User talk:GELongstreet

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

New kid on block with good intent[edit]

You look like you know how this works. Can you look at the Thomas Drayton talk page and see what I am trying to correct? I got labeled a level 3 spammer in my first minor revision attempt. I probably should have used the footnote but I am not sure. I read the blockers note to me but still am not sure what I did. I have been studying Wikipedia methods a lot but I am not being given much of a learning curve. Can you see and/or correct what I am trying to correct on the Thomas Drayton page? I also thought the map of the battle I mentioned on the Thomas Drayton talk page was excellent but I am unsure about the use of it etc. I might watch how you do things for awhile to see how things work. I found you under the American Civil War Task Force page. Thanks. JLQ23 (talk) 01:56, 24 October 2015 (UTC)JLQ23

  • Answered on your talk page ...GELongstreet (talk) 09:36, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
    • Thanks. You do good work! I'll get there.--User:JLQ23 —Preceding undated comment added 14:02, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Ordnance sergeant[edit]

And there are ordnance corporals and ordnance privates? There is nothing simple.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 16:42, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

  • There were enlisted men in the Ordnance Department other than ordnance sergeants - privates, artificers, corporals and sergeants; possibly of all grades; and officers. However they was no rank of ordnance corporal or something as it was just their service branch. Ordnance sergeant was created for their specific positions and duties while all others served in different capacities in the department. Means seargeant of ordnance is not the same as an ordnance sergeant, so I changed your picture link to the correct picture. Thanks ... GELongstreet (talk) 14:56, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

List of U.S. Army, Navy, and volunteer units in the Mexican–American War Comment[edit]

I am in the process of adding to your list. The U.S. Revenue Marine had several of their cutters assigned to the Army for use during river campaigns. Several of the cutters were assigned to the Navy by the Army. I will have this section cleaned up in a few days. I hope this doesn't interfere with your plans for the List Article. Additionally, I believe that there were several Navy ships used in the war that are not listed. Cuprum17 (talk) 01:28, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

  • It is not my list, I´m just the last one doing a bit of work there. If the list is anybodys it is from Asiaticus (talk · contribs). There definitely were Navy ships, they´re just not put on this list for now. Not my area of studies I have to admit. As far as I am concerned carry on as you please. ... GELongstreet (talk) 01:52, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

General Johnson[edit]

Hi GELongstreet,

I noticed that you did a copy-paste move of the General Johnson content to General Norman Johnson and changed General Johnson to a disambiguation page. If you would like to move the content from General Johnson to General Norman Johnson, use the Wikipedia Move tool. If you can't move the page, please open a request at Wikipedia:Requested moves to move the page. From a personal standpoint, I feel the content should stay at General Johnson, but either way, correct procedures need to be followed. Natg 19 (talk) 22:21, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

  • Answered you on your talk page ... GELongstreet (talk) 22:36, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Please be careful with redirected talk pages. The page you were editing [1] was not the page you wanted to edit [2]. I have moved your project banners to the correct talk page [3] and restored the talk page you blanked [4], which was associated with the biography article. You will need to fix all the incoming redirects to the disambiguation page, to point to the current article location. -- (talk) 08:13, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for supporting my RfA[edit]

Thank-you-word-cloud.jpg Hawkeye7 RfA Appreciation award
Thank you for participating in and supporting my RfA. It was very much appreciated. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:02, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your support[edit]

Peace dove.svg Peacemaker67 RfA Appreciation award
Thank you for participating and supporting at my RfA. It was very much appreciated, and I am humbled that the community saw fit to trust me with the tools. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:12, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

REL Dates of Rank[edit]

The citation for the addition of CSA Brigadier General for Robert E. Lee doesn't line up. Page 807 just lists the Generals (of which Lee is one). I don't have the full book, just the snippets available on Google Books, so I can tell if Lee is listed under CSA Brigadier Generals (which appear to somewhere between pages 809-811). If you have the full book can you please update the citation? Wiki publius (talk) 15:12, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

  • Fixed it; was page 810 though you´ve also find said dates on pages 344 and 790. A most excellent reference book ... GELongstreet (talk) 15:35, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your page on the 154th TN Senior Inf Reg[edit]

Thanks for putting all that information in the page, you obviously know way more on the regiment than I do! Sorry if I made it look ugly, I'm a new user, but I love the information and layout that was added. Thanks, - S — Preceding unsigned comment added by 154thTN Pvt. Seth Adam (talkcontribs) 13:09, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

  • You´re welcome. No need to apology, please keep on working here on wikipedia and the regiment's article as there's always stuff to do. ... GELongstreet (talk) 18:35, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Double listing in dab page[edit]

I thought I had raised this issue before, either with you or in a more general discussion, but I can't for the life of me find it. Apologies if this is duplication.

