User talk:Buckshot06/Archive 21

Archive 15

←

Archive 19

Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22

Archive 23

→

Archive 25

The Bugle: Issue CVI, January 2015

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Jonas Vinther on Hitler and Cliftonian on the Rhodesia Regiment Interview: 2014 Military History Newcomer Award nominees Review essay: Nick-D on the Australian War Memorial Op-ed: TomStar81 on the birth of strategic bombing Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:27, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

About Vietnam Special Forces in the article List of Special Forces

Thanks for your comment. But I think special forces also include marine and paratrooper. As I check — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tran Ai Quoc Vietnam (talk • contribs) 04:58, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Marines and paratroopers are generally considered to be elite infantry, not special forces Nick-D (talk) 05:27, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited No. 904 Expeditionary Air Wing (United Kingdom), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Lee. 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) 09:11, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Draft: Centre of Excellence for Operations in Confined and Shallow Waters

I strongly disagree with your alterations to the article. The COE CSW is an International Military Organization and a Military HQ under the Paris Protocol of 1952. It is not part of the German Navy nor a subordinate entity to the Flotilla 1, as you have put it now in the article of the German Navy. Also moving the literature part to that article makes no sense as it is very specific literature about the COE CSW and doesn't belong to the general article about the German Navy. Other NATO COEs, for example the CJOS COE (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_Joint_Operations_from_the_Sea_Center_of_Excellence) have separate articles as well, and the COE CSW has an article in the German Wikipedia. Regards seabas57 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seabas57 (talk • contribs) 13:18, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

332d Expeditionary Operations Group

added a link pointing to Springfield

Bamyan

added a link pointing to DDR

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:39, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

List of Military Special Forces Units (Japan)

"Central Readiness Force" is the special operations command of japanese SF units combined of: Special Forces Group, 1st Helicopter Brigade, 1st Airborne Brigade, 101st NBC Protection Unit. It is similar to U.S Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC).

The "1st Helicopter Brigade" is the special aviation unit supporting special operation units of CRF. It is similar to U.S 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment .

The "Central Readiness Regiment" is a regiment ground combat unit of CRF, the main mission of which is to carry out operations on battlefields abroad as an advance force. As of now it is deployed in (DAPE base) in Djibouti, Horn of Africa, first overseas permanent military base of JSDF.

The "1st Airborne Brigade" is specializing in Airborne Assault operations. It is the oldest SF unit of JSDF before the special forces group (SFGp) and Special Boarding unit (SBU).

The " Western Army Infantry Regiment" is combined of japanese Ranger troopers and amphibious specialized units, its counter part is U.S. 1st Marine Expeditionary Unit (1st MEU) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keijhae (talk • contribs) 03:52, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

List of Military Special Forces Units (Japan)

"Central Readiness Force" is the special operations command of japanese SF units combined of: Special Forces Group, 1st Helicopter Brigade, 1st Airborne Brigade, 101st NBC Protection Unit. It is similar to U.S Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC).

The "1st Helicopter Brigade" is the special aviation unit supporting special operation units of CRF. It is similar to U.S 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment .

The "Central Readiness Regiment" is a regiment ground combat unit of CRF, the main mission of which is to carry out operations on battlefields abroad as an advance force. As of now it is deployed in (DAPE base) in Djibouti, Horn of Africa, first overseas permanent military base of JSDF.

The "1st Airborne Brigade" is specializing in Airborne Assault operations. It is the oldest SF unit of JSDF before the special forces group (SFGp) and Special Boarding unit (SBU).

The " Western Army Infantry Regiment" is combined of japanese Ranger troopers and amphibious specialized units, its counter part is U.S. 1st Marine Expeditionary Unit (1st MEU) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keijhae (talk • contribs) 03:52, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

648th Maneuver Enhancement Brigade

added a link pointing to War in Afghanistan

United States Air Forces in Europe - Air Forces Africa

added a link pointing to Rhein-Main

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Battle of Berlin article

Can you comment on this[1], as you protected the page last time? Two users, who never edited the article before, followed me to the article and reverted text. One of them is making personal attacks against me, and said that I fooled others and sneaked in text. She then asks to show evidence that there was consensus to add this text over nine months ago... This is basically wiki hounding. As you noted back then, this article is covered by WP:ARBEE. -YMB29 (talk) 04:55, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Please see my comments on the talk page, especially this[2][3].

The users who recently came to the page removed text that I supposedly sneaked in, but, as the diffs show, it was not me who added the text originally. -YMB29 (talk) 03:57, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

" YMB29, with all due respect, you have been warned before on this issue, and this remains the English wikipedia: there is no serious disgreement that this kind of thing occurred after the fall of the city, except by former Soviet [yes, now Russian] writers. I've gone over your quotes immediately above, and they simply don't invalidate the Western scholarly consensus: protests, possibly, but no evidence that says the acts did not occur." Stop pushing this line against all consensus, and then I doubt any administrator will have cause to be concerned about your actions. Buckshot06 (talk) 05:29, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Well after you told me that in May, I did not even edit the article for months.

The issue now is a few users coming to the article (they never edited there before) and removing text[4] that had consensus for months, because I supposedly added it there, when in fact I did not.

Look at the diffs. One part of the text was added by the user I was debating with[5] and the other part was in the article since 2009![6] -YMB29 (talk) 06:08, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Articles and article text discussions evolve. The editors in question, I hope, are assuming good faith, and responding to the content rather than arguing about who put it there. I would stress that you should argue on the merits of the text, and, again, assume good faith on the part of the other editors involved. I would also commend to you JBH's last comment at AN/I: stop arguing about the people who are making the arguments, and concentrate on the content. Please make any further comments at the AN/I discussion to keep this discussion centralised. Kind regards Buckshot06 (talk) 08:04, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

On what basis are you supporting a topic ban against me? Did you even look at the diffs or evidence in that ANI?

JBH is just making accusations against me and advocating for the other user.

So it is ok for users to come to an article they never edited before, make reverts and false accusations?

I asked you to take a look at that page before making the ANI report, but you did not reply. This is not a fair assessment of the situation by you. -YMB29 (talk) 08:20, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Kindly (a) stop attacking the users, but rather comment on the issue, as JBH has also asked you to do. This is exactly the reason why I am supporting a topic ban against you; (b) comment on the AN/I page to keep the discussion centralised. Buckshot06 (talk) 08:27, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

YMB29

Hi, I've just restored YMB29's unblock request: this needs to be assessed by an uninvolved admin (WP:APPEAL says that they should be "independent"). Regards, Nick-D (talk) 02:52, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	Thanks for your contribution in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ahmad Keshvari. AliAkar (talk) 14:53, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Buckshot06. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 01:01, 15 February 2015 (UTC). 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.

Stickee (talk) 01:01, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Centre of Excellence for Operations in Confined and Shallow Waters

Dear Buckshot06, why did you remove the general sections about confined and shallow waters and the NATO COE programme from the article. If you think they should be in a new and general article then set one up, but please don't just erase them so the information is lost. seabas57 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seabas57 (talk • contribs) 09:47, 16 February 2015 (UTC) I saw that you undid my changes of the German Navy article as well. First of all, it makes no sense to put the information about the COE CSW in the place where you did and it is not even a good text (typos etc) and second the way that the COE CSW is underneath the HQ Flotilla 1 is just wrong without the description that I gave before! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seabas57 (talk • contribs) 13:36, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

The information is certainly not lost - just go back into the page history, retrieve the info, and add it to Ocean or Sea. The COE information duplicates the master description of the NATO Centres of Excellence programme which is located at Allied Command Transformation. Buckshot06 (talk) 18:40, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

7th Infantry Division (UK)

Hi, I am looking at a really old edit you did to the above article. You cited an article called 7th Division Commander in the 5th October 1938 edition of The Times. I am wondering, do you still have access to this? If so, does the paper give an exact date the division re-formed or if it just says the division formed during that October? Regards EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 21:53, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 44th Parachute Brigade (V), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Parachute Regiment. 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) 08:55, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CVII, February 2015

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book review: Nick-D on the British Pacific Fleet Op-ed: TomStar81 looks at the advent of chemical warfare Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:50, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Twelfth Air Force, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Operation Safe Haven. 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) 08:53, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

The old dispute

When it comes to your edits I always assume bad faith. In my view this goes back to the three unsigned comments followed by your signed comment that took place before you "consolidated" the articles on the deceptive British Parachute units, that is what the discussion should have been about, not the smokescreen you created.

