User talk:Sturmvogel 66: Difference between revisions
join WiR |
DrFleischman (talk | contribs) →1st SS Police Regiment: new section |
||
Line 168: | Line 168: | ||
|} |
|} |
||
--[[User:Ipigott|Ipigott]] ([[User talk:Ipigott|talk]]) 11:25, 5 December 2017 (UTC) |
--[[User:Ipigott|Ipigott]] ([[User talk:Ipigott|talk]]) 11:25, 5 December 2017 (UTC) |
||
== 1st SS Police Regiment == |
|||
Hi there. I don't edit in military history at all, but I ran into you through your comment at [[User talk:OberRanks]] and thought you'd be interested in [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lion_Guard&oldid=813406997#Article_sources this discussion] at [[Talk:Lion Guard]]. This appears to be OR's typical pattern, and dealing with it can end up being quite time-consuming. They were warned by ArbCom years ago not to engage in this sort of conduct. (I don't even know if you can call it original research. {{nw}} --[[User:DrFleischman|Dr. Fleischman]] ([[User talk:DrFleischman|talk]]) 23:22, 5 December 2017 (UTC) |
Revision as of 23:22, 5 December 2017
Military history WikiProject |
---|
Articles for review |
See the full list of open tasks |
Descending from the heavens
I have returned from my Wikibreak. And how better to mark that by archiving my talk page?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:17, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
Welcome back
Great to see you back, Sturm! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:04, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
- Hopefully, I can start to do some reviewing once I finish off salvaging the pesky German destroyer Z1 Leberecht Maass ACR in the next couple of days.
- Glad you're back! :) --Rosiestep (talk) 00:32, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
- Welcome back from your Wikisabbatical. Pennsy22 (talk) 06:07, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
- Likewise, great to see you back, Sturm. Hope you are well. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:53, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
- Ditto. Welcome back, Sturm. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:43, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
- Welcome back. I hope that you will create more articles that I can translate to pl.wiki :) PMG (talk) 16:00, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks, one of these days, I hope to return the favor and expand the articles on the Polish ships in WW2 as I'm fairly certain that they're better covered in Polish than in English-language sources.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:21, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
- Welcome back. I hope that you will create more articles that I can translate to pl.wiki :) PMG (talk) 16:00, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
- Ditto. Welcome back, Sturm. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:43, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
- Likewise, great to see you back, Sturm. Hope you are well. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:53, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
- Welcome back from your Wikisabbatical. Pennsy22 (talk) 06:07, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
- Glad you're back! :) --Rosiestep (talk) 00:32, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
A goat for you!
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b8/Boer_Goat_%288742860752%29.jpg/150px-Boer_Goat_%288742860752%29.jpg)
Just because I assume you hate recieving WikiLove, and goats got added to the options list for reasons I'm not aware of... ;-) Welcome back!
Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:53, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
- Hah! Little do you know I'd been watching videos about raising goats for the farm that I'll buy whenever I win the lottery! Look like too much trouble to me, though. Which of course makes them a perfect symbol for my trouble-making self.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:15, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
WikiCup 2017 November newsletter: Final results
The final round of the 2017 WikiCup is over. Congratulations to the 2017 WikiCup top three finalists:
- First Place -
Adityavagarwal (submissions)
- Second Place -
Vanamonde (submissions)
- Third Place -
Cas Liber (submissions)
In addition to recognizing the achievements of the top finishers and everyone who worked hard to make it to the final round, we also want to recognize those participants who were most productive in each of the WikiCup scoring categories:
- Featured Article – Cas Liber (actually a two-way tie with themselves for an astonishing five FAs in R2 and R4).
- Good Article – Adityavagarwal had 14 GAs promoted in R5.
- Featured List –
Bloom6132 (submissions) and
1989 (submissions) both produced 2 FLs in R2
- Featured Pictures –
SounderBruce (submissions) improved an image to FP status in R5, the only FP this year.
- Featured Topic –
MPJ-DK (submissions) has the only FT of the Cup in R3.
- Good Topic – Four different editors created a GT in R2, R3 and R4.
- Did You Know – Adityavagarwal had 22 DYKs on the main page in R5.
- In The News –
MBlaze Lightning (submissions) had 14 ITN on the main page in R2.
