there anything that new reviewers could do at FAC that you would find particularly helpful? (Watching) - Dank (push to talk) 19:00, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Dank, just emphasize that no technical qualifications are needed; you don't need to know the MOS inside and out. Just read the article and see if it reads well, etc. If you do know the MOS that's a plus, but hardly necessary.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:17, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for German destroyer Z9 Wolfgang Zenker

The DYK project (nominate) 00:04, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Russian battleship Retvizan GA Review.

Hey Sturm! I've reviewed Retvizan here. there are a few minor errors, but nothing that can't be fixed. Buggie111 (talk) 14:16, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

HMS Queen Mary

Just letting you know I'm getting started on this. Btw, how's school? (Watching) - Dank (push to talk) 19:21, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

I saw that you were already at work. School's ok; just want to get over with at this point. Still got about 3+ weeks to go, but no big tests or projects to complete so time's just dragging. I'm curious to see how my 14 hour days twice a week for summer semester will work out. There's a three hour break in the afternoon, so I'm hoping it won't be so bad.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:00, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Wow, you're hard-core. Are you going for a BA? - Dank (push to talk) 21:11, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

First, I'll finish the AA in December and then transfer to get my BA, hopefully in only two or three semesters with all my transfer credits.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:21, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Yak-140Prototype.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Yak-140Prototype.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 05:46, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

HMS Exmouth

Hi Sturm, I don't know if your forgot to save changes but HMS Exmouth is still the same and the changes from the GA review still need doing [1] Jim Sweeney (talk) 18:41, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Quite right, I did forget to save.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:04, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for HMS Plover (M26)

The DYK project (nominate) 06:04, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of HMS Diana (H49)

The article HMS Diana (H49) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:HMS Diana (H49) for things which need to be addressed. Harrison49 (talk) 12:11, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to take part in a study

I am a Wikipedian, who is studying the phenomenon on Wikipedia. I need your help to conduct my research on about understanding "Motivation of Wikipedia contributors." I would like to invite you to Main Study. Please give me your valuable time, which estimates about 20 minutes. I chose you as a English Wikipedia user who made edits recently through the RecentChange page. Refer to the first page in the online survey form for more information on the study and me.cooldenny (talk) 01:19, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Chat?

Sturm, I'll be on irc for a couple of days (as Dank). Ping me please when you have a minute, or leave a note on my talk page. - Dank (push to talk) 22:53, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm don't have any chat software. But feel free to call me on Tuesday or Thursday.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:06, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

I'll call Tuesday, thanks. - Dank (push to talk) 00:29, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

I'll look forward to talking with you.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:01, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

It looks like you're around ... good time to call? - Dank (push to talk) 17:38, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Sure. Feel free.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:02, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

21-inch torpedoes

Sorry, Sturmvogel. I got a bit confused about 21-inch torpedoes (they are of course 533mm). I was getting confused with British 18 inch torpedoes, which are of course 450mm, or 17.72 inches, in diameter. Shem (talk) 21:30, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

That's quite alright. I was getting ready to ask you what your source was as nothing I can find mentions the exact diameter of the British 21-inch torpedoes, length and most other parameters, but not diameter. I think that I've already changed them back while generally editing the articles.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:53, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

I feel a bit of a prawn, actually. Not my normal style. I did a check - any I've changed have now been changed back. If you're online now you might care to wade in at Talk:Corvette. Your opinion (either way) would be welcome. Shem (talk) 22:08, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for HMS Diamond (H22)

The DYK project (nominate) 12:02, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of German destroyer Z8 Bruno Heinemann

The article German destroyer Z8 Bruno Heinemann you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:German destroyer Z8 Bruno Heinemann for comments about the article. Well done! Harrison49 (talk) 18:50, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:29, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

SMS Radetzky

Hey there Sturm. Can I bring your attention to this thread for a moment? If you could help in any way, I'd be greatly appreciative ;)

All the best--White Shadows ^{Stuck in square one} 14:26, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Specifications for US Military Aircraft

I have started a discussion on User:Ken keisel's proposal to standardise on a single source for specification of US Military aircraft here.Nigel Ish (talk) 20:37, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

References

Hi Sturmvogel66; just a quick note to ask for your help while I introduce Ken to citing his sources. He has a long history of contributing unsourced or poorly sourced material and even recently was still looking for opportunities to continue to do so. It's better that, at least for now, he errs on the side of overreferencing rather than underreferencing. He's also having trouble formatting references in their simplest form; condensing them down with the "name" attribute will be the next step.

Could I please ask for a little patience with him? I'm continuing to work with him and will ensure that everything is properly squared away at the end. Of course, I'm not asking for any special forbearance with cleaning up any actual breakages that he might cause along the way.

