User talk:21stCenturyGreenstuff/Archive 4

Dates
Saw your edits to the Heather Mills article and I thought you might be interested in this post at my talk page. I'm sure you'll get the idea once you read it. Dismas |(talk) 22:42, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. ;)  Dismas |(talk) 16:47, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Great little tool, very useful, am having great fun with it...and it saves a hell of a lot of boring work 21stCenturyGreenstuff (talk) 16:49, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

What do you wanted to say to me?Max Mux (talk) 21:28, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

ROC
Retired Officers List (2000):
 * MILLER M.H. CBE AFC Born Born 14/1/28 Commd 29/9/49 A Cdre 1/7/76 Retd GD 22/8/81
 * OFFORD R.J. AFC FIMgt Born 17/9/31 Commd 8/8/52 A Cdre 1/7/80 Retd GD 17/9/86
 * BLACK G.P. CB OBE AFC Born 10/7/32 Commd 19/1/53 AVM 1/1/85 Retd 10/7/87
 * BROUGHTON J. FIMgt Born 18/2/34 Commd 24/9/52 A Cdre 1/7/86 Retd GD 1/1/89
 * HORROCKS I. Born 10/3/34 Commd 26/11/52 A Cdre 1/7/85 Retd GD 22/12/89
 * BODDY G.M. OBE Born 16/9/37 Commd 5/2/56 A Cdre 1/1/90 Retd GD(g) 1/7/92

Still a bit more research needed, Hope this helps. MilborneOne (talk) 18:21, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXI (September 2008)
The September 2008 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 has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:44, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Another airline article nominated for deletion
Hello. Based on your recent comment at Articles for deletion/Alaska Seaplane Service, I thought you might be interested in looking at Articles for deletion/Alsek Air Service. -- Zyxw (talk) 15:17, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Austin Aero
Like the idea of a separate article on Austin Aero, found out that the Whippet and Kestrel were built by the Austin Motor Company Limited, Northfield Works, Birmingham which already has an article at Austin Motor Company. I presume that Austin Aero was a later company to build engines and aircraft (possibly as a shadow factory) during the second world war. Need to find out a bit more. MilborneOne (talk) 19:01, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Vandalizing /1/

 * I beg your pardon? I do not and never had vandalised any articles. Kindly indicate which edit you consider to be errant. 21stCenturyGreenstuff (talk) 01:07, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

here45Factoid44 (talk) 01:09, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * That's me reverting your edit 45Factoid44 (talk) 01:10, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The name of the village was right and concurred with the rest of the article as Crofton and you changed it to Coston. It could have been a mistake and if I'm saying this defaces any good edits that you've ever made. Thanks and have a great night. 45Factoid44 (talk) 01:13, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * READ THIS earlier in the article "The Old English postalveolar consonant for “S” was always written as “ ʃ “ and at some stage in the last two hundred years has been misread by later scribes as an “F” thus turning Coston into the present day Cofton.
 * I had just reread the source material and realised I had spelled it incorrectly as "Cofton"....the old history book had spelled it COSTON and I was correcting my own entry. Kindly keep out of articles you know nothing about and save you "welcome to wikipedia" comments for new editors. I am a member of three wiki projects and have completed nearly 7,000 edits....I think I know what I am doing thank you 21stCenturyGreenstuff (talk) 01:23, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Nobody is perfect...including you. If you had done an edit summary like an experienced editor should then you wouldn't have this problem to begin with ;-) 45Factoid44 (talk) 01:55, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Just getting tired, it is 3am and I have been glued to the laptop for twelve hours. Getting sloppy. I am off to bed, tomorrow is another day....but even so, if you shoot from the hip like that with vandalism accusations, methinks you will be on the receiving end of some very snotty responses....you might like to review which template you use with long service editors...just a thought 21stCenturyGreenstuff (talk) 02:11, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary. P.S.: Length of time editing Wikipedia does not place you above the fundamental rules and warnings that everyone else is subject to. Just keep that in mind. 45Factoid44 (talk) 05:21, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

SSP case
"Oh no Bazonka, that is not true. There have been several occasions where he has alternated between logged in and non logged posts in the space of several minutes. His anonymous IPs have made statements in support of his logged in identity trying to imply that they are from other people. It was done deliberately and he has done it many times in several locations. However, I think it is beginning to dawn on him that the anonymous IPs are not as untraceable as he first assumed...hence the sudden rush of apologies 21stCenturyGreenstuff (talk) 16:22, 8 October 2008 (UTC)" &mdash;From Suspected sock puppets/Max Mux
 * Hi, 21stCenturyGreenstuff. Would you mind providing me the diffs showing the IPs saying such things?  All I have found are reversions with no edit summaries.  Thanks!  SunDragon34 (talk) 03:01, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Sir Douglas Evill
Greetings. I am currently working on the article on Air Chief Marshal Sir Douglas Evill. Any assistance you can offer would be gratefully received. Greenshed (talk) 07:43, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Stanwell School Badge.jpg)
You've uploaded Image:Stanwell School Badge.jpg, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 08:00, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Adding Photos
So,How could I find the images you're talking about? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Laum Tancelin (talk • contribs) 18:16, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Condover
Nice article, just a few points it mentions navigator training, I dont think the Advanced Flying Units trained navigators, it may have taught navigation to pilots thou. It mentions that the airfield was home to Spitfires, Hurricanes, Stirlings and Lancasters. Cant find any reference of the airfield being used apart from as a Relief Landing Ground for the AFUs. Was there a source for that? Keep up the good work. MilborneOne (talk) 19:48, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Several internet entries mentioned navigation training and also references to both single seaters and heavies being instructed in navigation...The memory from an ex-WAAF officer halfway down the article also refers to navigation training. It would appear that, apart from Oxfords and Harvards, the station was probably not 'home' to anything...but these types certainly staged through and possibly overnighted from time to time...I will amend the 'home to' wording. Most of the other sector stations in the vicinity, Shawbury Ternhill Atcham etc, were specifically fighter stations for defence of the Midlands manufacturing bases... yet Condover had a thundering great east west runway installed...so someone must have anticipated multi-engine use at some stage 21stCenturyGreenstuff (talk) 20:04, 2 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, good points, looks like it was a much underused place. Although they were worried that facilities in east and south east england may have become unusuable, probably just a bit of insurance. MilborneOne (talk) 20:45, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations on an excellent article. I find it astonishing that anybody not actually from Condover would care enough to write anything about it, and you've done a really top-notch job. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.248.93.177 (talk) 22:53, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Gang show programme.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Gang show programme.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:22, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Man
Thanks for the note on the Man Discussion page

The hassle is that sources should appear:- "... in reliable, third-party publications. Primary sources and sources affiliated with the subject of the article are generally not sufficient for a Wikipedia article."

