User talk:bahamut0013/Archive 12

Archive 5

←

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Warning

Ouch! You've used a template to send a message to an experienced editor. Please review Wikipedia:Don't template the regulars or maybe listen to a little advice. Doesn't this feel cold, impersonal, and canned? It's meant in good humor. Best wishes. bahamut0013^words_deeds 15:58, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Re: Battleships

Sweet. I, too, am surprised that the delivery guys would bother to show up so late, but those are awesome models. If you get the other models you're going to have an interesting battle on your hands. I'd give the Yamato and Bismark team a slight edge over the Missouri and New Jersey team with regards to firepower, but I'd bet the Missouri and New Jersey team for the total victory since the New Jersey version has missiles :) USN all the way! TomStar81 (Talk) 02:50, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Well, you know what they say: anything worth having is worth working for :) Good luck on the model making, I'm looking forward to hearing about the completed versions. TomStar81 (Talk) 08:25, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

My memory is a little hazy on this point, but i seem to recall that they signed the surrender near the #2 turret on the starboard side. The aft deck would've made more sense, but the photos of the surrender ceremony seem to center on the area just below and a little behind the bridge aboard Missouri. TomStar81 (Talk) 21:28, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

3rd Civil Affairs Group

Would you mind chiming in here on the Talk Page? I asked for this page to be protected because of an edit war & your honest comment one way or the other would be appreciated. It starts at the Combined Joint Task Force - Consequence Management section. Thanks! FieldMarine (talk) 18:32, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Bahamut0013. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Hi Sgt!

Thanks for the note. I've rarely been on Wikipedia. Was checking USMC pages/news today in light of the earthquake and tsunami in Japan. Marines in Japan will be providing aid. Noticed that the "picture" and the "quote" were blank on the Portal. Just redirected to older ones. Hope all is well with you and you are safe. — ERcheck (talk) 00:24, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

If you have time, here is a link to a picture that could be posted with the top news item on the Portal.... Marines loading relief supplies. [1] — ERcheck (talk) 00:46, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Your nomination subpage has been created

Your application to serve on the Audit Subcommittee has moved forward to the community consultation phase.

Please visit your nomination subpage to answer the standard questions and any additional questions that may be posed.

Feel free to let me know if you have any questions or concerns regarding this process.

–xeno^talk 00:21, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

AUSC

Hey, I referred to you in a post on WT:ACN. Granted, it was in abstract terms rather than by name, but it seems courteous just to let you know. Best of luck, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 04:43, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Mk43 pages vs Mk48

Hi again...I was just browsing other articles that are still up on Wikipedia and seem to have everyone's blessing. There is a Mk48 page up that doesn't seem to have any more references that I do on the Mk43 so I"m wondering if I should just model a new Mk43 page on that since it seems to be acceptable? The Mk48 doesn't really have any more need for it's own page than the Mk43 does, so what's the difference? I'd like to go back and resubmit the Mk43 soon.

Thank you Littlemslawandorder (talk) 18:54, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LX, February 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: Ed talks about real-world collaborations and how you can help

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 21:13, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Hyphenating ship class names

Re: the October discussion you participated in on hyphenating ship names, User:SW is willing to make a mass move with a bot if there is a consensus here. — kwami (talk) 21:48, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

.. and down the hatch..

Hahaha.. I'm glad I could bring some joy to your life. I'll sign here so that you can get a chuckle whenever you need one ;) Ommnomnomgulp (talk) 23:13, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Marine Corps Forces Reserve

Bahamut, seems this page United States Marine Corps Reserve is lacking the full proper name. The insignia says "U.S. Marine Corps Forces Reserve", but that term is not used in the article. (Except in the official EL, which I corrected.) ALSO, the 3rd paragraph says "MARFORRES comprises two groups of Marines and Sailors." I know that Navy medics get assigned to USMC units, but are these Navy medics part of MARFORRES? Thanks. --S. Rich (talk) 23:48, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Bahamut. I thinking you had a quick and easy answer. I think I'll simply change the naming sentence to reflect what the insignia says. Rather than researching the sailor question, I'll tag to clarify. The idea of including the Navy medics in the units is most sensible, but explaining to the readers is needed too.--S. Rich (talk) 14:15, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for notifying me about the debates going on about some of my articles. I think I'll probably stay out of it, and if enough of my Wikipedia piers feel certain articles aren't notable, I'll accept it. Though I just want to point out with humor, I notice you referred to me as 'he'. I'm actually a 'she', but I can see where someone can make the assumption from my name and the subjects I tend to focus on. Packerfansam (talk) 18:13, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

No worries, I'm a tomboy, it happens. Packerfansam (talk) 06:08, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations

... on your appointment to arbitration audit sub-committee. Regards Peter S Strempel | Talk 17:02, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Just curious ... any idea why they didn't +sysop you, or do AUSC members usually not need to work with seeing deleted page histories? (Or, does oversight give you access to viewing regular-deleted pages?) /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 16:36, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

The Arbitration committee does not have the authority to +sysop in the English Wikipedia, it is solely up to the bureaucratic discretion. That aside, having the +oversight flag enables a user to see all deletion related logs, as it is an extension of the deletion tool. Think of the the log part as grandfathered in. With that in mind, bahamut0013 can technically perform deletion related admin actions but will not do so with the tools just being an AUSC member. Should he run for adminship and be granted, he can use the deletion tools as a run-of-the-mill administrator. bahamut0013 does not have technical access to block or protect. Keegan (talk) 07:23, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Goodness, this is a bigger buzz than I expected. There was some discussion about this at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Audit Subcommittee appointments (2011) if you feel the need to opine there. bahamut0013^words_deeds 19:29, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Can I not just nominate you for the tools? :) AGK [•] 22:33, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

