User talk:FarSouthNavy

Hello DagosNavy, and welcome to Wikipedia! Here are some recommended guidelines to help you get involved. Please feel free to contact me if you need help with anything. Best of luck and happy editing! —Aucun effort n'est trop grand 02:25, 15 September 2006 (UTC) Getting started Wikipedia Tutorial How to edit a page The five pillars of Wikipedia Manual of Style Be bold in editing How to write a great article WikiProjects Getting your info out there Cite your sources Neutral Point of View Point of View Verifiability Uploading images Image use policy Getting more Wikipedia rules Policy Library Getting help New contributors' help page Where to ask a question Help Desk Frequently Asked Questions Getting along Wikipedians Wikiquette Civility Sign your posts Conflict resolution Getting technical Pages needing attention Peer review Utilities Village pump

Invitation

Flag of Argentina Hello! Seeing your edits, I guess that you are Argentine, if you are, c'mon join us at WikiProject Argentina. Don't forget to sign your membership with four tildes (~~~~) =D Also you may like to know that Wikipedia has a small but constantly growing Argentine community, if you want to include yourself in our noble ranks =D add this in your user page: [[Category:Wikipedians in Argentina|DagosNavy]] . Goodbye! —Aucun effort n'est trop grand 02:25, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Battle of Nasiriyah

I just wanted to commend you on a great job with the Battle of Nasiriyah article. It was in such poor shape and given such little attention that at one point I had nom'd it for AfD. You pretty much single-handedly took it from that to (in my opinion) a start class article. Awesome work and thanks so much! NeoFreak 21:41, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi

Maybe you should consider changing your name. Dago as you probably already know, is a serious ethnic slur. Such names are not allowed on this site. Superdude99 11:55, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Superdude. Since I'am proud of my Italian ancestry, i have never intended to offend nobody with my nickname. The term "Dago's Navy" was employed by an American Admiral commenting the supposed poor performance of the Italian Fleet in WWII in his Preface to the memories of British Admiral of the Fleet Andrew Cunningham, so I introduced this phrase as a way of mocking those certainly offensive remarks. I guess I could change it to a more suitable one, like "WopsNavy" if you want, but I have already made a lot of contributions under the former nick. I will make the proper changes as soon as possible. Thanks. Dario 12:36, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

No sweat

Hey man, I guess its all about context! Obviously someone who sees your name would/could be offended but seeing how you are Argentinian w Italian ancestry It should not that big of a big deal. Also nice to see someone from agentinia take interest in Irish nationalism! Do you also have Irish ancestry? Superdude99 12:55, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Revolución Libertadora corrections

Thank you for correcting my mistake in editing the Revolucion Libertadora page. Somehow, my signature got put at the top of the page, I am not sure how. I did try to sign my correction, but I don't know how the signature got put at the top of the page. I find some aspects of the editing task with Wiki a bit confusing. Thanks again. I am going to try to sign this edit, without causing the same error again.warshy 10:21, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

IRA Volunteer issue

Go to this page, an Indian guy is being forced by Loyalists and West Brit who are demanding that the rank of Volunteer is banned for describing the rank of members of the IRA – if you do not voice your opinion on this then they are going to get away with this bull Vintagekits 22:33, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

The end of the mediation cabal on the term Volunteer is ending in two days.

The mediation process is ending in two days - you have two days to have you final say and 1. show any proof that Volunteer is a rank and 2. leave your final vote in coming to a consensus here. Thank you.--Vintagekits 22:48, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Sub-eds

Sometimes I've followed your edits and rephrased them (sub-edited) (eg Malta Convoys). I hope this doesn't offend, the intention is to "smooth" the text a bit and correct punctuation. It's not a deliberate chase, just as I see them on my watchlist; probably I'm too fussy. As far as I recall, I don't change the sense without explanation. Let me know if/ when I cause offence and we can resolve peacefully. Folks at 137 13:23, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Argentine ground forces in the Falklands War‎

You are welcome to help! --Jor70 15:48, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Belfast Brigade

Provisional IRA Belfast Brigade has been created, just so you know. Thanks. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 17:00, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

• Hi, One Night. Thank you for the info.