Deke is clearly "affiliated with the subject of the article", so I'm saving Deke's books for the things I can't cite from elsewhere.

I know it's the best source, but I haven't got, and can't get hold of, a copy of "Mannerisms" - any ideas welcome.

Thanks for removing the NPOV - didn't think I should, as the person who rewrote the article. Arjayay (talk) 14:48, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

ROC Dates
Hi. Question for you at Talk:Royal Observer Corps. Regards Endrick Shellycoat  20:23, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Image:Lickey Hills.jpg
Hi, could you please provide a link to the image on Geograph? Thanks. J Milburn (talk) 18:50, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I am not sure what you mean about providing a link, did you want it personally? It is the top pic on this search http://www.geograph.org.uk/search.php?i=4285558 21stCenturyGreenstuff (talk) 19:03, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXII (October 2008)
The October 2008 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 has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:17, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Izzard
When you get a moment, would you drop by Talk:Eddie Izzard? The comments you made there could be considered a personal attack, and I'd appreciate you considering at least striking them out, if not removing them altogether. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 16:06, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Shakin' Stevens
You are quite right! I know perfectly well how to use apostrophes, I don't know why I did that. Sorry. Poltair (talk) 20:06, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * It's not a problem....but you are also correct it needs to be consistant...I have changed four now and I think I have snagged them all now. Hope so anyway. Cheers 21stCenturyGreenstuff (talk) 20:09, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Your substantial additions to the CTC page I recently created
Many thanks for having put in a lot of work on this: may I ask what your other information sources are, in addition to the main CTC Comcast page you have cited? I have known about the CTC for decades, but was always surprised about how no-one else in the ROC appeared to have ever heard of them.

A suggestion re the CTC/ROC rank badges chart- what about including a column that lists the Corps Leading and Chief instances, as well as the two columns for CTC versus RAF (or at least giving L/Obs and C/Obs as sub-text refs within the RAF column).

On a related note - since I suspect you (like me) also served in the ROC, do you agree with me that the information listed on the main ROC page regarding the supposed issue of black RTR berets to the Corps as a result of wartime supply difficulties does not quite sound right? Every ROC beret I have ever seen (including ones from the late 1940s), including any I saw being issued from 1978 to 1995 was definitely navy blue.

Comments on the above?

Citidel (talk) 07:50, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

ROC
Hi. Good work on the instruments! I'll have a crack at the MET, but can't promise anything. :)

Regards Endrick Shellycoat  21:07, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Ghost ROC
Absolutely worthy of a mention - can you provide a source to accompany such? Endrick Shellycoat  19:47, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Shoes
Apologies, corrected accordingly. (I recal purchasing Beta shoes from the stores at Turnhouse, made me think I'd always done so). Hope the 9000 or so bytes added to the article in the past couple of weeks have improved it somewhat. (And I haven't forgotten abot the ROCMET, I'll get to it eventually!) Regards Endrick Shellycoat  03:14, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar
Shame on me, I've only just this minute noticed what you'd placed on my user page a week ago. Thank you! (I've come over all embarrassed now...) Regards Endrick Shellycoat  14:15, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

ROC Ensign
Hi. Noted your comments re. the shade of blue on the ROC ensign. Have changed the shade to the official Pantone 549 C of the RAF Ensign, although the colour of the RAF Ensign as shown on Wikipedia is still a shade too dark I feel. Regards Endrick Shellycoat  10:34, 6 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Agreed; original banner restored. 'Tis trickier than I first thought this shade business. Not having software to create an .svg image, (on which I think you can dictate exactly what RBG or Web Hex equivalent to a Pantone shade you apply), I've discovered that various PC monitors show the required shade on .png images slightly differently. I could mess about all day, (as the image histories themselves will testify), trying to get a good match, only to discover that the shade looks wrong on the next PC I sit down at! I've resigned myself to never getting an ideal match, but I hope those images now in place are good enough for me to strike a line through the issue of shade. Regards Endrick Shellycoat  01:21, 7 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi. Have changed the titles back. However, reading the list of those RAF units awarded 'colours', I can't quite see the RAF College Cranwell marching into battle somehow, yet they have their own. Can you educate me further on this topic. (Also see Queen's Colour). Off to work but will check back later. Cheers. Endrick Shellycoat  11:30, 17 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Fantastic reply - thanks very much. On the basis of what you describe it would indeed be worthy of a section of its own, but perhaps in Colours, standards and guidons, with a link to it in the Royal Observer Corps article, rather than in the ROC article itself. Thanks again. <font face="american uncial" color="red">Endrick <font face="american uncial" color="red">Shellycoat  15:54, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIII (November 2008)
The November 2008 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 has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 15:47, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Civilian Technical Corps : problems with placing images on page
Can you please give me the benefit of your considerable experience on Wikipedia: I had added images to the CTC webpage, but the bots have removed them (on an interim basis, to keep it tidy, I have at least for now, also removed the location holders). How do I re-instate these images? I stated honestly that I could not remember how I originally obtained the images of the CTC cap-badge, and similarly for the shoulder-title, but I did't expect this to mean that the images would then be auto-deleted! Any suggestions? Citidel (talk) 09:16, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Well sadly once the bot has removed them they are gone from wiki and cannot be rescued. The only remedy is to re-upload them from your computer with a different file name. I assume the photos were taken at the time (1940s) so the best bet is to upload them as a Public Domain licence, as fifty years will have expired since they were taken. In the meantime you will have to refind the originals on the net to be able to quote a source site in the file description. If you took the photos yourself you could reupload them as your own work and apply a Creative Commons Licence. But if they are modern work by someone else then it is unlikely that they would be wiki acceptable. 21stCenturyGreenstuff (talk) 10:10, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

