User talk:W. B. Wilson

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

#1 1/07 - 2/08,
#2 2/08 - 12/09,
#3 1/10 - 12/10,
#4 1/11 - 12/11
#5 1/12 - 12/12

Happy New Year from Aotearoa!![edit]

Talk:Belgian Army#Requested move - would you kindly consider providing some input at this RM? Buckshot06 (talk) 02:32, 5 January 2013 (UTC)


Hi W. B. Wilson. This is just a courtesy note to tell you that I've struck one of your votes at the requested move discussion on this talk page. You had two support votes down, which is one more than you're allowed unfortunately. Regards, Ranger Steve Talk 09:41, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Ayers Kaserne[edit]

Actually I disagree: think the disambiguating words are helpful. Buckshot06 (talk) 04:47, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

U.S. Army Ryukyu Islands[edit]

Do you have anything on this command - raison d'etre, commanders, HQ locations, dates established/deactivated, subordinate units/formations etc? Buckshot06 (talk) 04:02, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Another one. The 10th Armored Division (United States) article says it was reactivated as a U.S. Army Reserve unit in 1946 or so. Cannot find any such information; can you clarify? Cheers Buckshot06 (talk) 05:29, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
Just wanted to congratulate you on all your hard work on List of French divisions in World War II - it's a great reference article. Buckshot06 (talk) 02:17, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Lloyd Fredendall : thanks for your kind answer[edit]

Merci beaucoup, cher collègue, pour ton aimable réponse à ma question d'avril 2008 sur Lloyd Fredendall ("Tout vient à point à qui sait attendre", dit-on chez nous). Réponse sans une faute de français (normal : tu as des ancêtres wallons ! ;-) ) , à part (dommage) à la dernière ligne ( ExcuseZ, faiblE )...

As you may see on my User Page roster, I wandered after Fredendall into A.C.W., then into Spanish Civil War, and was intrigued by the queer destiny of those poor German men who fought in WW I, escaped nazi Germany in 33, fought in 36-39 in Spain, were squalidly stored away by France, then delivered to Gestapo, and whose survivors tryed to built a land, and were superseded and-or decimated by their kins who had stayed safely in Moscow for 15 years... I now focus on Hans Beimler , one of those "cocus de l'Histoire" , & try to find precise sources showing up he was shot in the back in 36 in Madrid by Richard Staimer , who 20 years later became an aparatchik in DDR while Baimler was officially installed as an anti-fascist heroe ... I find Der Speigel an interesting next-to-contemporary source, as you may see in the 1956 article "Verrirte Kugeln" ([1]) . If you care to cast a glance at it, you'll see it points at the end to 3 other articles about Beimler's death (Aufbahrung des Politkommissars Beimler (1936): Woher kam der Schuß? - Sowjetzonale Ernst-Beimler-Medaille: Vorbild proletarischen Kämpfertums - Spanienkämpfer Rau, Staimer (l. u. M.): Neuentdeckte Tradition) . I see on your UP that you are very fluent in German, & you look quite deft at handling links...Could you please help me in the research of those 3 articles ? I've tryed again & again to find them on Der Speigel's site, but fruitlessly...With my beforehand thanks for your time, t.y. BTW I also have walloons ancestors, funny to think that they maybe got in touch some centuries ago ..."Le monde est petit ! " as we say here ) Arapaima (talk) 09:18, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Merci beaucoup, cher Wilson, ce lien me semble très intéressant. T.y. Arapaima (talk) 16:31, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Soviet 38th Army[edit]

I hope that you can help with a correction to the February to July 1942 section of this article where, towards the end, there is a blind link to the Soviet 21st Army. In fact there is an extensive article on the Soviet 21st Army and the link should be to there. Unfortunately I do not know how to create the required link. Max Payload (talk) 16:52, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Update 24 February -Thanks for responding so promptly. Max Payload (talk) 16:15, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Soviet tank left red.png missing description details[edit]

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot (error?) 09:16, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

11th Guards Mechanised Brigade[edit]

Thanks for checking with me Mr. Wilson. The MILUNIT rule is that the most recent name of the formation/unit should be used; that's why I decided to create the 120th Guards Mech as 120th Guards Mech, rather than 120th Guards RD, which would have probably been the title with the most WP:RSs heading to it. Also means the entire history of the unit can be covered. Cheers Buckshot06 (talk) 06:35, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