DagosNavy 17:25, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I know you add some good info to the other Brigade articles, so thought you'd be interested in this one as well. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 17:32, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Real IRA

Don't suppose you know of any convenient fair-use images that could be used on it please? I've done plenty of work on it recently (still more to do) but images would be good too naturally. Thanks. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 04:37, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm working on the origins right now, it needs more details about the split from the PIRA which I'm in the process of writing, should be done soon. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 22:57, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Finished that finally, was a tricky task as it all had to be written at once rather than parts at a time. Still need to add more after the re-organisation post-ceasefire and pre-MI6 rocket attack, but I think it's coming along nicely. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 03:39, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Hola

Sos Bostero? o Gallina? Soy Bicho Colorado. Cheers for your help on the Superclásico article. Maybe you would be interested in joining Wikipedia:WikiProject Argentine football. Regards, King of the North East (T/C) 00:42, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

One of the greatest frustrations my father has faced (and he continues to face) in his life is that his son is a turncoat Gallina!. When I was 12, I became a fan of...Huracán, after my Grandma (her brothers were fans of Huracán of Mar del Plata). However, I was very happy last Sunday, so there is still some sympathy for the Millo in my heart ;).

The bichitos have style, Argentinos was incredibly prolific in producing good players, besides Diego (I'am a living witness of his first two goals in the league). I remember Riquelme, Sorín, Pavoni, Ereros, "Checho" Batista, "El colo" Domenech...an endless list. Thank you for inviting me to the project, I promise to join it as soon as possible. Good look and thank you again. Dario 10:36, 9 October 2007 (CEST)

Battle of Top Malo House

I hope you can correct the recent update done on this page for it is now claiming 5 Argentine Commandoes were killed and seven wounded when as far as I recall 2 Argentine Commandoes were killed and six wounded. Thanks for your work. Marco.

DYK

On November 8, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Attack on Derryard checkpoint, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:41, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 22 November, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Battle of the Espero Convoy, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Zzyzx11 (Talk) 20:13, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

the troubles

the only reason i added republic of ireland is because members of the garda irish police had died. If you would be so kind would you add the casualties of the civillians aswell.

Paddy (talk) 20:52, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes i aswell found it hard to find the right format to include civilians. I tried to mimic the Vietnam war page but as soon as I entered a third collum to include the UK and Irish forces the bottom area disapeared (see Vietnam war page and you'll get what I mean. But the problems is with the page as a whole its very one sided at times. One of the big things i wanted change was the image of a bobby sands quote next to a IRA member. I just put the current image of the divide in Ireland. (Paddy (talk) 00:00, 27 December 2007 (UTC))

Hello, thats a valid point about the map for a image, but the problem was i couldnt find any photograph that would go well with the article. But if you find one thats suitable please put it up. Its best to have this article been edited by people who are making changes that are historically acurate. Rather then others who have in the past made changes that are biast to there own opinion. Which sadly people have done alot to "the troubles" page before .

(Paddy (talk) 00:36, 27 December 2007 (UTC))

Mar del Plata

I saw you removed the template added to the article and decided to go back to those small and limited city-header-ar, city-poli-ar-ba, and other tiny little templates. I added such template in order to be consistent with other cities (e.g. Buenos Aires). Is there any reason on using the little ones when there is already one suitable for any city? I notice that you've done most of the editions to this article, which is great, but I don't see the reason for having a map flying on top of the article and a somewhat limited template, thus giving a dull and messy look to the article. Good luck. Ctirado (talk) 06:16, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Al Hussein missile article

DagosNavy, I poured a fresh cup of coffee and enjoyed reading your re-write of Al Hussein article and upgraded it to B-class. JOB WELL DONE! If you don't mind, I would like to do a few minor tweaks for you. Pour yourself a cup of fresh coffee or pop the lid off an adult beveraage! ... depending of the time of day (lol). Thank you so much for the re-write! Cheers! Lance.... LanceBarber (talk) 18:16, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

THANKS A LOT, Lance!!!. I have no words for the Barnstar...here in Argentina is summer right now, so I will get a pint of chilled dark beer ;)...Thank you again! DagosNavy 23:53, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

The Orignal Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		Presented to DagosNavy (talk · contribs) for an impressive body of contributions to Military History and missile articles on Wikipedia, and for your generous willingness to lend us your expertise in these areas, I award you this Original Barnstar, most overdue! Thank you. With sincere regards, ...LanceBarber (talk) 18:21, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Argentine Type 42

Does the remaining Argentine Type 42 still have Exocet? From memory these were fitted aft of the funnel but I couldn't see any such installation on the latest pictures on the Argentine Navy website. There is also no mention in the technical details. [1] Justin talk 10:33, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:your message

I will take a look at it over the weekend, but if you need a second opinion faster than that leave a message with Roger Davies (talk · contribs). TomStar81 (Talk) 06:41, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Be there momentarily (I have three article left the "nedd attention", then the category I'm working on wil be empty :) TomStar81 (Talk) 20:36, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

