Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history

Main pageDiscussionNews &
open tasksAcademyAssessmentA-Class
reviewContestAwardsMembers

Summary of Military history WikiProject open tasks watch · edit · full list News and announcements The 2024 coordinator election has begun with nominations open until 14 September. The August newsletter is now available. Editors are advised that Featured Articles promoted before 2016 are in need of review, if you had an article promoted to Featured status on or before 2016 please check and update your article before they are listed at FAR/C. Current discussions No major discussions are open at the moment Featured article candidates Jozo Tomasevich • Battle of Saipan • Siege of Baghdad • British nuclear weapons and the Falklands War • German atrocities committed against Soviet prisoners of war Featured article review Byzantine Empire • Battle of Red Cliffs • Edward I of England • Northrop YF-23 • Middle Ages • Thomas C. Hindman Featured list removal candidates List of deaths at the Berlin Wall Featured picture candidates Thorsten Nordenfelt A-Class review Henry Biard • Miyoshi Nagayoshi • Ernest J. King • Lockheed YF-22 • SPARS Peer reviews Muckrach Castle • Military logistics • Military dictatorship • Henry Clay Work • Galatian War • Charles the Bold • 1939 Liechtenstein putsch • Sher Shah Suri • Rwandan genocide • Castlereagh–Canning duel Good article nominees Ava–Hanthawaddy War (1401–1403) • Suleiman I of Candar • Aérospatiale SA 330 Puma • Mehmed of Dulkadir • 1864 Washington Arsenal explosion • Roswell incident • Maximiliano Hernández Martínez • Mohammad Shah Qajar • Gubir shootdown • Gotha WD.7 • Constantine II (emperor) • Battle of Lewisburg • Eleanor of Castile • Charles Upham • Soldiers' and Sailors' Arch • Destruction of cultural heritage during the Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip • Northrop B-2 Spirit • Battle of Ekiokpagha • Simon Stuart (general) • Ernie Pike • Duncan MacDougall (British Army officer) • 170th Rifle Division (Soviet Union) • Alfred Sully • Dabney Coleman • Benin Air Force • Battle of Mosul (2016–2017) • Crusading movement • Battle of Thorgo • Jarrett Robertson • Michael Robinson (RAF officer) • Rumpler 6B • Tel al-Sultan attack • Charles Keating IV • Soviet cruiser Vladivostok • Sack of Delhi (1757) Good article reassessments 130th Engineer Brigade (United States) • 2008 Mumbai attacks • United States Special Operations Command • Kony 2012 Articles that need... work on referencing and citation (148,333) • only work on referencing and citation (43,215) • work on coverage and accuracy (123,628) • only work on coverage and accuracy (19,869) • work on structure (31,865) • only work on structure (361) • work on grammar (8,169) • only work on grammar (46) • work on supporting materials (32,913) • only work on supporting materials (1,338) • assessment (1) • assessment as lists (3) • project tags fixed (1) • assessment checklists added (2) • assessment checklists completed (5) • task forces added (3) • attention to task force coverage (656)

Missing/broken ref final sweep

Following Headbomb's now archived post, I figured I'd repost the remaining GAs that still have broken harv refs. We're actually rather close to getting through these so if some folks could each do one or two more we should be good: Aza24 (talk) 05:50, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

