User:EyeSerene/Archive1

Welcome
Hey there, ! I'm here to welcome you to Wikipedia! The tutorial is a quick and helpful way to help you fit in with all the other Wikipedians! It would be a good idea to take a look at the policies and guidelines of Wikipedia before you start. If you need help, feel free to post it on my user talk page, but don't forget to add it to your watchlist so that you are notified when I reply! Another option would be to use the questions forum. Or, if you prefer, you can insert on your talk page (this page) and someone should answer soon. I hope you enjoy yourself on Wikipedia, and good luck with your contributions! --Deon 13:11, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Voulet-Chanoine Mission
Thanks very much for your work in copyediting; it was immensily appreciated. As for the question of the reunion of the missions, that isn't clear enough, and especially the Gentil mission, which I had only mentioned in the lead. To speak much of the Gentil Mission much before is unfortunately difficult, as they had arrived to Chad not from Algeria or Senegal, but from Congo, that is a completely different route, with hardly any contacts with the other missions. BTW, I've noted you're a new user; I'm an admin and I've been around here quite a long time, so if there's any way I can help you, don't be afraid to ask.--Aldux 14:15, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

sims
Thanks for the reply. Deighton is fiction, but it deals with a sims specialist who uses a model to make a point (one I obviously didn't make well): Soviet flying boats may be able to land on ice & deploy sonobuoys, or weaps, thru it, a fact not accounted for in NATO exs & models... I made a minor correction to your correction; Dupuy didn't actually say models that can't repro are whimsy, I did, because it seems true to me. (Maybe I overstated it...) I'm wondering if you've seen anything on the work Canadian Professor Patrick M. Blackett did on convoys in WW2, which demononstrated large convoys were actually better than small ones, or on ASWORG. (Maybe this is more appropriate to an article on ops research...) You might look to van der Vat's Atlantic Campaign, or Milner's North Atlantic Run, to name 2, for sources. I've got one small stylistic criticism: including so much detail on the Ardennes wargame seems out of place (interesting as it is); I'd suggest breaking it out into a "practical examples" section, if possible, & summarinzing the event in the section it's now in. I'm looking forward to the complete article. It's been pretty interesting so far... Trekphiler 00:43, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Sims (again)
I was looking at your wrok in prorgess (...) & it occured to me: Roman armies trained rigorously, using field exercies, to crib a phrase, "as bloodless battles, & battles as bloody drills" (& I wish I could attribute the quote). Something of a breakout into "history" section, where this might be included, occurs to me. So do some additional examples; the ones now seem a bit selective, like they were readily available. (Maybe I'm fussy.) The Roman example, not to beat a dead equus, leads me back to exs not being sims. I doubt the Romans even had a concept of "field ex", just training. My thinking is, it's a bit difficult to draw a "bright line" between the two, which leads me to think "Simulations" should be merged with "Military Training" (if such page exists), with a link to "Sims". No? Trekphiler 19:56, 12 October 2006 (UTC) (Post Scriptum {showing off my command of Latin, Y...) No need to answer, unless you've got questions. )

'Training', manual
Wish I could offer examples. My info is much more general; you've already got more depth than I could offer. I've heard of Lanchester, of course, but that's by way of books on wargaming, & the Ardennes example I came across in books on the operation, with (probably) fewer specifics than you've got. I'm no more a linguist, I'm afraid, so I can't point to foreign language sources, but let me offer some possible leads, if you can connect with somebody--say, on Japanese Wikipedia: before the Pacific War, & during, IJN did several map exercises, & all were stopped as IJN fell into a war of attrition, so as to avoid defeat. A Midway map ex showed four IJN CVs sunk, until the umps stepped in & changed the outcome. IJN umps would routinely provide positional info, so faulty (or absent) recon wasn't penalized, a major problem for IJN thru the war. As to sources for this, look at...(I'm getting my bibliography... I wrote an essay on the war, & it includes just about every book I ever read on it.)
 * Appleyard, Rollo, Commander, RN. Elements of Convoy Defense. 1917 (if you can find it...& if you can, tell me immediately!)
 * Ito & Pineau, End of the Imperial Japanese Navy. W W Norton, 1962.
 * Willmott, H. P. Empires in the Balance. USNI Press, 1982.
 * ________. Barrier and the Javelin. USNI Press, 1983.
 * Hartman, Gregory. Weapons that Wait. (mine warfare) USNI Press, 1979.
 * Peattie & Evans. Kaigun. (IJN) USNI Press, 1997.
 * Badsay, Stephen. Hutchinson Atlas of World War II Battle Plans. Oxford: Helicon Publishing, 2000.
 * Calvocoressi & Wint. Total War. NY: Pantheon, 1989. (I don't recall much pertinent in it.)
 * Jones, R V. Wizard War. (The bibliography might have sources.)
 * Hartcup. Challenge of War. (The bibliography might have sources.)