You were not bold, simply rude and inconsiderate, Wikipedia is about cooperation, not gaming the system. Graham1973 (talk) 04:39, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 10

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 10, January-February 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)

• New donations - ProjectMUSE, Dynamed, Royal Pharmaceutical Society, and Women Writers Online
• New TWL coordinator, conference news, and a new guide and template for archivists
• TWL moves into the new Community Engagement department at the WMF, quarterly review

Read the full newsletter

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:40, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

10th Combat Aviation Brigade (United States)

added a link pointing to Battle of Mogadishu

7th Special Operations Squadron

added a link pointing to Operation Flintlock

Malmstrom Air Force Base

added a link pointing to Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty

Structure of the French Army in 1989

added a link pointing to Chaumont

Umvoti Commando

added a link pointing to Unit

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:19, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Combined Joint Task Force 76

added links pointing to Qalat, TF Bayonet and Task Force Bayonet

Arba Minch Airport

added a link pointing to Mahe

War in Afghanistan (2001–14)

added a link pointing to Further

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:44, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 15 March

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the 1st Combat Evaluation Group page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:18, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

33rd Rifle Division (Soviet Union)

added a link pointing to Samara

Combined Joint Task Force 180

added a link pointing to 25th Infantry Division

Combined Joint Task Force 76

added a link pointing to 25th Infantry Division

Joint Task Force

added a link pointing to 25th Infantry Division

Viktor Zavarzin

added a link pointing to KFOR

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:40, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

why the delete?

i thought i referenced the units, especially the korean onesSyriaWarLato (talk) 13:07, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your message SyriaWarLato. Unfortunately Wikipedia cannot be used as a reference for itself. You must get a WP:Reliable Source which is not from wikipedia. Re-reading the WP:Reliable Source guideline may be helpful so you know what to look for in future. I'm sorry, I'm going to have to remove the units again. Force Recon is marginal as well, and despite my views, we will need very high quality references that specifically state it is a SOF or SF unit before it can be readded. Happy to continue discussing, because most of the units you've added do belong in the list - we just have to be careful about sources. Kind regards and happy editing, Buckshot06 (talk) 20:06, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

I understand. I added a new reference for the rok special forces brigades. Couldn't find one for all the Force Recon Companies though, or the ROK Marine Recon, which is presumably based on US Force Recon SyriaWarLato (talk) 22:26, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

U.S. military sources will not do for Force Recon. Independent, specific, high-quality, reliable sources will be required. I'm copying this to the talk page; it's better that this discussion continue there. Buckshot06 (talk) 00:36, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CVIII, March 2015

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book review: Recent external reviews Review essay: Nick-D on the Australian Fleet Air Arm Museum Op-ed: TomStar81 on submarine warfare in World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:36, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Operation Barbarossa

Re: the contents of User:Nick-D/Drafts12, you might want to weigh in on Talk:Operation Barbarossa#Soviet offensive plans - including in relation to the new para I'm proposing for consideration. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 00:12, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Some more FARDC information

I found an article on the FARDC, dated to February 1, 2015, that provides quite a bit of current information on the FARDC, including commanders of different branches (the current ones on the FARDC page are a bit outdated it seems). I wasn't sure how you would want to put it into the article, so here is a link if you want to look at the information and decide on using it or not: http://gga.org/stories/editions/aif-30-broken-ranks/rogue-army-for-a-fragile-state —Славянский патриот (talk) 16:30, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Thankyou Slavinsky Patriot. Appreciate your hard work on the FARDC articles. We really need the decrees they talk of. It is my view that the updated list of service chiefs should be placed on the service branch articles, and I see you've made a start, at least for the Ground Forces. I have a little more info and can do a bit more. Was looking at your userpage and was intrigued by a few userboxes. I'd be interested to hear why you think the UN should be dissolved... Kind regards Buckshot06 (talk) 04:35, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

No problem. I am a monarchist and would like to see a return of the Russian Empire, and getting rid of the UN would make it more likely to happen. —Славянский патриот (talk) 04:45, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited European Air Materiel Command, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sudbury. 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) 09:05, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

5th Tank Group

Saw you did some minor editing to 5th Tank Group (United States) a while back, so thought you might be a good person to ask this question. How can we rename the page to the "5th Armored Group"? "Armored vs. "Tank" is the correct term, and I can cite numerous contemporary official sources that refer to these formations by the former name. Thanks. Bilhartz (talk) 20:23, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

We can move the page easily. Can you add a couple of references that cite 5 Armd Gp? Then I'll move the page. Cheers Buckshot06 (talk) 01:55, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Buckshot06! A little niggle if I may: since it is a US formation can we correct the spelling to "Armor" instead of "Armour"? Once we have it sorted I will have the "Armored group" page cite it, and will have to see what the 758th, 761st and 784th Tk Bn pages say. Bilhartz (talk) 14:38, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! Now we're cookin'! Cheers, Greg Bilhartz (talk) 13:13, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Buckshot06. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 05:08, 3 April 2015 (UTC). 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.

Nikkimaria (talk) 05:08, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 5 April

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Air Force Center page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:17, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Air Defense Artillery Branch (United States), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fort Totten. 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) 09:16, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

A new reference tool

Hello Books & Bytes subscribers. There is a new Visual Editor reference feature in development called Citoid. It is designed to "auto-fill" references using a URL or DOI. We would really appreciate you testing whether TWL partners' references work in Citoid. Sharing your results will help the developers fix bugs and improve the system. If you have a few minutes, please visit the testing page for simple instructions on how to try this new tool. Regards, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:47, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

A new reference tool

Hello Books & Bytes subscribers. There is a new Visual Editor reference feature in development called Citoid. It is designed to "auto-fill" references using a URL or DOI. We would really appreciate you testing whether TWL partners' references work in Citoid. Sharing your results will help the developers fix bugs and improve the system. If you have a few minutes, please visit the testing page for simple instructions on how to try this new tool. Regards, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:47, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 14 April

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Indonesian Army page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:15, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

13th Army (Soviet Union)

added a link pointing to Belaya Krinitsa

56th Field Artillery Command

added a link pointing to Providence

List of Soviet Army divisions 1989–91

added a link pointing to Buzuluk

North Caucasus Military District

added a link pointing to 12th Army Corps

Volga–Urals Military District

added a link pointing to Buzuluk

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:19, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

7th Rifle Corps

added a link pointing to Southern Front

Baltic Military District

added a link pointing to Gusev

Rifle corps (Soviet Union)

added a link pointing to Kuibyshev

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CIX, April 2015

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at the landing at Anzac Cove Op-ed: TomStar81 on the debut of poison gas in World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 06:31, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

25th Army Corps

added a link pointing to Nikolayev

Clark Air Base

added a link pointing to Far East Air Force

Highlands Army Air Defense Site

added a link pointing to Middletown Township

RAF Wildenrath

added a link pointing to Army Air Corps

Rifle corps (Soviet Union)

added a link pointing to Glukhov

Somali Civil War

added a link pointing to UNOSOM

Tuzla Air Base

added a link pointing to Treaty of Paris

Tuzla International Airport

added a link pointing to Treaty of Paris

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Helpme: rule that says that an editor reinserting text bears responsibility for it

What is the rule that says that an editor who reinserts text into an article bears responsibility for that text? Buckshot06 (talk) 09:21, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

If you're referring to the verifiability of the text, I would think it's WP:BURDEN. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:31, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Fantastic thankyou Cordless Larry. May I try, with some risk, some cross-cultural, appreciative humour? - despite being cordless, you're a pretty good connector!! I do very much appreciate it. Also, let me explain; despite the initial tribal problems of the Isaaqs from 1981, Barre's control seems to have begun to break down since the injuries he suffered in the car crash, which is why I emphasise from the middle of the 1980s, rather than 1981. Many thanks and kind regards Buckshot06 (talk) 09:41, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Cheers, and the humour is appreciated! My (admittedly not very thorough) searches of Google Scholar and Books do lead me to think that 1991 is the most commonly given year for the start of the civil war, but there's clearly an ambiguity because there was violence before then. Fearon makes that clear with the way he codes the conflict: "If one of the main parties in the conflict was defeated or otherwise dropped out, we code a new war start if the fighting continues (e.g. Somalia gets a new civil war after Siad Barre is defeated in 1991)". I don't see any reason why this ambiguity can't be reflected in the article though. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:49, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

That's all fine. It really makes me wonder why everybody is claiming 1991 though. I don't think I could possibly emphasise further, short of all caps and expletives, how weird and illogical this appears to be, in regard to the Somalis that had been fighting since the mid 1980s. We will need to do a brief gander through the 1980s history to lead into the rest of the article, which will strengthen the coherence of the entire saga. Buckshot06 (talk) 09:55, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Transitional National Government

Hi. Just a quick note about the addition you made to Transitional National Government based on the article I mentioned at Talk:Somali Civil War. The material I pasted there was a direct quote, so I think you need to paraphrase it more thoroughly. Cordless Larry (talk) 00:01, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 1 May

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Châteaudun Air Base page, your edit caused an unsupported parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:22, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 11

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 11, March-April 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs)

• New donations - MIT Press Journals, Sage Stats, Hein Online and more
• New TWL coordinators, conference news, and new reference projects
• Spotlight: Two metadata librarians talk about how library professionals can work with Wikipedia

Read the full newsletter

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:20, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

USAF Wing and Group numbers -- why 582?

In 1984 and 1985, USAF did a series of consolidations, redesignations, reconstitutions, etc. aimed at providing support units (almost none of which dated earlier than 1948) with lineages that included earlier units while perpetuating the histories of both support and operational units that had served in World War II. For example, almost all Air Refueling Squadrons (post 1948) were consolidated with WW II squadrons (mostly bombardment).

In doing these consolidations and in the following actions to some degree unit numbers figured strongly. Similar numbers were chosen (identical ones if possible -- for example, the 23d Antisubmarine Squadron, 23d Troop Carrier Squadron, 23d Helicopter Squadron were all consolidated with the then-active 23d Tactical Air Support Squadron, If not, then similar numbers (keeping the last one or two digits -- for example, the 4th Antisubmarine Squadron and 74th Air Defense Missile Squadron were consolidated with the 24th Tactical Missile Squadron). I believe this accounts for the "2" of the 2d Air Rescue Group being kept in the 582d number.

The second thing was to establish a single series of wings/groups (modified slightly by the Objective Wing reorganization of 1991-1992 which allowed for more duplication of wing numbers by operations groups). If same-numbered wings and groups were never active at the same time, they were consolidated. World War II operational units numbered in separate series (ferrying, transport, combat cargo, photographic reconnaissance, combat crew replacement) were renumbered into the single series. In picking the new numbers for the renumbered units and eliminating some other duplicates (like 479), first numbers were used that were currently vacant -- primarily numbers previously used by groups renumbered 101-146 when they were allotted to the ANG in 1946 and revoked dive bomber and tactical reconnaissance unit from 1943 in the low 400s that weren't used. Then numbers were added at the end of the series in the 500s. New numbers were added particularly in the mid 1990s when 4 digit numbers were eliminated). Another aspect of this was to get rid of high numbered wings (but not reserve 900 series groups) by consolidating them with lower numbered groups or wings. This freed up all numbers higher than 552 for new units. The number 582 became available when the Air Resupply Wing became the 472d Special Operations Wing.

