User talk:Eurocopter/Archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Russian Air Force

Eurocopter, PLEASE DO NOT 'update' the information in the RussAF article from the Geocities/9059 Pentagon site. It is incomplete, old, and inaccurate in several places. As I've said before, the most accurate site is Vad777's site, even if you have to get up very early so to view it a few minutes after midnight EST. I will now have to go back and re-do your edits!! Regards Buckshot06 13:31, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Pardon. Golts and Butowski are among the best informed journalist out there- I'm sorry about my assertions. I will have to find AFM Aug 07 myself. But think. If you had the info, but not the money, you could construct a huge site, but not have enough money to host it- and thus have to put it on a free site. Why the best? Because I've seen several things on his site which I've disbelieved, and later found out through other coroboration to be true! That's why I said what I said. I will change the orbat source to AFM Aug 07. Apologies and best regards, Buckshot06 11:40, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Great to hear ET. Where did you find them? And what do you mean by the AMF? the AV-MF? Cheers Buckshot06 20:16, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Best place would be the individual Fleet articles, though the Russian Navy page. For centrally controlled units, you could update and reorganise the Soviet Naval Aviation article to cover post-91 and put things there. Would be a good update generally. Great work. Also saw your first changes to the RLF page; good start; hope you're enjoying reading thu all those masses of CWIHP stuff. Cheers Buckshot06 20:31, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Good work on the 5th Air Army. PLease when you set up the WPMILHIST banner, add the appropriate task force tag (Russian-task-force=yes). Buckshot06 09:20, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Ro

Salut! Te-am gasit din greseala, dupa ce m-am uitat la Romanian Army, history contribution, si am vazut ca tu ai contribuit la articol ca sa fie promovat la GA. Bine ai facut. Daca te intereseaza chestii despre Ro si mai multe, poti sa vii la Wikipedia:Romanian Wikipedians' notice board. Sanatate si voie buna. --Thus Spake Anittas 21:32, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Pai pe Ro Wiki Notice Board poti cere ajutor in mai multe chestii si poti sa-ti gasesti colaboratori. Nu cred ca gasesti multi, deoarece majoritatea membrilor sunt interesati de comunisti, etc. Cred ca eu sunt singurul care am pus un efort mare in a crea articole despre batalii, majoritatea fiind din Evul Mediu. Daca te uiti pe pagina mea, ai sa vezi. Eu am sa incerc sa-l promovez pe Battle of Vaslui si cred ca o sa reusesc sa fac acest lucru anul acesta. Nu cred ca te pot ajuta prea mult cu articolul despre Apararea Ro, deoarece nu este un subiect in care pot contribui cu prea multe, dar poate ca unele din bataliile incepute de mine te pot ajuta (Battle of Marasesti, Targu Frumos, etc.). --Thus Spake Anittas 22:02, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Duplicate Image:Su25-TM.jpg

Information icon.svg

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:Su25-TM.jpg, by Staeckerbot (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:Su25-TM.jpg is a duplicate of an already existing article, category or image.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Image:Su25-TM.jpg, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it did not nominate Image:Su25-TM.jpg itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 21:54, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Su-25

Hello, I'm kind of busy in real life and with work at Wikipedia:WikiProject Peru. I'll try to give it a look over the weekend. Greetings, --Victor12 03:11, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XVI (June 2007)

The June 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 13:46, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Su-25 Copyedit

I went through your Su-25 article and copyedited a few sections. Take a look and see if it makes sense to you. JKBrooks85 15:31, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the Wikiwings! JKBrooks85 00:43, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Air force

I'd say it should stay at Romanian Air Force, where it is now. Common name and all that, you know. By the way, see my recent Prunaru Charge; do you think we could get up an article on the Roşiori? Biruitorul 19:16, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Images from www.aeronautics.ru

I have listed all of the images from aeronautics.ru at WP:PUI under a bulk listing. Your comments are welcome.Megapixie 11:54, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Problem with image tag in Image:Su-25Cockpit.jpg

The problem is as follows:

  1. Wikipedia only allows fair use images under extremely restrictive circumstances - i.e. WP:NFCC
  2. Images that have been granted wikipedia only permission {{Withpermission}} are only allowed to be used under the WP:NFCC criteria.
  3. When we ask someone to release the image to wikipedia they must permit:
  • Commercial use
  • Modification

We allow them to require attribution, as it's part of the GFDL (also cc-sa or cc-sa-by).