Look into the work Prof Patrick M. Blackett did on OR (or did I mention him already?). In Zimmerman, Scientists and War, I think. Hope that's some help, at least.

Thanks for the tip on "bloody drills". I came across it recently in a book on the Roman army, & it fits with the "train hard, fight easy" motto I've also seen. This is what IJN did prewar, which is why ops around Guadalcanal went so well for IJN & so badly for USN for so long.

As you can probably guess, I've little specific knowledge on sims, beyond Dupuy's Numbers (which I still think is definitive).

Hope I've been some help. Trekphiler 03:23, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Sims again
Reading the article, I recall something else I came across once. (I've no idea where, I'm afraid...) The Israeli Army trains officers with a surprise exercise. It gives them days to prepare a plan, & when the plan is presented, the trainee is told, the conditions have completely changed, you have hours to formulate a new plan. When he presents that one, again he's told, the conditions have completely changed, you have minutes. (The ones who don't have heart attacks become famous generals...)

And RN has a program described by Tom Clancy in Submarine, called "The Perisher" (for very good reason): the command candidate must pass, or he will never command a ship at sea. The Brits have a great system for producing leaders, something the USN could afford to learn. (End of editorial) Trekphiler 03:39, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Don`t worry
I accept your apologies, we all work for the sake of Wikipedia and for that objective sometimes we have to be harsh on others, i thank you for doing a good work editing the article and glad to be your acquaintance. Zidane tribal 05:35, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Military simulation

 * Word to the wise: ibid mixes badly with the nature of Wikipedia, as you can see here. I suggest you fix this before it gets out of hand, if it hasn't already. You would be a better judge of that than myself, naturally.--Rmky87 01:01, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:Wargame spectrum.JPG
fits the criteria for speedy deletion for the following reason: '''Self-created image no longer used (replaced by better version on Commons). Request by image author.''' --Android Mouse Bot 2 19:51, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Welcome!
 Hi, and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.

A few features that you might find helpful:


 * Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
 * The announcement and open task box is updated very frequently. You can [ watchlist it] if you're interested; or, you can add it directly to your user page by including WPMILHIST Announcements there.
 * Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you [ watchlist it].
 * The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, detailed article and content review, offline publication, article improvement contests, and other tasks.
 * We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, periods, and conflicts.
 * We've developed a variety of guidelines for article structure and content, template use, categorization, and other issues that you may find useful.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask one of the project coordinators, or any experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Carom 18:16, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Notability of Deathstalker universe
seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. --Android Mouse Bot 2 10:31, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Jellyfish
Thanks for the comments and context. I have been adding to Wiki for a while but do not have time to commit to it. As well as running Magforum, I am an editor at the Financial Times, a former lecturer in publishing and magazine editor. I am also an external examiner at the London University of the Arts. Tony Quinn tony@magforum.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.5.69.244 (talk • contribs)

Sino-Indian War
I like what you did with the introduction and do not mind at all if you copyedit the whole of the article. Traing 01:31, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Hi, great comment. Cheers. ←Humus sapiens ну? 11:09, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Holocaust Revisionism
Hi, this is Vissario, Wikipedia's newest member to my knowledge.

I just wanted to say I completely disagree with your opinion concerning the Holocaust Revisionism page. I feel that the entire article is biased in favor of the critics of the movement. It fails to provide an unbiased, nonpartisan, and totally objective view of the movement, its goals, and the factual background behind it.

