User talk:Catlemur: Difference between revisions
→Milhist coordinator election voting has commenced: new section Tag: |
|||
| Line 255: | Line 255: | ||
<small>Note: the previous version omitted a link to the election page, therefore you are receiving this follow up message with a link to the election page to correct the previous version. We apologies for any inconvenience that this may have caused.</small> |
<small>Note: the previous version omitted a link to the election page, therefore you are receiving this follow up message with a link to the election page to correct the previous version. We apologies for any inconvenience that this may have caused.</small> |
||
<!-- Message sent by User:TomStar81@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Members/Active&oldid=859335859 --> |
<!-- Message sent by User:TomStar81@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Members/Active&oldid=859335859 --> |
||
==Your insistence== |
|||
Your insistence at the Meuse-Argonne Offensive on including a fact on the participation of Siam's 1200 troops (0.1% of the US force of 1.2M) for this major World War I battle, and continued argument for its inclusion on the basis a single primary source, a journal article, suggest both a lack of understanding of historical and historiographic process in support of general, encyclopedic content, as well as a propensity to misuse Wikipedia policy (through limited reference) to support a personal desire to maintain marginal content. This is all the more galling, considering the generally poor quality of the content and sourcing of that article (two observations not unrelated), a trend to which your contribution and argument contributes, detrimentally. No one editor's demands should be met in defiance of WP policy, good historical practice (for encyclopedic overviews of an historical event), and common sense in generalist writing. You should remove the content until you can show it included in a good secondary or tertiary source, and only then include it if the full historical picture painted by that source is included, so as to provide scholarly perspective on that single fact's relative importance. This is one scholar's opinion. |
|||
Revision as of 23:42, 23 September 2018
The Bugle: Issue CXLIII, March 2018
|
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) 10:36, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
April 2018 Milhist Backlog Drive
G'day all, please be advised that throughout April 2018 the Military history Wikiproject is running its annual backlog elimination drive. This will focus on several key areas:
- tagging and assessing articles that fall within the project's scope
- adding or improving listed resources on Milhist's task force pages
- updating the open tasks template on Milhist's task force pages
- creating articles that are listed as "requested" on the project's various lists of missing articles.
As with past Milhist drives, there are points awarded for working on articles in the targeted areas, with barnstars being awarded at the end for different levels of achievement.
The drive is open to all Wikipedians, not just members of the Military history project, although only work on articles that fall (broadly) within the scope of military history will be considered eligible. This year, the Military history project would like to extend a specific welcome to members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red, and we would like to encourage all participants to consider working on helping to improve our coverage of women in the military. This is not the sole focus of the edit-a-thon, though, and there are aspects that hopefully will appeal to pretty much everyone.
The drive starts at 00:01 UTC on 1 April and runs until 23:59 UTC on 30 April 2018. Those interested in participating can sign up here.
For the Milhist co-ordinators, AustralianRupert and MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:53, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 4
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of wars 1500–1799, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Edward Hyde (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXLIIV, April 2018
|
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) 09:55, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Abdul Qader Saleh.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Abdul Qader Saleh.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 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).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:04, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
Your edit in Talk:Young Scots
WP Disambing has a convention not to add WPDisambig template to talk pages of disambig articles which do not have any talk, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Disambiguation#Templates. Staszek Lem (talk) 20:17, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 17
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Operation Orator, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Afrikanda (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:22, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
April 2018 MILHIST Backlog Drive
|
The Hard Worker's Barnstar |
| On behalf of the Milhist coordinators, you are hereby awarded this barnstar for your efforts during the April 2018 MILHIST Backlog Drive. Thank you for your contributions. AustralianRupert (talk) 09:22, 4 May 2018 (UTC) |
Battle of Andros (1790)
Hi Catlemur. Re your comment on the assessment request page. Thanks for looking at this. It was listed as Start class with b5=no. I found it difficult to disagree with this. Do I understand it that you would have disagreed and changed it to b5=yes without additional images? I ask from a perspective of being new round here and trying to get a grip on where the boundaries of the assessment decisions are.