Properly skilled up, I think he'll be an extremely valuable contributor to the project.

Cheers! Rlandmann (talk) 22:16, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

I hadn't gone to his talk page before I removed all his excess references and didn't know that you two were working together. Still, I'm surprised that he was making such simple mistakes after all the time that you'd been coaching him. But I'll back off until you can get him on the straight and narrow.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:54, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXI, March 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: Dank helps you see what article writers want from reviewers

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) 04:48, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Action of 28 January 1945

Hi Sturmvogel, I've responded to all your comments on this article's ACR. Are you prepared to support the article's promotion to A class? Cheers, Nick-D (talk) 06:33, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Military history project ACRs for closure

Hi, sorry to bother you. We are currently having trouble finding an uninvolved co-ordinator to close a few ACRs. If you get a free moment, could you please take a look at the list at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators#ACRs for closure and close one if you are uninvolved? Cheers! AustralianRupert (talk) 04:59, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

The bell of HMS Renown

Hi Sturmvogel 66. This is my first go at using talk, but if it works it's a better way of having a dialogue than leaving comments on edits.

Take your point about verification, and I've been trying to turn up some evidence - preferably photographic, but so far no joy. I will keep trying! It would be nice eventually to add something to such a well researched and informative page, so I hope I'm successful.

For the (as yet unproven!) record: I was a pupil at RMS Bushey from 1972 to 1975. The bell was hung on a purpose built frame on the dining hall stage with a small information panel bout the ship. From my memory of that panel I would be certain it was the Battlecruiser scrapped in 1948 as the photograph was very similar to that at the head of the Wikipedia page (and nothing like the other HMS Renown you referred me to as portrayed on its page).

The school closed in 1977 and I don't know where the bell went. The buildings have been converted to luxury flats and in 2000 any old boys who were inclided had one last chance to walk around the site. That included lunch in the dining hall, and the bell was not there.

My old craft master has become something of an unofficial historian of the school and if anyone knows the whole story, he will. I will endeavour to trace him and report back!

Meantime, thanks for the effort you've put into the Renown page - that bell always stuck in my memory, and it was great to learn a bit about the ship it came from. Tykesage (talk) 20:02, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

I hope that you can source your memory as that would be a nice addition. Also see if you can trace the bell's fate after your school closed. Maybe the National Maritime Museum might know something? Maybe not, but it might be worthwhile to check out.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:04, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Sturmvogel 66...some progress...the 2011 copy of my old school magazine arrived yesterday and included a photograph of the president of the Old Masonians' Association ringing the bell at the start of last year's Association dinner. The event was held in the Royal Masonic School for Girls' dining room. It would seem the bell was moved there after the boys' school closed. The girls' school is in Rickmansworth and I will contact them for the citation you need, and will try and get an original of the photograph to send you also. Best regards Tykesage (talk) 18:01, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Excellent! I'll look forward to seeing the material. Please be sure to have the photographer release the photo under a Commons licence to avoid any copyright issue.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:05, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Sturmvogel 66. I now have the photo and the owner's consent to use it. Being a novice at this kind of thing, how do I get it to you? I don't see an attach icon anywhere....

The bell was, as I suspected, moved to the girls' school when the boys' school closed, and the picture (when you get it) shows the bell hung in the same frame as back in the 1970's together with a picture of the ship.Tykesage (talk) 15:54, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for German destroyer Z11 Bernd von Arnim

The DYK project (nominate) 18:03, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

MV New Flame

Hello

I am not sure what are rules about GA in en.wiki but for me MV New Flame is really outdated and it shouldn`t have GA sign. What you think? PMG (talk) 02:33, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

I've started the process to review its status at Talk:MV New Flame/GA1.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:12, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

DYK for German destroyer Z12 Erich Giese

The DYK project (nominate) 12:04, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Overdue

Awards applenty you may have, but this one seems to be overdue.

		The Featured Article Medal
		Awarded to Sturmvogel 66 for outstanding and repeated featured article production. Keep it up. MrMedal (talk) 15:24, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. That's very kind.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:34, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Case Blue

DYK for German destroyer Z13 Erich Koellner

The DYK project (nominate) 18:03, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of German destroyer Z16 Friedrich Eckoldt

Hello! Your submission of German destroyer Z16 Friedrich Eckoldt at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 16:43, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXII, April 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: Buggie111 discusses neutral point of view

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) 23:46, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Armoured trains of Poland