In fact, quite to the opposite of Wikipedia's goal of giving quality information, the article distorts and misrepresents the people who believe in the movement. It calls them anti-Semites even if they have never been to a Nazi political rally or preached the ideology. It claims they support fascism and Nazism even if they vote regularly in democratic elections and support moderate regimes. Quite frankly, this is all absurd. I will not deny that some people who support revisionism do support anti-Semites, but to say they all do? That is like saying all Southerners in the United States are racist because some of them are racist. It simply does not follow and it is the logical fallacy known as generalization.

I know you will disagree with, but can't you agree to edit the article to at least fix this blatant fallacy?Vissario 04:44, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XV (May 2007)
The May 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 14:49, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Pearl Harbo(u)r?
Hi Eye, I responded on my talk page...Balloonman 02:50, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 02:39, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Henry Peel Ritchie
Congratulations - an excellent copy-edit on suggestions provided. It is well presented and passes the WP:GAC. You may wish to cut the following template   and paste to your user page or other suitable location - This will provide the following template:    Well done!-- VS  talk 23:54, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thankyou very much for all your help on getting this article to GA, your copy-edit ironed out many problems I'd missed and did a fantastic job of getting the article to it's current status. Much appreciated, --Jackyd101 04:17, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Baccara
Hi there. I was wondering if you can help us improve Baccara's article by copyediting it in an appropriate way. This article was born as a mere translation from the Spanish Wikipedia and has been polished several times, but it's still far from perfect. By the way, you've marked the article with the unreferenced tag... Is it possible to consider the same Wikipedia or any foreign language Wikipedia as a reference? For example, the "Bambi (prize)" article also states that Baccara received this prize in 1978, but other sources appear just to be in German language. Thanks in advance. Oaobregon


 * Thanks a lot for your soon answer. I'll be looking deeper for some references in English before deciding to cite in other languages. We really appreciate the copyediting work you're going to do with this article. Cheers! Oaobregon


 * Wow! You've done an amazing work with this article... Thanks a lot! And you're right, New Baccara's history is kind of confusing but you did understand it well. Now, we're going to rework the Spanish article because it's worth-while getting inspiration from what you've done. Our most sincere thanks. Cheers! Oaobregon


 * First of all, you're doing a great work!
 * "Palmarés" is the name of a programme that used to present several artists (singers and comics) in one single night.
 * It was not "The Zaragoza Theatre", but a common theatre (mainly a hall) in that city (we don't have the exact name of that hall).
 * You can trust that website upon that reference, but not for the history of both Baccara incarnations.
 * Indeed, it was the 1977 edition, though we can't find a copy of it.
 * Sorry if I'm late to answer, I'm in Mexico six hours earlier ;) Oaobregon


 * Thanks a lot for everything. Have a nice week-end and take care. Regards. Oaobregon


 * Thanks for all the work you've done. There's just one big mistake in Mateos's Baccara: Gina T. was never part of it (this is one of those false statements of some websites, including the Polish one). All the girls who form part of it, in chronological order, are:


 * Marisa Pérez (yes, the one who has partnered with María Mendiola)
 * Ángela Muro
 * Sole García
 * Jane Comerford
 * Cristina Sevilla
 * Paloma Blanco
 * Rommy Abradelo
 * Francesca Rodrigues
 * María Marín


 * I think it would be better to mention that the current member is María Marín.


 * One more thing, Marisa Pérez is written with a single "s"... I'm correcting this right now.


 * Regards. Oaobregon


 * Great! Now everything reads perfect! Thank you very much for copyediting this article. We appreciate your work and effort a lot! Best regards and greetings from Mexico. Oaobregon

RE: Request
Two things.

1: Thanks for the "review" of my article, the Battle of Verrieres Ridge. Your comments are helpful

2: I'd be glad to contribute to the discussion on young users and useless pages. I've got two friends who tried to create a page about their fake "company", and it was deleted faster than you can say "Wikipedia isn't for useless articles", so I get what you mean.

Cam 21:59, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh, here's one more underage user you might want to contact. He's been around longer than I have, and is WAY more active than I am.

User:Anonymous Dissident.

He might be able to help you a bit.