It is, of course, your perrogative to nominate anyone you like. I will not turn down such an honor (you're not the first to suggest it, just the first to do so publicly). bahamut0013^words_deeds 19:29, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

WP:SMS - Dank (push to talk) 18:10, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Since XfDs are your strength, you might want to list a few to make it easier for voters to find them. - Dank (push to talk) 19:59, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

• Congrats, indeed! Having interacted with you extensively at Amsterdam (city), New York, but in few other places, I had no clue about this until I saw it in Signpost. --Orlady (talk) 02:13, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Milhist FA, A-Class and Peer Reviews Jan-Mar 2011

		The Content Review Medal of Merit
		By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted work on the WikiProject's Peer, A-Class and Featured Article reviews for the period January–March 2011, I am delighted to award you this Content Review Medal. AustralianRupert (talk) 08:02, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Autoconfirmed RfC

A formal Request for Comment has now been started on this topic. Feel free to contribute; best, Ironholds (talk) 20:36, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

MCRD San Diego

I see that you removed a photo that shows what the MCRD buildings looked like during a ceremony with a military band in the 1980's. None of the photos on that page shows what the MCRD actually looked like. There's a map, a detail of an emblem above a doorway, and a Marine walking through an archway. Speaking as a video editor for the last 20-some years, it's traditional to present what we call an "establishing" or wide shot that shows the topic, and then zoom in to the details.

Instead of summarily rejecting the photo, why not instead add a Gallery section? Although I am a newbie, I have seen this done to great effect with articles that seem to have more than a few photographs. People who are interested in learning about the MCRD would naturally want to see all that is available on the topic. That particular shot is unique in that not many civilians had the opportunity to photograph events on base, and soldiers on the base were too busy soldiering to take any photographs.

TigerCherry 01:05, 4 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pattymooney (talk • contribs)

LST AfD

Hey, I just wanted to say, for the record, I have no sense of dislike for the ship in question. My stance comes from having seen in one AfD (I can't remember what the article was, or else I would have brought it up in the AfD) where a MILHIST convention was used to support a number of keep !votes, which were then discounted on the grounds that the convention they cited was contrary to policy/guidelines. My main reservation with giving the level of credence to WikiProject conventions as is happening in the AfD is this: Suppose WikiProject:Pokémon had sole control over standards of inclusion for pokemon related articles. Given the nature of pokemon fans, we would likely see a return of articles on individual pokemon, written like fan magazine entries. The forgoing would then give the general public the impression that we accept low quality articles on things that, in the grand scheme of things, aren't that important. Thats how I look at the LST in question. LSTs as a type of ship are important. An individual LST, unless it has some remarkable distinction (Like being repurposed as a research vessel, museum ship, or a static display) isn't. There are so many of them, they are not terribly exotic as far as ships go, and their function is rather mundane. I appologise if any of arguments have offended you, and please no that I did not enter into this to make a WP:POINT. Given how this AfD has gone, I will take my arguments elsewhere. Regards, RadManCF ☢ open frequency 17:52, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

April 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States

The April 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States 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.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 17:16, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

RfA

Q4 gives me pause as have other questions posed by this user. It would be wrong of me to suggest if or how you answer it but when your RfA is over, with I hope a well deserved pass, that question will be joining this list. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:17, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Accidental removal of userbox?

I could never vote against your RFA - I have philosophy of voting for any trustworthy candidate and by the position you hold you're a gazillion per cent off the scale - and in fact I have already voted for you - but I was amused to see that unless I misread, you removed this 'un:

This user wears corrective eyeglasses or contact lenses, without which he'd be as blind as a bat!

What happened there? I assume you accidentally removed it?

Cheers,

Egg Centric 23:46, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Oh, and another thing - please get the bloody hell rid of comic sans! Egg Centric 00:40, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Jumping the gun

Let me be the first to (pre-)congratulate you on (very soon) gaining the mop as a new tool of the trade. Make sure to squeeze it out between uses! Cheers – Binksternet (talk) 16:48, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Question: does the mop go through the wringer, or the administrator? Binksternet (talk) 16:59, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

When I got mine I felt that 'I' had gone through the wringer. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:26, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

RfA

Congratz on your RfA

Congrats on being a soon-to-be admin. Your RfA closes in less than 24 hours and you are a definite admin. mauchoeagle 22:02, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

May I second this, unless there are a few hundred last minute opposes, welcome to the cabal! :) The Helpful One 11:09, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Good luck with your new job! Reaper Eternal (talk) 11:35, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, 6:39 pm, Today (UTC+7) came and went, so I see no point in waiting for the official close, so I'm giving you this - I couldn't find a smaller one, so you'll have to do with this XXXXL (Of course, if you've failed, I want it back!) --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:50, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Prepare yourself. –BuickCenturyDriver 12:05, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Remember, baha. Buggie111 (talk) 12:45, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

The suspense is killing me. - Dank (push to talk) 13:01, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

If I could close your RfA, I would. Congrats, man. EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:11, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

You're a 'crat EV, why can't you? Do you guys decide at the start who is going to be the one to follow the RfA and close? Perhaps there's been an unexpected contretemps. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:22, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