6th TC, yes, 6th TD (pre-war) no. My intent in gathering all the 9th TD information together was to create one article for all references to Sov formations that were designated '9th TD' (we may eventually split it out much much later, when we get good histories of the 1938-41 tank divisions). So that would be the same for 11th Guards TD or previously TC. Because it was formed from a non-Guards formation, we can include 6th TC. But including 6th TD violates the above rule, and causes confusion with 6th GTD as I think it was.
Also many many many kudos on 11th Tank Division, especially since it was disbanded in the 1950s. Cheers Buckshot06 (talk) 06:57, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
I assume this is the 57-65 period, or maybe the Mech Div/Tank Div reorg of the 1950s. One simply has to try and present things in a way that non-specialists will best understand. Going with the apparent Soviet intent of '65 to go back to the 1945 designations, my view would be to put the few years of the 6th TD in the 19th TD article, noting the designation change as per 90th Guards Tank Division infobox or your splendid new 11th TD infobox. Happy to discuss - no rights or wrongs here. Buckshot06 (talk) 07:08, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
Agree. Suggest we crack on with the 19th GTD article in the near future as well. The problem is that the best sources readily available are not clear on the final VKhVT designation or current status. Buckshot06 (talk) 08:09, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
Great work!! Needs however to be linked at any other armies beyond 1st Guards Tank Army that it was subordinate to during the war. Cheers Buckshot06 (talk) 09:01, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
'Ranged among the Guards' is the GTranslate of Russian references to it, and makes sense in English - sort of [ar]ranged as part of serried ranks of Guards units marching past the Red Square saluting base. But it's your article, make the change as you will. Buckshot06 (talk) 09:11, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
Great work on 9th Guards Motor Rifle Division ! Will need to be mentioned in a few places, like Transbaikal Military District etc. I can help with that. Buckshot06 (talk) 21:34, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Belgium in World War II[edit]

Hello W.
I'm sorry if I sounded a bit brusk on the edit summaries I made. The areas you mentioned are certainly important. Personally I prefer "American" as an adjective over U.S., but I'd appreciate it if you could make the changes from US to U.S. throughout. What you say is quite right after all. Would you be interested in picking up the GA summary? The half-completed GA reviewing page can be found here, I'm sure it would be fine to continue it?
By the way, the Battle of the Bulge is not something I know much about; if you could add something into the (empty) section on the subject in Luxembourg in World War II also, that'd be much appreciated!
All the best & thanks for your help! ---Brigade Piron (talk) 20:58, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello, would you still be willing to do the GA review? I got the feeling from the previous reviewer that there was not a great deal of work needed anyway! All the best! ---Brigade Piron (talk) 18:20, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
Thank you so much! It's probably best to start a new review (I think Retro-lord's review has been closed, I don't know if its possible to reactivate) but thank you again! ---Brigade Piron (talk) 08:40, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, W. B. Wilson. You have new messages at Ezhiki's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

62nd Army[edit]

No need to amalgamate this article - once it's properly written up, could easily be 60k+ about it's year of operations. Buckshot06 (talk) 01:26, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Your input sought![edit]

Hi W.B.,
Sorry to keep pestering you for help like this! I just wondered if you might be able to start the section on the Battle of the Bulge in Luxembourg in World War II#Battle of the Bulge? It's unfortunately not a topic I know well at all! All the best, ---Brigade Piron (talk) 12:28, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Tireless Contributor Barnstar Hires.gif The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For really impressive and diligent contributions to Belgium in World War II and othersBrigade Piron (talk) 19:55, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

SS Panzer Corps July 1943, Frieser[edit]

(Requests for Battle of Prokhorovka)

Sorry to pester you with these requests:

1) Please can you provide me the context of the 41 damaged tanks and AGs attributed to the SS Panzer Corps by Frieser's Die Ostfront 1943/44, page 130. From what Glantz has, which is 42, I suspect the figure is from the difference between the on-hand tank strengths of 11 and 13 July, but I don't want to get ahead of myself until I confirm with you.

The figures are given for the 1st and 2nd SS Divisions for the report of 12 July 1943. The figure is for vehicles with "long term" (serious) damage, and Frieser states the figure includes some damaged vehicles from previous days, but does not specify further. He mentions there were also 67 vehicles with "short term" damage, mostly damaged radio antennas.

2) Please can you confirm that the 3 tank losses stated on page 132 (Frieser) is only for LSSAH on 12 July. This article Vor 60 Jahren: Prochorowka (Teil II) mentions that the 3 tank losses were only for LSSAH (unless Google Translate messed big time).

Don't see anything about this on page 132. Page 133 includes a graphic that shows three German tank losses, but does not specify the unit that had the losses.

3) Does Frieser give the WIA-KIA-MIA breakdown of the 522 casualties?

He does not.