I dropped the author a mail and he responded very quickly but in somewhat rough (autotranslated ?) English - I'm not sure I understood his reply, and I'm not sure he understood the above terms.

  • Did he release the image as per above ? in which case we can change the tag back to {{attribution}}
or
  • Is he saying the image is wikipedia only ? in which case we cannot use the image - per 1 and 2, since the use of the image does not meet WP:NFCC ?

Megapixie 07:58, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I asked him to give me his permission to use Su-25 images taken by him on Wikipedia, and he accepted. That's all. I don't mind if you change the copyright tag into a proper one, I'm not an expert on image copyright tagging. --Eurocopter tigre 08:21, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Based on a mail exchange with me - I believe he didn't understand the implications of releasing the image. He said that we could only use the image as it was on airliners.net - i.e. no modification. This breaks the deal per the above. I will arrange to have the image deleted. Checkout Wikipedia:Requesting_copyright_permission#For_images which gives a guideline about how to do this. Sorry about all this. I really am trying to help here. It may pass a A-class article review in milhist with dodgy images, but it'll get torn apart by the time it reaches FA-review. Regards. Megapixie 22:37, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
I agree that it sounds stupid - but we must be able to re-distribute, modify and use commercially as a result of Wikipedia:Five pillars wikipedia as free content. Wikipedia only images could not be used by another project - for example http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Main_Page etc. Or any of our mirrors - for example answers.com. As a result we don't accept wikipedia only images that we couldn't use anyway under our WP:NFCC (i.e. without permission). This encourages people to create free images.
Where this is not possible - i.e. iconic images of historic events (Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima) and works of art that we are commenting on critically on we can use them in a limited way under WP:NFCC. I hope that explains things. Megapixie 22:57, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
The problem is that when I asked him specifically about commercial use and modification he replied:

I am sorry, but nor once providing betray into e - mail I beg to differ!! If her there do you want have, so only in form, in what was assumed from Airliners.net handsome day and I'm sorry

He was using automatic translation software, so a lot may have been lost in translation, but I believe he was indicating that he didn't want the image to be modified and was applogizing for not allowing us to modify it. Megapixie 23:02, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
The problem is right in the middle of that image template "Redistribution, derivative work, commercial use". Derivative work - i.e. modification must be permitted. Megapixie 23:06, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Any modification to the image must be allowed - cropping, rescaling, repainting (i.e. cloning out watermarks), using it in a montage - anything. Megapixie 23:24, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Mentatus

Hi. Unfortunately, I have no idea. Is he still active on ro wiki? Dahn 23:48, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

He must be a busy man, then. Though I wish he'd return soon. Dahn 00:03, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Other airliners.net images

Eurocopter, can you confirm that for the other images you have uploaded from airliners.net the authors gave permission inline with WP:COPYREQ#Declaration_of_consent_for_all_enquiries ? (i.e. allowing modification, commercial use, etc)

If you are sure that they have given their permission, then I would like to proceed with cropping the watermarks from the images.

If you are un-sure, could you seek clarification from the author(s). If they haven't given permission could you either tag them for speedy deletion {{db}} or change the tag to fair-use {{fairusein}} (which will probably result in their deletion).

Not to be dramatic but: As the uploader of the images the responsibility and potential consequences for the image's copyright status falls on you. Megapixie 05:18, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Have a look

At [1] and send it to others if you agree. all the best Lear 21 13:56, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

It would be helpful if you reinsert the EU entry to the list from time to time. There are two editors who constantly revert the inclusion and support would be much appreciated. all the best Lear 21 12:11, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Su-25 lead

Hello there, I'm kind of swamped right now, but I'll try to work on it tonight or tomorrow. Greetings, --Victor12 19:29, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I've just expanded the lead to three paragraphs. Check it out, --Victor12 00:37, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

List of countries by area 3RR violation

This is a content dispute and not vandalism. Please respect the WP:3RR policy. You have already reverted 5 times within the last 24 hours. The version prior to the controversial edit should be restored until some kind of agreement is reached. If you continue reverting against policy, there is a possibility that you may be blocked. Thanks. --Polaron | Talk 20:07, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Imagine that. I was going to report you for the same thing, and I see Polaron beat me to the punch. And yes, all 5 edits count as reverts made in an edit war. Parsecboy 20:34, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
I would like to suggest this.:Dc76\talk 17:32, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Oh, I had completely forgotten about it. No worries. Parsecboy 21:16, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Maistri militari