South Armagh sniper

I am very concerned about the amount of material you are adding which doesn't correspond precisely to the refs you are providing. You need to be aware that the subject matter is considerably more complex that it might appear at first sight. It should be apparent to you by now that the contents of this article are becoming increasingly controversial and not only are feelings running high but my patience is wearing thin. When including contentious material, you should include impeccable references which correspond exactly to the material you are relying on. I intend checking the material myself when the cited books I've ordered arrive. Failure to comply with policy will result in material being withdrawn and may also result in your account being blocked. Please be extra careful. --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 12:48, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi Roger. Well, I'am seriously reflecting about it. Some of the controversial material was already removed or re-shaping by myself to match exactly what sources say, thus avoiding OR violations. And I will remove by myself all the material that could mean a prejudice to Wikipedia readers. My edits were made on good faith; perhaps because I'am not a native speaker of English, I failed to include accurate references sometimes, but not in the degree that another user(s) claim. I will response as soon as possible to the post at the talk page of the "South Armagh Sniper" article.--Darius (talk) 13:12, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. It would be excellent use of your time if you could check your contributions very carefully against the sources and either amend the text or fix the source. I suggest you be bold while you are doing it to err on the side of safety. I also agree that this should be your priority rather than entering into discussions about it. I hope you don't think I'm being impolite if I suggest that this is particularly difficult area for someone who does not have English as their mother tongue to edit in and that it might be easier to work also in less controversial areas :) --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 13:34, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank for your tip, Roger. I've introduced some changes in the SA sniper article. I re-shaped the potential OR statements (synthesis of two different sources), by replacing Taylor for two cites from Harnden. I also added quotes (without removing the tags) about the smuggling of the rifles. I hope it will be the start of some kind of compromise about this hard-debated issue. I also want to ask you about the online links to CAIN website. The tables produced by searching casualties there are the prime source for the main article about "The Troubles". Are these tables a reliable source according to Wikipedia or not?. Thank you again.--Darius (talk) 15:12, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

P/S: The PoV charges against the sources are beyond my reach :)--Darius (talk) 15:15, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Falklands war task force

Hello :) I'm considering setting up a Falklands war task force on wikipedia and noticed you've edited the subject quite a bit. Would you consider joining the group if I go ahead and create it? Thanks, --Tefalstar (talk) 19:27, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Pedro Giachino

I want to thank you for the article you write about Pedro Giachino, I think he deserves it. Best Regards Bcartolo (talk) 13:01, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Re:GADA

Reassessed as B-class owing to the now cited section. Well Done! TomStar81 (Talk) 00:21, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Great article, hope you don't mind if make some copyedits. Is English your first language? Ryan4314 (talk) 18:21, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I think this sentence needs changing; "From the period between May 1st to May 28, there were three Vulcan sorties planned, but only one was carried out, achieving nothing." The main thing is the "achieving nothing" part, grammatically it's wrong, if the Vulcan crew had still only managed to bomb an outhouse it would still be classed as "something". Secondly it's unreferenced, but it can't ever be referenced as that piece of information is a matter of debate between military analysts. We ourselves can't add our own opinions. Also the "May 1st to May 28" bit is odd, why not just say "May" instead, at moment it appears you're trying to avoid mentioning the May 31 raid (although I do see you have placed it later in article) :) Ryan4314 (talk) 18:45, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

"Celtic" remarks

Now that I know you've Celtic blood in you everything's ok then. By the way, I'm married to an Italian, I've two children who are by extension half Italian; I just didn't care for your incorrect remark regarding the "British". Most of us people with Irish blood also possess in varying degrees ancestry from our "British" neighbours; therefore, I resent other nationalities commenting on our ethnic origin. But I don't hold your Argentinian/Italian heritage against you. You have as much right to your input on any article in Wikipedia as I or anybody else. I happen to have strong feelings about the Warrenpoint atrocity.13:14, 20 May 2008 (UTC)13:14, 20 May 2008 (UTC)~~

Port Stanley

I fundamentally disagree with your argument. The name of the place in English is Stanley aka Port Stanley at the time, calling it Puerto Argentino is simply giving in to an Argentine POV push. Using the Argentine names is POV and we should strive to be neutral. The subject of the article, to be blunt, is irrelevant to the use of names in the content. Imagine for example an English speaker who has never heard of the use of the Argentine name, they would be confused as to the location. In the English wikipedia we should use the English names, acknowledgment of the Argentine name should be more than sufficient. I'm not particularly enamoured of your compromise edit but I won't change it. Justin talk 20:52, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Blurred Royal Marines pic