"Honourary"
Thank you for your message on my talkpage. In fact you are mistaken; the word is spelled "honorary" worldwide. Thanks for caring about spelling though. --John (talk) 04:07, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * When I started school in 1954 we were all given a Pocket Oxford Dictionary as a gift by the school and it has travelled everywhere with me for the last 55 years although it is now very careworn and dog eared. It spells the word as honourary, as have I all my life. So when did it change? 21stCenturyGreenstuff (talk) 14:33, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I can't comment on your 1954 Pocket Oxford Dictionary's accuracy as I don't have one to hand. It is possible that it is in error; such things do happen. My understanding is that the 'u' spelling went out of use in the mid-19th century. We should certainly not be using it on Wikipedia in the 21st. --John (talk) 20:26, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Radyr School Logo.gif)
You've uploaded File:Radyr School Logo.gif, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 09:41, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:StCyresBadge.gif)
You've uploaded File:StCyresBadge.gif, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 05:23, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of File:Radyr School Logo.gif
A tag has been placed on File:Radyr School Logo.gif requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on  explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Gr0ff (talk) 19:05, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIV (December 2008)
The December 2008 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 has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:47, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Barry Island Pleasure Park
Hi there,

you have reverted a spelling change again to this article claiming the original as British spelling. I have checked here Compact Oxford English dictionary and the version missing the U seems to be correct and the version without is not found. It seems to me that the version without the U is acceptable British English. noq (talk) 00:27, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
 * http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/labourious and it is the spelling I prefer. The word currently the topic of discussion at the typos page. 21stCenturyGreenstuff (talk) 00:56, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Bournville School
Dear 21stCenturyGreenstuff,

Sorry about the delay in getting back to you. Although I'd obviously heard of Wikipedia, this January was the first time I'd ever logged on to it. I was with a mate - an Old Griff - who said the 'Griffs' did not even get a mention on Bournville School's Wikipedeia site. I decided to have a look and see if I could get us in somewhere. In doing so, I got carried away and started altering things that my information differed with. In mentioning that we policed the 'Club Griffin' dances, I made a mistake which was pounced on straight away by someone who was a 6th former at the time. The article referred to dances in the late sixties and seventies and he was spot on, because I then recalled that the 'Griffs' only participated from 1966 for about two and a half years. We used to get 10% of the proceeds which went to the club funds, and checking back through old balance sheets, we stopped getting paid in January 1969. I now remember there was a reason for this but I won't bore you with the details.

Although I went to a 'tech' school, to my eternal shame I'm only semi-computer literate and I found navigating around Wikipedia a bit confusing to say the least. It seems a bit over engineered to me, if not just too complicated for its own good. I hope this message gets to you because despite getting advice over the last few days from people who use it regularly, I still haven't got a clue what I'm doing. They said I'm supposed to open an account to start with, which as you can see, I haven't. Other tips were never to release my full name, telephone number or e-mail/home address as I'm liable to get cranks attacking my computer, or have hundreds of pizzas/curries delivered to my door. I suspect they were winding me up, although you never know.

Getting back to your article on our old school, I don't obviously want to get into an editing war so I'm wondering about a compromise. You see I've got stacks of documentation about both schools including those two opening of the school booklets. They even give a list of the architects, builders, clerk of works etc. and there is the list of the original teachers of both establishments. The opening paragraph of the girls' school booklet says that educational history has been made in that it is the first girls' technical school to be opened in the city of Birmingham.

As I mentioned earlier, I left Bournville in 1962 and joined the Old Griffs. There were rugby ,cricket, and soccer sections and I played for all three for donkey's years. We used to train in the gym every week and some members of staff played for us as well. I was on the Griffs committee for more years than I care to remember and the committee also included Bill Jennings (the head), Ralph Gaskell, 'Fred' Fidgeon, Bernard Malin, and many other teachers over the years. We are on very good terms with the school but have yet to have a formal meeting with Barbara Easton, as she has only just been appointed as the new head teacher.

When messrs Jennings and Gaskell passed away, as I was the historian for the Griffs, their widows kindly gave me piles of interesting stuff from the the years when their husbands first started, to when Bill Jennings retired or in the case of Ralph Gaskell, to when he moved on. After cataloging it all, it was then passed on to the school for their archives.

The compromise would be for me to put it all on your site as an edit. If you and your wife came to the Griffs 50th anniversary dinner dance this autumn, I could show you all the relevant stuff. Anything you still disagree with, you could then 'undo'. ( You see, I,m getting the hang of of this Wiki lingo already! )

All the best, agent Wiki Scully aka IP whatever number I'm supposed to be-I can't remember.

P.S. What are these tildes I'm supposed to put in at the end of this message? These symbols don't exist on my keyboard. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.128.126.250 (talk) 22:56, 22 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I hope you check back and read this. I was going to reply on your IP user page but I see your Internet Service Provider is logging you on with a floating proxy IP, so it is different every time. Wow, you are just the person we need to talk to....and no question about an edit war if you have the documents. Please email me on renegadeuk@hotmail.com after which I will give you my regular email address. I can help you make the edits to the Bournville School entry, or you could send me photocopies of what you have and I will put it together.


 * So does the Old Griffinians still exist as a body?... I would like to join....do you have a website?


 * What is the date and cost of the Anniversary dinner this Autumn, if my diary is free I would kill to have a chance of being there? No wife any more sadly, she buggered off eight years ago and is living in Slovenia with her toyboy boyfriend....the swine....I hate him...LOL.