I can't explain why 562 or 572 weren't used, though. --Lineagegeek (talk) 16:46, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited II Corps (United Kingdom), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 3rd Infantry Division. 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) 10:57, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

When did the modern era begin?

I see that you've made changes based on USAF units that weren't reactivated after the Renaissance. (and for that a

Here is a semihemidemibarnstar for pointing out that the modern era did not begin in 1991

).

Now for some units there's a good heading to select for a heading of recent history (like Expeditionary service), but a. Do you think there's a good generic heading? b. Should this be asked on Talk:WP:MILHIST? --Lineagegeek (talk) 23:50, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

FYI

AS done with user:Lineagegeek last May 8 in ([7]) , allow us to inform you about this research/investigation: memoriesfromwiki.blogspot.com/2015/05/supposed-al-shabaab-support.html .If interested contact us, your help would be appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.59.37 (talk) 23:54, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CX, May 2015

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book review: Recent external reviews Op-ed: TomStar81 and Simon Harley on the sinking of the Lusitania Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 00:05, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Glad to help keep some of the Russian pages up to date

Just got your note - I don't do much, but thanks for the appreciation for what little I can do. Have a good rest of the week. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Milnews.ca (talk • contribs) 01:39, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Kanalkampf

Thanks. It is nearly finished Dapi89 (talk) 11:38, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Accrington Pals

Buckshot06, having "created" Accrington Pals by splitting off a big chunk of text from East Lancashire Regiment, I have realized that you upmerged the original text back in September 2012. I hope I have not stepped on your toes, but I felt that the text in question was swamping the WWI section of the East Lancs article. Hamish59 (talk) 20:03, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

You've now set it up as a proper, fully-fledged article; I've got no problems whatsoever with what you've done. Cheers Buckshot06 (talk) 01:33, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Cheers, mate. Still some work to be done on it... Hamish59 (talk) 02:08, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

User:AcidSnow|AcidSnow

hi you would like to have your help with this user who seems to insists in using a fraud document against a CSIS.ORG document and keeps rv all the time in the State of Somaliland, which you can read in talk page thanks Hadraa (talk) 22:45, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Wings

I see you've been working on the inactive AFCON wing list. Some of this is just random (as are the choices), but: Reserve Training Wings were formed in late 1951, mostly on stations where a reserve wing had been mobilized for Korea. They were replaced in 1952 as reserve wings were released from active duty.

• 901st RTW Birmingham MAP
• 902d RTW Dobbins AFB
• 903d RTW Ellington AFB
• 904th RTW Hensley Field
• 905th RTW Memphis MAP
• 906th RTW Miami IAP
• 907th RTW Brooks AFB
• 908th RTW planned for either Tinker AFB or Will Rogers Feld, never activated
• 909th RTW constituted 19 May 51 for activation at Cleveland Hopkins Apt, order revoked
• 910th RTW Greater Cincinnati Airport, moved to Clinton County AFB in December 1951
• 911th RTW Baltimore Friendship Apt
• 912th RTW Floyd Bennett Field
• 913th RTW Laurence Hanscom Apt
• 914th RTW Mitchel AFB
• 915th RTW constituted 19 May 51 for activation at Niagara Falls Apt, order revoked
• 916th RTW New Castle County Apr
• 917th RTW Probably at Greater Pittsburgh IAP
• 918th RTW Standiford Field
• 919th RTW Planned for Paine Field, never activated
• 920th RTW Hamilton AFB
• 921th RTW Long Beach Muni Apt
• 922d RTW Portland IAP/AFB
• 923d RTW Atterbury AFB
• 924th RTW Billy Mitchell Field
• 925th RTW O'Hare IAP
• 926th RTW Olathe NAS
• 927th RTW Unknown planned location, never activated
• 928th RTW Scott AFB
• 929th RTW Selfridge AFB
• 920th RTW Minneapolis-St Paul IAP, moved to Snelling AFS

Air Depot Wings

• 13 ADW* Japan AMA AB
• 24 ADW* Clark AB
• 25 ADW Kelly AFB, moved to Hill AFB Dec 50
• 29 ADW Kelly AFB. moved to Norton AFB Oct 49
• 30 ADW* RAF Burtonwood, moved to Sealand Storage Depot Apr 51, RAF Brize Norton Jan 52
• 39 ADW* Elmendorf AFB
• 59 ADW* RAF Burtonwood
• 73 ADW Kelly AFB, moved to Chateauroux AS Jul 51
• 75 ADW Kelly AFB, moved to Chimhae AB Jan 53, Pusan East AB Oct 54
• 77 ADW* Long Beach CA (Reserves)
• 80 ADW* Kelly AFB, Moved to Nouasseur AB Jul 51
• 85 ADW* Erding AB
• 88 ADW* Santa Monica CA, moved to Norton AFB Apr 51 (reserves)

Reserve Depot Training Wings

• 941 RDTW original designation of 951 RDTW, redesignated before activation
• 942 RDTW original designation of 952 RDTW, redesignated before activation
• 943 RDTW original designation of 953 RDTW, redesignated before activation
• 944 RDTW original designation of 954 RDTW, redesignated before activation
• 951 RDTW Olmsted AFB
• 952 RDTW Norton AFB, moved to Long Beach CA Sep 52
• 953 RDTW McClellan AFB
• 954 RDTW Kelly AFB

And, speaking of revocations:

• 583d Air Resupply & Communications Wing activated 20 July 1953, action revoked retroactively in August
• 584th Air Resupply & Communications Wing constituted along with the 583d, revoked

--Lineagegeek (talk) 22:31, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 5 June

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Western Technical Training Command page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:28, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

One of Wikipedia's fundamental policies is to present topics from a neutral point of view. This means articles must represent each outside view fairly and proportionally, but not present any single view as true. Your edits appear to violate this principle and introduce bias to the article. Please use the talk page to discuss controversial edits—if you do not, it is likely that your edits will simply be removed by others. You should also be aware that repeatedly inserting something breaks the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. Ignoring this may get you blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.

June 2015

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Sudanese Armed Forces may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• out again in 1982 and continued until 2005. "As part of the Addis Ababa accords ending the (First]) civil war, 6,000 of the former [[Anya Nya]] guerrillas were to be integrated gradually into the

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 08:41, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 6 June

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Ministry of Finance and Planning (Somalia) page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Reverted edit

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you.  JLDW  talk  02:40, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library needs you!

The Wikipedia Library

Call for Volunteers

The Wikipedia Library is expanding, and we need your help! With only a couple of hours per week, you can make a big difference in helping editors get access to reliable sources and other resources. Sign up for one of the following roles:

• Account coordinators help distribute research accounts to editors.
• Partner coordinators seek donations from new partners.
• Outreach coordinators reach out to the community through blog posts, social media, and newsletters or notifications.
• Technical coordinators advise on building tools to support the library's work.

Sign up to help here :)

Delivered on behalf of The Wikipedia Library by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:16, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Middayexpress

Just got back off holiday to find Middayexpress banned for biased editing. Good work dude. It was needed.BrumEduResearch (talk) 14:58, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Category:Military installations by date of establishment

Category:Military installations by date of establishment, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 00:40, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi

Your going to regret defending Acidsnow. Its not a coincidence he is mentioned on a forum by Middayexpress. Dont bother pinging me when it get worse. Zekenyan (talk) 22:32, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Military Balance

Thank you, I own 1969 and 1970 as well as every issue from 1972-2015 but I only have handwritten notes for 1961-68--Woogie10w (talk) 22:37, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Together we're stronger!! I can add 1966-67, 1967-68, 1969-70, 1970-71, 1971-72, 1972-73, plus a whole lot of others you do have, to that list. Where do you want to add material? Buckshot06 (talk) 22:59, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Do you have 2015?--Woogie10w (talk) 23:05, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

No, but you said you had it. Did I misunderstand? Buckshot06 (talk) 23:08, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi I sent you Africa, I hope it is OK--Woogie10w (talk) 20:43, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

OK, I will send all of Russia. --Woogie10w (talk) 23:11, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

It's there--Woogie10w (talk) 23:47, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXI, June 2015

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book review: Recent external reviews Op-ed: TomStar81 on the new technology of World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:38, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Somaliland republic

I have seen your name in here [[8]] there is a very Aniti-Somaliland activities going on both Somaliland and State of Somaliland Pages by the Same User AcidSnow . He first urged that The state of Somaliland never existed. Now is involved similar activitites in Somaliland republic. I tried my best to deal with him but this user is not interested any form of Agreement he rejected all possiple solutions as you can read here Talk:Somaliland#Map may be he thinks he is smart and have many other friends who can help him edit warring. But the reality is this is very bad faith editing. Please lock the page if you can as you did in the other page. As a wikiSomalia project member you may also mediate us in the talk page. Thank you Dandaawi (talk) 15:46, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 13th Division (United States), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Camp Lewis. 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) 09:47, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library needs you!

We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:

• Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
• Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
• Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
• Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
• Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
• Research coordinators: run reference services

Sign up now

Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Myanmar Army

Thank you for the message. Here is the link you requested and I added another link, which is the official newspaper of Myanmar Army called Myawaddy daily newspaper July 13, 2015. You can look at page 15 and you will see the same news as facebook link. You may ask Myanmar translator to translate the name of Central Military Regional Command, Commander name: which is Soe Htut.

This is link to Newspaper https://www.scribd.com/doc/271388285/13-7-2015-MWD

This is link to face book of the same news https://www.facebook.com/Cincds

Scroll down to find July 12 11:09 PM timestamp post. You will see the same news.

Myanmar military do not officially announce top leadership changes; all you usually learn who is who in new post is usually via news from newspaper only.