No we don't decide ahead of time who will close it, but EVula participated in the RfA. –xeno^talk 15:26, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

As xeno pointed out, since I participated in the RfA, my hands are tied. Even if it was sitting at 205/0/0, I wouldn't close the RfA. EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:30, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Understood. I hadn't realised that you had participated. No 'crats around who didn't? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:37, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

It'll happen soon enough. I'm not exactly threatening "OMG open a cratchat, post it on ANI, complain at the Pump, open an RfC, file at ArbCom, appeal to Jimbo, threaten WMF with a lawsuit!!!!" here. Maybe I should. In reverse order. :P bahamut0013^words_deeds 15:43, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

There are probably some around (I saw Deskana post something a while ago), but the general rule of thumb is to allow 12 hours to elapse from the scheduled end time before trying to actively hunt down a closer. –xeno^talk 15:44, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

This will work out fine, too. I'm on duty tommorrow night, so I can swing by the NAS and practice the tools a lil bit. bahamut0013^words_deeds 15:53, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations! --joe decker^{talk to me} 16:25, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations from me as well! (I thought it would be kind to say well done here despite the fact I voted against the RFA. I don't usually come up with such a poorly written opposing statement, but this usually happens about once a year in my case.) Minima© (talk) 16:36, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

• Congratulations! Feel free to raid my monobook.js, once you've started using the block button you'll appreciate the advantage of a script that knows the block messages and templates. ϢereSpielChequers 16:39, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations my friend
Now get to work :P

Mlpearc powwow 16:43, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Congrats!!! Don't delete the main page :) —James ^{(Talk • Contribs)} • 3:39pm • 05:39, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, it's done, isn't it?

Congratulations. I've closed your RFA as successful 121/6/3. It would be wise to take account of those oppose comments, but with overwhelming support of the community, I'm pleased to hand you your mop. Any minute now some new buttons should arrive. Feel free to contact any of your fellow admins should you need any advice, and my talkpage is always open. Well done again. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:26, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

• Congratulations! Don't hesitate to ask me or any other admin if you have any questions at all about the appropriate use (or non-use) of various buttons. In my personal opinion, it's every bit as important to know when *not* to use them as how to use them, but I think you've already figured that out. Risker (talk) 16:31, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Congrats! You're going to want to raid my or someone else's vector.js page so you have closing scripts for AfDs and the like. You do not want to close those by hand. :-) Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 17:29, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Let me add my handshakes as well.  :)   ArcAngel   (talk) ) 20:03, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Congratulation, dude! Have fun kicking some vandals' asses !--♫Greatorangepumpkin♫T 21:49, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

• Congrats on the promotion! —GFOLEY FOUR— 22:05, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
• Congrats and good luck! Swarm ^X 00:01, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Thankspam

I thank you all for participating, and I thank you all for your warm congrats. bahamut0013^words_deeds 12:23, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Oh, and I'm suprised none of you jerks noticed this. Quite the coincidence, my math had me thinking it would end on the 14th. Well, that's why I'm a liberal arts major. bahamut0013^words_deeds 13:35, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

A belated Welldone from me too - welcome top the mop! Brookie :) - he's in the building somewhere! ^(Whisper...) 10:47, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

• Belated congratulations from me too. I look forward to working with you. Best, AGK [•] 19:41, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

• Belated congratulations! Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:22, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Notice of request for deletion of editor Bahamut0013 :)

Bahamut0013, the editor you are, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that you satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space. Your opinions on yourself are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at User:GlassCobra/Editor for deletion#Bahamut0013 and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit during the discussion but should not remove the nomination (unless you wish not to participate); such removal will not end the deletion discussion (actually it will). Thank you, and have a good sense of humor :). Worm^TT · (talk) 13:30, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Reverted; see the edit summary. - Dank (push to talk) 13:36, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Eh, it's funny. I say we keep it going. bahamut0013^words_deeds 13:40, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Move request

Hey baha! Could you make way for a move of User:Buggie111/Battle of Caldera Bay to Battle of Caldera Bay? I'd really apreciate it. Buggie111 (talk) 18:40, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Ah, now I get it. Baha will be able to do this for you in a little under 5 days when he's an admin :) - Dank (push to talk) 18:32, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Just about to reply. Yeah, delete the redirect and move the Caldera. Buggie111 (talk) 18:35, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Operation Majestic Titan

Now I'm a member of our project for four years and I have failed to notice this initiative. How blind must I be, don't answer that please :-) Would Adalbert Schneider qualify to be listed under this topic? Thanks MisterBee1966 (talk) 07:55, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Your sig

This may sound pedantic and could even be a feature of my web browser, but I find the lack of contrast between the black of your signature font and the brown of the background a bit of a strain, and while my eyesight is not good there are others with worse. Would you mind going for a better contrast? ϢereSpielChequers 20:45, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Mail

I'm afraid the mail you sent me is lost. User:Fred Bauder Talk 20:45, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Iowa class battleship A-class Review

I took a stab at a more uniform version of citation display, it can be seen in column one on the citations section in the article. I was curious if this method of uniformity would work towards a support, and if not what I may be able to do better gain uniformity here. TomStar81 (Talk) 12:24, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

PS: congrats on what I expect will be a successful rfa. For what its worth, I was actually seriously weighing the possibility of noming you myself once the ACR had closed. The only reason I did not do so sooner was that due to a hard learned experience I did want to create the appearance of nominating you to further the cause of getting the Iowa article back to FA-class. TomStar81 (Talk) 12:24, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Newsletter column on FAC reviewing