By this edit you removed one of the listings of John Brown Gordon from the John Gordon dab page. Gordon was both a Civil War general and a politician (Governor and U.S. Senator). I thought putting him in both categories served the readers the best. Someone who encounters a reference to Gordon elsewhere, and wants to know more about him, might come to the dab page and not want to wade through scores of listings to find the right one. Categorizing the listings is a big help. The problem is that some people might look under "Politicians" and others under "Military", depending on the context in which they saw his name. If he's in only one of the categories, some readers won't readily find him and will give up.

The question I thought I'd raised was why we should be averse to a "duplicative" listing when there's a good reason for it.

If you think we should not list Gen./Gov./Sen. Gordon twice, we should start a discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disambiguation, because this issue could affect other listings. JamesMLane t c 18:20, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the trouble to start that. It's become quite the edifying discussion. JamesMLane t c 18:41, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Battle of Caporetto statistics[edit]

I noticed you made an edit a few months back increasing the number of Italians involved in the Battle of Caporetto to 874,000, with your edit summary noting that the original lower number only included one of the two Italian armies involved and that casualty numbers were higher than the number involved. Do you have a source for 874,000? Since your edit, the "350,000 missing" have been correctly identified as having withdrawn rather than lost and so removed from the casualty totals, and I'm tempted to restore the original 400,000 number cited in the relevant source. Alcherin (talk) 12:33, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

  • The article itself says that there were 265k prisoners and 350k stragglers; which already far outnumber the 400k given as strength in the infobox and therefore make clear that something is wrong. Which is the original reason why I searched for other numbers of the total forces (where it isn´t relevant if they were lost of withdrawn) and took the numbers from the Italian casualties section in the German wikipedia article which gives the strength for the 2nd Army as ca. 667k and for the 1st as 207k; that section itself taking the numbers from the contemporary Austrian analysis reports. ....GELongstreet (talk) 13:26, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Hans Cramer[edit]

How is Hans Cramer's prior service relevant? What he is known for is his service in the WWII. The rest is just clutter. ÄDA - DÄP VA (talk) 16:41, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

  • Mostly known, yes, that`s why it could be enough information for the lead sentence but not for the infobox. It is factually wrong to write otherwise. He served from 1911 and during WW1. There was no Wehrmacht back then. I´ve seen you did so on many articles ... I´m going to restore the correct versions and if you can´t see my point I suppose you take this to the MILHIST project talk ... GELongstreet (talk) 16:48, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Nathan Bedford Forrest[edit]

I don't know how exactly to send messages but I think I'm this right. Just wanted to let you know I uploaded the same photo, just with a higher resolution. - S — Preceding unsigned comment added by 154thTN Pvt. Seth Adam (talkcontribs) 22:28, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Deleted Page and About K.e.coffman[edit]

I have oversighted the material in this section, which reveals off wiki contributions to other web sites. GEL. do not repeat this or you will be blocked. DGG ( talk ) 08:08, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

  • I was not the original poster of said material, so despite not agreeing with your decision I have no problem to say fine by me. ... GELongstreet (talk) 08:21, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

ANI notice[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Doxing_by_Special:Contributions.2F144.13.183.111. K.e.coffman (talk) 16:25, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

  • Thanks for notifying. Disagree, comment made. ... GELongstreet (talk) 16:55, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Hyphens in ranks during the American Civil War[edit]


American Civil War era ranks[edit]

Would you please stop removing hyphens I correctly put in American Civil War era ranks such as Lieutenant-Colonel, Major-General, etc. before consulting the following external links to contemporary Confederate States army regulations which clearly indicate hyphens as official standard for Confederate army ranks:

You may also want to consider consulting the voluminous correspondence within the Official Records of the War of the Rebellion as yet another additional source of American Civil War era rank usage.

"Thank You" for your service[edit]

One additional note...

I would like to thank you for your service in the Luftwaffe. I am a U.S. Army officer stationed in Europe, and am greatly impressed by the Bundeswehr's contributions to peace and stability within NATO.

Nothing else[edit]

Thanks. ...Lieutcoluseng (talk) 22:54, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

  • For the records, my digital copy of the 1863 regulations shows those ranks on page 1 without hyphens. But apparently the rest of the copy favours the use of hyphens, too, though it is not completely consistent with that just as your version. And in the end the same is true for the ORs. But I see your point and will no further interdict your hyphening. No hard feelings and thanks for contributing about the ACW ...GELongstreet (talk) 23:35, 23 March 2017 (UTC)