Once again, I thank you for the message. If any issue , please let me know

Ujustu4u (talk) 03:45, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

PS. To make your life easier, you can use Google Translate from Burmese to English: fonts may be little problem but I tested and you can see the correct name " Soe Htut" This is what appears on my translation: Mandalay, Nang city from a local battalion donor donor K ပေးအပ်လှူဒါန်းပွဲ 30 at 3 pm on July 11, the battalion held in the Central Region Gen Soe Htut, Regional military officials, Battalion and officers, Donors and invited guests attended.

There was used to be Myanmar Ministry of Defense official website, but no longer available. Even if official website is in function, Myanmar Military DO NOT make any official announcement of who is who in high ranking positions. Most of us learn from newspaper sources only. For example: 3 weeks ago new Chief of Staff for Air Force was appointed. We only learned it from newspaper , not from official source and all are written in Myanmar.

If you want to follow restrict rules of Wiki reliable sources, all the names of current regional military commands commanders will have to be removed since there is no current references for all of their names, Citation "13" is only referred to names of the very first commander of each particular region.

Ujustu4u (talk) 04:37, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, here is link per your request. www.mod.com.mm this is website of Ministry of Defense, Myanmar www.myawady.com.mm this is website for Military daily newspaper/ TV station etc. Good luck with both functioning all the time. Both works sometimes and sometimes not. Mainly these sites are for myanmar people use and all with Myanmar Language. I just want you give you head up, there will be major top military reshuffle will be coming in next 1-2 months. Most of current regional military command, commanders will be promoted to War office HQ and new batch will be appointed. again. We will know who is who now based on daily military newspaper.

Scribe link I sent you , is the official site where Myawady daily newspapers and other related links are posted. I will be MIA for about 10 days, on holidays somewhere around the world. May not able to get back with you in timely manner, if there any questions. Take care ..

Ujustu4u (talk) 10:59, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

I will cited the reliable sources when I get back from trip. Thank you Buckshot06.Ujustu4u (talk) 14:25, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 12

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 12, May-June 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs)

• New donations - Taylor & Francis, Science, and three new French-language resources
• Expansion into new languages, including French, Finnish, Turkish, and Farsi
• Spotlight: New partners for the Visiting Scholar program
• American Library Association Annual meeting in San Francisco

Read the full newsletter

The Interior 15:23, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXII, July 2015

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book review: Recent external reviews Review essay: Nick-D on sourcing articles about bombing a battleship Op-ed: TomStar81 on the role of nursing in World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:34, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

July 2015

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to No. 42 Squadron RNZAF may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• ] with [[A-4 Skyhawk]]s at Ohakea in 1984, 42 Squadron moved to [[RNZAF Base Auckland|Whenuapai]]) and absorbed the Andovers of [[No. 1 Squadron RNZAF]] which was disbanded. The squadron then had
• In 1988 an Andover joined the [[[[United Nations Iran–Iraq Military Observer Group]] (UNIIMOG). The detachment of 17 personnel and

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:46, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited No. 14 Squadron RNZAF, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chief of Air Staff. 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) 08:55, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Request assistance with disruptive editing

Dear Buckshot, you blocked User:HHubi for 3 days on 19 July for continued creation of non-English titles and refusal to follow WP:Discussion. Imagine my surprise when he reverted an edit of mine to recreate a non-English title which I had redirected (correctly, I think). This follows a pattern of disruptive editing and non-discussion that long ago ceased to be amusing. The question is - what do I do about it? Any help gratefully received. Shem (talk) 20:12, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

I've also noticed that the sort of edits I would normally associate with HHubi went on under an IP address while he was banned. I understand that's a form of sockpuppetry. Again - what do I do about it? Shem (talk) 20:14, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Royal Engineers, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 33 Engineer Regiment. 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) 10:17, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

101 Engineer Regiment

Excellent stuff! I'm tending to work from the original Volunteer units (1859 onwards) and I have masses of information on RE and RA units still to come. I'm trying to make sure that these historical pages link seamlessly with the modern units' pages. I also use redirects and the categories to ensure that searches on the changing unit titles will all point to the right page. There is a slightly non-standard page already in existence on 1st London Field Company Royal Engineers, and I'm still trying to work out how to integrate that with its predecessors and successors.Rickfive (talk) 11:58, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

OK, I'll push 1st Middlesex and 1st Tower Hamlets Engineers/47th and 56th London Engineers up to the front of my 'to do' list, and I'll look up and insert the appropriate name(s) into 101 Engineer Regt. They are not simple linear ancestries! I'm currently putting the finishing touches to 46th (North Midland) Divisional Engineers - which, by the way, is among the ancestor units for the present-day 75 Engineer Regiment, which gets very short shrift on the current Royal Engineers page, and really cries out to be done like 101 Regt.Rickfive (talk) 20:16, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

MIT Press Journals

You should have received an email a couple of weeks ago regarding MIT Press Journals - could you please either fill out the linked form or let me know if you didn't get the email? We'd like to get these processed soon. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:39, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

71 Engineer Regiment (United Kingdom)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of 71 Engineer Regiment (United Kingdom), and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.army.mod.uk/royalengineers/units/28726.aspx.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 02:22, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

75 Engineer Regiment

The simplest source for 75 Engineer Rgt lineage from formation until 2005 is archived at Regiments.org (which you mention); the page is: http://web.archive.org/web/20051226180630/http://regiments.org/regiments/uk/vols-tavr/art-eng-sig/engr75.htm

Also the 'Sappers site': http://www.sappers.co.uk/squadrons/ta-75-engineer-regiment-volunteers

and the old page from MoD site (archived Dec 2005):

http://web.archive.org/web/20051227012058/http://www.army.mod.uk/royalengineers/org/75regt/index.htm

The present day regimental page on the MoD site:

http://www.army.mod.uk/royalengineers/units/28729.aspx

The planned changes by 2020 from the MoD site:

http://www.army.mod.uk/documents/general/20130703-SUMMARY_OF_ARMY_2020_RESERVE_STRUCTURE_AND_BASING_v2.pdf

I haven't been able to work out when 143 Plant Sqn disappeared from the TA order of battle (some time between 2005 and present)

The pre-1967 history of 125 and 143 Sqns will be covered in the wiki page for North Midland Divisional Engineers when that is completed.

Enjoy!Rickfive (talk) 10:07, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

"Eagle Dustoff" move not appreciated!

I hope you understand that "Eagle Dustoff" and 326th Med Bn are 2 completely separate terms? yes "Eagle Dustoff" (Dco 326) was in the 326th Med Bn at one time, but it was also once known as the 50th Med Co, C co 7-101 Aviation battalion and C co 159th Aviation Regiment as well. That is why i created a page separate from 326 Med Bn. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DustoffControl (talk • contribs) 18:19, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Hey thankyou very much mate!! Look, we have to use the official unit names, as otherwise nobody except unit members will ever find them. But now I can mention the 50th Medical Company, which is a separate rather than a battalion organic company, which may have a chance of an article, add some mention and links to 101st Aviation Regiment, and some mention and links to 159th Aviation Regiment. I had very little to work with when I made that merge - please tell me more about the history of the company.... Buckshot06 (talk) 22:28, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 9

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 links pointing to the disambiguation pages Eighth Army and XXIV Corps. 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) 09:10, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Flag Officer

Please consider this was the correct link let me show you. Under United States on this [page] it states "In the U.S. Army, Air Force, and Marine Corps, the term "flag officer" generally is applied to all general officers authorized to fly their own command flags—i.e., brigadier general, or rank O-7, and above" Hell in a Bucket (talk) 00:48, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Ghana Military Academy

added a link pointing to Royal Military Academy

RAF Technical Training Command

added a link pointing to Catterick

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:05, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXIII, August 2015

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D on the Second Schleswig War Interview: Featured picture participants Op-ed: TomStar81 on Indian nationalism during World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:46, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Deletion review of Jeffrey Allen Sinclair

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Jeffrey Allen Sinclair. Because you participated in the deletion discussion or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. GregJackP Boomer! 00:21, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 91st Motor Rifle Division, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 19th Army. 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) 09:02, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

1st Military Region (Algeria)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of 1st Military Region (Algeria), and it appears to include material copied directly from http://countrystudies.us/algeria/165.htm.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 22:49, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 31 August

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the 49th Army page, your edit caused an unsupported parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:14, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

75 Engineer Regiment (United Kingdom)

added a link pointing to Army Reserve

Royal Engineers

added a link pointing to 21 Engineer Regiment

Support Command (New Zealand)

added a link pointing to School of Military Engineering

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:41, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Crowfoot and Avanzini

The Crowfoot and Avanzini books available online are a good source for the Rifle Divisions. The descriptions say that there are volumes for the Guards and other units, but I can't find them. If they weren't published, are there any other books? --Kges1901 (talk) 07:43, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Can read it with Google Translate. I can't read Russian. --Kges1901 (talk) 09:16, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Philippine Commonwealth Army, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jonathan M. Wainwright. 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) 11:58, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXIV, September 2015

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors, coordinator elections have begun Articles: Abbasids to a Yugoslav monitor Book reviews: Economics of warfare, Japan, and light horse Op-ed: We can (not) advance Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 05:08, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

bdmilitary.com as source for order

Thanks for your work on references for Equipment of the Bangladesh Army. I agree that IISS is a solid source, but bdmilitary.com doesn't fit Wikipedia's definition of reliable for this order. No peer review, editorial oversight, or reputation for fact-checking and accuracy are evident. It is a self-published site that proclaims itself accurate because "the founding members and present staff are all former Bangladesh defence personnel and defence industry associates ensuring quality of information" [9]. It has been discussed once at WP:RSN here, where one editor supported it and two others expressed skepticism. I've removed it as a source for now, but am open to discussion if you think I've mischaracterized it. Worldbruce (talk) 05:15, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Soviet Army divisions 1989–91, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Skovorodino. 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) 13:11, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator election

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 29 September. Yours, Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 05:20, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

32nd guards tank division

Pages and categories adjusted. --Kges1901 (talk) 07:39, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

feskov online

Where is the 2013 feskov book online? I can't dind a link to the 2013 book, yet there is one for the 2004 book. --Kges1901 (talk) 15:28, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

