Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Main page Discussion News &
open tasks
Academy Assessment A-Class
Contest Awards Members

US Military uniform cuff stars?[edit]

I was doing some reading and came across something about US military uniform accoutrements I've never heard of.

Wyllie, Col. Robert E. (1921). Orders, Decorations and Insignia: Military and Civil. New York and London: G.P. Putnam's Sons, the Knickerbocker Press. 

in chapter XI- Decoration of the Colours, page 208-9 Now for our American system, which has been entirely changed since the close of the World War. ... In addition we have followed the Belgian custom by embroidering on the [regimental] colour the names of battles in which the regiment so distinguished itself as to merit citation in War Department orders. ... In addition each officer and man in an organization which is cited in War Department orders wears a silver star on the cuff, a second star is added for a second citation. For a third citation the two silver stars are replaced by a gold star, etc., a gold star being used for every three citations, and a silver star for each intermediate one. This is purely a regimental decoration, and not in any sense personal, it is a part of the uniform of the organization and must be removed when the individual is transferred elsewhere..

Is this some sort of predeccessor to both the Silver Citation Star and unit awards? Anyone know anything more about this?

Gecko G (talk) 01:56, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Anyone? I'm hoping this will lead to some information on the history of unit awards in the US military to be added at that article when I have the time to regularily return to wikipedia early next year. Gecko G (talk) 19:11, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
I took the liberty of adding a url to Gecko's book citation. I have never heard of stars on the uniform cuff except in the sense of a general's rank insignia (see here - the 1941 artwork). I googled "star on army uniform cuff post-world war I" and got, besides a bunch of extraneous stuff, nothing that points in the right direction. I thought it was curious that Wyllie useed "colour" as his choice in spelling.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 23:30, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Aircraft lists again[edit]

More discussion on the finer points of tabulated lists of aircraft for military operators here. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 04:46, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

RfC about the Duke of Windsor (Edward VIII) article[edit]

There arose a dispute about the proper extent of the Duke of Windsor's wartime activities in regards the German Nazi regime. An editor feels that the pro-Nazi sympathies and activities, including one act of treason, is not reflected with the appropriate due weight in the article, and believes that the insertion of an extract of a German embassy cable should be added, as a footnote. Another editor feels that quoting the entire text of the cable is overkill, and that overall the article is consistent with the views that are presented in scholarly discourse and presents them with due weight and cites them to reliable sources. The question is now being put forth to Wikipedia editors whether to Support the addition of the contested material in a footnote or Oppose it. Anyone interested to participate in the relevant RfC is welcome. -The Gnome (talk) 14:08, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Titanic (1943 film)[edit]

This article, about the flop propaganda "blockbuster" commissioned by Nazi Germany's Josef Goebbels, has just been through a pretty nasty patch of edit warring, which included personal attacks and the use of sock IPs. The editor responsible has been blocked fo 2 weeks, but it might be a good idea if folks were to add it to their watchlists to make sure things don't start up again when the block is over. BMK (talk) 23:19, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

AfC submission - 26/11/15[edit]

See Draft:Maxwell K. Goldstein. Thank you, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 02:37, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Harper Encyclopedia of Military Biography[edit]

I couldn't figure out if there was a place at the open tasks sections but an editor created User:MadMax/list to have a list of biographies missing from Trevor N. Dupuy's The Harper Encyclopedia of Military Biography. Is there an interest in have this list and/or moving it? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:52, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

G'day, potentially some of the requests could be added here, maybe: Template:WPMILHIST Announcements/Military biography. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 00:21, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
At a quick glance, many of the red links in MadMax's list do have corresponding WP articles, but not under those exact names, e.g. "Sir Douglas Robert Steuart Bader" => Douglas Bader which I just corrected along with four or five other B's. Stanning (talk) 08:49, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
Well the initial question is, would there be any objection to moving it and the subpages to say Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Harper or something? From there, would the project be interested in keeping it going (even if it's just copying to the lists with a note that Harper has it)? I'd just prefer someone's eyes on it so that the details aren't lost. If not, I'll review and incorporate the listings here when I get a chance. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 04:48, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
If we're going to move it, I'd suggest placing it under the military biography task force (so e.g. Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Military/Harper). Kirill Lokshin (talk) 13:00, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

WP:BOTREQ#Pinging when a "task" section is edited[edit]

This bot request may be of interest to anyone who regularly checks one small section of a busy page. Volunteer coders who are interested get my undying gratitude ... actually, a lot of Wikipedians will probably love you for this. - Dank (push to talk) 16:04, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Request ID help for armored vehicle[edit]

Us ord museum 008.JPG

Can anyone identify the vehicle shown in this photo? Ran across it while moving unused photos over to Commons and I haven't been able to figure out what it is. Kelly hi! 08:11, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

M42 Duster regards Mztourist (talk) 08:39, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Citations outside brackets[edit]

Does anyone have a link for the style guide for this practice please? Thanks Keith-264 (talk) 21:24, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