You asked two questions during the review. Regarding the second one, I believe there are next to no sources discussing it; at the very least, in my gathering of materials for this article (I wrote it first on pl wiki), I found no information on how the trains were used after capture (anyway, in '39, only one surrendered, so presumably most of the remaining wagons were destroyed in combat or upon abandonment). You also asked for "more information on combat operations". I believe that just like on pl wiki this information belongs in the subarticles on individual trains, not in the main article. I plan on eventually translating all those articles, but I don't believe that the article would benefit from doubling or tripling in size which would occur when we add the detailed info on the 2-3 weeks operations of all 10+ trains in '39. I am of course open to further discussion, which I'd strongly suggest should take place on Talk:Armoured trains of Poland (and feel free to copy this message of mine there). Thanks for your review, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 02:04, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Talk:HMS Crescent (1931)/GA1

I've reviewed the article and left notes on the talk page. I've put the nomination on hold for seven days to allow the issues to be addressed. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, here, or on the article talk page with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on.

Your usual good work, just a couple of niggles. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:51, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

DYK for German destroyer Z16 Friedrich Eckoldt

Materialscientist (talk) 16:04, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Faa di Bruno 1917 bis.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Faa di Bruno 1917 bis.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Damiens.rf 20:47, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Ring ring

Up for a phone call? - Dank (push to talk) 19:50, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Sure, any time. I have no life.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:18, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Just tried with the number I have, "I'm sorry, this mail box has not been set up by the subscriber". It worked before. - Dank (push to talk) 20:32, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Try it again, my roomie forgot to plug the phone back in.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:45, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/SMS Zrínyi

Hey Sturm. Even though this ACR has ended, mind replying to my responses to the issues that you raised so I can fix the ones that are still left over and re-nominate it at a later time? To be honest, I was not ready to take this to ACR when Buggie nominated it but I hope that this failed ACR will provide a stepping stone to a future successful one.--White Shadows ^{Stuck in square one} 01:59, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

You dealt with most of the issues that I raised. I'll have to take a look and see what you didn't get to or didn't understand what I meant. I hope that Buggie takes a look because there was a lot of style-type issues that I raised that probably apply to other articles that y'all have done together. It would be smart to take care of these sorts of things before your next ACR.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 05:37, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks and don't worry, I'll take your advice. When I get around to nominating the other ships for an ACR, I'll comb through them for the same issues that were brought up on this one. Hopefully Buggie will do the same.--White Shadows ^{Stuck in square one} 22:50, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

DYK for CSS Missouri

The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 May newsletter

We're half way through round 3 of the 2011 WikiCup. There are currently 32 remaining in the competition, but only 16 will progress to our penultimate round. Casliber (submissions), of pool D, is our overall leader with nearly 200 points, while pools A, B and C are led by Racepacket (submissions), Hurricanehink (submissions) and Canada Hky (submissions) respectively. The score required to reach the next round is 35, though this will no doubt go up significantly as the round progresses. We have a good number of high scorers, but also a considerable number who are yet to score. Please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. Also, an important note concerning nominations at featured article candidates: if you are nominating content for which you intend to claim WikiCup points, please make this clear in the nomination statement so that the FAC director and his delegates are aware of the fact.

A running total of claims can be seen here. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 23:37, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Case Blue GA- Review

Hi, i want to remind you, that this GA-review you started is still open and awaits your comments. StoneProphet (talk) 19:49, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIII, May 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors – Contest results, A-class medal recipients Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Editorial: Hawkeye's thoughts on the article writing process

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) 23:35, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 28 cm SK L/40 gun

The article 28 cm SK L/40 gun you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:28 cm SK L/40 gun for things which need to be addressed. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 19:36, 7 June 2011 (UTC) Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 19:36, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations!

		The Military history A-Class medal with oak leaves
		For your outstanding work on USS New Ironsides, HMS Queen Mary and Lockheed D-21, all of which were promoted to A-Class between March and May 2011. AustralianRupert (talk) 09:30, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Rupert.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:28, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

A question regarding notes

Hey Sturm. Would it be acceptable if I were to delete the first note from the SMS Zrinyi article? While it is technically true, one could argue that I used original research in adding it is as the connection that it reveals, it not mentioned in any books that I've come across. Furthermore, the note technically does not serve any real purpose. It is established that the ship is a pre-Dreadnought BB. And it is also established that the ship was launched in 1910....--White Shadows ^{Stuck in square one} 01:59, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't see a need for it, but it's not incorrect. You should also probably delete the bit about the last class of pre-dreadnoughts built as that's best suited for the class article.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 03:41, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Warship