 * The four Tildes are usually on the right hand end of the middle row of letters, right next to the @ sign. 21stCenturyGreenstuff (talk) 23:23, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

ROCMET
Thanks for the message - it was not in your user space, it was at 21stCenturyGreenstuff/ROCMET, not User:21stCenturyGreenstuff/ROCMET. I will move it to User:21stCenturyGreenstuff/ROCMET and tag the redirect for deletion. – ukexpat (talk) 19:33, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks I tried putting in User:...etc but all I got was a blank 404 page 21stCenturyGreenstuff (talk) 19:36, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks good. If I recall the Met signal format was similar to the Air Traffic Control 'Actual' report used at airports today. I'll try to find out more. <font face="american uncial" color="red">Endrick <font face="american uncial" color="red">Shellycoat  09:45, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Great news about your former colleague and the info they can add to the article. I look forward to reading it. <font face="american uncial" color="red">Endrick <font face="american uncial" color="red">Shellycoat  16:33, 23 January 2009 (UTC) PS Your user page I'll be happy to have a bash at, probably Saturday eve (my missus is working in the pub so I can sit on the PC undisturbed ;) )

Many thanks <font face="arial" color="green">21 17:56, 25 January 2009 (UTC)₮ ₡€₦₮UR¥ GR€€₦ 17:56, 25 January 2009 (UTC)₮U₣₣ 17:56, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

No bother. :) <font face="american uncial" color="red">Endrick <font face="american uncial" color="red">Shellycoat  18:03, 25 January 2009 (UTC)


 * If you're interested, I see you've restored the link to your (talk) page which appears next to your signature. (Apologies for my oversight). I reworked your signature code to a version which will hopefully be short enough to fit in the "Signature:" window on your preferences page, but links the first part of your signature to your user page, and the second part to your talk page. (As per my own). See below if you want to copy it over and give it a try... Regards <font face="american uncial" color="red">Endrick <font face="american uncial" color="red">Shellycoat  11:06, 28 January 2009 (UTC) PS The "Greenstuff" part won't show up here as linking to your talk page, as you're already on it, in case you're wondering why it doesn't appear to work here  - as I did...

<font face="arial" color="green">21 <font face="arial" color="green"> GR€€₦₮ ₡€₦₮UR¥ [[User talk:21stCenturyGreenstuff|<font face="arial" color="green"> GR€€₦$₮U₣₣ ]]₮U₣₣ ''₮ ₡€₦₮UR¥  [[User talk:21stCenturyGreenstuff|<font face="arial" color="green"> GR€€₦$₮U₣₣ ]]

SIGNATURE ALERT!
Hi. Have discovered a problem with your signature. At my PC at work not all the characters are being recognised and your signature is appearing as <font face="arial" color="green">21$ȝ ȝ€ȝȝUR¥ GR€€ȝ$ȝU₣₣ !!! This problem may be replicated on countless other machines.

Enter the code below into your signature box and change your User Page and all will be well:

<b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b>

Sorry - a case of my artistic licence meeting software issues.

Regards <font face="american uncial" color="red">Endrick <font face="american uncial" color="red">Shellycoat  17:55, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

No problem...fixed <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 18:31, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Please remember to mark your edits as minor if (and only if) they genuinely are minor edits (see Help:Minor edit). Marking a major change as a minor one is considered poor etiquette. The rule of thumb is that only an edit that consists solely of spelling corrections, formatting changes, or rearranging of text without modifying content should be flagged as a 'minor edit.'  -- John <span class="plainlinks" style="font-family: Verdana; font-variant: small-caps; font-size: 11px; text-align: center;">(Daytona2 ·  Talk ·  Contribs) 21:36, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Please do not add unsourced or original content. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. -- John <span class="plainlinks" style="font-family: Verdana; font-variant: small-caps; font-size: 11px; text-align: center;">(Daytona2 · Talk ·  Contribs) 21:36, 31 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Where?....which edit are you talking about?...and where do you get off threatening blocking action to responsible and established editors?...you could try being a tad more civil and save your ignorant threats for the myriad of vandals in 'them thar hills' <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 22:23, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXV (January 2009)
The January 2009 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 has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:53, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Civilian Technical Corps
I just wanted to thank you for all the work that you put into Civilian Technical Corps and for your cordial response to the source article's author at the talk page. It seems obvious that your extensive work there was well-intended, and I know it can be hard to stay calm in the face of accusations of bad faith.

Unfortunately, it does seem you have run into some copyright issues in terms of following that source too closely in language and detail. Since no alternative version was provided in temporary space, I have restored back to the point just before summary of that source was added. If you are unfamiliar with US copyright laws regarding summaries of other sources, you might find this section of my userpage useful in helping explain why closely following in structure and sequence of facts can be a problem (since facts are not governed by copyright). Included there are some external links that might provide more information. (Please note that I'm not intending to offer up my userpage as Wiki policy. :) Our copyright policy touches on this here and the Copyright FAQ offers slightly more detail here. I've simply attempted to expand on that a bit.) I'll be watching your talk page for a few days in case you'd like to discuss the matter. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:56, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * No worries, I have been resigned to the article vanishing since last week. I have no connection at all with the subject organisation and my only regret, already expressed, is that the CTC will no longer be adequately represented on wikipedia. Win some, lose some though and I am not going to tear any hair out over it. Incidently, I never had a chance to thank you for your sterling work on the Great Yarmouth Pleasure Beach copy vio by another editor some months back and was pleased my rewrite was eventually acceptable. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 23:20, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVI (February 2009)
The February 2009 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 has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:13, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Coordinator Elections
Nominations for Coordinator positions in the Military History WikiProject have commenced, and voting will begin on March 14, 2009. Make sure to get involved and ask questions to the candidates. Nominations for Coordinators goes until March 13. Then come out for the voting which begins on March 14. Thanks and Have a Great Day! Lord R. T. Oliver  The Olive Branch 23:56, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 13 March! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:56, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. We will be selecting coordinators from a pool of eighteen to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on Saturday, 28 March! Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:59, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Missed one
I fixed this for you. Choess (talk) 01:06, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Date autoformatting poll
Hi there! I noticed that like me, you are opposed to any form of dates autoformatting. I have created some userboxes which you might like to add to your userspace to indicate your position. You will find the boxes here. Ohconfucius (talk) 07:54, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVII (March 2009)
The March 2009 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 has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:45, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Adcote
Thank you for your comment and your edits which I appreciate. I agree there are too many references from the school website, I am attempting to research more references from other sources.