All the best Cam 22:20, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: Whoa there!
Sorry about that. Just started using anti-vandal, and it made my browser go all funny. It froze up, then did all my mouse clicks at once. :( Darkson (Yabba Dabba Doo!) 20:20, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Holocaust Denial GA/R
Hey there EyeSerene,

I noticed on the GAC talk page that you indicated that the you've waivered on the Holocaust Denial page and whether or not it is a GA quality article. I've switched my vote to keep now that it has been edited significantly for POV---which was my primary objection. But in all honesty, it probably isn't quite up to GA standards. There are still sections where the prose is weak and where it is grossly undercited---which is saying something when dealing with a page with as many citations as this one has. Other sections are choppy and poorly written (namely the section on Iran.) So, why I have I switched to keep? I tend to be more on the side of 'keeping' an article if the article has editors who are motivated to cleaning it up/fixing it. So my vote is really on the potential of the article---there are sections that are not up to snuff but on the whole I think it is fine. Why am I mentioning this to you, because your comments on the two GAC/GAR talk pages indicate that you were unsure of how what the guidelines should be. Some of the other editors tend to be more of a delisters---the lack of citations in significant sections will cause them to vote to delist. Some use, what IMHO, is too harsh of a standard for GA's---I don't personally believe that an article has to be FA quality to be GA. Some use the same criteria, and in their opinion the only difference is thatthe GA article only needs one person to think it is at that level. I give the article a 50-50 chance of being delisted... the criticisms that remain are very valid.Balloonman 22:12, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
 * (Response here as per your talk page request) It's embarrassing to admit it, but my vote was based more on an emotional reaction to the nature of the bad-faith nomination than a proper reading of the GA criteria... especially embarrassing as one of my pet dislikes on WP is violations of WP:SOAP and WP:NPOV. In giving support against one extreme of POV I went too far towards the other - call it a lesson learned ;) Re the voting, I had understood your change of vote and accompanying comments on the GAR/HD talk page to be an encouragement to further improvement rather than a complete about-face, and that seems to be what you're saying above.
 * I'll have a stab at something from the GAC backlog over the next few days and, if you don't mind (and as per the discussion on Wikipedia talk:Good article candidates - which may or may not be resolved soon!), I'll request a quality check. If that's inconvenient, no problem, I can ask there instead ;) EyeSereneTALK 16:42, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I can take a look at the articles and see if I agree with the pass/fail---the technical aspect of moving/recording GAC's is not my strong suit. I've never had anybody say I've done it wrong... but let me know which one's you looked at and I'd be happy togive them a second glance.Balloonman 18:19, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Operation Gibraltar GA
I've made many minor grammar & spelling changes as well as adding some inline citations (Actually they are already referenced as given in the "References" section) and made other corrections. Pl. tell me how it looks now. Thanks. --Idleguy 03:47, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I have no issues with you editing the grammar/spelling errors that you seem fit. After all any suggestion, even by reviewers of GA/FA nominees, is a kind of indirect editing by the reviewer. I'm sure it doesn't invalidate any reviewer for it involves only minor changes. Thanks. Idleguy 14:29, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


 * OK. NP. Idleguy 13:01, 6 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I tried myself and couldn't right align it and wrap it. I must admit I'm not that good at layouts/designing so I'm not sure how to do a wrap around. But I personally feel it would be better if the table was centered, what do you say? Idleguy 14:49, 8 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Very much appreciated. :-) Idleguy 02:12, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