Hey Sturm, I stumbled across this and I was wondering two things: how similar is the Argentine naval buildup article to this copy online (it's in the 2002-03 edition, and I'd rather not pay $95 for it!), and is there anything important in the 2006 edition about Almirante Latorre? Many thanks, Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 09:22, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Ed, you're in luck; I've got both volumes. Lemme check how the online article compares to the one in the 2002-03 volume tomorrow. The '06 article just mentions that Vickers had plans to rearm the ship with 4-inch DP guns, but nothing became of the plan.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 04:52, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Good, I looked online and got scared before I remembered that you had some. Thanks very much! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 20:32, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Hey, is there anything in Scheina or anywhere else about Chilean efforts to repurchase Eagle/Amirante Latorre after the end of the war?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:34, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

I used : Brown, David. "HMS Eagle." In Profile Warship, edited by Antony Preston, 249–272. Windsor, United Kingdom: Profile Publishing, 1973. ISSN 1754-4459. OCLC 249286023. in Almirante Latorre-class battleship. He had quite a bit on it. Somervell has some too. I think I found Brown online, but I don't know where I saved it. I have to run to work but I'll try to find it tonight. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 20:41, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

I've got Brown, but I was hoping for more from the Chilean side. Can you send me the Somervell article? I have limited access to JSTOR.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:45, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, the Chilean Navy's (former) site has basically nothing besides what the ship was going to be named before "Almirante Cochrane". Schenia has virtually nothing aside from dates. This looks like it could have a lot (search for "acorazados" = battleship in Spanish), but translating it is going to be slow given that I don't read Spanish and can't copy/paste into Google. :-) Somervell has a bit on the tussle over Chile's acquisition of Latorre and attempt to have Britain convert Cochrane back into a battleship. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 08:35, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Didn't really see much of use in Somervell, but I've compared the online article to the published one and they're pretty much identical. Minor variations in wording and such, but the main points seem to be the same. The online one might be an earlier draft, but I can scan the latter one for you if you'd like.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:16, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, he doesn't have anything besides 1920 stuff. It'd be great if you could scan it so I can cite correct page numbers from a published source, but don't rush to do it. :-) Lecen just told me he bought a book on the dreadnought arms race, so when he's finished reading it I'll ask him if it has anything on Cochrane. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 09:47, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Oh, and my book shelf just reminded me that we need to get Arizona to FA by the 70th anniversary! Lemme know when you want to get going (assuming you still want to collaborate on it). I have Stillwell and can get another book or two if we need. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 09:34, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Once I finish up with Eagle, I'll get started on the technical stuff, but you'll have most of the operational history on your plate as I have only DANFS for her activities before the war.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:42, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Gotcha. I just ordered Hone's Battle Line: The United States Navy 1919-1939 and Jones' U.S. Battleship Operations in World War I so with Stillwell and The New York Times I think we'll have enough on that end. :-) Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 06:14, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Bad news: Hone has literally nothing. Good news: images from NARA! See Wikipedia:GLAM/NARA/Requests#USS_Arizona. I'm going to work on cropping/rotating/converting them to jpg tomorrow or asap. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 10:10, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:PetlyakovPe-8.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:PetlyakovPe-8.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. — This, that, and the other (talk) 06:34, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

I've stuck a link to here from a 1942 edition of Flight, which may satisfy the requirement for a source needed for a non-free rationale, although it may need some tweaking.Nigel Ish (talk) 20:09, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Non-Free rationale for File:Il-18aerial.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Il-18aerial.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under Non-Free content criteria but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a Non-Free rationale.

If you have uploaded other Non-Free media, consider checking that you have specified the Non-Free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:38, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikinic

Jason, This is the ship I was talking about: "Originally commissioned by the East German People's Navy as the Rudolf Eglehofer, the Hiddensee (corvette) is a Tarantul I class corvette built at the Petrovsky Shipyard, located near the Soviet city of St. Petersburg (formerly Leningrad)." fro the Battleship Cove website. Excellent mtg, glad we met. Cheers. LanceBarber (talk) 01:02, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the link. It was a good meeting. I'll have to let you know next time I'm working on US post-war aircraft as you might have something useful.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:22, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Dupuy de Lome

Am very glad to see you setting about this ship! I have been wondering for months about how she fits into the development of armoured cruisers more generally. Something doesn't add up for me - she is often hailed as a great breakthrough, but she was obsolete very soon after launch and differs more or less completely from the armoured cruisers of the late 1890s. I hope the work you're doing sheds some light on my conundrum ;-) The Land (talk)

I wish I had more on the ship's design rationale, but my source only has a few scant paragraphs so it will be more descriptive than I'd prefer. Don't think many of the earlier belted cruisers, with the exception of some of the Russian ships, had turrets, which may well be her main claim to fame. Still got a couple of more generic cruiser references to look through in the (probably vain) hope that they describe her design rationale.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:29, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