Thanks in advance. EyeTruth (talk) 05:51, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

W. B. Wilson (talk) 15:26, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I made a mistake for the 3 tank losses. It is supposed to be on page 130 instead. Also, to confirm, the 41 losses are essentially long term motor vehicle damages (including soft-skinned and AFVs), right? And are they from II SS Panzer Corps archival data? (I really feel like I'm bothering you too much but please bear with me for a little bit more). EyeTruth (talk) 19:06, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

The "41" figure is for tanks and assault guns. The loss of three tanks is tied with II SS Corps but I don't see a division specified in Frieser's text. The data all seems to be taken from II SS Corps archives. The interesting thing about the loss of the three tanks noted is that they could not be recovered because of Soviet fire (thus they were a "total loss"). For me, this is where I have doubts about our (I mean Wikipedia's) way of comparing losses. The Prokhorovka article shows 144 or 334 Soviet armored vehicles destroyed. But if we were to apply what the standard for what the Germans called a "total loss", then the Soviets would have zero losses because, ultimately, most of those destroyed vehicles were likely recovered. Kind of makes one wonder how the Soviets defined "irrevocable loss", because it sounds like it does not mean the same thing as what the Germans meant by "total loss". Considering the 41 German vehicles with long-term damage, they probably met the conditions for being considered "knocked out" or "out of action"; making the total for German vehicles knocked out in the battle at least 44. This is not something that we can resolve as editors, but a note discussing this issue might be useful in the "Notes" section of the article. W. B. Wilson (talk) 05:06, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Yup, you nailed it. I will eventually get to that. An interesting stuff is that according to the study by the U.S. Army Concepts Analysis Agency (Kosave II), a good number of the tanks losses classified as damaged (that is, withdrawn to repair shops) actually never made it back to the front line, or at least not before 18 July. According to the study, the average ratio of Soviet to German tank losses (destroyed, total loss) in the southern Kursk salient is 6:1, however when damaged tanks not returned to front line are accounted for, the ratio reduces to 2.66:1. As for the irrevocable Soviet tanks losses of 334, those are actually total write-offs (hence irrevocable). Even Rotmistrov in his memoir, acknowledged that his tank units took serious beating at Prokhorovka, although he tried to balance it out by giving impossible figures for German losses in men and materiel (350 tanks and 10,000 casualties in just one day).

But note that most German tank losses were not incurred while fighting attacking Soviet tanks units. The Soviets paid excessive attention to all-round anti-tank warfare during the campaign, and that paid off. On the occasions the Soviet tank units decided to go out of their fortified positions to face the Germans, they always took serious beating, like 5 July in northern face, or 6 July on the left wing of 4th PA, or 8 July on right wing of 4th PA, or 12 July at Prokhorovka.

Also, I finally found all the casualty figures (with the KIA, WIA, MIA) reported by the medical staff of II SS Panzer Corps for 5 to 20 July hidden away in Zetterling & Frankson's appendices. It also has Totenkopf's figures that couldn't be found in Frieser's (in the brief note, Zetterling & Frankson claimed that they are probably the first to publish Totenkpf's figures). I will soon update the infobox with those after I carefully add them up for 10 to 17 July. EyeTruth (talk) 07:04, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 14[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Schongau (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:20, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
This barnstar is awarded in recognition of your efforts on Alsace-Lorraine Independent Brigade (France) and Prague Offensive. Buckshot06 (talk) 01:16, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Would you be able to provide a proper cite at First Army (France) for the BIAL's inclusion within the army?, and, additionally, more cites in the army article from any sources you have would be great - it's pretty scarce there. Buckshot06 (talk) 01:18, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Otto Skorzeny's surrender[edit]

Charles Foley (1954), Commando Extraordinary has only Google preview access in my location (I have a hard copy) but it was serialise in The Sun-Herald (Sydney, NSW : 1953 - 1954) and the relevant text about his surrender to the Americans is available from that source (see the section "Hitler's final Imposture") it makes an interesting read. -- PBS (talk) 23:31, 30 June 2013 (UTC)


Note to self. Restore text that is commented out, copyedit (use de.wikipedia as basis), provide citations. Let Gerda Arendt know so she can verify translation if she wishes. on student uprising

The new face of the article[edit]

Hi. I've reworked the Battle of Prokhorovka and gotten it to B-class. I'm looking to get opinions from other editors to help improve the article before nominating it for GAC, or possibly FAC. It will be very appreciated if you can spare some of your time and check out the article. You can start a discussion or post your message on here or on my talk page or the article's talk page. (I like the new look the Prague Offensive has. Very impressive job). EyeTruth (talk) 05:36, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, W. B. Wilson. You have new messages at EyeTruth's talk page.
Message added 01:49, 10 July 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, W. B. Wilson. You have new messages at EyeTruth's talk page.
Message added 19:07, 10 July 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Would you be interested in joining new taskforce?[edit]

Hello W.B.!