I also apologise for putting in the category again - I did not spot that you had taken it out.

Regards

Gary Wright  comment added by Gary Wright Adcote (talk • contribs)

No problem, will give as much help as I can <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 17:00, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Will do - many thanks for your help. comment added by Gary Wright Adcote (talk) 17:25, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVIII (April 2009)
The April 2009 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 has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:15, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Adcote - new revisions
Hello there,

I have made some quite large additions to the Adcote entry. I have revised the references using a wide variety of sources.I wondered if you might care to have a look over and let me know any comments/changes/revisions you make think need to be made.

Many thanks in advance

Gary Wright Adcote (talk) 15:28, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Adcotiennes
Thank you for your constructive comments. Old Adcotiennes - I like that!

Lots more to add of course, which I will endeavour to do the more information I find, but you have given me lots of ideas. I will try to add a summary to edits, I have already had a bot undo a (in my opinion legitimate change - Headteachers to Past Headmasters and Mistresses, a more usual term in the independent sector).

In terms of the Curriculum section, whilst I am keen to avoid any advertising or bias, I wonder how I can list the subjects taught without it seeming like a 'sell'.

I must say looking at your home page, you have one of the most varied and interesting career histories I think I have ever seen! Gary Wright Adcote (talk) 19:05, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

JLC
Ah ok, I didnt know it was such a vicious thing against her... as far as I knew, it was only a vague hypothesis. Yeah I'm not trying to stir up BS against anyone, so the revert's fine by me. Take it easy. —<b style="font-size:medium; color:#000000;">ᚹᚩᛞᛖᚾᚻᛖᛚᛗ</b> ( ᚷᛖᛋᛈᚱᛖᚳ ) 04:49, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Rehoboth Carpenter Family
Welcome to the ongoing saga of the repeat reverts to old formats for no reason or discussion by Iwanafish, aliases now include 125.199.58.121, 160.244.140.202, and 220.102.13.244. Any suggestions of how to deal with him? Apparently, in the past, I was using the wrong "warning" formats. So I had to start over again with the proper ones on his talk page. I am up to level 3. Would you be so kind to warn him for the next level? Or what ever you feel is appropiate? Thank you. Jrcrin001 (talk) 04:42, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

FYI - While I writing the above, he "did it again" on Rehoboth Carpenter family and John Carpenter, town clerk of London. Which I revert again with another ReVert note. Please check out the following page: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=100&target=Iwanafish Since 1 April his primary focus is reverting pages to a non-wiki format that he see more acceptable. Jrcrin001 (talk) 05:01, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Your CTC page?
What happened to the rather-good page we had both worked upon that covered the Civilian Technical Corps? It seems to have all but disappeared (it is a while since I managed to get on to Wikipedia).

best wishes

Citidel (talk) 22:59, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XXXIX (May 2009)
The May 2009 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 has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:57, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Cofton Hackett
--Kudpung (talk) 04:43, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Prince Harry
Yes. Although the "official" form of his name is Henry (as shown by the link to his article), Harry always is and always has been known solely as Harry. His parents announced this at the time of his baptism, saying that, although the name on his birth certificate was Henry, he would be known as Harry. This is how he is always referred to - it is not a nickname, and it certainly helps to make it clear who we are talking about, bearing in mind that at least eleven British royal princes have been named Henry. Deb (talk) 17:38, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Well if you can support that with a reference it needs to be raised on the Diana talk page ... or an edit war will ensue ... the change has already been reverted half a dozen times in recent weeks <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 19:05, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Already done. I'm guessing it's mostly non-British people who are having the problem with this. Everyone in the UK knows it well. Deb (talk) 17:50, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XL (June 2009)
The June 2009 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 has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:05, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Page
I know Wikipedia isn't for this, but I loved your layout and 'About Me' section; very interesting :) -- Flash flash  ;  17:50, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLI (July 2009)
The July 2009 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 has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:35, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Nominations open for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 12 September! Many thanks,  Roger Davies  talk 04:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLII (August 2009)
The August 2009 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 has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:52, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Military history coordinator elections: voting has started!
Voting in the Military history WikiProject coordinator election has now started. The aim is to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on 26 September! For the coordinators,  Roger Davies  talk 22:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIII (September 2009)
The September 2009 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 has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:57, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Penarth Article
Hi there, I'm relatively inexperienced with Wikipedia and am trying to find out who wrote a particular part of the article for 'Penarth'. I've noticed you have edited this page on a number of occasions and so thought you might possibly be able to help. Ideally I would like to contact the person who states:

"Military developments Many Penarth Yacht Club members volunteered for the Dunkirk evacuation and sailed their yachts and motor boats around the coast and across the English Channel to France. Several never returned, having been killed by mines and enemy action during the many crossings."

This is an interesting story that relates significantly to some research I am currently doing but, I can find little to back this up in terms of other sources. Could you shed any light on this? Or at least, advise how I can identify the user who added this information, so I could then look to write to them with the same query?

Many thanks All the best Matt matt.david@steadfast.tv Mattdavid26 (talk) 17:27, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Test your World War I knowledge with the Henry Allingham International Contest!
As a member of the Military history WikiProject or World War I task force, you may be interested in competing in the Henry Allingham International Contest! The contest aims to improve article quality and member participation within the World War I task force. It will also be a step in preparing for Operation Great War Centennial, the project's commemorative effort for the World War I centenary.