request
responding on my pageBalloonman 13:14, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Balloonman asked me to fulfill this request for him as he is currently under the weather. Upon looking over the article and related discussions, I have the following comments:
 * You can correct minor edits you find. You aren't required to, but it does not create a conflict of interest. Sometimes it's just easier, depending on what the issue is. I corrected a couple issues while I was reviewing.
 * I would recommend that the table centered in the middle of the article be placed like images, rather than its current placement.
 * References should be consistently formatted. Recommend the use of cite web. However, note that it is not required, but it can help in easily including all required information; such as author, title, work or publisher, date, and retrieval date. Currently the references lack this information in several instances. It should also be noted that retrieval dates can be useful once links expire. With the date, programs can be used to find archived pages to replace broken links.
 * Other than that, your review looks good. Thank you for your contributions to the project. Lara  Love  T / C  05:20, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XVI (June 2007)
The June 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 13:47, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome!
It pleases me to hear that you got a chuckle out of one of my edits :) Maralia 16:44, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Purely for your amusement (and hopefully not at anyone's expense, as it was obviously an honest mistake), check my comment at Talk:Compass Direct.Maralia 20:54, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Socialdemocrats
Best of luck trying to get anywhere with this guy. A few of us have tried for a while now, but it's a lost cause - I don't think Socialdemocrats means to be disruptive, he's just unbelievably arrogant. Full marks for effort though; maybe you can convince him to read WP policy ;) EyeSereneTALK 13:25, 19 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah... they un-protected his page to talk to him (he's blocked) and three guesses what happened... ah well. He does it again and I'll request page protection... it's a pity. Gscshoyru 13:27, 19 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Only one guess needed - you can have the other two back. In some ways it's the most frustrating form of disruption to deal with, because I genuinely believe he thinks he's improving WP. Good faith does only go so far though ;) Watching this over the months, it seems to me there's a grey area in WP policy as to how to deal with editors who absolutely refuse to adhere to community consensus and ignore all attempts at communication. Eventually they get themselves blocked, but it takes much longer and causes much more disruption than simple vandalism. As you say, a pity - his kind of enthusiasm could be very beneficial if applied in the right manner. EyeSereneTALK 18:17, 19 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I've noticed that grey area. Specifically, currently, with user:JJonz and user:CrystalB4. You probably have a lot more experience than I... but they both seem to edit things and ignore the idea of consensus, reverting and reverting and reverting. Also... I get the vague feeling the two are sockpuppets, though I'm not sure it warrants a checkuser, yet. Even though one reverted the other's edits, I think that was just coverup when I pointed it out to both. I admit that I've been going about it the wrong way with them anyways... can you advise? Thanks! Gscshoyru 18:22, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Baccara - GNU Licence
Hi,

Please help me. Someone has taken 6 paragraphs of Baccara's biography (before the copyediting) and has signed it as an original mind work. Worst of all, this biography will be included in a Sony-BMG compilation to be released in September. Doesn't the GNU licence states that a reference to Wikipedia must be made in order to use its articles?

You can find the compilation's official site here: http://www.baccara2007.moonfruit.com/

For now, it's only on a website... But it will be released as a written material in September. What can we do to defend Wikipedia's rights?

oaobregon@gmail.com oaobregon


 * Thanks for your help. I'll keep you posted with what they tell me. But the biggest problem is not the website, but the booklet to be inlcuded with Sony-BMG's compilation. They'll make money with something that Wikipedia owns.


 * Best reagards. oaobregon


 * The people from http://www.baccara2007.moonfruit.com/ have rewritten those 6 paragraphs in their website, and they've unsigned the biography. Indeed, they're supplying the text to Sony-BMG... So, I don't know if we were on time to make them include their new biography in the booklet or if it already includes the one from Wikipedia. Perhaps, we shall wait for the compilation to be released and take a look at its booklet. If the booklet violates the GFDL, I think that further action must be taken. Thanks a lot for your help, you're such a nice person. By the way, my name is Alex Obregón (or O'brien, as you prefer). Best regards. oaobregon

Solon
Hi Eyeserene

Thanks for the message. I have to admit I also would not pass the article Solon as a candidate for GA. The main problem is the section 'Solon the reformer', though it could in fact be a matter of overall structure. I wasn't aware of style problems and I'll have to check that out. I agree with you also that the article deserved better than a Quickfail, which I considered highhanded in the circumstances (I had put a lot of work into improving the article). On the other hand, I'm now aware that reviewers like you are flat out and I can readily forgive Awadewit for being a bit short of diplomacy.

I found your user page very interesting. You're an original character with a very disarming way of expressing yourself and I can well believe that you get on really well with troubled kids. I'm a school teacher and I know what it takes to manage that.

Thanks again. Lucretius 22:35, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Chocokettle.com
just wondering why you decided to remove chocokettle.com ?

yet othere video hosting sites have there wiki pages —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alistair.phillips1 (talk • contribs)