Salut! Am vazut ca te pricepi foarte bine la Armata Romana, si ai imbunatatit multe articole cu acest subiect. Problema in care as avea nevoie de ajutorul tau este cea a maistrilor militari, care sunt trecuti peste tot pe Wikipedia ca "Warrant officers". Maistri militari nu sunt warrant officers, ci doar "technical non-commissioned officers", deci insemnele lor de grad ar trebui trecute la "enlisted", la un loc cu sergentul major si plutonierii. Eu nu stiu cum sa schimb toate chestiile astea, asa ca te-as ruga pe tine, daca vrei, sa le schimbi. Rimush 08:36, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Puma SOCAT Helicopter.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Puma SOCAT Helicopter.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Denniss 13:40, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Alpini

Hi, I'm currently working on the creation of the Coat of Army of the Italian Army see here. At the moment I'm wotking on the Engineers, after that Signals, Army Aviation and Logistics. I guess this will take me 2-3 weeks more. After that I will return to the Alpini article. --noclador 14:28, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator selection

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by August 14! Kirill 03:05, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Superpower OR reversal

Please read my more in-depth explanation Talk: Superpower#Russia & OR and User_talk:Ash_sul#Superpower & OR and WP:SYNTH. Thank you & happy editing. Sijo Ripa 18:20, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Romanian Land Forces

Sure I can help ET. First, take a look at the Library of Congress country study- you'll find a link at the bottom of Military of the DRC, and the CWIHP documents I linked. Also take a look at www.orbat.com's history section for 1946-99; there's an outline OB there. Also you can talk to W.B. Wilson and ask him to send you the Romania section of Keegan's 'Armies of the World'. Once you've done digesting that, and this below (remember to cite it as 'Andy Johnson, Warsaw Pact Order of Battle etc') you can do some draft sections in a sandbox and I'll happily look at them. Cheers Buckshot06 06:14, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

WARSAW PACT ORDER OF BATTLE JUNE - 1989, Andy Johnson, sabre21@gateway.net, Last update: 27 May 00

    • Extract** RUMANIAN PEOPLE'S ARMY (RVA)

(Available as reinforcement for the CGF or SGF)

Note: The RVA consists of very out of date equipment, and in the event of war, would be used on secondary objectives. No Divisional Helicopter Squadrons present. You really don't want to commit these forces to the WGF/CGF. Other Army assets may be available other than shown below - see TO&E #2. Rumania refuses to participate in any Warsaw Pact exercises and is the least enthusiastic of the Soviet Allies, not allowing Soviet or other Warsaw Pact troops from crossing its territory. Wartime could prove interesting.

1. 1st RVA Army HQ - Bucharest, RU:

a. 4th RVA Tank Div (Cat A) - Bucharest, RU: see TO&E #5 with T-72, T-55, BMP-1, BTR-60, SA-6, D-30, D-20 b. 1st RVA Motorized Rifle Division (Cat A) - Bucharest, RU: see TO&E #4 with T-55, BTR-60, S-60, D-30, D-20 c. 1st RVA Mountain Brigade (Cat A) - North of Bucharest, RU: 2 regiments d. 1st RVA Artillery Brigade - Bucharest, RU: 36 M-46, 36 D-20

2. 2nd RVA Army HQ - Buzau, RU:

a. 7th RVA Motorized Rifle Division (Cat A) - Lasi, RU: see TO&E #4 with T-55, BTR-60, S-60, D-30, D-20 b. 19th RVA Motorized Rifle Division (Cat B) - Constanta, RU: see TO&E #4 with T-55, BTR-60, S-60, D-30, D-20 c. 57th RVA Motorized Rifle Division (Cat B) - Braila, RU: see TO&E #4 with T-34, BTR-152, S-60, SU-100 d. 2nd RVA Artillery Brigade - Buzau, RU: 36 M-46, 36 D-20

3. 3rd RVA Army HQ - Craiova, RU:

a. 2nd RVA Motorized Rifle Division (Cat B) - Craiova, RU: see TO&E #4 with T-55, BTR-60, S-60, D-30, D-20 b. 8th RVA Motorized Rifle Division (Cat B) - Tinnsora, RU: see TO&E #4 with T-55, BTR-60, S-60, D-30, D-20 c. 3rd RVA Mountain Brigade (Cat A) - Craiova, RU: 2 regiments d. 3rd RVA Artillery Brigade - Bucharest, RU: 36 M-46, 36 D-20