If you would like to participate, please sign up by 11 November 2009, 00:00, when the first round is scheduled to begin! You can sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:30, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIV (October 2009)
The October 2009 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 has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:30, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Commemorating 'The Corps'
Hi. Couldn't log in to add that section, (for some reason my password wasn't recognised using the PC's I was on at the time), but I'm not sure if it sits quite right where it is. Just thought it might be worthy of mentioning the trains and Spitfire, but couldn't think how to incorporate such detail elsewhere. What do you think? Cheers <font face="american uncial" color="red">Endrick <font face="american uncial" color="red">Shellycoat  12:53, 4 November 2009 (UTC)


 * On a separate matter - The beret and badge can be worn on Remembrance Sunday by former members. However, nobody I've spoken to can give me an answer re. the wearing of the side cap as opposed to the beret. Is it specified somewhere that the beret and only the beret can be worn? Any ideas where an answer might be found? Cheers. <font face="american uncial" color="red">Endrick <font face="american uncial" color="red">Shellycoat  22:40, 18 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your reply. The concensus had been only beret, but nobody could point me in the direction of a reg. (Sadly, my Indonesian Fender Squire pales to insignificance. Hopefully my ability will one day warrant something with a bit more pedigree!) Cheers.<font face="american uncial" color="red">Endrick <font face="american uncial" color="red">Shellycoat  23:43, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Vale of Glamorgan and Wales
Hi. I noticed you've done a lot of work on the Vale of Glamorgan. Dunno if you know but do you know about this site? It has a massive number of images for villages, areas of Cardiff without photos and roads and just about anywhere in the UK. I've already used to to provide images to many villages in the Vale and by the time I've finished I hope to provide photographs for every village in Wales. If you could upload some this would be great. Just have a search for local areas on geograph and you may be surprised. All the images can be used under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 license.Perry Rimmer (talk) 17:44, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes I have utilised the Geograph source many times for a large number of photographs to illustrate articles. Unfortunately although I used to live in the Vale until 1980 I now reside accross the other side of the UK in Lincolnshire, so am unable to provide any new photos to the Geograph catalogue. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 18:33, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Stanwell School Badge 2.jpg)
 Thanks for uploading File:Stanwell School Badge 2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you.  Zoo Fari  03:22, 19 November 2009 (UTC)


 * The .jpg image is no longer needed after being replaced by a newer and better .png version. Don't bother waiting 7 days, delete it immediately. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 11:40, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

User:Bankhallbretherton
Thanks for the heads-up... there were two other questionable images that I listed at Possibly unfree files/2009 November 23. I also deleted the above image as G7 per your note. Skier Dude ( talk ) 07:24, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Martin Lacey
You may have seen that a citation has been requested for your claim that Martin Lacey lives in Keal Cotes. The same user has also challenged the claim in the Great British Circus page that he trained the tigers in the Esso TV adverts. I can find no internet support for either claim. Do you have anything that can be cited in support of either claim?

Thanks

Peteinterpol (talk) 22:25, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I see you had already added some, but I backed them up with a local authority one and one from The Guardian <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 02:04, 10 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Great stuff; it all looks really solid now.


 * Thanks,


 * Peteinterpol (talk) 07:36, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XIV (November 2009)
The November 2009 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 has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:33, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVI (December 2009)
The December 2009 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 has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:21, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVII (January 2010)
The January 2010 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 has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:39, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Nominations for the March 2010 Military history Project Coordinator elections now open!
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 8 March 2010! More information on coordinatorship may be found on the coordinator academy course and in the responsibilities section on the coordinator page. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 20:51, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVIII (February 2010)
The February 2010 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 has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:29, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

ROC Article
Hi Re. article size; if you want to break it down into sub-articles then I've no objection. I'll visit from time to time to help if I can, otherwise send me a message should you want a second opinion or whatever. best regards. <font face="american uncial" color="red">Endrick <font face="american uncial" color="red">Shellycoat  20:07, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Coordinator elections have opened!
Voting for the Military history WikiProject coordinator elections has opened; all users are encouraged to participate in the elections. Voting will conclude 23:59 (UTC) on 28 March 2010. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:17, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIX (March 2010)
The March 2010 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 has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:08, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Greenstuff
You are right. I guess I didn't think of the user page as a page about me since it's just "Kimtastic93" and not my actual name, but you are right. I probably shouldn't have made it such a big deal about it, I just got frustrated. Like you said, I need to know the restrictions, and at the time of creating the page "Kimberly Ann Suizdak", I didn't know the restrictions. But now I do. Thanks for putting this in a new perspective. :) Kimtastic93 (talk) 22:10, 19 April 2010 (UTC)Kimtastic93

Impressed...
I took a look at your user page and I found it very impressive. I look forward to personalizing my user page as well.

Also, I noticed on your user page it says that you are an athiest. I happen to be a firm believing Christian, and I think that perhaps stubbling across you on the internet was not an accident or a coincidence. I don't know if you like debating or not, but I would be interested in sharing my beliefs with you, if you'd be willing to listen. I'd also be interested in listening to your beliefs, if you'd be willing to share them. Kimtastic93 (talk) 03:21, 20 April 2010 (UTC)Kimtastic93
 * I am glad you have retrieved your enthusiasm and are looking forward to developing your user page.


 * Thankyou for your very kind offer to debate religion and exchange views on Christianity but, with the greatest of respect for your obviously deep felt views, I will pass if I may. I spent nearly thirty years examining my personal need for a belief system ... even attending several evangelical rallies by the likes of Billy Graham and debating the topic at length with local ministers, clerics and missionarys (even our UK christian icon Cliff Richard on many occasions). However, I came to the conclusion that it was all unsupported myth and fairy stories drawn from highly dubious texts written hundreds of years after Jesus's actual life and death.


 * I found that I really have no need for the emotional support of a belief in some kind of afterlife. We are born, we live the best life we can while being as kind and caring as we can towards our fellow man ... and then we die ... end of. There is no more ... so make the very best of what you have for the time you have it. We are all here for the briefest flicker of time, only by the merest flukes of nature and the laws of science (that we are a million miles way from fully understanding and probably never will).


 * There are many religions in the world and all fervently consider themselves to be the 'one true way', but they cannot all be right. I am saddened and disheartened by the evil and slaughter on massive scales that has been perpetrated in the name of religion over the millennia ... and in this respect ALL religions, including Christianity, are equally to blame (except possibly Hinduism).