We'd like to put a column in the Bugle encouraging people review at FAC, or at least to assist the frequent FAC reviewers. Is there anything that new reviewers could do at FAC that you would find particularly helpful? (Watching) - Dank (push to talk) 19:07, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Hm. Well, aside from really learning the criteria and maybe participating a few times on the recieving end... not much. I thin the only advice I would really give is to figure out what you specialize in: copyediting, citation formatting, verifibility auditing, prose work, etc. and focus on that (for example, I wouldn't dare try to correct anyone on MOSNUM because I don't really understand the minutiae very well). Most editors have those pet peeves that they would always correct in an article they were working on (for me, one of the big ones is excessive greenlinks/redirects). If a person gets really active, then they probably want to write a userspace essay about what they look at and expect. bahamut0013^words_deeds 11:24, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXI, March 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: Dank helps you see what article writers want from reviewers

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 01:15, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Awarded barnstar

		The Admin's Barnstar
		For all around good (and numerous) contributions to wikipedia Moneya (talk) 20:36, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		I, Mikhailov Kusserow, hereby award Bahamut0013 with The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar for outstanding achievement in countering vandalism. — Mikhailov Kusserow (talk) 07:14, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:BM(8Bit).jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:BM(8Bit).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 03:50, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:DarkWarriors(8Bit).jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:DarkWarriors(8Bit).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 03:50, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Thief(8bit).jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Thief(8bit).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 03:50, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

List of characters of 8-Bit Theater

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. We always appreciate when users upload new images. However, it appears that one or more of the images you have recently uploaded or added to an article may fail our non-free image policy. Most often, this involves editors uploading or using a copyrighted image of a living person. For other possible reasons, please read up on our Non-free image criteria. Please note that we take very seriously our criteria on non-free image uploads and users who repeatedly upload or misuse non-free images may be blocked from editing. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. ΔT _{^{The only constant}} 11:31, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

read that link, it has been hashed out that non-free content in lists is rarely acceptable, also you cannot protect an article you are involved with. ΔT _{^{The only constant}} 11:45, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Further violations of our non-free content policy will result in an ANI discussion and probably a block on your account for violating it. ΔT _{^{The only constant}} 11:46, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

• I have reverted your protection of this article, which was utterly inappropriate; quite frankly, it's not what I'd expect of an administrator, nevermind an administrator whose additional role is ensuring people granted special rights don't fuck up using them.

  You do not use your admin tools in a dispute you are involved in.

  You do not fully protect an article so only sysops can edit it in response to a single user disagreeing with you.

  You do not argue that individualised consensus overrides policy built on legal obligations.

Questions? Ironholds (talk) 12:12, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

• @Bahamut0013: Wikipedia administrators are held to a higher standard of conduct, and are not to use their privileges in disputes in which they are involved. It would behoove you to go back and read Wikipedia:Administrators#Involved_admins and Wikipedia:Administrators#Misuse_of_administrative_tools. A number of administrators have been stripped of their privileges for precisely the sort of action you chose to undertake on List of characters of 8-Bit Theater. Most recent was User:Rodhullandemu [2]. I am absolutely astonished that a person entrusted with not only administrator privileges, but also oversight and checkuser privileges would not only engage in such conduct but then attempt to defend their actions as just. Irrespective of what Δ did, your actions were wholly out of line. Either understand that and the serious breach of privilege you engaged in, or upon repetition of these unfortunate events it is likely your privileges will be removed by force. If you still insist your actions were defensible, I concur with Ironholds [3], voluntarily turn your tools in. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:46, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

  Note, I was suggesting that if he couldn't see what the issue was, he should turn his tools in; simply screwing up is not and should not be sufficient to mandate removal. Screwing up and then maintaining that what you did was wholly correct, however.. Ironholds (talk) 13:52, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

• 100% agreed. ArbCom has made it clear that administrators are human and will make mistakes from time to time. I have no problem with that. I make mistakes too. But, when a mistake is highlighted and at least two other administrators are informing him that he made a mistake, and he continues to defend his actions we have a situation where an administrator who abused their privileges is likely to abuse them again. I am not suggesting his privileges be forcibly removed. I would prefer he voluntarily step down if he maintains this stance. But, I doubt at this point this is going to happen. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:40, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