Similarly, I have tried to be careful if I have put any substantive work in, specifically if I feel that I have pushed the final B class criterion over the line, to have it independently assessed. As it says in the guidance: "However, by convention, the final assessment for a B-Class rating is typically left to an independent editor; requests for an independent assessment may be made..." Am I to take it that I should feel free to self assess my own work as an exception to this if it only contributes to a single criterion? This would certainly make my life easier and save other editors' time, but I am wary of being seen as pushing the boundaries. Advice would be gratefully received. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:58, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
- @Gog the Mild: Since the article already had an infobox that is enough for b5, therefore your addition of the images does not have an impact on the rating and you have the right to assess the article on your own. You cannot self assess if a criterion is modified following your edits. Cheers.--Catlemur (talk) 20:10, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks. So in this case the b=no was out of date or over zealous and I should have just changed it. Got it. (I think.) Thanks.
- But if it hadn't been and I had added images/an infobox to bring b5 up to yes I would have needed to run it through the assessment request page. Yes? Gog the Mild (talk) 20:15, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
- Correct. Assessments are often outdated.--Catlemur (talk) 20:18, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:39, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
A cup of tea for you!
|
In appreciation of your not biting the newbie. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:40, 6 May 2018 (UTC) |
The Bugle: Issue CXLIV, May 2018
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:00, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for June 8
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kidnap of Heinrich Kreipe, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Palestine (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:30, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
The article is now at FAC. Your input and that of Gog the Mild would be appreciated. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 09:09, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
- I won't have as much free time in the coming months but I will see how I can chip in.--Catlemur (talk) 09:53, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXLVI, June 2018
|
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) 10:35, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
Greek Legion
Hi! First off, again thanks for this and your other articles, they will some important gaps. Keep it up! Second, could you do me a favour and refine the references you have taken from Psimouli in Greek Legion (Septinsular Republic) a bit further? I.e. provide a reference with page numbers by sentence or event, rather than entire paragraphs. I have some sources that can be used to expand the article (I've already included one) but I cannot easily do this without breaking up the existing text, which is difficult as I don't know which pages from Psimouli's work refer to which facts. Thanks in advance. Constantine ✍ 07:52, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
- @Cplakidas: I did as you requested.--Catlemur (talk) 08:16, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot, much appreciated :) Constantine ✍ 08:18, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXLVII, July 2018
|
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) 12:12, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXLVIII, August 2018
|
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) 08:35, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Cheers, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:53, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXLIX, September 2018
|
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) 22:19, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
Milhist coordinator election voting has commenced
G'day everyone, voting for the 2018 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:35, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
Milhist coordinator election voting has commenced
G'day everyone, voting for the 2018 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:22, 15 September 2018 (UTC) Note: the previous version omitted a link to the election page, therefore you are receiving this follow up message with a link to the election page to correct the previous version. We apologies for any inconvenience that this may have caused.
Your insistence
Your insistence at the Meuse-Argonne Offensive on including a fact on the participation of Siam's 1200 troops (0.1% of the US force of 1.2M) for this major World War I battle, and continued argument for its inclusion on the basis a single primary source, a journal article, suggest both a lack of understanding of historical and historiographic process in support of general, encyclopedic content, as well as a propensity to misuse Wikipedia policy (through limited reference) to support a personal desire to maintain marginal content. This is all the more galling, considering the generally poor quality of the content and sourcing of that article (two observations not unrelated), a trend to which your contribution and argument contributes, detrimentally. No one editor's demands should be met in defiance of WP policy, good historical practice (for encyclopedic overviews of an historical event), and common sense in generalist writing. You should remove the content until you can show it included in a good secondary or tertiary source, and only then include it if the full historical picture painted by that source is included, so as to provide scholarly perspective on that single fact's relative importance. This is one scholar's opinion.