 * Seek knowledge, always be questioning ... and let your intelligence lead you to your own decisions. Have a lovely and fulfilling life Kim. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 11:15, 20 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I have few disappointments in my sixty one years of life and on the whole it has been pretty good. I have never been poor, I have never starved, I have never been homeless, I have never been in a war, I have never even fought with anyone or been seriously injured. I have been married to two beautiful, intelligent and wonderful women (both of whom I am still very friendly with even after divorce) and I have two incredible children and three healthy grandchildren. I have been able to do what I wanted, whenever I wanted throughout my life. If I die tomorrow I would have no regrets after a rich, varied and fulfilling existence. Really ... could anyone expect more or better? <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 11:32, 20 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I am delighted to hear of your happiness in life, yet I am also saddened by your lack of belief, and that this attempt to reach out to someone in the name of the Lord had "failed". Thank you for being so respectful toward my beliefs, and likewise I respect yours.


 * I understand that you have (for lack of a better term) "investigated" Christianity before. If you ever find yourself curious to know more, or if your outlook on Christianity (or religion in general) ever changes, for whatever reason, you know where my talk page is.


 * It is my hope that one day God will show himself to you so that you would believe.
 * Have a great day, and a great life.
 * Kimtastic93 (talk) 20:01, 25 April 2010 (UTC)Kimtastic93

Category removals etc
Sorry, I didnt think it was a particularly contraversial thing. I am simply sorting out the sixth form colleges categories into counties. I am also getting rid of high schools with the label as they are not 6th form colleges. I am also separating out between further education colleges and 6th form colleges. Any objections? Bleaney (talk) 21:14, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * None at all, I was just wondering what prompted it and hoped that something would be replacing it ... so that parents seeking a choice of sixth form college in a particular area can find one ... that is a huge amount of work you have taken on there. Best of luck. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 21:17, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, its been bugging me that sixth form colleges get kind of muddled some how on wikipedia with further education colleges and/or secondary schools with sixth form departments. i'm just trying to create some distinction. Bleaney (talk) 21:22, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Just be aware and careful when dealing with grammar schools in some parts of the country (like Lincolnshire) that may be named High Schools ... but are in fact selective grammar schools (Boston High School for Girls for example) <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 21:25, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Non-free files in your user space
Hey there 21stCenturyGreenstuff, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:21stCenturyGreenstuff. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.


 * See a log of files removed today here.


 * Shut off the bot here.


 * Report errors here.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 00:07, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * All sorted, images replaced with alternates. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 00:30, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Helen Mirren
Hello 21stCenturyGreenstuff. I am wondering if you would please add the the message that you left on Doctor Who 1975's talk page to the talk page for Ms Mirren. You stated the case better than I could and it would be nice to have it there for future reference and discussions. MarnetteD | Talk 01:44, 21 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Hello again. I have just come across the fact that this editor has started a discussion of sorts here Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (biographies). I suspect that he will not be bothered to inform us about this so you may wish to add your thoughts there. Cheers and happy editing. MarnetteD | Talk 01:51, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up on that. I would not have spotted it otherwise. I have thrown my two cents into the ring. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 14:21, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * You are welcome and thank your for the followup work that you did on this. MarnetteD | Talk 15:00, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * For your info the discussion has resumed on the MoS|biography page. I thought that I would also pass along these two links from the MoS Manual of Style and Gender-neutral language that I found in case you need them in future discussions on other articles. MarnetteD | Talk 12:09, 26 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Hello again. A new discussion has started here . You may wish to add your thoughts but I also will understand if you don't want to. MarnetteD | Talk 00:23, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : L (April 2010)
The April 2010 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 has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:24, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

The size of London
[/me spills coffee all over keyboard.] Gee... that's sweet ! Thanks for your help, Greenstuff ! Bishonen | talk 21:35, 8 May 2010 (UTC).

Frank Farrell
Thank you for expanding the article on Frank Farrell, truly impressive! ;) --Mathonius (talk) 18:42, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * He was a good pal for many years. I have not finished yet ... but it is a start <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 18:44, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

I think his time with Renaissance was shorter than you imply - Jon Camp was the regular bass player well before 1974. RGCorris (talk) 12:52, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Difficult to tell, it looks like he was depping on and ooff, possibly because of illness or other commitments. But I was going by the Renaissance history website ... he was not living in my flat any more at the time and I was away in Germany, I didn't even know he had been with Renaissance till Mathonius pointed it out the other day. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 15:58, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

The Renaissance history suggests his stint with the band was in 1971 - before Jon Camp joined as a permanent member. So your chronology on Frank's wikipage is a little out. RGCorris (talk) 17:17, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * That is freaky, because Frank was definitely with Supertramp between 1970 and 1972. That would make it seem like he was playing with both bands at the same time, although of course Supertramp were not doing much in the way of gigging in 1971 (spending most of the time in rehearsal and studios). I will have a word with a couple of other chaps that knew Frank during that period and see if I can throw some light on things. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 18:57, 2 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Please pardon me for butting in but I have to say that I am envious of/fascinated by your experiences. Supertramp was one of my absolute faves my Jr and Sr years in college and their concert in Boulder CO in 1980 is still one of the best that I have ever seen. I also admired and enjoyed Renaissance, especially their album Scheherazade. I was fortunate to see them at Red Rocks - one of the more special venues to see a performance anywhere. This conversation has sparked all sorts of memories so my thanks to you both and happy editing. MarnetteD | Talk 16:10, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The early seventies were happy and exciting days, living in London and being part of the rock music scene. Breakasting with fellow bassists Noel Redding, Lee Jackson and Frank Farrell ... lounging about in the Supertramp rehearsal rooms across the road while they worked (when I was not off gigging myself) ... rubbing shoulders with buddies from Slade, Free, ELO, Wizzard, David Bowie Band, Rare Bird, Capability Brown, Clouds etc in the bar at the Speakeasy - it all seems like a distant dream now, growing old can be a real bitch. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 16:22, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, so much, for sharing these memories. ELO is another favorite from those years. My David Bowie memory treat is having seen him in The Elephant Man (play) (much different from the film.) He was being groomed to replace Philip Anglim on Broadway and Denver was one of the stops along that process. He was absolutely marvelous in the role. You are sooo right about this getting old thing. Waking up with the same aches day after day is for the birds - though I would not wish this on any of our feathered friends :-) Thanks again and cheers.