• @Bahamut0013, regarding diff: Let me make this clear. I think that your threatening of page protection, and your actual page-protection were fully out of line, that is not how an administrator on en.wikipedia should behave. You were in a direct conflict with Delta, and that is a clear abuse of your bit(s). On most policies (and guidelines) that we have, is that we discuss the inclusion of material, especially when that e.g. involves BLPs, copyrighted/copyvio material, or other material where there are legal or decrees from the board affecting it. The policy is clear that the use of non-free material should be kept to a minimum, and then, if the use is challenged/deemed to be excessive, we first remove, then discuss (especially when earlier discussions regarding similar subjects did show that this type of use is for that case deemed excessive). I agree, that Delta should not have been edit warring about it, but you as an adminstrator should know just as well as Delta (as a former adminstrator) how things work here. Also your statement here 'I'm a well-respected editor, not some floozy, and you shouldn't be trying to pick a fight with an admin like this.' is also fully out of line, and I hope that you will retract that. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 13:57, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Bullshit. I said it before, and I say it again: I reverted disruptive edits, and continued to revert them when they persisted. That does not make for an involved editor, regardless of the fact that it's been a very long time since I've edited that page. What good does it make to give an admin the bit, and then quail at the fact he uses it when he finds a mess to clean up? My reverts were not based on content, though I would have been willing to discuss: they were based on behavior. Delta refused to discuss the matter, and I discovered he had a pattern of such disruptive behavior, which is what forced me to implement the protection, because he obviously was't going to stop. It was overturned, so this wailing and gnashing of teeth is pointless... I wasn't arguing the point of policy until after the protection. So, no, I'm not retracting anything, because I was just doing my job. I'm sure as hell not retracting after such insults as you've offered me. bahamut0013^words_deeds 14:21, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Baha, you need to take a break. The fact that you can't see how you've made multiple mistakes in this situation is a problem that is only going to make matters worse for you in the long run, especially if you keep commenting in a way that reinforces it. Trust me, it's in your best interests to disengage and come back after you've cooled off. Preferably a few hours. Lara 14:31, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't particularly care about the article; I didn't really care when I woke up this morning, and I'm still not going to care when I go to bed tonight. But the fact that people are actually defending this guy for trying to bully editors in good standing, and then criticize me when I tried to stop him from doing it, pisses me off far more than what Delta did in the first place. I'm not going to be the sheep so stands there stammering when an ANI thread is written and dozens of editors I don't even know face off on whether I did the right thing or not. But when it comes down to it, I tried to stop a disruptive editor from his disruptive behavior. When I go to sleep tonight, I know that I've acted in good faith. I'm sure that's not going to win me any fans, and I'm going to be lambasted for it, and I'll accept that even if I don't agree. I'm not happy that one of my friends chose to dress me down, but I know Ollie well enough to know that he didn't mean to hurt me with what he said, so I don't mind it (even if it did bruise my pride). bahamut0013^words_deeds 14:37, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

• Your behavior is being discussed. Whether Δ acted improperly or not is beside the point. You were an involved administrator, and chose to threaten and then use your tools in a dispute in which you were directly involved. That is out of line. You had an option to take the issue to a noticeboard and get other administrators to step in. Instead, you chose to use your administrator privileges in a dispute in which you were directly involved. There really isn't any disputing that, and now multiple administrators have informed you that they too feel you were out of line. Yet, you continue to defend your position and actions as just. That is the most troubling part of this. We have no assurances that you will not repeat this behavior ever again. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:44, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Why do you keep asserting that I'm an involved editor when I haven't edited that page in many months? I've told you that I'm twigged to what Delta did, not what Delta did to me, and you apparently don't believe me. So, fine, you've got an axe to grind for whatever reason instead of assuming good faith. I don't think it was in error because I was trying to end a disruptive revert cycle, and that's exactly what happened. You want to harp on what I did as if it's divorced from the situation, but it's not. I did what I did as an admin, not an editor. I wasn't trying to enforce my preferred version of the page, not only because I don't really have one, but also because the page was protected on the version Delta wanted. You can make it sound as uppity as you want, but when it comes down to it, I'm not going to apologize for trying to end a conflict and stop disruption. I can respect if you disagree about how I did it, but that doesn't change the fact that it wasn't made with malice, as I keep saying. bahamut0013^words_deeds 14:54, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

You shouldn't ever need to protect a page because of a single editor. If a single editor is causing a problem on a page, you warn and block them. If you cannot justify a block (which you couldn't), you cannot justify the page protection either. Once you started reverting him, for the purposes of page protection you were an editor involved in a content dispute on the page. For the purposes of blocking you wouldn't have been so involved. The image use policies are rather annoying, but Delta is correct in his application of them. Prodego ^talk 14:58, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

@Bahamut; you are involved for the following reasons;

1. Of the ten images removed, you uploaded 6 of them yourself (1,2,3,4,5,6). That made you directly involved by itself.
2. You've made more than 100 edits to the article. That by itself makes you involved.
3. You're the second most active contributor to the talk page of the article. That by itself makes you involved.
4. You undertook 4 reversions within 20 minutes prior to your protecting the article. That by itself makes you involved.

Three administrators and a former administrator are all telling you you were directly involved. Can you not see this? --Hammersoft (talk) 15:15, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

(ec)The point is, Bahamut0013, YOU defined the edits as disruptive, where in fact they are within policy and guideline. YOU reverting Delta here is contrary to the common way of handling similar things. The fact that one of your friends is asking you to reconsider your actions should tell you that maybe you did make a mistake, and that you should reconsider your actions. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 14:48, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Alright, Baha, as someone you've shared meals with, hopefully you can take this as someone who does know you (at least a little) compared to hearing it from "dozens of editors [you] don't even know". I've bt;dt so I get where you're coming from. When you started reverting him on the article, it became an incident. Two editors edit-warring. It ended up being two editors both violating 3RR. That's the incident that someone needed to report to a noticeboard. Instead, you—one of the two involved parties—ended the edit war with use of your admin tools. That is not acceptable. I really need for you to take a step back, cool down, then rethink this entire sitch.