GAs

Done

1. Alexander Godley
2. Bali Strait Incident
3. Battle of Haman
4. Battle of Huoyi
5. Battle of Masan
6. Battle of Nam River
7. Battle of P'ohang-dong
8. Battle of the Plains of Abraham
9. Black Dahlia
10. Black September
11. Bobbili Fort
12. Boulogne agreement
13. Byzantine–Sasanian War of 602–628
14. Capitulation of Saldanha Bay
15. Caracalla
16. Christian Streit White
17. Cipher Bureau (Poland)
18. Croatian War of Independence
19. Crusades
20. Emeric, King of Hungary
21. Ernest Lucas Guest
22. Expansion of Macedonia under Philip II
23. First Battle of Naktong Bulge
24. Frank McGee (ice hockey)
25. Frank Worsley
26. Franklin D. Roosevelt
27. Franz Kurowski
28. Franz Kurowski
29. HMS Hermione (1782)
30. Hans-Ulrich Rudel
31. Home Army
32. Homs
33. House of Lancaster
34. Hungarian conquest of the Carpathian Basin
35. Huolongjing
36. Indonesian National Revolution
37. Isaac Parsons (American military officer)
38. James Caudy
39. Michael I Komnenos Doukas
40. Mise of Amiens
41. Monarch-class coastal defense ship
42. Mulan (1998 film)
43. Myth of the clean Wehrmacht
44. Operation Storm
45. Operation Summer '95
46. Oswald Boelcke
47. Paddy Finucane
48. Philip III of Navarre
49. Pons, Count of Tripoli
50. Prince Marko
51. Raid on Batavia (1806)
52. Richard Garnons Williams
53. Robert White (Virginia physician)
54. Rommel myth
55. Roza Shanina
56. SS Black Osprey
57. Saab JAS 39 Gripen
58. Sajmište concentration camp
59. Second Battle of Naktong Bulge
60. Siege of Damascus (1148)
61. Siege of Melos
62. Siege of Pondicherry (1793)
63. Skanderbeg's Italian expedition
64. Stanisław Koniecpolski
65. Stephen Tomašević of Bosnia
66. Teuruarii IV
67. The Great Naktong Offensive
68. The Holocaust in Albania
69. Third Anglo-Maratha War
70. Treblinka extermination camp
71. USS Cincinnati (CL-6)
72. USS Kentucky (BB-66)
73. USS Lunga Point
74. USS Salamaua
75. USS Texas (BB-35)
76. USS Tucker (DD-374)
77. Uprising of Ivaylo
78. Walls of Constantinople
79. Wings (1927 film)
80. World War II
81. Battle of Osijek

Remaining

1. History of cannon
2. History of the United States Navy
3. Humphrey Atherton
4. Napoleon

Just looking at Monarch-class coastal defense ship and I think I need Sturmvogel 66's help. You added a ref to Sieche p250 in April this year, I see there's several publications it might be. Could you add the right one to the References section? Thanks - Dumelow (talk) 12:50, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Done.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:34, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Cheers, I've struck it from the list - Dumelow (talk) 17:48, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Aza24, you can use Petscan to run a query to list articles with template:good article and the MILHIST banner on the talk page that are also in Category:Harv and Sfn no-target errors. It throws up 103 articles. Some may be false positives that have already been discounted but some will be from the bottom end of the alphabet that User:Headbomb didn't get to before. If you remove the good article requirement you can get a list of 3,800 MILHIST articles in the error category - Dumelow (talk) 18:24, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

@Dumelow: - From a quick spot checks in there, it looks like the 103 is a mix of both. The false positives should be easy-ish to sort out manually, though. Hog Farm _Bacon 18:27, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

I've had a quick sweep through and think there are 39 which were not already covered or false positives and added these to the list above - Dumelow (talk) 08:02, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Nominations for military historian of the year for 2020 are open!

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Military historian of the year 2020

• 
  First place
• 
  Second place
• 
  Third place

As we approach the end of the year, it is time for us to nominate the editors whom we believe have made a real difference to the project. As part of the first step to determining this year's "Military Historian of the Year" award, all Milhist editors are invited to nominate those that they feel deserve a nod of appreciation for their hard work over the past 12 months. The nomination process will commence on 00:01 (GMT) on 2 December 2020 and last until 23:59 (GMT) on 15 December 2020. As the awards process is one of simple approval, opposes are deprecated. After that a new thread will be created and a voting period of 14 days will commence during which editors will be able to cast their simple approval vote for up to three of the nominees. At the end of this period, the top three editors will be awarded the Gold, Silver and Bronze Wiki respectively; all other nominees will receive the WikiProject Barnstar.