To show appreciation for your work on Dupuy de Lome, and also to test the Wikilove feature. :-D The Land (talk) 21:40, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you kindly.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 05:25, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

WT:WikiProject Military history/Strategy#Ambassadorship

Interested in your thoughts. - Dank (push to talk) 16:10, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Oldenburg

Hey Sturm, I wondered if you might be able to check the German edition of Groner on SMS Oldenburg (1884) for me - the English version gives a range of the main battery as "5700–8800m", which doesn't make sense. I'm hoping you might be able to answer the question as you did with the "layers/strakes" translation error. Thanks. Parsecboy (talk) 21:26, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

That's a good # in the English edition. It correlates with the 26cm gun used in the Sachsen-class ships. I guess that Krupp took a while to develop gun technology.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:42, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Milhist task force expansion

Hi Sturm :) Per this discussion the South American task force, of which you are a coordinator, has now been expanded to cover Central America as well. The new task force can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Central and South American military history task force. I've left a redirect at the old title but you may wish to update your watchlist accordingly. Best, EyeSerene^talk 17:00, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Your DYK nomination of Russian ironclad Ne Tron Menia

Hi, just a note that, unless I'm missing something, your hook for Russian ironclad Ne Tron Menia is incomplete. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 03:57, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I did rather skip that part, didn't I? Fixed.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 05:00, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Milhist FA, A-Class and Peer Reviews Apr–Jun 2011

		The Content Review Medal of Merit
		By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted work on the WikiProject's Peer, A-Class and Featured Article reviews for the period Apr–Jun 2011, I am delighted to award you this Content Review Medal. AustralianRupert (talk) 08:55, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, mate.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 12:04, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIV, June 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Finland and Spitfires Op-ed: Fifelfoo and hunting for plagiarism

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) 00:05, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Your comments on Blockhaus d'Éperlecques

Thanks for your comments on Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Blockhaus d'Éperlecques; I've actioned the various issues that you raised. Please take another look to see if that satisfies your concerns. Prioryman (talk) 19:13, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the further feedback! I think I've sorted out all the points you raised... Prioryman (talk) 20:20, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Good Article promotion

	Congratulations!
	Thanks for all the work you did in making Russian ironclad Pervenets and Russian ironclad Ne Tron Menia certified "Good Articles"! Your work is much appreciated. Thanks also for your reviews. Featured article candidates and Good Article nominees always need more reviewers! All the best, – Quadell (talk)

DYK for Russian ironclad Pervenets

Thanks from me and the wiki Victuallers (talk) 16:04, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

• You asked a couple of weeks ago about an alleged ramming of HMS Warspite by the Pervenets on my usertalk page; note my reply in the same place. Regards, Rif. Rif Winfield (talk) 11:37, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Russian ironclad Ne Tron Menia

EncycloPetey (talk) 08:03, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

HMS Endymion

I've recently expanded the HMS Endymion (1865) article, which you created. You gave "Various British Screw Frigates". Warship International. V (4). Toledo, OH: Naval Records Club: 323. 1968. as one of the sources. Do you still have that journal, and is there anything in it which could be used to further expand the article? Mjroots (talk) 09:35, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Seydltiz

Hey Sturm, would you mind revisiting the B-class request for German cruiser Seydlitz? I added the armor information as per your request. Thanks. Parsecboy (talk) 23:41, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

National Maritime Museum Warship Histories project is go!

Hello! I'm very pleased to say that the collaboration with the National Maritime Museum which I mentioned earlier in the year is going ahead. They have put a load of their data on Royal Navy warships up on their website. Please do drop by Wikipedia:GLAM/NMM to find out more and help suggest ways of moving forward. Look forward to some MILHIST input. :-) The Land (talk) 12:25, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Framlingham Castle...

...thanks for the GA review! All the bits should be done now, let me know what you think. Cheers! Hchc2009 (talk) 17:07, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Template_talk:Did_you_know/Suicide_by_hanging#Suicide_by_hanging

Seriously? Seriously? Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 21:24, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

I apologise for my obvious conflict of interest here but...seriously? Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 21:25, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

How callous do you want me to sound?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:59, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Oh, please, be my guest. I didn't mean to come across as so rude earlier so my apologies again. I was just rather shocked, and I honestly can't understand for the life of me so any explanation would be appreciated. Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 23:19, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

HMS Vanguard GA review

Hi this may help in the review [2] from page 44 and especially page 56. Obviously not a RS by itself but it does include references which may help. Jim Sweeney (talk) 08:44, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for looking this up for me, Jim. Unfortunately, it's quoting from archival stuff that's not much use to the current review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 09:15, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Type 79 radar