I can't find it online, so you'll have to email me it. Also, GRDs are not covered on ww2dk. --Kges1901 (talk) 07:42, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Battle of Davao protection level

Hello Buckshot06. On 16 September 2015 you template-protected Battle of Davao (log). As template protection is only meant to be used for templates, or other highly transcluded pages, did you perhaps mean to select a different level? Thanks, Evad37 [talk] 15:09, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 13

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 13, August-September 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs)

• New donations - EBSCO, IMF, more newspaper archives, and Arabic resources
• Expansion into new languages, including Viet and Catalan
• Spotlight: Elsevier partnership garners controversy, dialogue
• Conferences: PKP, IFLA, upcoming events

Read the full newsletter

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:29, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited United States Central Command, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Task Force 88. 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) 10:16, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

magaclawe

hi Buckshot06 on your talk or point abiut somalis speaking arabic rather reading, the fact is somali people dont speak arabic thats a fact and what you have read on the world fact book its been writrn by a human like you and they can miss undersand so before you edit my writing as am somali my self please do your research. thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Magaclawe (talk • contribs) 22:59, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Sunk

I have a sense you're right. However, I won't be drawn into that debate again. I'm done with it, now & forever. TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 06:03, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

I also agree on your thinking here. Judging by the remarks made by Marcd30319, I was right in refusing to have anything more to do with it. TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 23:43, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Assessments

Can you please assess or reassess Medal "Army General Margelov", Vasily Margelov, Alexander Kapitokhin, Nikolay Voronov, United Belarusian Military School and Vasili Glazunov. Thanks, Kges1901 (talk) 19:04, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Well, first up, Vasily Margelov is heading for a B->A, but has virtually nothing about his command and leadership of the Airborne Forces. Improve that, significantly, and you'll just about be able to nominate it for A-Class Review. I'll get to the others, and work through all of these probably within a week. Great work all round. Buckshot06 (talk) 19:39, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXV, October 2015

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book review: Anotherclown and Sturmvogel 66 on war in the air and at sea Review essay: Auntieruth55 on the French Revolutionary Wars Op-ed: TomStar81 on the entry of Bulgaria in World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 21:46, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Prem Ratan Dhan Payo‎

Semi protect this page till Dec 2015. This page was previously semi-protected. An Ip hopper is adding Gautam Mrinal again and again. My RPP request is not answered. --The Avengers (talk) 11:26, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Chanute Air Force Base, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Scott Field. 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) 09:50, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Cyprus emergency

The Cyprus emergency version that you have reverted to, is a POV version of the story. The combatants are placed wrong, EOKA and TMT were not fighting together, but on the opposite sites, the number of British troops and police was not 17,000 but 40,000, EOKA was 1250 and not -, and the combatant casualties were 151 for the British and 108 for the EOKA and obviously not 371 killed by EOKA, and EOKA -, which is an obvious POV. I suggest of reverting to at list the following version, which is more NPOV, it is widely accepted, and is also covering the previous. You can add it and then ask the other users if they accept it if you want. I don't think that we will have any issues on this version. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cyprus_Emergency&diff=685628087&oldid=685620271. For more information on the subject you can conduct me, and discuss the issue more.Ron1978 (talk) 10:01, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

If you decide to revert it, to the more NPOV and widely accepted version that I have suggested, then we can discuss on adding more NPOV information on the article, and make it a proper NPOV article. As it was reverted now though, it went backwards to a higher degree of POV.Ron1978 (talk) 10:18, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

I acknowledge your message Ron1978. All discussion should be placed on the article talkpage, and this is where I am moving your message. Buckshot06 (talk) 20:43, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

The article is still in a very high POV version I have to say. The numbers that I gave were coming from books and universities and the 108 figure, had even had the names of them, one by one. Now the article is still saying 371 killed by EOKA and that's it. No numbers of EOKA members, no numbers of EOKA casualties, no numbers of combatant casualties in general. What type of a guerrilla warfare anywhere else, involving three parties, is saying to the box of casualties, that a number is killed by one organization and that's it.? The British and the Turkish Cypriots didn't kill anyone? Only the Greek Cypriots were killing? That is an obvious POV.

The same POV applies to the wars involving Cyprus. All the Greek victories are deleted. When there is a Greek victory there is no victory, when there is a Turkish victory, then there is victory. That is another obvious POV.

The same as well, applies to the articles about any type of 20th century conflict involving Cyprus and Turkey. Only Greek Cypriots are accused for massacres in all of them. Never a Turkish or a Turkish Cypriot one. How more of a pro-Turkish POV can that be? Are the civilian casualties in 1974 support this? On the contrary.

You have noticed yourself I guess the mania in which the two users are trying to delete all the victories of the Greek side haven't you, even in a version that I deliberately, left out the victor.!?

The user GGT is a Turk, edit warring the articles in relation to Cyprus for a very long time, and the user that is pushing the highest pro-Turkish POV in the whole Wikipedia. User Mikrobølgeovn is edit warring among others, the article list of wars involving Cyprus for a whole year now,! deleting with mania all the Greek victories and pushing pro-Turkish POV in the highest degree that he can.

Those two users are closely cooperating for a very long time, in reporting in false charges anyone else adding NPOV versions in the articles related to Cyprus and Turkey, accusing them to the administrations on false charges and pushing them in edit warring the articles, while those two are edit warring them as a team. You can see this from the history. Other users that were adding NPOV versions, have being permanently blocked for this, as a result of those two users actions.

Now if the administrators want to fix this, there are definitely ways to do it, but to start locking articles related to Cyprus in these very high degree POV versions, that it is not the way to do it. That it is certainly the way to secure these high degree POV versions and stop anyone else of adding any NPOV in these articles. Like that you are not fixing the problem, but you are securing the problem and the problem grows, and it will grow more, as it continuously grows for a very long time now.

If you want more information or to discuss the subject more, you can conduct me, to discuss it, but don't expect that you will find any users adding NPOV anywhere, if you try to discuss it in the talk pages. It is likely to just find those two users in many of them and that's it. The rest have being stopped editing, either due to getting blocked due to the actions of those two, either due to seen their NPOV edits always deleted by those two.Ron1978 (talk) 14:41, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Remember that I am not an particular expert on Cyprus, and the first task is to freeze the dispute, rather than get the 'right' (WP:WRONGVERSION?) entry. Any admin can, once good evidence is provided change the entry to another one in about five seconds. My inclination is to delete/merge the List of wars involving Cyprus; it's not really a viable article with only three entries. Now, regarding your problem, you need to come back to me, or AN/I, with a list of diffs (linked edits) and evidence of POV, citing sources; only then can action be taken. Buckshot06 (talk) 20:06, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Good evidence for the 108 EOKA casualties figure, are to be found here, in this book, in the digital library of the University of Cyprus, where all the names, one by one, of the 108 members of EOKA are to be found. . Another one is from the organization EOKA itself which is saying both the figure of 108, and is showing the 108 shootings that the national guard of Cyprus is shooting in their honor. Another one is from the open university of Cyprus, which also tells the figure of 108. The source is also showing parts of a monument that includes 108 steps in their honor. Good evidence of the 156 are to be found in this book here published by the Oxford University press. Those are the combatant casualties of the EOKA and British sides, as showing in the sources. Now if anyone else understands both Greek and English, knows the subject well, and can come with sources that are showing something else, then we can discuss it, but no one came, with either of those qualities. The number 1250 is to be found in this book here. Is anyone else coming with something else in this? The number 40000 is to be found here.

About what I have said in the articles related with Cyprus and Turkey conflicts there is a vast amount of evidence, since this is going on for a very long time....I will give enough and if you want more, just tell me.

Lets start with the Cypriot intercommunal violence.......

Here user GGT removes the POV tag, while there is discussion on the matter calling it unexplained.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cypriot_intercommunal_violence&diff=686524035&oldid=686181988

Here user GGT deletes the sourced Greek victory, with all the sources claiming it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cypriot_intercommunal_violence&diff=686148388&oldid=686106999

Here user Mikrobølgeovn adds unreliable source in the first source claiming Greek victory.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cypriot_intercommunal_violence&diff=686069656&oldid=686068737

and here he deletes the second.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cypriot_intercommunal_violence&diff=686086735&oldid=686071049

Here user GGT deletes this, about the British having to interfere to stop the atrocities by the Turkish Cypriots and the important conversation of Denktas.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cypriot_intercommunal_violence&diff=670036140&oldid=661448091

Here user GGT deleted this, of the report of the UN mediator Dr Gala Plaza.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cypriot_intercommunal_violence&diff=661448091&oldid=661149451

Here user GGT deletes this, of the report of the Secretary-General of the United Nations in 1964, because as he says it came from the official website of the Republic of Cyprus.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cypriot_intercommunal_violence&diff=656350613&oldid=655418401

Here user GGT deletes the Cypriot victory and calls it complete non-sense, saying that Turkey just supported Turkish Cypriots. Turkey was bombing Cyprus at the moment by the way.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cypriot_intercommunal_violence&diff=655418401&oldid=655414262

Here user Mikrobølgeovn deletes the Cypriot victory as well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cypriot_intercommunal_violence&diff=655382659&oldid=655337639

Here user GGT is edit warring the article, deleting everything that he doesn't like in the whole article, adds only what he likes, threatens and then reports the other user.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cypriot_intercommunal_violence&diff=496117210&oldid=496108328

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cypriot_intercommunal_violence&diff=496079395&oldid=495997162

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cypriot_intercommunal_violence&diff=495646210&oldid=495582965

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cypriot_intercommunal_violence&diff=493545192&oldid=493416753

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cypriot_intercommunal_violence&diff=493370583&oldid=493369701

Lets go now on the wars involving Cyprus

Here user Mikrobølgeovn is constantly edit warring the article.