4. 4th RVA Army HQ - Cluj, RU:

a. 6th RVA Tank Division (Cat A) - Dej, RU: see TO&E #5 with T-55, BTR-60, SA-6, D-30, D-20 b. 81st RVA Motorized Rifle Division (Cat A) - Tirgu Mures, RU: see TO&E #4 with T-55, BTR-60, S-60, D-30, D-20 c. 11th RVA Motorized Rifle Division (Cat A) - Oraden, RU: see TO&E #4 with T-55, BTR-60, S-60, D-30, D-20 d. 2nd RVA Mountain Brigade (Cat A) - Bistrita, RU: 2 regiments e. 4th RVA Artillery Brigade - Bucharest, RU: 36 M-46, 54 D-20 (18 per battalion)

5. 161st PVA Airborne Regiment (Cat A) - Buzau, RU: see TO&E #14 (no BMD's) 6. 2 RVA SSM Brigades: 12 SCUDb per brigade 7. 1st RVA Marine Infantry Battalion (Cat A) - Constanta, RU: 34 BTR-60, 3 120mm mortar, 9 SA-7

Romanian Division Graphic

A OrBat Graphic like this? :-) --noclador 12:54, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Romanian Land Forces

Eurocopter, which period of history are you interested in? I'll be happy to send excerpts. W. B. Wilson 15:36, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

man stop

stop fucking removing the informations on the freaking bloody syrian army you are not the best one who knows about the army man read the articles about the su-27 and you will see that syrians have the freaking su-27 plz stop that we are not playing a game here

Romania in the Cold War

Eurocopter tigre, Your article already explains the communist takeover of Romania and the Romanian Army in as much detail as Keegan does. He does mention the following about the Cold War years which might prove useful for you:

"The army was at its peak size in 1953-5; it was reduced in 1955-8 and again in the early 1960s. . . . Romania has pursued an increasingly independent line on foreign policy, particularly with regard to her relations with China and the West, since 1963. In 1964 Romania reduced the basic term of military service, probably against the wishes of the Warsaw Pact command. Romanian troops did not participate in the invasion of Czechoslovakia, and Ceausescu criticised not only the invasion itself but also the subsequent Brezhnev doctrine. . . . Political control of the army is achieved through the (Armed Forces) ministry's Central Political Office, whose officers are attached to all formations and units. Romania is divided into three military districts. . . . All Romanian forces are stationed within the borders of Romania, and there have been no Soviet troops permanently stationed in Romania since 1958. . . . There are about 450,000 regular army reservists who would be used to bring the army's field formations up to strength on mobilisation. The Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia gave impetus to the law of November 12th, 1968, which created the present People's Militia and territorial defence system. There is a wide liability for service in the People's Militia which is armed with a variety of weapons, most of them obsolescent, and carries out part-time training. (Text by Richard Holmes in 1979).

Other comments - the article's introduction mentions Romania fighting with the Nazis during World War II but does not mention the subsequent fighting against the Nazis which cost Romania almost half as many men again. The article later mentions the Romanian First and Second Armies going to fight the Germans; it was the First and Fourth Armies (check out my order of battle chart at Battle of Debrecen (Order of Battle for Second Ukrainian Front, October 1944)). Your article may also wish to note that Romanian forces played a key role in the capture of Debrecen in October 1944. Cheers, W. B. Wilson 05:20, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

WP:CVU status

The Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit project is under consideration to be moved to {{inactive}} and/or {{historical}} status. Another proposal is to delete or redirect the project. You have been identified as a project member and your input as to this matter would be welcomed at WT:CVU#Inactive.3F and at the deletion debate. Thank you! Delivered on behalf of xaosflux 16:14, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Super Hornet talk, pylons

Thanks. I had decided that my reply this morning was it for me on the pylon cant thing. Replying there to your comment wouldn't help any. Take it easy.. -Fnlayson 20:35, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Novi Avion

I posted this at WT:AIR, and thought I'd make sure you got it, just in case you don't watch that page. You're a bit closer to the former Yugoslavia, so maybe you can help me clean up this page, if you're able and want to. THanks.