The comment you made about "picking a fight with an admin" is so far outside of the realm of okay things to say. Seriously, dude. Not cool. He didn't pick a fight with an admin. He ended up in an edit war with an editor who also happens to be an admin. To say he should have known better because you, as an admin, are a more respected user... that just really makes the fact that you abused your tools all the more insulting for him, to use your terminology. Speaking of personal feelings and the words used to describe them: from the beginning you've been talking about your feelings. That alone exhibits that you're not being objective. Anger, offense, insult... these aren't words you use when you're being objective in a situation. Point blank: you should not have involved yourself as an admin. If you can't grasp that, your tools may very well be in jeopardy. And rightly so, to be honest.

Take a break. Come back when you can look at it all objectively. Seriously. I've been desysopped. Don't join my ranks when you can avoid it. Lara 14:56, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

I see your point, Lara. Fine, I should have realized that I was getting ahead of myself (I recognized that enough not to make a block, which was wise enough). I hate to think that people are going to take things as blatent as they have thus far... but yeah, my emotions got hot after the block. I am plenty angry, but mostly at the response I've been getting. I said at my RfA that I don't tolerate bullies, and it galls me that people I respect (or people I just met but probably would otherwise respect) are not being supportive of that idea. You're right, I should have backed off when he made it clear he wasn't going to stop with his editing pattern... I should have twigged to that when I saw his talk page, but instead, I thought myself the valiant defender of the wiki against the evil troll. And even then, I took an action I thought to be pretty mild... but a simple page protection is causing major waves. I never meant to threaten Delta, so I should have picked my words more carefully, but it still stands to the matter that it's an injustice. He did pick a fight, and he picked it with one of the people that fights aren't supposed to get picked with... I tried to talk to him, I tried warning him, and the only other options I had were to escalate, abandon, or report, but he beat me to the last one by reporting me.

But whatever, the chips are all on the table now, and the community will judge. I thought myself still objective, and I still do (kinda), but people aren't going to see it that way, so that's too bad for me.

Thanks for your advice, Lara. bahamut0013^words_deeds 15:16, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

He didn't pick a fight any more than you did, and he is no less entitled to not having a fight picked with him than you are. Your status as an administrator/checkuser/oversight doesn't grant you the privilege of any enhanced respect. I have no rank on this project whatsoever. None. When given rollbacker involuntarily, I asked for it to be removed. Editor is THE highest "rank" (if there is one) on this project. Your extra tools give you privileges to conduct work in support of the editors who are working to enhance the project. They do NOT give you any other special privileges, titles, expectations of respect or authority. None. --Hammersoft (talk) 15:19, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Oh, dude... You can't call him an evil troll. That violates policy, too. And Hammersoft is right. Admin means nothing. No one is supposed to pick a fight with anyone else. Privileges don't matter. I'm no more entitled to punch a janitor in the face than a manager. And, again, no fight was picked here. It was an edit war that you were equally involved in. And when you want to talk about bullies, you really need to take a look at yourself. As the admin who abused his privileges, it's you that comes off looking like a bully. Beta/Delta removing images without discussion comes off looking like Beta. That situation could have very simply been resolved if you'd taken it to a noticeboard early on. Lara 15:27, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm well aware of WP:NOBIGDEAL. That said, you don't stick your head in a tiger's mouth, even if you're a tiger yourself. And I said he looked like a troll. I had no idea that Beta changed his name, nor did I really know who he was. But I saw the mess on his talk page, and it's rather telling of a person who was continuing to do actions he knew were being objected to. bahamut0013^words_deeds 15:34, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Bob, I've sent you an e-mail about all of this. Courcelles 15:07, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

The one at 10:10? I got that one. bahamut0013^words_deeds 15:16, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

ANI

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Ironholds (talk) 14:48, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

• I was considering doing this but was hoping for a better outcome before that became necessary. :( --Hammersoft (talk) 14:49, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

  So was I, but the sheer number of "whatever, guys, regardless of how many of you shout at me, I was in the right" messages made it clear that something more reasonable is unlikely to happen. Ironholds (talk) 14:51, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

  That saddens me, Ironholds, because I don't think you were being very reasonable yourself, especially when you knew I was angry. bahamut0013^words_deeds 15:36, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

  Please cease using my personal name on-wiki. Ironholds (talk) 16:07, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

  Fine. bahamut0013^words_deeds 16:10, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

Sometimes, editing gets hot. Sometimes, it becomes all too easy for editors to self immolate, even unintentionally, and find themselves on the short end of a very pointy wikistick.

I just wanted to say that irrespective of all of that, I respect you. More specifically, I am in your debt. Thank you for your service in the USMC. I know that when you're in combat, the last thing on your mind is the people at home for whom you are wearing that uniform so they don't have to, and certainly you're not thinking of the Constitution you took an oath to defend. You're thinking about your platoon, and how this clusterf*** is going to end with your and your platoon mates' asses intact. But regardless of those thoughts, I am still ever thankful for _you_. Please don't take this as any sort of sophistry. It isn't. I am truly thankful. --Hammersoft (talk) 15:56, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Your kind words mean a lot to me. I suppose you're right, I am feeling a bit stressed today. The hour or so I was gone at around 9 today was a staff meeting, and didn't go well for me, so I didn't return to the fray as calm as I should have. Now that I think about it, I should have just gone to lunch early... wouldn't have changed much, but I suppose my blood pressure would thank me. Now, I'm guessing that you probably thought that I was the bully, and stepped in to help defend Delta. That fact alone shames me a great deal. I'm sorry if you thought I directed any disrespect at you. bahamut0013^words_deeds 16:02, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