There's this, but that's pretty short and simply lists it as an acceptable method (and links to the template to use to do it). What exactly are you looking for? Parsecboy (talk) 21:28, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
HMS Ben-my-Chree I moved the cite on line 1 outside the bracket but someone objected. I decided to check my facts and couldn't find them....Keith-264 (talk) 21:32, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
Ahh, I misunderstood. This is what you're looking for, and actually, the cite should be inside the bracket. Parsecboy (talk) 21:40, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
Oh bugger! It looks horrible. Keith-264 (talk) 21:53, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Reorganization of the Military history WikiProject task forces[edit]

US-O11 insignia.svg 6 Star.svg
Milhist coordinator emeritus.svg

Recently, the Coordinators for the XIV tranche have discussed the matter of introducing a new continental based task force system intended to allow the project to cover by proxy all nations and regions on the Earth. The new system proposed would see the nations and regions task force section reorganized with the introduction of a North American, European, and Asian task forces, a reclassification of the current Latin American task force into a dedicated South American task force, and the retention of the currently used African and Australian, New Zealand, and South Pacific task force (ANZSP).

The proposal for reorganization is based in part on a desire to better addressed perceived gaps in the coverage of national and regional task forces so as to allow for us to cover military forces in areas that presently have no specific coverage. Additionally, as has been observed by others in the project, the task forces run by the Military history Project have at this point evolved into a means of organizing project pages as opposed to being dedicated sub-sections of the project where interested editors work exclusively. It is believed that reorganizing the project's national and regional task forces in this way will benefit the project in the long run by allowing us to retain the current national and regional task forces while placing a moratorium of sorts on the creation of additional national and regional task forces while simultaneously allowing us a safe haven to catch national or regional task forces that have failed or disbanded. Creation of the currently proposed continental task forces would be followed up by the creation of certain regional task forces as judged to be necessary for the project to operate efficiently.

Because the coordinators require community input on this matter in order to move forward we are placing this here for discussion and to solicit feedback from the community on this proposal. If you have any comments, questions, concerns, or suggestions feel free to raise them here. TomStar81 (Talk) 03:02, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

I think, rather than placing a moratorium on the creation of new project-based national or regional task forces, it would be better to simply have them redirect to the continental task force. Additionally, if a particular task force is pretty active, I recommend letting that one continue as it is. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 04:06, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
In the long term that is one of the possible outcomes of this process, however there was disagreement on directly disbanding the task forces because a number of them are thought to be active enough to warrant a national or regional specific task force. For that reason we decided to go with a moratorium as a middle ground approach in order to research the subject to best determine which task forces could be consolidated and which can still stand on there own. TomStar81 (Talk) 06:44, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Will the implementation of this proposal involve reactivating the task force talk pages? I'd be in favour of doing so, for the ANZSP task force at least, to provide a forum for topic-specific discussions and take a bit of traffic off this busy page. Nick-D (talk) 07:57, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
I like the idea of activating all the continental taskforce talkpages (at least initially), to see if there is merit in the terms Nick suggests. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 08:00, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
We can give that a try. No harm is trying something new since we already contemplating a major overhaul here. TomStar81 (Talk) 08:27, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Help with Donald Nichols[edit]

Hello, all. Calling for a bit of help here. Question at hand is, is Donald Nichols (spy) the same man as Don Nichols, the racing team manager?

Little is known about the military Nichols after his 1962 retirement except that he died in Alabama in 1992. The racing Nichols bio basically begins at this point. A link at the racing article [1] claims they are the same, but is an unreliable source. A photo comparison between this article's photos and a photo in Apollo's Warriors is inconclusive to my eyes. Also, the military Nichols had the reputation of being sloppy in dress; pictures of the racing Nichols show him to be somewhat dapper, with a thinner face.

I am posting this in hopes that someone will prove/disprove the connection between these two.Georgejdorner (talk) 18:53, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

military aviation image issues[edit]

See WT:AVIATION where there is a discussion about a mass deletion request on Commons, some of which involve military aircraft -- (talk) 06:29, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Need reviewers for a FAC[edit]

Hi, Juan Manuel de Rosas needs reviewers for its FAC. It would be great if anyone could take some time to take a look at the article. --Lecen (talk) 00:09, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia's 15th anniversary is coming[edit]


Wikipedia's 15th anniversary is coming! A couple things. First, does Milhist want to get some sort of online event (an edit-a-thon?) together? There's only a couple online-specific events so far, so I think we could be a potential leader here. Second, there's now a battleship wordmark available for use (see right). Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 01:25, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

what about choosing a level-3 vital article or two that are already GA or A-Class and working together to get them to FA? There are a few obvious ones like Alexander the GreatGood article, NapoleonA-Class article, George WashingtonGood article, and Adolf HitlerGood article in the bios, and World War IIGood article and Cold WarA-Class article. I'm best placed to help with the later three, but even though selection of the article(s) might depend on who was interested, I'd give it my best shot to help out on any of those, or even one of the level-3 weapon articles like Nuclear weapon (a former Featured article that's now B-Class article). We could work from 15 Jan to 31 Jan... Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 02:50, 2 December 2015 (UTC)