- Good Article Review –
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (submissions) completed 31 GARs in R1.
Over the course of the 2017 WikiCup the following content was added or improved on Wikipedia: 51 Featured Articles, 292 Good Articles, 18 Featured Lists, 1 Featured Picture, 1 Featured Topics, 4 Good Topics, around 400 Did You Knows, 75 In The News, and 442 Good Article Reviews. Thank you to all the competitors for your hard work and what you have done to improve Wikipedia.
Regarding the prize vouchers - @Adityavagarwal, Vanamonde93, Casliber, Bloom6132, 1989, and SounderBruce: please send Godot13 (talk · contribs · email) an email from the email address to which you would like your Amazon voucher sent. Please include your preference of global Amazon marketplace as well. We hope to have the electronic gift cards processed and sent within a week.
We will open up a discussion for comments on process and scoring in a few days. The 2018 WikiCup is just around the corner! Many thanks from all the judges. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), and Godot13 (talk · contribs · email) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:41, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
Italicizing Russian
- MOS:ITALICS has the answer you were asking of Anomalocaris: Don't italicize non-English material that's not in Latin-based script; the very fact that it's in Cyrillic is enough to set it apart as non-English. For such a language, the practice is to italicize the Romanization, not the Cyrillic (or Greek, or Japanese, or whatever) original, and not the English gloss (which goes in single quotes, per MOS:SINGLE). The
{{lang|ru}}
markup goes around the original-language word. Example: Russian самизда́т samizdat, 'self-published'. It can also be done with a single{{lang-ru}}
template:{{lang-ru|самизда́т|samizdat|self-published}}
, which produces: Russian: самизда́т, romanized: samizdat, lit. 'self-published'. (That's a bit long-winded for every use, so we don't always use that template; once the order is established, it's annoying to the reader to have "Russian:", "translit.", and "lit." again and again in the same material.) Doing it with{{lang|ru}}
and manual markup instead of{{lang-ru}}
also allows a different presentation order, e.g.: Soviet censorship was evaded by dissident publications termed samizdat (самизда́т, 'self-published' in Russian). — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ< 07:13, 5 November 2017 (UTC)- Thanks, I hadn't investigated deeply enough to notice that you could have both the transliteration and the translation in the template.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 12:53, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXXXIX, November 2017
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:29, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
Joseph not a RS?
I'm assuming these removals imply the source isn't a reliable one? - The Bushranger One ping only 03:48, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
- As he's an avowed neo-Nazi, I don't think that we can trust anything that he says. While the Fa 223 may have been considered for the rescue mission, you should be able to confirm it from better sources, either on the better books on German helicopters or books on the rescue mission itself.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 04:37, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
- I did manage to trip over the main discussion and yeaaaaah, we can do better. (Also how did I forget to sign that earlier. Bah!). Thanks. - The Bushranger One ping only 20:18, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
- I'm a little reluctant to wipe out all of the citations without looking at the book. It may well be a very model of proper sourcing without POV pushing, but I'm not particularly inclined to lay down money that that's the case. The Fa 223 cite was trivial enough that removing it did no damage to the article, but that's not the case in a couple of other articles that I looked at.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:20, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
- It's not just the fact that he's a neo-Nazi or a sexual predator, he's also a peddler of junk science, and he has no academic credentials. He could very well have written two fine history books, but that doesn't mean he's any better than any self-published hobbyist as far as Wikipedia is concerned. Taken together, nothing he's ever written has any place here. Parsecboy (talk) 01:05, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
- It's not just the fact that he's a neo-Nazi or a sexual predator, he's also a peddler of junk science, and he has no academic credentials. He could very well have written two fine history books, but that doesn't mean he's any better than any self-published hobbyist as far as Wikipedia is concerned. Taken together, nothing he's ever written has any place here. Parsecboy (talk) 01:05, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
- I'm a little reluctant to wipe out all of the citations without looking at the book. It may well be a very model of proper sourcing without POV pushing, but I'm not particularly inclined to lay down money that that's the case. The Fa 223 cite was trivial enough that removing it did no damage to the article, but that's not the case in a couple of other articles that I looked at.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:20, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
- I did manage to trip over the main discussion and yeaaaaah, we can do better. (Also how did I forget to sign that earlier. Bah!). Thanks. - The Bushranger One ping only 20:18, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Good topic
Hello, I've nommed a good topic on the Type 1934-class destroyers, after getting the lead article (Type 1934-class destroyers) to GA. I've listed you as a main contributor since you've done a ton of the work involved; Though I should tell you, and ask if you think I should add anyone else in on to the "Main contributors". Cheers. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 14:50, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
- They were mostly my work, although you could check their edit histories to see if anyone else made major contributions.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:17, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
WikiCup 2018
So the 2017 WikiCup has come to an end. Congratulations to the winner, to the other finalists and to all those who took part. 177 contestants signed up, more than usual, but not all of them submitted entries in the first round. Were editors attracted by the cash prizes offered for the first time this year, or were these irrelevant? Do the rules and scoring need changing for the 2018 WikiCup? If you have a view on these or other matters, why not join in the WikiCup discussion about next year's contest? Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Godot13 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:59, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!