Hi Darius, you were the original uploader of this pic; File:ComandosAnfibios-Marines.jpg Have you used a "blur" special effect? Would you mind sending me the original, or giving me a link where I can find it online please. Ryan4314 (talk) 18:13, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

A further apology is in order

Hi DagosNavy, it's me again, Jeanne. I'm writing to you again in order to offer a deeper apology for the offensive remark I made to you the other day. It was horrible and uncalled for, made in the heat of the moment following a fight I had with my Italian husband. I'm sorry I offended you and the apology I sent you the other day wasn't really abject enough. I hope you bear me no grudges as I admire your excellent grasp of the English language. Congratulations. Peace?Cheersjeanne (talk) 05:35, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Darius, thank you for accepting my apology. I feel much better now.Cheers.jeanne (talk) 14:24, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Operation Agreement

I've found some online sources to prove it was the Italian San Marco Marines that defeated the British seabore landings that were meant to take Tobruk from the Italians. I hope you can tidy up the page a bit for I am not a wikitechno. Like the Argentines in the fighting, the Italians were much maligned by commentators during the Second World War. I believe I have done much to rectify their image as "poor fighters". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Generalmesse (talk • contribs) 09:28, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Image Copyright

For info Darius, I think you might want to revise the copyright notice on some of the images you've uploaded. You might find the tag {{PD-AR-Photo}} is more appropriate as given the length of time since the war, the copyright on Argentine photos has expired. Justin talk 12:51, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

No worries, ask away anytime. Justin talk 13:25, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Falklands FF Incidents

Good idea but I've replied on my talk page as another editor may have an input. Justin talk 07:47, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

GADA 601 can you keep an eye out for vandalism on this article. Seems to have beem caught up on a spat on WP:AN/I Justin talk 22:57, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

==porfavor DagosNavy ayudanos--nosotros de sangre italiana-- en la pagina de la Primera Batalla de Alamein

Veras que en la pagina de discusion se ha establecido gracias al libro "Rommel's Desert Commanders (pagina 145)que el Regimiento de Bersaglieri 7 logro la conquista de la fortaleza de Mersa Matruh el 29 de junio del a#o 1942, en la que los italianos tomaron 6,500 prisioneros britanicos. Manana seria el aniversario no. 66 de esta gran victoria terrestre italiana. Yo soy David Aldea (autor de varios articulos de Malvinas, y al momento estoy escribiendo un libro sobre el RI 4) y he contribuido en gran parte a las primeras ediciones de la pagina del desembarco argentino en Malvinas y otras paginas, como la pagina de Monte Longdon. El paragrafo que han deletado es el siguiente:

General der Panzertruppen Ulrich Kleemann's 90th Light Africa Division began the encirclement of Mersa Matruh on June 27. Initially the 10th Indian and 50th Infantry Divisions put up a confused, but determined resistance[2] Soon, the German force, numbering only 1,600, ran out of steam.[3] Thanks to infantry reinforcements, in the form of the 7th and the 9th Bersaglieri Regiments from the Italian X and XXI Infantry Corps, Kleeman and the Italians overwhelmed the position on 29 June at 0930 hours[4][5].

Mira, si he cometido un pecado, es del tener varias cuentas para editar, pero pense que eso no era un crimen. Me dicen que estoy cometiendo vandalismo pero si ves mis contribuciones, veras que las hago en buena fe. No se porque un tal Noclador ha decido hacer la guerra contra mi en cuanto a mis ediciones sobre las fuerzas terrestres italianas en norte africa y en el frente ruso. Con bastante esfuerzo he establecido que los soldados italianos tomaron 20,000-30,000 soldados aliados prisioneros en tunisia, libia y egipto y ahora un tal Noclador me ha bloquedo sin ganar el argumento de quienes fueron las tropas que obtuvieron la victoria en Mersa Matruh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Topmalohouse (talk • contribs) 08:20, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

En cuanto a la batalla de Goose Green, Justin A Kuntz a borrado lo siguiente:

The defending Argentinian forces known as Task Force Mercedes consisted of the Lieutenant-Colonel Italo Piaggi's 12th Infantry Regiment (RI 12) and a company of the Ranger-type 25th Infantry Regiment (RI 25). Lieutenant-Colonel Mohamed Ali Seineldin, considered by many Argentinians to be the 'father' of the Argentinian Commandos, who chafing at his role as Commanding Officer of an ordinary infantry unit, put all his conscripts through a compressed version of the commando course in March 1982[6], dressing them in the green berets of the Army Commandos and changing the title of RI 25 unofficially to 25th 'Special' Infantry Regiment. The name 'Special' was picked rather than adopt the US Army 'Ranger' title.