Please nominate editors below this line, including links in the nomination statement to the most significant articles/lists/images editors have worked on since 1 January 2020. Please keep nomination statements short and concise; excluding links to the articles/list/images in question, the ideal nomination statement should be about 20 words. Self nominations are frowned upon. Please do not vote until the nominations have been finalized. Thanks, and good luck! For all the coordinators, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 20:59, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Nominations

Editors are asked to keep their nominations to 10 editors or less and nominations should be made in the following format:

• [user name]: [reason] ~~~~

• Gog the Mild - Has brought many of the wars, battles, and leaders of ancient Carthage and Rome to GA/A-Class/FA this year, all the while keeping up a steady stream of high-quality reviews. Hog Farm _Bacon 05:06, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
• Djmaschek - Has created or expanded countless needed articles about battles, weapons, and units of the American Civil War, including M1841 24-pounder howitzer which solved an obnoxious redlink in one of my FAs. Hog Farm _Bacon 05:06, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
• Hog Farm: 56 GAs, 7 A class, 3 FAs since last November. Reviewed 250 GANs[!] - ACRs and FACs in proportion[!!] - all to a high level. New, active MilHist coordinator. Placed 5th in WikiCup. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:33, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
• Dumelow -- A milhist stalwart, Dumelow passed 500 did you know credits this year, including many high quality new articles on military history Helps around the project, too -- Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 12:28, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
• Buidhe -- Buidhe has a vast amount of content creation to their name (look no further than their user-page), much of it high-quality work on difficult topic of the Holocaust. Also, lots of great reviews. Awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves, the first time in over four years. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 12:28, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
• Sturmvogel 66 - I'm counting at least 63 bot notices for passed GAs on their user talk page for 2020 alone, likely more. A lot of GA/A-Class/FA throughput, and an active reviewer as well. Hog Farm _Bacon 16:48, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
• Peacemaker67 - Lots of great reviews, quite a bit of content work in a difficult subject matter (the Balkans), keeps the project running behind the scenes. Hog Farm _Bacon 04:49, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
• Zawed: for their excellent content work such as Leonard Trent, Haane Manahi and Percy Storkey, as well as reviewing and co-ord work. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:45, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
• Hawkeye7: for continuing to evolve Milhistbot and for his continued prolific high quality content work across a broad range of topics (such as Strategic Air Command in the United Kingdom, United States war plans (1945–1950), American logistics in the Northern France campaign, Manned Orbiting Laboratory (and many, many others) -- frankly I don't know how you maintain the rage! Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:45, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
• CPA-5 for many things, but especially for 157 detailed MilHist reviews Oct 19 - Sept 20, and for being an active MilHist coordinator. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:29, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Voting

Nominations for this year's "Military Historian of the Year" award have now closed, and it is time to vote for who you think deserves this honour. As with the awards for previous years, the second and third placed editors and all the runners up will also be acknowledged.

The nominees for this award and the statements given in support of these nominations are provided above. Voting can be done below by adding a hash sign (#) followed by the four tildes (~~~~) to nominee's sections. As the awards process is one of simple approval, opposes are deprecated.

All project members are welcome to vote, but are asked to vote for a maximum of three candidates. The winner will be the editor who receives the most 'support' votes by the time voting closes at 23:59 (GMT) on 30 December 2020.

Good luck to all the nominees! For the coordinators, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 21:01, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

• Gog the Mild

1. Not only writes diligently and well, but is the best at that often unsung outreach that makes a community and keeps editors here and feeling appreciated. Neopeius (talk) 19:53, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
2. --Catlemur (talk) 22:14, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
3. Incredibly prolific, high-quality work. Hog Farm _Bacon 05:28, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
4. AustralianRupert (talk) 08:44, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
5. Great contributor to the project, and tremendous output. Zawed (talk) 09:06, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
6. An obvious choice. Amazing articles, great support to others. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 09:36, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
7. Love the mate's work. But my other candidates would be CPA-5 and Hog Farm. All are great editors! --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 17:51, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
8. I haven't been as active on the project recently as I'd like but I try to keep up with the latest and greatest, and much of both continues to be produced by GtM. Chetsford (talk) 02:20, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
9. Tireless contributor. TeriEmbrey
10. Great reviewer, even greater content creator. Well-deserved. Constantine ✍ 19:19, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
11. Wonderful work, especially regarding ancient warfare articles.--Darius (talk) 20:05, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
12. Hit the ground running at MilHist -- and WP in general -- and hasn't let up. Outstanding articles, reviews and participation overall. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 03:47, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
13. Astonishingly prolific (and good!) content creator, reviewer, co-ordinator - Dumelow (talk) 12:04, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