Here is reverting everything in two parts, a classic tactic used by user Mikrobølgeovn. The sum of the number of characters are exactly the same.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=687187716&oldid=687186908

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=687186908&oldid=686105841

Here is edit warring....

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=686066317&oldid=686064879

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=686055070&oldid=685927624

Another reverting in tho parts....

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=685880402&oldid=685624086

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=685621530&oldid=685598353

And then in one part....

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=685463373&oldid=685417902

Here is reverting in many parts

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=685202706&oldid=685202427

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=685202427&oldid=685202006

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=685202006&oldid=685201702

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=685201702&oldid=685199744

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=685199744&oldid=685124390

Here user GGT is helping him by adding non reliable sources to the sources that are claiming Greek Victories e.t.c in two parts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=684785790&oldid=684785720

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=684785720&oldid=684783491

Here user Mikrobølgeovn is doing exactly the same as user GGT in the previous....

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=684783491&oldid=684722514

Here user GGT and user Mikrobølgeovn are cooperating in edit warring the article.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=684716288&oldid=684636709

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=684625224&oldid=684615161

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=684538147&oldid=675282702

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=675186547&oldid=675057742

and here they add Turkish user Alkzi to aid them.....

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=675012772&oldid=675004381

Here user GGT s reverting in parts...

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=674998191&oldid=674998013

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=674998013&oldid=674997579

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=674997579&oldid=674997541

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=674997541&oldid=674994865

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=674994865&oldid=674994738

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=674994738&oldid=674994623

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=674994623&oldid=674994003

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=674994003&oldid=674911089

Here GGT is reverting in one part.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=674424497&oldid=674423851

Here user GGT is edit warring again..

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=674422891&oldid=674421833

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=674372353&oldid=674266884

Here user GGT is reverting again..

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=655399808&oldid=655399093

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=655399093&oldid=655396220

Here user Mikrobølgeovn is edit warring again....

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=654249005&oldid=654248169

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=654231997&oldid=654217957

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=654171998&oldid=654161288

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=654155894&oldid=654153846

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=654092411&oldid=654023848

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=653633422&oldid=651988640

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=632753698&oldid=632724501

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=631476151&oldid=631453955

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=631436185&oldid=631364802

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=631047189&oldid=631045914

There are edit warring the above article from the start, pushing POV, always deleting all Greek victories and the rest of the information that they don't like.

Now lets go to the Turkish invasion of Cyprus....

Here user GGT removes the veto power information and call it potentially contentious claim.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Turkish_invasion_of_Cyprus&diff=671708546&oldid=671442247

Here user GGT pushes the POV about EOKA forces began targeting and killing Turkish Cypriot police deliberately to provoke Turkish Cypriot riots in Nicosia, that I have mentioned in previous discussions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Turkish_invasion_of_Cyprus&diff=670039603&oldid=670038576

Here user GGT goes further to expand the creation of the pro-Turkish POV...

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Turkish_invasion_of_Cyprus&diff=670038576&oldid=668171596

Here user GGT deletes a Turkish war crime, recognized as such by the UN.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Turkish_invasion_of_Cyprus&diff=662782424&oldid=662681115

Here user GGT deletes the source from the official website of Republic of Cyprus calling it a propaganda link.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Turkish_invasion_of_Cyprus&diff=661435199&oldid=661396418

Here user GGT removes the number of Greek Cypriot refugees given by Guardian.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Turkish_invasion_of_Cyprus&diff=656487849&oldid=656487445

Here user GGT removes the information and the source that is explaining that the reason of the Turkish invasions was not valid since the government was reestablished again after a few days.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Turkish_invasion_of_Cyprus&diff=656487315&oldid=656486867

Here user GGT pushes the POV that I was talking about in a previous discussion, in the first Turkish invasion section where he adds only Greek Cypriot crimes and present the case in a total pro Turkish POV manner.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Turkish_invasion_of_Cyprus&diff=655416023&oldid=655413383

Here user GGT is deleting everything that comes from the official websites of the Republic of Cyprus and calls it propaganda.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Turkish_invasion_of_Cyprus&diff=651841515&oldid=651841470

Here again GGT deletes valuable information that comes from the Cambridge and Oxford universities.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Turkish_invasion_of_Cyprus&diff=651678856&oldid=651678387

If you want more information in the subject tell me. There is an endless evidence, that is just a small part of what is going on.Ron1978 (talk) 01:24, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Thankyou for your note Ron. You provide some reasonable evidence (removing the UN reports is rather surprising) but I will have to consider what you are saying, and look at more of the diffs. Feel free to continue to post relevant diffs on this page. Regards Buckshot06 (talk) 01:37, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

References

Lets continue with the Turkish invasion of Cyprus.......

Here user GGT deletes relevant information, that shows a more NPOV way of presenting the story, and a Greek Cypriot victory in the inter communal violence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Turkish_invasion_of_Cyprus&diff=651676991&oldid=651676349

Here user GGT deletes information from the Princeton University that says that the TRNC has not being recognized by anyone else rather than Turkey and the ethnic cleansing that took part, by the Turkish army.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Turkish_invasion_of_Cyprus&diff=651674354&oldid=651673730

Here user Mikrobølgeovn is edit warring the article.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Turkish_invasion_of_Cyprus&diff=632901394&oldid=632853359

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Turkish_invasion_of_Cyprus&diff=632753871&oldid=632722553

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Turkish_invasion_of_Cyprus&diff=632452070&oldid=632450779

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Turkish_invasion_of_Cyprus&diff=632200178&oldid=632140200

Now lets go to the Cyprus Emergency....

User Mikrobølgeovn as usually is edit warring this article as well....

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cyprus_Emergency&diff=686107376&oldid=686106235

Here is reverting in two parts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cyprus_Emergency&diff=686099385&oldid=686087922

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cyprus_Emergency&diff=686087922&oldid=686069682

And here is deleting a source.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cyprus_Emergency&diff=685620271&oldid=685620137

Now lets go to the Egyptian raid on Larnaca Airport....

Here user Mikrobølgeovn is deleting the Greek Cypriot victory even in this small one!

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Egyptian_raid_on_Larnaca_International_Airport&diff=653634237&oldid=651664837

Now lets go to the list of wars involving Turkey....

Here user Mikrobølgeovn is edit warring the article as usual and deleting all Greek in this case and Greek Cypriot victories as usual.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Turkey&diff=654249001&oldid=654248128

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Turkey&diff=654232012&oldid=654217856

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Turkey&diff=654172021&oldid=654161258

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Turkey&diff=654155911&oldid=654153815

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Turkey&diff=654027170&oldid=654023930

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Turkey&diff=653640561&oldid=651988440

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Turkey&diff=632753082&oldid=632723836

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Turkey&diff=632453263&oldid=632450935

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Turkey&diff=632083248&oldid=632082206

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Turkey&diff=631471559&oldid=631454010

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Turkey&diff=631436147&oldid=631365320

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Turkey&diff=631047142&oldid=631046470

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Turkey&diff=623168503&oldid=623160714

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Turkey&diff=622796005&oldid=622787372

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Turkey&diff=622190139&oldid=620946311

Now lets go to the article Cyprus.......

Here user GGT deletes the violation of Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention sourced by the Washington post.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cyprus&diff=666476227&oldid=666457173

Here user GGT deletes the filing at the International Court of Justice against Turkey for the war crime of transferring its civilian population to occupied territory, and the violation of Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cyprus&diff=666188490&oldid=666187961

Here in all three of them, user GGT deletes the attitude of the Turkish government in the 50's, in relation to Cyprus. In other edits of him in the same article, gives special emphasis to present in a negative way the Greek policy of the time, yet he deletes all the Turkish one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cyprus&diff=662984612&oldid=662970810

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cyprus&diff=654550577&oldid=654547687

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cyprus&diff=654482531&oldid=654389336

Here user GGT deletes the statement by the Secretary General of the United Nations twice.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cyprus&diff=661294381&oldid=661293729

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cyprus&diff=661269248&oldid=661268370

Here user GGT deletes the word illegally in occupied by Turkish forces. The occupation is obviously illegal since no country recognize it as legal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cyprus&diff=654224821&oldid=654222895

Here user GGT deletes all the non-recognition information and the military occupation by Turkey and all the information of the international community attitude on the matter.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cyprus&diff=654217529&oldid=654217070

Here user GGT deletes the information about the US intervention in preventing Turkey to invade in the 1960's

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cyprus&diff=653901511&oldid=653901301

Now lets go to the article Northern Cyprus.....

Here user GGT deletes the information from the U.S department of state and from the United Kingdom in relation with human rights and forced migration policy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Northern_Cyprus&diff=669330851&oldid=669061272

Here user GGT deletes the Turkish aid that shows their economic relationship.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Northern_Cyprus&diff=651968956&oldid=651669430

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Northern_Cyprus&diff=642228050&oldid=642227604

Here user GGT deletes the word illegal in the occupation everywhere he can find it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Northern_Cyprus&diff=651669006&oldid=651352551

Here user GGT deletes all the non-recognition information and the military occupation by Turkey and the information that says that the UN, EU, Council of Europe and other international organisations recognize the de jure sovereignty of the Republic of Cyprus over the whole island.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Northern_Cyprus&diff=642227604&oldid=642227234

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Northern_Cyprus&diff=642227234&oldid=642226972

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Northern_Cyprus&diff=642226972&oldid=642226642

Here user GGT deletes the information about the negotiations between the two sides and the United Nations source as usual....

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Northern_Cyprus&diff=642063812&oldid=642043984

I will continue tomorrow with moreRon1978 (talk) 00:55, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Now lets see their conduct with any other user trying to add NPOV in the articles.

I have never, not even a single time, added anything related with Cyprus or Turkey that they haven't deleted or changed by those two.