• No, I didn't feel put upon by you. Really, I just wanted to stand out this section on your talk page to separate Wikipedia out from this and pass an understanding of my respect to you. If some catastrophe struck and all of Wikipedia were destroyed, life would go on. You'd still be wearing a uniform tomorrow. Your service to our country is orders of magnitude more important than ANYthing that happens on Wikipedia. Your value and worth as a person have a hell of a lot more to do with your service than any of the crap here, bad staff meeting amongst other marines not withstanding! --Hammersoft (talk) 16:26, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I'm not far from taking it off for the last time. But your point is understood. Thanks. bahamut0013^words_deeds 16:30, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

One last sticking point

Bahamut, I created the section "Was Bahamut0013 an involved editor?" to evaluate consensus on whether you were an involved editor. But, I hope that it's having the unintended effect of helping you to understand where the line is with respect to whether you are involved or not. This comment from you leads me to believe we can close the discussion at WP:AN/I. But, for me a final sticking point is that you understand involvement can come in many forms, and even if that line is unclear at times, it must be respected. Can we conclude that in the future you will be more careful in your evaluation of yourself as an "involved editor" and avoid using your administrator tools if there's reason to believe you are an involved administrator? --Hammersoft (talk) 16:34, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

I suppose so, yes. I'm a very literal man, so I have a tendency to believe that appearances don't matter. Even though I thought myself uninvolved, the fact that it would have looked like I was should have given me pause (especially since it seems I probably was, though it bruises my ego to admit it). Honestly, if it had occurred to me to think wonder how this owuld look to others, I probably would have involved others and come out smelling like a rose. I still don't really care about the images, though I think Lara did something to fix that anyway. Once this dies down, I'm going to remove the page from my watchlist; I would have done so a long time ago if it weren't for what used to be a fairly steady stream of vandalism. bahamut0013^words_deeds 16:41, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

• No, it's nothing to do with whether this looked like involvement to others - this is involvement. If you think that the issue here is how we interpreted it and not how you acted, this isn't a resolution at all - this is playing with semantics. You uploaded the images under discussion and edit-warred over content with the user before using your tools. Accept that this is wrong. Ironholds (talk) 02:46, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

User:Delta

Before closure, can you please repeat the post you made elsewhere about not having ever heard of Delta or his past history before at the ANI thread, just for the record, as it would dispell one of the common myths put about in this area of perma-conflict (not least by him) that the people who react like you did in the face of his edits while citing NFCC only do so because they're out to get him personaly, rather than it being the case that it's him and his behaviour/mindset which is the common denominator, not their ignorance/wish to willfully abuse NFCC (when you read up on his history, you'll see the exact same on his past account and which he had supposedly modified when returning in this new guise). He has, to put it mildly, been asked to "soften his approach" going on 30 times at least. MickMacNee (talk) 17:37, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Also, please can you summarise the the difficulty you had with determining the source of the supposed consensus for his 1-2 image rule (there is no such rule, as you seem to realise), and the difficulty you had in simply getting to the stage of a talk page discussion over the specific article, as apart from the edit warring etc, these pretty much go to the heart of the ongoing sources of conflict, where far too much of the NFCC consensus is simply extracted and extrapolated from prior discussions, which rarely if ever involve opinions from more than the few editors you've encountered already, while the policy wording itself is largely ignored, except in the completely counter-intuitive cases - where the letter of it mandates something. MickMacNee (talk) 17:46, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Much less serious topic - about your sig

I don't know if you realize, but your sig is a bit difficult to "use" for editors with mobility or vision issues, since the link to the talk page is very small and requires sharp vision to see and manual dexterity to hit. It's also not easy to click using a tablet computer such as a Galaxy or iPad; a finger is a lot bigger than a mouse pointer, and it's hard to get the pointer just so to click on it.

Obviously I'm not saying you have to change it; I'm no admin, thank goodness (for me and the project!). I just suspected you might not realize that the sig poses a difficulty to some editors. I tried leaving this message using my iPad, for instance, but it was easier to fire up the Macbook. A visually or mobility impaired editor wouldn't have the option to "fire up" anything to help him. Take care. --NellieBly (talk) 18:38, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Thief(8bit).jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Thief(8bit).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 03:19, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:BM(8Bit).jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:BM(8Bit).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 03:20, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Sarda(8bit).jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Sarda(8bit).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 03:51, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:RM(8bit).jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:RM(8bit).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 04:05, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

May 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States

The May 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States 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.

 
.--Kumioko (talk) 01:51, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXII, April 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: Buggie111 discusses neutral point of view

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 21:53, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Hood ACR

I think that I've address all of your concerns for this ACR. I'd be obliged if you could take a look and see if there's anything else that still needs to be addressed.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:53, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

WP:Wiknic June 25

Do you maybe want to plan something for Raleigh for the Great American Wiknic June 25?--Pharos (talk) 19:53, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't think he's going to be living in the area at that time. See WP:BRC3. Lara 12:00, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

A Unit Rep, I think

FYI, I found a unit representative, I think, see User talk:278ACR. I directed him to your draft for the military reps, would you mind supporting him if you need, I am kindof wrapped up in several different things off wiki and on? Sadads (talk) 13:47, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Operation Kita.jpg

I see that it's been promoted, but would still like to redraw it if it's still desired. I've found a vector base image that has sufficient detail, but is not of the right projection. Are there any specific locations that should be annotated (or simply used as guides for accurately showing the path)? sonia♫ 10:23, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIII, May 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors – Contest results, A-class medal recipients Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Editorial: Hawkeye's thoughts on the article writing process

To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:06, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Redraw File:Operation Kita.jpg

Hello, Bahamut0013. A reply to your request at the Map workshop has been made.
If you are satisfied, please copy/paste the following code and add it to your request: {{resolved|1=~~~~}}

You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{GL Map reply}} template.