• Djmaschek

1. Hard to believe I'm the first to vote for this user--Lineagegeek (talk) 00:47, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

• Hog Farm

1. Difficult to understand how we managed before Hog Farm was here. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:07, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
2. --Catlemur (talk) 22:14, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
3. AustralianRupert (talk) 08:44, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
4. Worthy of the double, outstanding by any measure. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 09:36, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
5. --Lineagegeek (talk) 00:47, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

• Dumelow

1. Tireless contributor. Hog Farm _Bacon 05:28, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
2. Another great contributor for the project. Zawed (talk) 09:06, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
3. --Lineagegeek (talk) 00:47, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
4. Stellar work, if I do say so myself -- Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 14:02, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
5. Has produced some great output. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:42, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

• Buidhe

1. A relentless image and source reviewer, who contributes a significant amount to the quality throughput of this project. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:32, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
2. Great reviews and content- Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 14:02, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
3. A great reviewer. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:42, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
4. Support -- Buidhe does outstanding academic work and is an enormous asset to the project. --Obenritter (talk) 00:21, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
5. A hell of an asset to the project.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:52, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
6. The third vote is always the hardest here but Buidhe earns it for meticulous reviews that we've really come to depend on at MilHist (and FAC) plus strong content creation in a challenging area. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 04:18, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
7. Of course! We are be thankful to have relentless image and source reviewer like Buidhe to improve this to a new level. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 22:43, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

• Sturmvogel 66

1. A relentless content machine. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 09:36, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
2. Full support MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:57, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
3. Support for the Cav.--Fondycardinals (talk) 02:24, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

• Peacemaker67

1. What can one say. Leads by example. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:07, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
2. Basically per Gog. Hog Farm _Bacon 05:28, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
3. AustralianRupert (talk) 08:44, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
4. A major asset for the project. Zawed (talk) 09:06, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
5. --Lineagegeek (talk) 00:47, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
6. Full support MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:57, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
7. The best. My full support, too. -- Hhfjbaker (talk) 00:01, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
8. Full support -- A true diplomat and a quality scholar. What some of us might call an "elite" admin.--Obenritter (talk) 00:21, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
9. Strong support. Chetsford (talk) 02:21, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
10. Full support - has stepped up to do some great work, from what I've seen. Nice one. Deathlibrarian (talk) 06:31, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
11. Definitely deserved, a project stalwart. Constantine ✍ 19:19, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
12. I probably bias my votes here more towards strong content creation and review than to leadership and participation in discussion but PM earns points an all counts, a great all-rounder. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 04:10, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
13. Support. An editor who has gone the distance with in depth contributions, this year and before. A pillar in the military history articles. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 04:22, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
14. Continued excellent project co-ordination work - Dumelow (talk) 12:04, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
15. Full support - high quality contributions! AntonyZ (talk) 21:41, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
16. The real godfather of the MILHIST. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 22:43, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

• Zawed

1. Hard to believe I'm the first to vote for this user--Lineagegeek (talk) 00:47, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
2. There are a couple editors I wanted to cast a third vote for and who probably equally deserve it. However, I'm exercising personal prerogative to cast this one for Zawed on the subjective basis of how much I have enjoyed their contributions. Chetsford (talk) 02:25, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
3. Tireless contributor TeriEmbrey

• Hawkeye7

1. Hard to believe I'm the first to vote for this user--Lineagegeek (talk) 00:47, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
2. Full support MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:57, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
3. Definitely!! Buckshot06 (talk) 01:43, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
4. Hawkeye's content creation is amazing, and his continued expansion of Milhistbot's skills is a huge benefit to the project. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:39, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
5. Support! AntonyZ (talk) 13:57, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
6. Have always been amazed at the quantity and quality of the contributions of this editor, this year and before. He should be voted Military Historian of the decade. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 04:09, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
7. Continued excellent content creation and reviewing work. Milhistbot has also done great things to clear some long-term backlogs this year - Dumelow (talk) 12:04, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

• CPA-5

1. An editor who put in a massive reviewing effort in the first half of this year, and it is good to see them back. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:32, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
2. Tireless contributor TeriEmbrey
3. Has put in a heck of a shift this year. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:06, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Nominations for military history newcomer of the year for 2020 are open!