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 00:02, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Main page appearance

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on August 6, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/August 6, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article directors Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 03:21, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

HMS Lion was a battlecruiser of the Royal Navy, the lead ship of her class. Lion served as the flagship of the Grand Fleet's battlecruisers throughout World War I, except when she was being refitted or under repair. She sank the German light cruiser Köln during the Battle of Heligoland Bight and served as Vice Admiral Beatty's flagship at the battles of Dogger Bank and Jutland. She was so badly damaged at the first of these battles that she had to be towed back to port by the battlecruiser Indomitable and was under repair for more than two months. During the Battle of Jutland she suffered a serious propellant fire that could have destroyed the ship if not for the bravery of Royal Marine Major Francis Harvey, who posthumously received the Victoria Cross for having ordered the magazine flooded. She spent the rest of the war on uneventful patrols in the North Sea. She was put into reserve in 1920 and sold for scrap in 1924 under the terms of the Washington Naval Treaty. (more...)

Good Article promotion

	You did it again!
	Another round of congratulations are in order for all the work you did in making HMS Vanguard (23) a certified "Good Article"! Thank you; your work is much appreciated. All the best, – Quadell (talk)

Thanks.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:35, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Type 281 radar

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 08:03, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Type 281 radar

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 08:04, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Mig i-211.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Mig i-211.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:48, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXV, July 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Zeebrugee and Afghanistan Op-ed: WereSpielChequers examines RfA

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) 23:12, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

talkback

Hello, Sturmvogel 66. You have new messages at WT:MIL.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

- Dank (push to talk) 19:14, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

15 cm naval gun

Thanks for your reply here (I've just seen it). My question was prompted by these edits; which I reverted, but it got me thinking.
The distinction between the nominal and the actual calibre is a good one; sources for ships etc. generally use the nominal calibre, but a reference to the actual calibre makes sense on the gun article.
I’ve taken the liberty of clarifying it on the gun page (here) in case it comes up again (if you are OK with that, I’ll fix the other 15cm gun pages the same way). Xyl 54 (talk) 23:23, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

BTW the Calibre page notes the distinction between the bore diameter (across the lands) and the groove diameter; is that what the difference is here? Xyl 54 (talk) 23:33, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Maybe, but I doubt it because the 20cm gun has a bore diameter of 20.3 cm, which matches the treaty standard of 8 inches. Groove diameter is not often referenced so I can't say one way or another.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:00, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Class A Review for 1st Filipino Infantry Regiment

I have responded to your comment here. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 18:48, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Additional edits have been made to follow MOS, please rereview.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 11:00, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Additional edits have been made, including de-bundling, please rerereview. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 09:26, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Additional edit made per request. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 18:05, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Your work in naval history has been consistently fantastic. Thanks for bringing so many article up to GA status, and improving many more in other ways. – Quadell (talk) 13:54, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:22, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Hugh Boustead

Hi, I got your message about my GA nomination of Hugh Boustead... I just wanted to let you know that my fiancee is in town for a bit, so I might need a little more than the usual seven days to address the GA review concerns. I get bits of time here and there, but I want to make sure that the concerns are properly addressed! Canadian Paul 16:20, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

That's fine; take as much time as you need. The 7 days was the automatic setting of the template and has no real meaning.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:57, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry about the delay, but hopefully I have addressed all of your concerns now. Please let me know what else needs to be done with the article. Canadian Paul 02:02, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

WP:Military History and WP:Espionage Merge?

On the WikiProject Military History disucussion page there is talk about a merge and eliminating WP:Espionage altogether. Would like your feedback there. It would be appreciated. Adamdaley (talk) 08:30, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

IL-22

Nice job there, but it leads me to two connections, the Heinkel He 343 and Ilyushin Il-28. Would you mind looking at each of these articles; I do not have the resources at hand to work on them. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 20:02, 21 August 2011 (UTC).

Thanks. I have the resources to work on both, but the Il-28 article really needs a whole lot of work that I'm not sure that I feel up to tackling at the moment. I might just fill out the development history section and leave the rest for later.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:33, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Conways

Hey Sturm, would you be able to scan me the page on the pocket battleships sometime? I imagine it'll be of at least some use in writing those articles. Thanks. Parsecboy (talk) 23:59, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Sure, but you really ought to get the Koop and Schmolke book on them for all the real poop.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:24, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, OSU has a copy of it (it's over $150 on Amazon) but I won't be on campus for about a month (and thus won't be able to check anything out until then). I guess I could stop in and use it in the library computer lab, I wouldn't need to check it out to do that. Parsecboy (talk) 09:25, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

GA in pl.wiki

Hello

I want thank you for your work on French cruiser Sully. I translated them to pl.wiki and get GA. This is probably best source of information in Polish language.