I recently discovered the Novi Avion page, and it needs a LOT of help. It lists two vague sources, and none are cited in the article. It doesn't specify who the manufacturer was, so I'm not able to find it in any of my printed sources. Then there's the fanboy IP who keeps adding stuff like (had not Yugoslavia being broken up and socialism having not collapsed two years earlier, and since not only would it have served Yugoslavia's airspace well. I could use some help from someone who is either more familar with the plane, or who has access to other material, perhaps even from non-English sources. Thanks. - BillCJ 04:35, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

WPMILHIST Assessment Drive

Hi Eurocopter, thanks for your endorsement of the DRC article. Noticed you'd been creating talkpage tags for some articles, and thought i'd ask: when you do, could you also delete the corresponding entry in the linked assessment page, accessible thu the 'what links here' link. Every little bit helps when we're working thu 165,000 pages! Cheers Buckshot06 17:27, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Revert wars etc

Hi, the anon I reverted (80.253.144.238) was an open proxy, obviously banned User:Bonaparte (who's been making such attacks against Anonimou for a while). So, you might want to avoid allying yourself too much with him. By the way, please also avoid personal attacks such as calling another editor's good-faith attempts at NPOV'ing an article "communist vandalism" ([2]). I don't know what your opinion is about this, but for somebody to want to avoid the term "liberation" for an attack made during WWII by an ally of the Germans against the Soviet Union, preferring the neutral term "recapture" instead, is certainly not something I'd dismiss out-of-hand as illegitimate. Fut.Perf. 13:20, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

While I was writing the above, you also continued your revert war. I first thought you'd actually violated 3RR and was going to block you, but it turns out the first of your reverts was a few days ago, so you get off with just a warning for now. (But mind that 3RR isn't an entitlement and some other admin might actually have blocked you nevertheless for edit-warring.) Fut.Perf. 13:25, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Hmm, feel free to "report" me - where? what for exactly? Sorry for the mistaken block, but as I said, you are actually lucky, I could have legitimately blocked you anyway. Plus, I now find you called A's edits "communist vandalism" not just once but you have a longstanding habit of doing this. This makes it a persistent pattern of personal attacks and harassment, which is blockable all in itself. So, if you are truly concerned about keeping your block log clean from "abusive" blocks, be careful you don't get it soiled with justified ones instead, sooner than you might think. To make this clear: one more attack against A. and you're out, and a good deal longer than for 24h. And next time you're in an editing dispute with the guy, you'd better show some constructive consensus-oriented talk page activity. Fut.Perf. 13:50, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

edit summaries

hi there,

Please stop using uncivil edit summaries, for example those in your recent edit wars with Anonimu. I don't know which of you is right and I don't care, but incivility helps no one and, frankly, hurts the entire project. Please try to be more civil in the future. (FYI I am sending Anonimu this same message, I'm not singling you out.) K. Lásztocska 13:48, 15 August 2007 (UTC)


Libya

operate 4 An-32P Firekiller , 2 An-72 ,2 An-74 ,2 An-124. the -32 are both cargo/fire-fighters , the 72/74 transport/VIP , the -124 transport , one of them is leased to U.A.E . the 32/72/74/124 are painted white with little green colour. the 4 -32 has each 2 tanks painted red . officialy operated by Libyan cargo but really belong to the Air Force. the A-109 i am not sure if exist. Libya recently ordered 15 Agusta Helicopters. but these older helicopters if exist in inventory i am not sure. Also their is at 29-31 October the LAVEX-2007 excibition/air show in Tripoli Libya. i want to belive that Tiger helicopter will be their because Libya is interesting to buy 12-20 Tigers . also their is interest for the Rafale that took part in last LAVEX-2006 . John, Athens 16/8/2007

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators from a pool of fourteen candidates to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by August 28! Kirill 01:19, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

3rr block

Hi. You have been blocked from editing for 24 hours due to a 3rr violation ([3], [4], [5], [6], etc.). Please be more careful in the future. Thx. El_C 10:28, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This blocked user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Eurocopter (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribs deleted contribscreation log change block settingsunblockfilter log)


Request reason:

The first revert for which I was blocked for, was made on 15 August, 13:18; second revert on 16 August, 12:18; third on 16 August, 19:50; fourth on 16 August, 19:58. So, that means four reverts in more than 30 hours. Where did I violate the 3RR?

Decline reason:


If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired.