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Military history newcomer of the year 2020

• 
  First place
• 
  Runners up

As we approach the end of the year, it is time for us to nominate the editors whom we believe have made a real difference to the project. In addition to the Military historian of the year, all Milhist editors are invited to nominate a promising newcomer that they feel deserves a nod of appreciation for their hard work over the past 12 months for the Military history newcomer of the year award. The award is open to any editor who has become active in military history articles in the last 12 months.

Like the Military Historian of the Year, the nomination process will begin at 00:01 (GMT) on 2 December 2020 and last until 23:59 (GMT) on 15 December 2020. As the awards process is one of simple approval, opposes are deprecated. After that a new thread will be created and a voting period of 14 days will commence during which editors will be able to cast their simple approval vote for up to three of the nominees. At the end of this period, the top editor will be awarded the Gold Wiki; all other nominees will receive the WikiProject Barnstar.

Please nominate editors below this line, including links in the nomination statement to the most significant articles/lists/images editors have worked on since 1 January 2020. Please keep nomination statements short and concise; excluding links to the articles/list/images in question, the ideal nomination statement should be about 20 words. Self nominations are frowned upon. Please do not vote until the nominations have been finalized. Thanks, and good luck! For all the coordinators, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 20:59, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Nominations

Editors are asked to keep their nominations to 10 editors or less and nominations should be made in the following format:

• [user name]: [reason] ~~~~
• Hog Farm joined us in November 2019. Since then has written 56 Good articles, 7 A class articles, and three featured articles, one of which qualified for a four award, meaning that Hog Farm created that article and built it up all the way to featured. Was elected a coordinator in September. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 05:00, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
• Kangaresearch: active since May 2020. Has unfortunately only worked on a few articles, but so far has produced some good work on some usually underworked topics (e.g. Nursing Service Cross and Australian Antarctic Medal). Hopefully these won't be their only articles. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:32, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
• User:IronBattalion: active since May 2020. Learning the ropes, but off to a good start -- working mainly on structural changes to Australian topics and improving the main Australian Army article. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:50, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Voting

Nominations for this year's "Military History Newcomer of the Year" award have now closed, and it is time to vote for who you think deserves this honour. As with the awards for previous years, all the runners up will also be acknowledged.

The nominees for this award and the statements given in support of these nominations are provided above. Voting can be done by adding a hash sign (#) followed by the four tildes (~~~~) to the nominee's section below. As the awards process is one of simple approval, opposes are deprecated.

All editors are welcome to vote, but are asked to vote for a maximum of three candidates. The winner will be the editor who receives the most 'support' votes by the time voting closes at 23:59 (GMT) on 30 December 2020.

Good luck to all the nominees! For the coordinators, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 20:59, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

• Hog Farm

1. Goodness. An inspiration! Neopeius (talk) 19:52, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
2. Massive first year. Massive. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:03, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
3. Per Peacemaker. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:04, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
4. Obviously.--Catlemur (talk) 21:10, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
5. Per my nomination above. Hard to believe that Hog Farm has only been here one year. Was editor of the week last week too. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:15, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
6. Everything I've seen from this editor bespeaks quality, attention to detail, and output, output, output. --Obenritter (talk) 00:25, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
7. Large contribution of high quality work. Donner60 (talk) 05:14, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
8. Without question. I knew I’d be voting this way months ago. -Indy beetle (talk) 06:56, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
9. Yep. Prodigious output. Zawed (talk) 09:00, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
10. Standout candidate, amazing output both in terms of quantity and quality, and has become a key part of the project, helping with maintenance and reviews. An excellent editor. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 09:29, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
11. Not much more to say. --Lineagegeek (talk) 00:43, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
12. Stellar contributor Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 23:06, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
13. Hog, your efforts in ACW articles has not gone unnoticed. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 23:43, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
14. Per Peacemaker & Gog. Hhfjbaker (talk) 00:03, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
15. Prolific editor who's dived deep into some of the less glamorous parts of Wiki. Very "coachable".--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:52, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
16. Excellent content work. (t · c) buidhe 00:05, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
17. Second Buidhe here...this is another that deserves recognition.--Obenritter (talk) 00:26, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
18. A tireless editor whose involvement has been nothing short of laudatory Chetsford (talk) 05:29, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
19. I am shocked to find out that Hog Farm is only in his first year here. Constantine ✍ 19:21, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
20. Piling on, Hog Farm seems to be everywhere (at my other haunt, FAC, as well as here) and contributing strongly all the time. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 04:21, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
21. Keeps the MILHIST family busy with the project's new front called ACW. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 22:54, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