Thanks for your work.

PMG (talk) 11:18, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, it's nice to be appreciated.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:53, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

69 Squadron (Israel) GA review

Hi Sturmvogel 66, thanks for reviewing my nomination for GA. I've addressed the issues you pointed out, could you please revisit the page let me know whether anything else is required to complete the process? Poliocretes (talk) 13:01, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi Sturmvogel 66, I'm a little lost on what still needs to be done in order to promote this article to GA status. Outstanding issues seem to have been dealt with. Thanks, Poliocretes (talk) 15:06, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

As I said, you need to delete the cites in the lead; they're redundant to what's in the main body.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:11, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Right, thank you, done. All cites in lead save one not repeated in article body have been removed. Poliocretes (talk) 10:02, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! Poliocretes (talk) 15:16, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Writer's Barnstar
	For your contribution to the articles about Russian Navy ships. DonaldDuck (talk) 14:40, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you kindly.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:52, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Oliver Hazard Perry

Thank you for reassessing. Reworked this to (perhaps) alleviate your concerns. Please take another look. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:10, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:VK-105PFengine.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:VK-105PFengine.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 17:58, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations

		The WikiChevrons
		The WikiChevrons are hereby bestowed upon Sturmvogel 66 for his fine efforts in the August 2011 Military History monthly article writing Contest, placing first with a total of 75 points from 12 articles. Well done! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:15, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Ian.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:05, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

HMS Hood (51)

If you've responded to WSC's points in the FAC, you might want to ask him to have another look. - Dank (push to talk)

Thanks for the reminder; I hadn't even noticed his latest comment. I've also just asked Nikkimaria to take another look.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:47, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

HMS Crusader (H60)

Gday. There seems to be an inconsistency in HMS Crusader (H60). In particular in the lead it says "She served as a convoy escort during the battle of the Atlantic until sunk by the German submarine U-91 on 14 September 1942," however in the info box it says: "Fate: Sunk by U-210, 14 September 1942." I'm not sure which is right so I'm hoping you might be able to fix this. Thanks in advance. Anotherclown (talk) 06:01, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Good catch. Fixed.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:45, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

No worries. Anotherclown (talk) 03:34, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/HMS Belfast (C35)

This one is past its sell-by date, and I can't tell if he's dealt with your concerns. - Dank (push to talk) 20:54, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

OK, Lemme look at it.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:59, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for C and D class destroyer

The DYK project (nominate) 00:04, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVI, August 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Carthage and Australia in Palestine Op-ed: Remembering 9/11

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) 18:45, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Question

Could you venture a guess as to the type of German gun photographed at Fort Napoleon, Ostend? Have mörser, will travel (talk) 20:52, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

28 cm SKL/35 guns.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:15, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Good guess! Have mörser, will travel (talk) 21:55, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

They were not SKLs though. All sources that give a model say 1887. The wheel mounts surely look like [3] Have mörser, will travel (talk) 22:41, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

One of my sources says SKL/35, another says 1887. What is certain that the gun in the other photo and the one in photo on the Fort Napoleon page are not the same. Look at the barrels; the one at Ft. Napoleon is smooth, but the other one is built up.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:23, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

I saw here that another source in Dutch said SK, but I'm not very confident that it is correct. The barrels seem to have had 4 hoops if you look carefully at [4]. Have mörser, will travel (talk) 23:52, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

[5] p. 166: "The Belgian coast defense system included the following major caliber armament : five 38-cm guns, four 30.5-cm guns, twenty 28-cm guns, in addition to the older and less effective guns of Battery Hindenburg and some 28-cm mortars." Have mörser, will travel (talk) 00:01, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

True, but the barrels don't look anything alike as that second photo that you reference shows very small shoulders of the hoops and matches the one on the Ft. Napoleon page much better. My source for the 1887 reference is a 1920 US Army report and is probably the most accurate reference available, barring German archival records.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:08, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

I agree that the Russian Krupp barrel has a different hoop disposition. Russia was the first big customer of Krupp naval guns (bigger than Germany at first), ordering 76 pieces of 28-cm (L/25 it seems) in 1869. Krupp designed and started to produce its own carriages for big naval guns at this time. I have this from the Krupp official history 1812-1912 p. 127. I found a conference paper saying something about the H battery as well, and added it to the article with a quote. Have mörser, will travel (talk) 00:33, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

I discovered that the 1997 (English) conference paper was written by Aleks A. M. Deseyne, the same author whose writing was used in the luftschutzbunker-forum.de to claim the guns were SK, but based on Deseyne earlier writing in Dutch. Either Deseyne corrected himself in the mean time, or (far more likely) the forum poster read him wrong. Have mörser, will travel (talk) 20:35, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Lavochkin La-7