MissMJ (talk) 07:58, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

June 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States

The June 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States 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.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 17:15, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Close

Please close the requested move discussion --Vinie007 11:36, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Please accept this invite to join the Conservatism WikiProject, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to conservatism broadly construed. Lionel (talk) 08:47, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to the Bacon Challenge 2012

Hello! You have been invited to take part in the Bacon Challenge 2012. In case you don't know or need a refresher, the Bacon Challenge is an annual celebration of bacon on Wikipedia in which editors come together to help create, expand, and improve Wikipedia's coverage of bacon. The event lasts all the way through National Pig Day 2012, giving participants plenty of time to work at their pleasure. In addition to the Bacon Challenge is the Bacon WikiCup 2012, a side event to the Challenge in which all bacon-related contributions done by those participating in the Challenge are submitted and scored by the scorekeeper (me) based on the scoring chart. At the end of the Challenge, the user with the most points in the Bacon WikiCup will win a shiny trophy for their userpage. In addition, the users who score the highest in specific categories (not yet finalized, but the categories include most image uploads, most article creations, most DYK submissions, and more) will win barnstars. Finally, all participants will receive a medal. While the awards are nice, in the end, the important thing is to have fun and enjoy what we're all here for, which is improving Wikipedia.

If you decide to participate, great! You may add your name to the participants list at the main page of the Bacon Challenge 2012, and pick up the userbox for your userpage if you desire. Signing up for the Challenge will also automatically enter you into the Bacon WikiCup. If you don't wish to participate, that's fine too - maybe next year! In the meantime, if you know anyone who might also be interested in participating, feel free to invite them! The Challenge is open to anyone and accepts participants at any time, so feel free to let anyone who might be interested know.

Note that I, the scorekeeper of the Bacon WikiCup, will be on vacation starting on the 18th of June all the way up until the 5th of July. I will have limited access to the internet, so I may or may not be able to score users' contributions during this time. Sorry for any delay in scoring (but since the Challenge lasts for more than half a year, there's no rush, right? (= ).

I'm looking forward to another fun, successful year. Thanks! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 05:59, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

US National Archives collaboration

United States National Archives WikiProject

Would you like to help improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to the National Archives and its incredible collection? This summer, the National Archives—which houses some of America's most important historical documents—is hosting me as its Wikipedian in Residence, and I have created WP:NARA to launch these efforts. There are all sorts of tasks available for any type of editor, whether you're a writer, organizer, gnome, coder, or image guru. The National Archives is making its resources available to Wikipedia, so help us forge this important relationship! Please sign up and introduce yourself. Dominic·t 15:22, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Radio Check

Sgt, radio check, over. How you doing? Semper fi! FieldMarine (talk) 16:03, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Milhist FA, A-Class and Peer Reviews Apr–Jun 2011

		The Content Review Medal of Merit
		By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted work on the WikiProject's Peer, A-Class and Featured Article reviews for the period Apr–Jun 2011, I am delighted to award you this Content Review Medal. AustralianRupert (talk) 08:57, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIV, June 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Finland and Spitfires Op-ed: Fifelfoo and hunting for plagiarism

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 22:30, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

USMC listed at FAR.

I have nominated United States Marine Corps for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. You have received this notice because you are listed among the top five editors of the article by edit count. Brad (talk) 01:06, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

July 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States

The July 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States 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.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 23:33, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

FOB Delaram

Hey, I was based out of FOB Karella (apparently also known as FOB Delaram). I was just wondering if when you went through there it was renamed to FOB Delaram or if it was still FOB Karella back then. The only reason I care is because Corporal Karella was killed in an accident there so thats why it was named after him.

Thanks, Scott (bstoopmarine, bstoopmarine@yahoo.com) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bstoopmarine (talk • contribs) 23:05, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXV, July 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Zeebrugee and Afghanistan Op-ed: WereSpielChequers examines RfA

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 21:32, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Please have a look at Stanislav Petrov and 1983 Incident

Hi, you commented on a discussion about splitting biographical data about the man involved from the article of the incident. I have been bold and made a cut at the changes required however I wanted to invite you to have a look at my edits on and Stanislav Petrov and 1983 Soviet nuclear false alarm incident make any changes you think are required. Thanks! --Deadly∀ssassin 23:30, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

September 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States

The September 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States 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.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 04:34, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Friendly notification regarding this week's Signpost

Hello. This is an automated message to tell you that, as it stands, you wil shortly be mentioned in this week's 'Arbitration Report' (link). The report aims to inform The Signpost's many readers about the activities of the Arbitration Committee in a non-partisan manner. Please review the article, and, if you have any concerns, feel free to leave them in the Comments section directly below the main body of text, where they will be reader by the editorial team. Please only edit the article yourself in the case of grievious factual errors, as well as refrain from edit-warring or other uncivil behaviour within the comments section. Thank you. On behalf of The Signpost's editorial team, LivingBot (talk) 20:48, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Check your mail

Hello, Bahamut0013. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

The Bugle: Issue LXVI, August 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Carthage and Australia in Palestine Op-ed: Remembering 9/11

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 17:34, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Archive 5

←

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12