I just wondered if you might be interested in joining the new Belgian-task-force at WP:MILHIST? Your attendance would be much appreciated! Brigade Piron (talk) 10:32, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Air International Position[edit]

Dear Wilson, The famous Air International (bought by Key Publishing) is expanding. They need a reporter who can report on aerospace issues on eastern Europe. If interest contact them at, David Wills, News Editor

Jack E. Hammond--Jackehammond (talk) 08:10, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Soviet divisions[edit]

Please take a look at the bottom of my talkpage re ordering of articles on Soviet divisions. Buckshot06 (talk) 06:29, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Would you be interested in joining me and User:Ryan.opel who are working on creating articles for the remaining Soviet armies? Right now we're working on 42nd Army (Soviet Union) in a sandbox off his userpage. Merry Christmas, and best wishes for the new year!! Buckshot06 (talk) 04:08, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
Hope you're enjoying Poland, Mr Wilson. Ryan.opel has effectively created a standard template for the armies because he always uses the same format. Please join in if you're able, once you're back... Happy New Year!! Buckshot06 (talk) 23:40, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Award of the Red Banner[edit]

Order Of Red Banner original.jpg Order of the Red Banner
By order SV/2014/003q of the Red Army editor's group, in regard to 56th Army, I award you with an additional Order of the Red Banner for your contributions to enhancing English-language knowledge of the enormous sacrifice of the Red Army in the Great Patriotic War. Buckshot06 (talk) 07:37, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation[edit]

Your upload of File:Belgian cemetery.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 13:08, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

  • Another one of your uploads, File:Berlin travel orders.png, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 13:16, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Another one of your uploads, File:Bienwald Bunker.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 13:18, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Busy Beaver[edit]

Nice to hear from you. I'm working on User:Buckshot06/List of U.S. Department of Defense code names, Somalia, and the Internal Troops. Anything you have on the organisation of the Internal Troops would be much appreciated. Hope you manage to manage your weasel! Buckshot06 (talk) 11:23, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Would you consider writing a short stub or protostub on BSSA itself? I think we need it as a source reference. Buckshot06 (talk) 09:08, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Please do exactly. If I can get hold of Glantz's description in Stumbling Colossus of the source, I'll add it. Buckshot06 (talk) 08:58, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
Support Combat composition of the Soviet Army with BSSA and the full unabbreviated Russian as redirects. Buckshot06 (talk) 06:13, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

nl:NAVO-hoofdkwartier_Cannerberg NATO War HQ[edit]

Do we have any Dutch translators available? This deserves some attention. Buckshot06 (talk) 09:49, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

WWII France articles mess: occupation edition[edit]

I'd appreciate if you could share your views: Talk:German_military_administration_in_occupied_France_during_World_War_II#Requested_move Thank you. Cheers, walk victor falk talk 17:11, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Honestly don't care for that article. It is not really about either the military administration of the Germans or the occupation itself. I left some comments on the talk page. W. B. Wilson (talk) 05:37, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Perhaps you care more about this on? Free_French_Forces#Requested_move. Thanx for your input. Cheers, walk victor falk talk 21:59, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 5[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Far East Command (United States), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Unified Command (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:57, 5 June 2014 (UTC)


I've just filed a dispute resolution request regarding Somali Armed Forces and Somali Civil War. Please take a look. In eight years, I've never been as close to quitting this site entirely in the face of POVpushing. Buckshot06 (talk) 08:48, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

I took a look at the dispute resolution history to see Nick-D's comment and yours. I haven't reviewed the articles in question but can well imagine what is going on; it sounds like the kind of thing that creeps up in Second World War - Eastern Front articles. I may have further comments later today. Cheers, W. B. Wilson (talk) 09:34, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
Merci pour ta couriel. J'ai a envoie un reponse. Cordialement Buckshot06 (talk) 05:34, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Order of battle of the Spanish Army in 1989[edit]

Please consider adding your opinion at this deletion debate. Buckshot06 (talk) 01:19, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

WP:OUP access[edit]

Hello, WP:The Wikipedia Library has record of you being approved for access to Oxford University Press's humanities materials through the TWL partnership described at WP:OUP . You should have recieved a Wikipedia email from User:Nikkimaria several weeks ago with instructions for access, including a link to a form collecting information relevant to that access. Please find that email, and follow those instructions. If you were not approved, did not recieve the email, or are having some other concern or question, please respond to this message at Wikipedia talk:OUP/Approved. Thanks much, Sadads (talk) 22:13, 5 August 2014 (UTC) Note: You are receiving this message from an semi-automatically generated list. If you think you were incorrectly contacted, make sure to note that at Wikipedia talk:OUP/Approved.

Can you take a look at a draft for me[edit]

I've e-mailed you.... Buckshot06 (talk) 03:29, 20 August 2014 (UTC) Please now consider the issue at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Middayexpress and comment as you will... Buckshot06 (talk) 10:28, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:34, 23 November 2015 (UTC)