Hey Sturm, I have reviewed the article here for GA. Just a couple source things to be taken care of before I'll pass it. Parsecboy (talk) 00:11, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Abdul Kadir and Reshadieh class

Hey Sturm. A while ago I got back to work on Ottoman battleship Abdul Kadir and Reshadieh class battleship. Could you look them over for me and tell me what they have left till they would pass a GAN? Thanks, Buggie111 (talk) 01:26, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Don't mean to leave you hanging, but I'll look them over this weekend.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:40, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

That's nothing. I'm still trying to read through Jappalang's peer review, kind of confusing for me, so I'm in no hurry. Buggie111 (talk) 04:06, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Battlecruiser as small battleship

My point was that those ships were smaller than the other battleships that were their contemporaries: Lion was heavier and longer than Iron Duke, Derfflinger was heavier and longer than Konig. The longest ships on both sides at Jutland were battlecruisers. By the thirties, all battleships were fast by WWI standards, so the speed distinction no longer seemed to apply, no battlecruiser was as fast as Iowa. By the thirties it seems that the term battlecruiser was reserved for battleships a little smaller than most others of the period. In other words, my point is valid. 207.30.62.198 (talk) 22:12, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Royal Sovereign

Hey Sturm, I've been trying to cobble together a half-way decent article on HMS Royal Sovereign (05), and I wondered if you have any material that might be useful. If not, no worries either. I'm probably running into the same problem you had with some of the battlecruisers over lack of information for late-WWI and post-war activities. Parsecboy (talk) 00:11, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Oh, sure, I've got tons of technical stuff on her and her sisters; all the design history stuff that you could ever want. Operational stuff, not so much, other than whatever Rohwer will show. There's a relatively new book out by Peter C. Smith on the class that hopefully fills in the gap you mentioned, so try to ILL it. If you'd like, we can collaborate and I'll do the technical stuff. Just let me know whenever you want to get started. I can use a break, I'm getting a little burnt out on British destroyers (only six more to go to finish off the G and H destroyer topic!). I've got a history of Rodney, though, that I need to use before I have to return it, so that's a little higher up the queue. And now that I think about it, we should probably work together on Breslau as well as I've got some good stuff on her service with the Turks.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:36, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Oh, you've already added a lot of the technical stuff. That's fine, there's some refit/modernization stuff that I can add.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:40, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

(ec) Rohwer's a little light (and limited to WWII, unfortunately, which I'm not having that much trouble with), especially because some of it's not viewable. As to Smith, the closest one to me is at the University of Chicago - I don't know how far my ILL will reach, though I imagine that it should have useful information (it's 200+ pages long on just these five ships). I suppose the least I can do is try to request it and see what happens. My main concern is time on my part, given that grad school is starting in a week. I'm sort of expecting to be largely done with article writing at that point, but we'll see how things turn out. I could certainly help you out with Breslau if you wanted to work on that sometime in the short term. And nice work powering through all those destroyers, by the way. And yeah, I got enough of the basic technical stuff from Conway's. Parsecboy (talk) 00:47, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Your ILL reach is likely better than mine as you hopefully don't have to pay to borrow from Chicago and the Ivies like I do now. God, I really miss Regenstein (Chicago's) Library! It's a pity that I didn't start editing until after I left town. So it then really becomes a time issue for you. I suspect that you'll still be able to edit, but maybe only an article or so a week, once school starts. Request it and see how things go, I can probably fill in any holes that you've left as I've got my own copy of Rohwer and I can probably request Smith, although I'm not paying $25.00 to borrow it if it's only at Chicago and the Ivies.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:56, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

I've got McLaughlin, which has a little. Buggie111 (talk) 04:10, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I've got it as well so that bit will be covered.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 04:35, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Alright, I've requested it through OSU's ILL - we'll see what happens. The last time I did that, they just bought the book outright as it was relatively new - maybe they'll do the same here. Parsecboy (talk) 12:19, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Why did you delete my request without reviewing it?

Here. Prioryman (talk) 22:57, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

It had already been assessed as B class.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:39, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

OK, I see another editor had already done a review. Prioryman (talk) 23:43, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations

		The Military history A-Class medal with oak leaves
		By order of the coordinators of the Military history WikiProject, you are hereby awarded the A-Class medal with Oak Leaves for exemplary work on HMS Hood (51), HMS New Zealand (1911)‎ and HMS Eagle (1918), all of which were promoted to A-Class between May and September 2011. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:49, 18 September 2011 (UTC)