--Eurocopter tigre 10:42, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

  1. 8:18 (reverting "second only to Poland among the Warsaw Pact"
  2. 15:50 reverting recapture-liberation
  3. 15:58 and again
  4. 5:03 and again. El_C 11:00, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that the 4th edit wasn't a revert. I changed a bit the modifications made by User:K. Lastochka (he rewrote almost the whole sentence), by replacing the word "regaining" with "liberation" - please check this up, because I'm sure it wasn't a revert. --Eurocopter tigre 11:06, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Read the policy: An editor must not perform more than three reverts, in whole or in part. You have switched "recapture" with "liberation," which was the key word with respect to the prior reverts and which I, thus, am counting as one, as well. El_C 11:30, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
Please don't try to game 3RR -- the ultimate goal of the policy is to prevent edit warring, not to provide an entitlement; if you check the policy:
"The rule does not convey an entitlement to revert three times each day, nor does it endorse reverting as an editing technique; rather, the rule is an "electric fence". Editors may still be blocked even if they have not made more than three reverts in any given 24 hour period, if their behavior is clearly disruptive. This particularly applies to editors who persistently make three reverts each day, or three reverts on each of a group of pages, in an apparent effort to game the system."
Given a (released) block just a few days ago on similar grounds, it doesn't seem this message is sinking in. Leaving this request up for a fourth opinion. – Luna Santin (talk) 11:25, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Note that in the fourth "revert" I changed regaining with liberation, not recapture with liberation. Also, for Luna, you can't say I'm an disruptive editor as long as almost the entire article is written by me, and the history sections are based on Wikipedian Romanian history articles. Just check out User:Anonimu's history and you shall see he is always introducing false informations which reflect his own political views - that's why he is often in conflicts on many talk pages and involved in edit warrings with other Romanian users. Again, as I edited almost the entire article, it's very hard for me to leave a user such as Anonimu to screw up my work - and I'm still the one blocked for this. --Eurocopter tigre 12:42, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

The point is that you restored liberation again, that's what makes it a revert. El_C 12:46, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

I restored liberation because it is a true historical fact and it fitted better in the sentence. However, I'm still shocked that my behaviour can be categorized as "disruptive". I really think that admins have the most disruptive behaviour, when they are blocking, for restoring a single word, effective users which would be able to improve lots of things within 24 hours - that's truely disruptive for Wikipedia. --Eurocopter tigre 13:07, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Whether it is "an historical fact" is subject to debate and is, in any case, entirely irrelevant to the 3rr. El_C 13:18, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

However, I'm still going to put it back with a reference after the block expires - and you'll see that your block was entirely irrelevant. --Eurocopter tigre 13:34, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

I have no further comment at this time. El_C 13:38, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
Finally. --Eurocopter tigre 13:46, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

User:El C should consider blocking User:Anonimu for the same reason he blocked me few hours ago. "Editors may still be blocked even if they have not made more than three reverts in any given 24 hour period, if their behavior is clearly disruptive". --Eurocopter tigre 16:19, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Ka-50/Ka-52

I know you can't respond off this page right now, but I wanted to let you know that an admin, user:Maury Markowitz, has merged the pages per [this diff]. I had planned on letting the discussion run at least a week. When you get back, if you would like to keep the poll going for a few more days after that point, I have no problem with that. Yes, I want the pages merged, but I also want to do it in the fairest way possible. If you feel this propsal was not handled fairly, then I have no problem continuing the poll, and even undoing the merge if the poll goes that way. Enjoy your vacation! - BillCJ 16:03, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

That's ok, even if we merge them now or after one week, it's the same bloody thing. However, if we'll find some sources and potential to expand the Ka-52 article, we can split them in the future. Anyway, thanks for announcing me! --Eurocopter tigre 16:11, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

Dear Eurocopter Tigre
I award you this Military Barnstar for your contributions to military articles in general and Romanian military in particular. I wish you the best of luck in the current MILHIST coordinator elction.
Kind regards and happy editing
Mads Angelbo Talk / Contribs 20:59, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Tigrule

Tigrule, ar fi bine sa faci un raport 3RR pentru Anonimu. Sper sa fie blocat definitiv.--213.132.44.92 14:19, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Unde si cand a incalcat 3RR? --Eurocopter tigre 16:18, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Please keep talkpage communication accessible to other users. This is the English Wikipedia. Bishonen | talk 16:54, 22 August 2007 (UTC).

Urgent request

Don't put that template back on El C's page again. Bishonen | talk 16:54, 22 August 2007 (UTC).