Military history A-Class medal with diamonds
![]() |
The Military history A-Class medal with diamonds | |
On behalf of the WikiProject Military history coordinators, you are hereby awarded the Military history A-Class medal with diamonds for your excellent work on developing St Vincent-class battleship, HMS Neptune (1909), and German destroyer Z1 Leberecht Maass to A-Class status. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 13:35, 28 November 2017 (UTC) |
- Thanks.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:30, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
Adelabde Dutcher
Nice article. But I was wondering about the name...this says "Adelaide". Seems more likely to me, but I don't have your source in front of me. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 21:06, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
- You're right. There's a typo in the heading of my source, but the body says Adelaide. And I looked at it so many times to ensure that I spelled it properly! So I've moved it to the proper spelling.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:22, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
- I know how that is. Happens to me all the damn time. My favorite is when I look at an article some months after creating it and discover a pesky little punctuation error that I missed the first time.
- Happy editing and contest-ing! --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 21:23, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks. Can't catch Miyagawa, but I'm doing pretty well.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:27, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
- Happy editing and contest-ing! --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 21:23, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
Good show!
Gotta say, you were definitely a worthy opponent for The World Contest. I'm impressed and more than a little embarrassed that you always managed to be two articles ahead me - good show. Enjoy the book money my friend, you earned it. –Vami_IV✠ 23:10, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks, you pushed me far harder than I expected today! I had rather thought that I could just sort of cruise through the day, carefully adding articles where they'd do me the most good overall, not focused on pumping them out as fast I could, just trying to stay ahead of you.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:15, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
Canadian biographies
Hi, Sturmvogel 66! I saw you wrote some Canadian biographies for the WIR Contest. If you'd like, you can also submit these to The 10,000 Challenge of WikiProject Canada. Please use this link for convenience. Thanks for all your amazing work on the contest! – Reidgreg (talk) 12:08, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
Hello, Sturmvogel 66. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
An exceptional barnstar for you
![]() |
The World Contest Laurels |
Congratulations for finishing 2nd place in the Women in Red World Contest!! -♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:05, 4 December 2017 (UTC) |
Thankyou so much for the hard work! I make it $652.50 that you've won. Please double check. If you would like to donate any of your winnings in the Women in Red Book Fund to raise money to buy books for editors of women topics who need the books on demand please add your name and the amount you'd like to donate on the main contest page.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:05, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks, yourself, for running a great contest.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:54, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
Why not join Women in Red?
![]() If you would like to receive news of future WiR events and participate in our discussions, you might now be interested in becoming a member of Women in Red where we are actively trying to reduce Wikipedia's content gender gap. In any case, thank you for actively contributing to the coverage of women (currently 17.25% of English Wikipedia's biographies).
| ||
(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) |
--Ipigott (talk) 11:25, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
1st SS Police Regiment
Hi there. I don't edit in military history at all, but I ran into you through your comment at User talk:OberRanks and thought you'd be interested in this discussion at Talk:Lion Guard. This appears to be OR's typical pattern, and dealing with it can end up being quite time-consuming. They were warned by ArbCom years ago not to engage in this sort of conduct. (I don't even know if you can call it original research. (I am not watching this page, so please ping me if you want my attention.) --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 23:22, 5 December 2017 (UTC)