My first and only attempt in the article Kurdish villages depopulated by Turkey, changed the next day by user GGT.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kurdish_villages_depopulated_by_Turkey&diff=674373323&oldid=674265372

My first attempt in the article List of wars involving Cyprus all deleted by user GGT next day, saying that "Northern Cyprus is unrecognized" nonsense. All my later attempts to add anything were deleted by user GGT and user Mikrobølgeovn as it shows from the evidence provided in the previous, in edit warring and in cooperation in edit warring, plus the false charges to the administrators, the continues false information that they spread around both for users and in the articles, and the false name calling.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Cyprus&diff=674372353&oldid=674266884

User Mikrobølgeovn after he failed to sanction me through false charges then he said to add the information on the articles. And the result was....

First attempt to add information in the article Cyprus emergency all deleted by user Mikrobølgeovn.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cyprus_Emergency&diff=685620271&oldid=685620137

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cyprus_Emergency&diff=686087922&oldid=686069682

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cyprus_Emergency&diff=686099385&oldid=686087922

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cyprus_Emergency&diff=686107376&oldid=686106235

First attempt to add information on the Cypriot inter communal violence, labelled by user Mikrobølgeovn as unreliable the same day. Later on he cooperates with user GGT to delete everything in all my attempts, as previous evidence show.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cypriot_intercommunal_violence&diff=686067678&oldid=686066758

If you want more evidence just let me know.Ron1978 (talk) 20:07, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

As usual user ‎ Mikrobølgeovn is deleting my edits in everything. The above is for wars involving Russia and unrelated with Cyprus, and now is edit warring that article as well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Russia&diff=687966655&oldid=687799167

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Russia&diff=688077655&oldid=687983707

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_involving_Russia&diff=688110361&oldid=688109803Ron1978 (talk) 18:30, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Further comment about List of wars involving Cyprus

Hello Buckshot06. I happened to see that disputes about Cyprus had come to your talk page. After noticing some complaints at WP:AN3 I've been trying to keep an eye on List of wars involving Cyprus. The long statements and unclear complaints make it hard for admins to tell if policy has been violated by either side. However, some links may be relevant to your review of the problem:

• Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive256#User:GiorgosY reported by User:FPSTurkey (Result: Blocked)
• Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive289#User:GGT reported by User:Courtier1978 (Result: Three-revert rule not applicable)
• Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive296#User:Courtier1978 reported by User:Mikrobølgeovn (Result: )

• Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/GiorgosY/Archive.

GiorgosY was an editor who was highly interested in the List of wars involving Cyprus article who got indef blocked in March 2015. To the extent we are talking about Greek/Turkish conflict, the sanctions of WP:ARBMAC may be applicable. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 03:11, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

• Dear Buckshot06, sorry to see this topic come sprawling all over your talk page. You may make of the topic whatever you would like to. What I would like you to know is that my activities on Wikipedia during the last year would probably get me labelled as an anti-Turkish POV-pusher had they been on Turkish Wikipedia by some groups. Please check my activity on Ottoman genocides for that: extensive expansion of the Assyrian genocide article to get it ready for the 100th anniversary here (staying up till 4 am at times to filter off and use very reliable sources at times so that your outraged nationalist won't come and trample all over the article), work on Turkish settlers in Northern Cyprus here, my work on Armenian Genocide which I cannot really bother giving evidence about (e.g. expanding mass burning section, adding the first real description of rape). For Cyprus, see this and this at least. I added half the massacres against Greek Cypriots here before this user could show up to rant about how a massacre denier I am. When he did nothing but to put forward a Greek Cypriot massacre using POV newspapers, I was the one to find European Parliament reports and everything and to actually put it into the article the way we are supposed to be doing it, per WP:V. Yet I am a massacre denier, a POV-pushing Turk, I deserve a scrutiny and cherry-picking of my "records". I do this because I know how history can get lost (see Assyrian genocide) or be manipulated (see wars in Cyprus) in such nationalist rage. Yes, I have removed quotes from UN reports, from reliable sources, but because they were irrelevant or manipulated. For God's sake I have seen a UN report that talks about the terrible circumstances in Cyprus in 1964 blaming both sides and yet on Wikipedia someone had cherrypicked a certain quote to make a point about how Turkish Cypriots were just messing up Cyprus! Yes, this is the one you found interesting, see this explanation after my removal of the quote in Cyprus was reverted by another user (who did not voice further objection to its removal). I am very, very tired of this long personal campaign and total whatever. Very, very tired. Just check the archives of the relevant pages to see fruitful discussions with other users that actually resulted in consensus and the article being developed, just check how the article development process on Cyprus has normally worked, just check the volumes of material out there. And a final kind plea, please check his and my claims critically and in depth before reacting. Cyprus is never, never as simple as it seems. I know that this could be getting you tired, and I appreciate your attempts at resolution through policy and procedure. Cheers. --GGT (talk) 18:08, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

@GGT: The reason I've been very sparing in my comments so far is that I've been spending some time going through page histories, including previous usernames, and block logs, for all three users involved. Buckshot06 (talk) 21:15, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Cyprus issue is resolved

All three editors that we have been involved in this, we have finally agreed on the issues and the dispute has been resolved.Ron1978 (talk) 14:52, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

List of Royal Artillery regiments

I would be happy to help out with lists of Royal Artillery and Royal Engineer regiments, where I can. However, I would strongly advise restricting the RA to List of Royal Artillery regiments in World War II (or some similar title) and perhaps a second postwar and/or present-day list. The reasons are entirely practical: there were something over 1000 RA regiments during WWII (Farndale lists some 177 Field, 61 A/T, 59 Medium, 26 Heavy and Super-Heavy, 95 Coastal, 407 AA (HAA, LAA, S/L and Z) and 82 Training, not to mention survey, mountain, defence, garrison, RA infantry etc), and then the whole system was turned upside down and everything renumbered in 1947. The RE are simpler: they did not adopt the regimental system until 1946. I would actually have suggested separate RA lists for HAA (159 entries), LAA (150) and so on, running from the adoption of regimental titles in 1938 until demobilisation in 1946, and paralleling the existing List of British Army Yeomanry Regiments converted to Royal Artillery. Everything we would need is in Farndale, History of the Royal Regiment of Artillery: The years of Defeat 1939–41, Annex M, supplemented (as Farndale himself suggests) with Norman Litchfield, The Territorial Artillery 1908–1988. The useful Royal Artillery 1939–1945 site ([10]) is based on Farndale. My sources are less good for 1947–67 (mainly British Army Units from 1945 on ([11])), and almost absent 1967–present.Rickfive (talk) 17:54, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

11th guards airborne brigade

It appears that the 500th Separate Airborne Battalion was disbanded in 2006, according to the Siberian Military district article, but I can't find a source for it. To satisfy B class standards of completeness, the article probably needs that information included. Kges1901 (talk) 11:15, 2 November 2015 (UTC) @Kges1901: Done. A better source than the one I originally used is http://www.ww2.dk. Anytime you need anything related to the organisation of the Soviet Armed Forces from 1945 onwards, check there, by service branch from the index page. Buckshot06 (talk) 21:10, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Canadian Expeditionary Force artillery from Prince Edward Island, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Battle of Amiens. 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) 11:34, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Volga–Urals Military District, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Samara. 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) 14:01, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXVI, November 2015

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-Class content Book review: Hawkeye7 on the Battle of the Bulge Op-ed: TomStar81 looks at the collapse of the Serbian Army in World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 03:25, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

157th Air Refueling Wing

The group redesignation in 1960 is documented in an issue of Air Pictorial, which ran an article on a unit history in each issue (at least back in the day). Mostly RAF squadrons, but they did a US unit every now and then. I've had trouble digging my old issues out (other units covered that I recall were the 31st Fighter Group and 394th Bombardment Group -- as the 106th Aeromedical Transport Group). This type of thing is one of the reasons that AFHRA refuses to track ANG lineages.

A lot of this was in a garbled manner in the earlier version of the 101st Air Refueling Wing, which, like most of the articles on the 27 groups allotted to the Guard in 1946, is a garbled history of the group and the 27 wings formed in 1950. Starting with the group, it was formed with squadrons in Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont with group HQ (and the 201st Air Service Gp HQ) in Maine. The 101st Wing was formed in 1950 (consistently missed in these articles is the fact that for the groups called into federal service in 1950, the wings and support units with the same number were activated in the regular air force, and not returned to state control in 1952/1953, but allotted to the Guard for the first time. Some, like the first 106th Air Refueling Squadron, were never allotted to the Guard). Anyway, the 101st was returned to the Guard as before. However, the group was withdrawn from Maine and transferred to Vermont in 1954. Starting in the Spring of 1956, Guard units gained by Air Defense Command began to transition to the organizational model ADC had been using since 1953, with a regional air defense wing commanding air defense groups (fighter groups (Air Defense) after 1955). At the same time the group was withdrawn from the Vermont ANG, which replaced it with the 158th Fighter Group (AD), while the group became the 101st Fighter Group (AD) in the New Hampshire ANG. The Maine squadron and support units (each group had a materiel squadron, an air base squadron and a USAF dispensary -- the wing had these, too, dropping its previous Air Base Group, Maintenance & Supply Group and Tactical Hospital) were assigned directly to the wing. In 1960, the New Hampshire unit converted to airlift. The 101st Fighter Group (AD) was not withdrawn from New Hampshire, but had to be renumbered when a Fighter Group was formed at Dow under the 101st Air Defense Wing and (being on the same station as the wing) given the same number as the wing.