Can I kindly ask you why? Isn't my right to warn users which are deleting content from my own talk page? --Eurocopter tigre 17:02, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

  • {{uw-delete}} is for removing article content. Perhaps you meant to use {{uw-tpv}}. Either way, a simple question about why the content was removed or a note about why you want non-English conversations on your talk page would have made your point much clearer than a template. For instance, the template directs the recipient to the sandbox. Do you earnestly believe he was making a test edit? Leebo T/C 17:10, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

No, I don't believe he was doing a test edit. Ok, I'll note that, but I wanted to make sure that he realises that he mustn't delete comments on my personal talk page. Best regards --Eurocopter tigre 17:15, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

It's not your personal page, it's part of the English Wikipedia. Don't use it for non-English communication, please. I suggest e-mail as an alternative. It's inappropriate to converse on this page in languages which most other users can't understand. Eller gillar du om jag skriver så här? Bishonen | talk 17:25, 22 August 2007 (UTC).

Pardon the butting in. Eurocopter, I agree that you shouldn't put a warning template on El C's page. I also think that El C shouldn't generally revert messages people leave you. No idea what this particular message said. If it were trolling or a personal attack I can see why he removed it, otherwise I don't know why he would revert it. Friday (talk) 17:30, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Nej men nu lägger Fredag näsan i blöt också, jag ger upp. Bishonen | talk 17:32, 22 August 2007 (UTC).

If somebody doesn't speak english very good, why can't he leave messages for me in my native language? I think it's better speaking in the native language, rather than embarassing yourself with a bad english, especially if the other user speaks the same language at a native level. I don't mind if somebody leaves messages on my talk page in any languages mentioned on my Babel (see my user page) - I think slovenian isn't mentioned. --Eurocopter tigre 17:40, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Seems reasonable to me. You're probably better off explaining this to El C than leaving him some standard template. Wikipedia:Don't template the regulars is an essay, yes, but it makes some good points. It can come off as rude to leave some standard warning message as you did. Friday (talk) 17:43, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
(ec) That's acceptable. Keep in mind that it is generally preferable for you or someone else to provide translations to non-English discussions on your talk page, so that others may read the comments. Leebo T/C 17:44, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Also, as long as we're talking etiquette, you should not change the signed comments of other editors. Friday (talk) 17:46, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Comments removal from my talk page is also considered rude by me. I have many better things to do on wiki, rather than translating comments, seriously. Anyway, this was an exception, how many comments in foreign languages can you find on my talk page? --Eurocopter tigre 17:48, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Several, but it was just a suggestion. Leebo T/C 17:56, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, but no thanks. Users shall feel free to post messages on my talk page in any languages mentioned in my Babel. Best, --Eurocopter tigre 18:04, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

WP:BAN#Enforcement_by_reverting_edits: Any edits made in defiance of a ban may be reverted to enforce the ban, regardless of the merits of the edits themselves. As the banned user is not authorized to make those edits, there is no need to discuss them prior to reversion. Other users are generally expected to refrain from reinstating any edits made by banned users. El_C 20:32, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

You do not own your talk page and do not get to keep comments from banned users. Charging vandalism is an enormous assumption of bad faith on your part. Ask, or even assume I know what I'm doing, before jumping to the conclusion that it's malice. Assuming good faith is policy here. El_C 20:39, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

How could I knew that he was a banned user? I'm always trying to assume good faith - that's why I put he's comments back. Eurocopter tigre 21:12, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Please review

Please review my edits of the number of Typhoons in the Italian Air Force. I've fixed it three times now, included a reference, and yet some anonymous person keeps breaking it.

I'm not mad; I'm just trying to get this person's attention. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kitplane01 (talkcontribs) 06:29, August 28, 2007 (UTC)

Coordinator election

Congratulations! You have been elected to serve as a coordinator of the Military history WikiProject. When you get a chance, please stop by the coordinators' work area and take a look at the various open tasks and ongoing discussions there. Kirill 00:29, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Congrats!

Assistant Cooridinator of the Military History Wikiproject, August 2007 — February 2008

Congrats on your election as an assistant coordinator. In honor of your achievement, I present you with these stars. I wish you luck in the coming term. TomStar81 (Talk) 01:01, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Congrats to you on your election as an asst coordinator! I look forward to working with you in the future. LordAmeth 13:47, 29 August 2007 (UTC)