• Kangaresearch

1. As my nom. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 08:43, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
2. Some nice work Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 23:06, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
3. Excellent contributions and overall support of the project Chetsford (talk) 05:29, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

• User:IronBattalion

1. As my nom. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 08:43, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
2. Fantastic all around work Chetsford (talk) 05:27, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
3. Thanks for all your hard work. TeriEmbrey
4. Goodness. An inspiration! Neopeius (talk) 19:51, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
5. Can't believe he's only been here a year, I come across this editor everywhere (in a good way!) - Dumelow (talk) 12:06, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
6. Am happy we have another Wikipedian to straight the units of the Australian Army and made some significant progress. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 22:54, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Vincent Barkly Molteno

Does anyone know his rank in December 1917? Thanks Keith-264 (talk) 00:28, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

@Keith-264, he was a captain when commended in September 1916 and still a captain when he was made a CB in June 1918. Alansplodge (talk) 15:49, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks very much. Regards (and happy New Year) Keith-264 (talk) 16:38, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Ottoman frigate Ertuğrul

Any help would be appreciated with a query concerning the naming of the Ottoman frigate Ertuğrul over at Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Humanities#Ertuğrul_the_boat. Alansplodge (talk) 16:18, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Many thanks User:Parsecboy. Alansplodge (talk) 15:53, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Resolved

Help tracking down a book

HI all. In working on Mercy dog, I came across a blog post by the British Red Cross (not the most RS) that says the following: Not many people will have come across Oliver Hyde’s book, The Work of the Red Cross Dog on the Battlefield, written in 1915. But in this long-forgotten book, a paean to the bravery of the daring canines, the author captures perfectly the value of the First World War’s most unlikely group of heroes. “To the forlorn and despairing wounded soldier, the coming of the Red Cross dog is that of a messenger of hope. Here at last is help, here is first aid. [The soldier] knows that medical assistance cannot be far away, and will be summoned by every means in the dog’s power. “As part of the great Red Cross army of mercy, he is beyond price.” Well not only have I not come across it, I've found no sign it ever existed-- Google, Worldcat, archive.org, and Amazon all draw blanks-- and all results for the quote seem to be drawn from the blog, or the blog is drawing it from one of the other sources. Could anyone help me track down this book? Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 22:18, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Just looked on bookfinder.com - no results. Maybe more of a pamphlet than a book? Lyndaship (talk) 16:26, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

This site lists an article entitled The Dog in Modern Warfare by Oliver Hyde on pages 371 - 378 of The Windsor Magazine [v41 #3, #242, February 1915] (London: Ward, Lock & Company, 120pp), that may be it - Dumelow (talk) 16:58, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Eddie891: Luckily Archive.org has it. Only had a quick glance but it looks to discuss the Red Cross dogs and may have some useful PD photographs - Dumelow (talk) 17:01, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Imperial War Museums also have some data on Red Cross dogs, including photographs. Farawayman (talk) 18:25, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks all, there looks to be good information there. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 13:28, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Eddie891, if you haven't seen it already, there's also The book of dogs; an intimate study of mankind's best friend (1919). Some of the illustrations are at Wikimedia Commons. Alansplodge (talk) 15:39, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Notice

Discussion proposing the merge of both General of the Armies and Admiral of the Navy into Six-star ranks in the U.S. armed forces to be found here. Cheers - wolf 16:10, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Help interpreting an 1837 memorandum

Hi all. I found a memorandum for the composition of the government's forces for Battle of Montgomery's Tavern but I struggle with understanding it and writing a paragraph about it. The document can be found here: [1].