I see that Air Pictorial has quite an archive online, but it's not handy to use if you don't have the exact issue since going back takes you to more resent issues and the old ones have to reload. I'll add the cite when I locate it, since my paper copies of the magazine are nearby somewhere. --Lineagegeek (talk) 22:49, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 11th Guards Airborne Division, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tula. 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) 10:19, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

November 2015

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Military of Mali may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• com/nouvelle_voir.php?idNouvelle=10935</ref> four infantry battalions, one Special Forces battalion]], one airborne battalion (possibly the 33rd Parachute Infantry Regiment, Djikoroni, in Bamako<ref

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:00, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

List of regiments of the Royal Artillery 1938-47

I've been thinking about this one. There is a whole string of key dates to consider: 1900, when previously ad hoc 'brigades' became permanent units of the RHA, RFA and RGA 1908, when the Territorial Force was formed, and TF artillery units became brigades under local designations (all doubled in 1914) 1916, when TF brigades were numbered in sequence with the Regulars 1920-2, when the TF was reformed as the TA and all TA brigades were renumbered from 50 upwards in each category 1924, when the RGA merged back into the RA 1938, when 'Brigade' was replaced by 'Regiment' 1947, when both Regular and TA regiments were reformed and renumbered in one new sequence 1967, when the TA was reduced into the TAVR and subsequent reductions and renumberings

I would recommend 'WWII' (essentially 1938–1947) as a viable list, though it requires a huge amount of transcription. 'WWI" (brigades 1900/08-1920) and 'Postwar' (regiments 1947- ) would also be viable. Trying to do everything in one list would simply be unmanageable, with units changing their titles too often.

Within WWII we would need the following sections (roughly following Farndale and the Royal Regiment's accepted order of precedence):

• Royal Horse Artillery
• Field
• Anti-Tank
• Medium
• Heavy (Field Army)
• Super Heavy
• Pack, Mountain and Light
• Air Landing
• Survey
• Heavy (Coast Defence) and Coast
• Heavy Anti-Aircraft
• Light Anti-Aircraft
• Searchlight
• Anti-Aircraft 'Z' Rocket
• Maritime
• Defence
• Garrison
• Infantry
• Training
• Reserve
• Hong King-Singapore
• Royal Malta

Some of these are quite short, others are very long. Most of them would have to remain as section headings followed by an 'under construction' note for quite a long time, though the existing categories provide a starting point. I would envisage a simple list format like List of British brigades in World War II with an introductory paragraph or two for each main section, and an in-line note about the title and role changes to each entry (regiment) that requires it (but not as much detail as in List of British divisions in World War II). Because I have done so much on searchlight regiments over the years I have a draft for that section almost ready, which I had been toying with as a possible stand-alone list.

As for Farndale's 'Annex M', the unit pages of the 'Royal Artillery 1939–45' website (http://www.ra39-45.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk) are closely based on it. (Farndale's book is available through Amazon).

CheersRickfive (talk) 15:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
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) 16:06, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Khmeimim Air Base

I noted that you "upmerged" the KAB to the Bassel Al-Assad International Airport although there was an invitation to a discussion about the matter. If you really think that the two lemmas belong together, why not initiate in the discussion or participate in it. You are invited to present your arguments there and then a decision can be made. I would appreciate that.Ekem (talk) 00:41, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your message. I followed WP:BOLD - honestly writing an extra article for an existing airport struck me as bizarre. You'll see I've tidied up the 'mergeto' tag and placed all the discussion at Talk:Bassel Al-Assad International Airport. Do you mean Lemma (mathematics)? Cheers & regards Buckshot06 (talk) 00:53, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Lemma = headword ≠ math.Ekem (talk) 01:06, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

29th Motor Rifle Division

added a link pointing to Kuibyshev

300th Rifle Division (Soviet Union)

added a link pointing to Pokrovka

Joint Task Force

added a link pointing to 1st Cavalry Regiment

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:16, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 29 November

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the 26th Air Division page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:18, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

30SW's text

I noticed you commented on 30SW's text for that merger discussion, and I was wondering if you knew of any concentrated effort to fix his text, or should we just fix it as we come upon it? I actually ended up writing that text by modifying his text on another article, but it would be good to know what the plan might be, if there even is one. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 06:05, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

372nd Rifle Division

added a link pointing to Sary-Ozek

Allied Joint Force Command Naples

added a link pointing to Multi-National Division (South-East)

Somali Armed Forces

added a link pointing to Darood

Volga–Urals Military District

added a link pointing to Kirov

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

transit processing page

What's a "transit processing page" ? DexDor ^(talk) 18:14, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Where did I use the term? Buckshot06 (talk) 21:14, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

In the edit summary creating Category:Wikipedia image galleries (which had previously been deleted). I'm trying to understand what this category is intended to be - mainly with a view to merging Category:Image galleries (which is currently directly below Category:Contents) into it. DexDor ^(talk) 21:49, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Actually looking at the category page should help you: these are pages which are *solely* image galleries, which need to be moved to Commons. Thus they're 'in transit' to Commons. Buckshot06 (talk) 22:00, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

So do you think that the articles currently in this category (Coats of arms of U.S. Infantry Regiments and Division insignia of the United States Army) need to be moved to Commons (i.e. deleted from wp)? They look ok to me and there's many similar articles in Wikipedia that (because of their subject) contain a lot of images (e.g. DZ Flash). If this category is intended to be a maintenance category then shouldn't it look something more like Category:Self-contradictory articles? DexDor ^(talk) 22:31, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject historian and newcomer of the year awards now open!

On behalf of the Military history WikiProject's Coordinators, we would like to extend an invitation to nominate deserving editors for the 2015 Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards. The nomination period will run from 7 December to 23:59 13 December, with the election phase running from 14 December to 23:59 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:05, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

List of Royal Artillery Regiments in World War II

(Or: List of Royal Artillery Regiments 1938–1947)

I've logged back in after a short break, and looked at the draft in your Sandbox. What's the drill now? Should I copy it across to my own Sandbox and begin working it up, then alert you when it reaches the next stage? The correct title for the other list would be 'List of Royal Artillery Brigades 1900–1938'. I wonder with these massive lists whether there should be a 'hide/reveal' function for each section to reduce the amount of scrolling down the page? Or would this require complex tabulation? BTW: what is the template for 'This Section is under Construction'?Rickfive (talk) 16:23, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

I've invited you to work on it there, so please go ahead and just treat it like a draft page in your userspace, possibly barring making comments about Donald Trump's intelligence, nous, manners, and ability to avoid bankruptcy, which actually now I think about it, we cannot make in such articles - drat!! Nor about Putin for that matter. Once we're both happy we can launch it onto the unsuspecting mainspace. I'll make the title change for 1900-38 and look into the other issues you raise. Ubique! Buckshot06 (talk) 01:01, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

3d ID unit crests

You don't like the unit crests in the article? Mikeofv (talk) 14:08, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

The whole Military History project generally does not support having these kinds of icons in higher-formation articles. This may be because of the same understanding that deprecates having flags in infoboxes. Definitely not my point alone, or anything singling out 3 ID. Buckshot06 (talk) 08:59, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 14

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 14, October-November 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs)

• New donations - Gale, Brill, plus Finnish and Farsi resources
• Open Access Week recap, and DOIs, Wikipedia, and scholarly citations
• Spotlight: 1Lib1Ref - a citation drive for librarians

Read the full newsletter

The Interior, via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:12, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

7th Guards Airborne Division

added a link pointing to Novomoskovsk

Central Asian Military District

added a link pointing to Aktogay

List of Soviet Army divisions 1989–91

added a link pointing to Novomoskovsk

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

File:Xmas Ornament.jpg

To You and Yours!

FWiW Bzuk (talk) 18:13, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXVII, December 2015

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-Class content Book review: Hawkeye7 on the German retreat from France in 1944 Op-ed: TomStar81 on empires of World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 05:06, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 161st Mechanised Brigade (Ukraine), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 1st Guards Army. 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) 10:38, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 27 December

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the 12th Guards Tank Division page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:15, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 28 December

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Group of Soviet Forces in Germany page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:19, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

161st Mechanised Brigade (Ukraine)

added a link pointing to BMP

British Army Training Unit Kenya

added a link pointing to Al Shabaab

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Aggressor squadron, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mary. 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) 09:26, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

COGARDRON ONE reply

About a month ago you asked on my talk page if there were and resources for Navy elements in the Saigon area that I knew of. The link I found to one unit was here. The Naval Facilities Engineering Command History 1965-1974 is at this page and Commander Naval Forces Vietnam is at this link. Some where in that mess I saw something about Navy medical facilities in Vietnam but I can't find it now. If I run across it again I will get in touch. These links will connect you with PDF that will cover a lot besides what you are looking for so you might have to dig a little to find what you need. The Commander Naval Forces Vietnam link will connect you with monthly summaries of operations but I found some interesting stuff in the appendix of each summary covering other than combat operations at least in some months. Sorry it took so long, but I have been tied up on a couple of projects off-line. Any questions, give me a shout. Cuprum17 (talk) 23:57, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Joint Task Force, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Atlantic Command. 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) 09:47, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Military Elite

There is nothing bizarre about that list. They are all elite units regardless of performance due to quality of training, equipment, and so forth. Some are elite due to level of performance. The typical person would love access to such a list to easily access information to said units.Don Brunett (talk) 15:10, 21 January 2016 (UTC)Don Brunett

But there will need to be a quality definition, sourced to thoroughly reliable sources, that says what a 'military elite' is, and then each entry will have to be referenced against that definition (WP:V). WP:V is one of our WP:Five Pillars. See for example the Jimmy Wales quote sourced via footnote 1 and 2 at [[12]]. I've fought a long and hard battle at List of military special forces units against random claims, and I don't intend to have Military elite let that down. Please make sure that (a) you add a definition, and (b) any units you re-add have proper references. Cheers Buckshot06 (talk) 00:09, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

• Congrats you killed a good article that provided links to elite units a lot of people do not know about.Don Brunett (talk) 00:24, 22 January 2016 (UTC)Don Brunett
  • Er, no. I removed a whole lot of unreferenced material that made a whole lot of unsubstantiated claims. This is an encyclopedia, not a WP:NOTAFORUM. Thus the data should be good. You're well within your rights to research and write a proper article on the subject; if you're not interested in properly referencing what you write, you're on the wrong website. Buckshot06 (talk) 07:51, 22 January 2016 (UTC)