Justin A Kuntz dice que no es buena cosa hacer disponible paginas disponibles de google books pero por much tiempo, por ejemplo, con la pagina SIEGE OF TOBRUK y OPERATION HUSKY, usando el nombre "generalmesse" estas paginas estaban disponibles para el lector. Debo reconocer que el editor Kirrages me ayudo mucho en este trabajo. En cuanto a tu pagina del GADA 601, gracias por tu buen trabajo en este tema. Desafortunadamente, Justin A Kuntz ha borrado mi contribucion sobre la afirmacion por partes de los argentinos, que posiblemente un misil Roland dejo fuera de accion un RAF Harrier el 12 de junio. Aunque no sea cierto es de mucho valor para historiadores esta afirmacion sobre un misil Roland siendo lanzado el 12 de junio. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Historyneverrepeats (talk • contribs) 10:26, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Argentina PNA

No worries, glad to see it corrected. To be honest I've been kind of distracted by the sock puppet master for a little while and have to get back into editing again. Just for information we were correct and all of those sock puppets have been blocked. Justin talk 15:43, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

By the way, were you aware of this Wikipedia:WikiProject South America/Falkland Islands work group, your perspective might be invaluable. Justin talk 19:42, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Hanrahan Quote

No problems, its fine as you've done it. Justin talk 07:49, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

ww1 navy campaignboxes.

Hi. I noticed you removed campaignboxes I placed on British Campaign in the Baltic 1918-19. The reason for having campaignboxes is that they assist a reader to navigate to other pages which might be of interest. As someone who has recently been reading (and indeed writing) navy battle articles, it is quite obvious to me that someone interested in a baltic sea battle is just as likely to be interested in a north sea naval battle. I note that some other language wikis do not have these separate boxes for WW1 navy battles in different oceans, instead just have one box for all naval engagements in ww1. Ships move across the sea, it is in their nature. Starting to read some naval history I found it somewhat annoying, not to say confusing, that some battles are linked (by a box) yet others occurring at the same time (and thus arguably more relevant than others in the same place at a different time) are not shown on the article at all. These articles all need to mention each other. Sandpiper (talk) 21:03, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I had a look back to see if you had replied. First time I didn't really understand your edit comment. However, perhaps now I do. If you removed the info boxes because you consider this battle not part of WW1, then the existing 'WW1 baltic sea box' and all category links saying it is part of WW1 need to be removed also: either it is, or it isn't. I don't know how historians view this, but it seems to me somethng of a tidying up after the fall of Germany, just as WW2 continued after Germany's fall, so part of the whole. Sandpiper (talk) 07:29, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi again. Then we disagree. As far as I can see there are only about 50 or less different ww1 naval battles. Some may be missing, but a read through a book on the subject would seem to suggest we have the main ones. As someone using these pages, I want all the campaigns to be listed. The alternative is to give me a deal of trouble trying to find them. The Balkans campaign in 1919 may be the extreme case, but in general all these engagements are part of one whole. battle of the Falklands was won by taking ships from the north sea, with a knock on effect reducing the grand fleet there. Similarly Coronel was lost because the admiralty refused to take ships and send them. The infoboxes dividing battles by the sea where they happened is completely arbitrary and cuts across battles which are related to each other. Ships move about. I started researching the dardanelles campaign. This has led me into all the others.... because the issues behind choices for the others affect that one.

I'm afraid I really don't see why having three or four compressed infoboxes each one summarising one campaign upsets a page. The whole is quite small and users can pop it up if they wish.

I have no comment to make about WW2, but I could see a good deal of sense in combining the individual 'sea' campaign boxes into one WW1 naval box. For example, see pl:Bitwa na Dogger Bank (1915) where the matter is done in this way. It seems to me the battles have been excessively divided. For the most part, the German fleet stayed at home. I don't see the point of leaving out relevant links: the point of having a navigation box is to provide them.

Examining your example, perhaps I should comment. In the example you give, I note the battle infobox is headed Operation abstention, whereas the campaignbox is headed Battle of the Mediterranean. If you insist, we could perhaps place a third box across the bottom of the pages listing all battles, but I don't see why this is necessary when the campaign boxes already exist and carry out this function. But I do believe it is necessary to provide users with a proper means to cross link to clearly related battles. Do you honestly believe someone interested in 'operation abstention' is only going to be interested in ww2 naval engagements which happened in the mediterranean? Sandpiper (talk) 22:03, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Vamos che!

un argentino por estos lares! te desubrí por esto saludos cumpa!--Argentumm (talk) 07:56, 28 July 2008 (UTC)