I'm interpreting that the advanced guard is all under the command of MacNab, with three companies led by Nash, Coppinge and Garrett, but why are Draper and Sherwood listed without additional detail? Is this the same reason why Duggan, Gamble, etc. are listed separately under Two Guns? Are "Two Guns" "Artillery" and "Dragoons" referring to different sections of the forces? What is the information under "Dragoons" referring to? Basically, I am really struggling with what this document is supposed to tell me about the composition of the government's forces.

Please ping me in your response so I get the notification. I really appreciate your help. Z1720 (talk) 20:47, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

RfC on the first paragraph of ethnic cleansing article

Please see Talk:Ethnic cleansing#RfC. (t · c) buidhe 02:12, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Returning soldier effect

Members of this project might be interested in expanding this article. LearnIndology (talk) 18:07, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

French officer notability

Alexandre Fourchault has recently been created-- I'm struggling to see how he meets NSOLDIER or GNG, isn't even mentioned at the Mokrani Revolt article (which he was supposedly a main figure in). Those with more knowledge of french-related things may be able to weigh in. Thoughts? Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 13:25, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

• The Mokrani revolt article only mentions the overall French commander in its text and is highly incomplete, so that does not reflect on Fourchault's notability. Given that he commanded a 2,000-man column that stopped the Algerian rebel advance and is mentioned in a large number of publications about the revolt, I'd say that there are enough mentions to pass GNG, and that is only with PD sources. Unfortunately, none of the Algerian books about the revolt listed in the bibliography of the French wikipedia article are available on Google Books, but being mentioned in all the French histories of the revolt makes a strong case for his notability. Kges1901 (talk) 16:10, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Russia–Turkey proxy conflict

I welcome your input at this location: Talk:Russia–Turkey proxy conflict#Move portions to other articles, or what else? --George Ho (talk) 17:34, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

C showing up as Start

Noting an oddness -- when I ran Rater on Discoverer 11 (and Discoverers 3-10 for that matter), adding it to the MilHist Project and assigning it a C, the rating shows up as Start: Talk:Discoverer_11.

Any idea what's going on? --Neopeius (talk) 05:34, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

G'day, to show up as anything higher than start class the various aspects of the B-class checklist (B1 through to B5) need to be specifically assessed as yes or no in the template. B-class would require all five to be "yes", while C-class has its own requirements. For instance it could be no for B1 (references), but yes for B2 (coverage), B3 (structure), B4 (grammar) and B5 (supporting materials) and would equal C class. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 05:41, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Fascinating! Thank you. :) --Neopeius (talk) 05:54, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Note: as an experiment, it looks like the coverage yes/no (B2) is the C class qualifier. In other words, the article has to be good but incomplete in breadth to make C for MilHist. --Neopeius (talk) 19:17, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

The other option under our current system would be good and complete in breadth but unsuitably referenced, I believe. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 19:27, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Can confirm. :) --Neopeius (talk) 23:03, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Failure to meet B1 or B2 only (but not both) causes a C class. Both, or B3, B4 or B5 fail will cause it to be rated Start (even if you put class=C or class=B in the template). When the Bot assesses an article, ORES is used to determine B2. In other words, it will be accepted if it contains as much detail as a B, GA, A or FA article. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:34, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

What is "ORES"? I take it a bot looks for things like citation at the end of each paragraph? It's amazing how much can be automated! --Neopeius (talk) 23:37, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

G'day, I think you can find information on ORES here: [2]. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 03:14, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Non notable articles cleanup

Hi all, there are currently over 500 military and warfare articles tagged as being of unclear notability, if my search is right. Members of this project may be interested in helping assess their notability-- either removing the tag if they are notable or nominating for deletion if the topic isn't. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 17:04, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

This is a good project. I passed notability for Military_Secretary_to_the_Commandant_of_the_Marine_Corps. --Neopeius (talk) 18:37, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Good idea Eddie. Not all of these are within project scope (I am not sure what determines if the article gets placed into the "articletopic:military-and-warfare" category?). Petscan can do an intersection of pages with both Template:Notability and Template:WikiProject Military history which gives 558 results that might be easier to work with? I think this would be a good backlog to target for clearance - Dumelow (talk) 18:51, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Smart! Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 19:43, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Article Dokumacılar recommending deletion. Primary cause, alleged group, alleged attacks. Group size supposedly 60-70 which alone would give one pause because of the unit size, if it existed, and if it was involved. Both questions would take a lot of research to validate. Tirronan (talk) 00:37, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

More reviewers needed for a Milhist FAC

G'day all, Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ba Congress/archive1 has image and source reviews, and one editor has expressed an interest in reviewing, but it could do with a couple more, otherwise it is in danger of being archived. Any assistance would be appreciated. NB: My nom. Thanks in anticipation, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:07, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

This one is in a similar condition: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/SMS Gneisenau/archive1, which hasn't drawn much attention thus far. If you have the time, I'd appreciate it if you take a look. Thanks! Parsecboy (talk) 16:39, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Decided to have a stab at reviewing after a very long period of absence. I've chucked my two penn'orth in at Gneisenau and I'll see if I get time to look at Ba Congress tomorrow - Dumelow (talk) 19:00, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Dumelow, if you are on a roll, do feel free to move on to Battle of the Saw. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:05, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Is WW2 general Nikolai Vasilyevich Travin notable?

Ruwiki: w:ru:Травин, Николай Васильевич. Plwiki: w:pl:Nikołaj Trawin.

An article was written about him: User:Leaftree1. Cleaning up tags, references and fixing the image license (which is how I found this) etc is no problem for me, but if he's not considered notable (and I don't know much about this subject) I'd be wasting my time. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 17:35, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Generally (not pun intented, but aknowlged) Generals are assumed to be notable.Slatersteven (talk) 17:39, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

He appears notable. Kges1901 is our expert on Soviet generals -- he will organize and clean it up, though I can start. Buckshot06 (talk) 22:17, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

50th Wisconsin Infantry Regiment

Hi there. I'm currently in the process of expanding the article on the 50th Wisconsin Infantry Regiment, and I came across a source that seems reliable yet has very confusing information. The book and page are here. The excerpt that I can't make any sense out of is as follows: "There [at Fort Leavenworth] the Fiftieth assisted in quelling a mutiny which broke out in the Sixth Virginia, and spread through other regiments clamoring to be mustered out." The reasons this is so confusing to me is that the 50th was a Union regiment and the 6th was a Confederate regiment; the 6th Infantry and Cavalry were disbanded in April 1865 – when the 50th were in or on their way to St. Louis from Madison; and it seems weird that a Virginia regiment who ostensibly fought on the east coast would be in Kansas of all places. I asked my friend who's a US history buff, and he couldn't make heads or tails of it.

Barring some weird explanation like "The Confederate regiment was in mutiny over mustering out near the end of the war, so the Union soldiers helped quell the mutiny so the regiment could muster out", I really have no idea. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 23:56, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

TheTechnician27 I think it's the 6th West Virginia Cavalry Regiment, a Union unit that mustered out at Ft. Leavenworth in May 1865. WV was part of VA until 1863, so WV units were still occasionally referred to as VA units. Probably need a second source to explicitly tie it together, but it makes sense. Hog Farm _Bacon 00:07, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Correct, the 6th West Virginia Cavalry Regiment. Apparently some 190 of them refused to move to fight against the Native Americans when the war ended while their enlistment term still had a year left. ...GELongstreet (talk) 00:16, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Wow, thank you both so much; I can't say I expected such a knowledgeable answer this immediately, let alone two. So long as I can find a proper source or two about the Sixth West Virginian's service history, I should hopefully be able to get a second source attesting to the 50th's assistance in quelling the mutiny. If I do, I might also have to take it upon myself to expand the article on the 6th West Virginia, since more can probably be done there. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 00:29, 31 December 2020 (UTC)