Censorship?
Is there any reason in particular why you would wish to censor discussion on the verifiability of the moon landing hoax page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.132.165.230 (talk) 02:31, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Absolutely not. But your comment on the talk page there was not a suggestion for improvement of the article. Discussion pages are not general chat forums for stating your personal opinions. If you check my balanced edit I simultaneously deleted another comment with the diametrically opposed view to yours for the same reason. Regarding your perception of the Moon Landing article please read the first entry in "Frequently asked questions" at the top of the talk page there. If you wish to be taken seriously sign up with a proper handle and make valid suggestions for an article's improvement - and sign all your entries with four tildes. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 10:56, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, it's obvious to any casual reader that you do not wish anyone to question either the article, or the legitimacy of the subject matter itself. You obviously have some sort of vested interest in this, so I'll simply leave you to protect your article as you wish to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.132.165.230 (talk) 21:56, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LI (May 2010)
The May 2010 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 has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:13, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

A friendly notice.
I've responded to you on the atomic bombings talk page. I would appreciate a response to my response. Thanks. --Raubfreundschaft (talk) 20:56, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * And a second time. I merely wish to understand how you can categorize court verdicts as debate, and not as something directly relevant to the issue they judged about. Also, what you consider an anachromism and what not. Mainly because the article already mentions things which are even younger than the 1963 court case, yet still have their deserved and unrefuted place in the article. Though constant objectivety, I am certain we will achieve a rewarding, not circular, debate (and results from that debate, of course). --Raubfreundschaft (talk) 09:13, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 02:12, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

West Heath
Hello, I was very impressed to see your modifications and improvements to my additions to the West Heath article and the correct formatting for it. Being new to entering items into Wikipedia I have not yet mastered all the methods of achieving a correctly presented piece so I am very grateful for your excellent intervention. I was very keen to expand the previous rather rudimentary item about West Heath when I had discovered that what seems to be rather an uninteresting little place superficially in fact has rather more about it to interest someone who is seeking information about West Heath t.han one would expect. One point of doubt for me however is whether the Austin Village should be mentioned since I rather think it may be situated outside West Heath and in Northfield proper. Do you think this point is worth reconsidering?White knight and dog (talk) 18:15, 29 June 2010 (UTC)White knight and dog.
 * Moot point and the Austin village is right on the boundary, but I think it is OK unless anyone seriously objects. I have had a similar misgiving about the previous article which I only tripped over when someone put in a statement that Ian Lavender went to Turves Green Boys School ... and I knew he (like me) went to Bournville Tech Grammar ... he was actually the fourth form lunchtime table monitor that sat on my table when I was a first former.


 * However I did not have access to the source material to add anything meaningful ... only able to chip in when you provided the material. A couple of points though a) Whoa, down boy ... not much more or the article will far outstrip the size of settlement it is covering ... if you have any more and it has value consider setting up a sub article. b) You obviously have good information and I cannot find it on the web so I assume it is the written word ... we now need to start putting in adequate in-line references to support the article ... it will be time consuming but needs to be done. We have the basis of a great article here and it just needs to be validated ... then all I need now is for you to do the same excellent job for Northfield (which is a bag of sh*te at present).


 * Start going back through your information and enter the references even if they are from books. If you need any help with that just shout and I will be happy to chip in. I have a soft spot for West Heath from my early childhood ... my first home was one of the 1930s semis on Redditch Road opposite the Man in the Moon and my grandparents lived in a 1900s cottage on Lilley Lane. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 21:06, 29 June 2010 (UTC)


 * If you need a steer how to do inline references from a book check out the article I did for Woodhouse Grove School, click on the edit tab, and checkout the HTML for quoting from a book "title of book, author, page number (and ISBN number if the book has one)" <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 21:30, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your extremely helpful reply. Much of the new information was obtained from items in West Heath's small library itself - evidence of the value of local libraries in these financially difficult times. Over the course of the next few days I shall attempt to enter the references and will undoubtedly use the advice you have provided and if I have problems I will get back to you as you kindly offer. Best wishesWhite knight and dog (talk) 07:10, 30 June 2010 (UTC)white knight and dog

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LII (June 2010)
The June 2010 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 has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:31, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LIII (July 2010)
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:01, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  03:56, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

The Milhist election has started!
The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. You are cordially invited to help pick fourteen new coordinators from a pool of twenty candidates. This time round, the term has increased from six to twelve months so it is doubly important that you have your say! Please cast your vote here no later than 23:59 (UTC) on Tuesday, 28 September 2010.

With many thanks in advance for your participation from the coordinator team,  Roger Davies  talk 20:56, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Clouds (60s rock band)
Hello, I've just seen your comments about the changes I made to this page. It's always helpful if other contributors get involved with any article, as long as the final outcome is meaningful, and I welcome your thoughts on that. However, if you check the changes I made (rather clumsily at times, I admit!), they are all fully referenced - I was very careful about that. As I said though, anything you can suggest or contribute to the overall good of the article is greatly appreciated, it avoids the dangers of one-dimensional input.

Thank you

Matthew Matthew.hartington (talk) 11:58, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Image deletion
PS to previous post - I didn't scan the item myself, it was given to me by an associate of the people involved, I assumed it was just a photo as such, and I apologise for unwittingly misleading you and other wiki editors. I'm also having trouble with the correct procedures for uploading images in any case, so please bear that in mind till I get the hang of it. Thank you

Matthew.hartington (talk) 12:33, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Images and copyright
Thank you so much for writing back and giving the advice, especially the image illustration, which will help me no end. Nevertheless, in the light of what you've said, I think we should remove the image I've placed there, I would much rather you add something appropriate as you know what you're doing for a start! And you say you know Billy Ritchie? That's quite something, as he has always been rather elusive, even to people associated with the band and website (James Alexander,the person who runs the Clouds website, is a friend of mine, but I don't think he has contact with Billy, just Ian and Harry). The second photo was given to me by James, and as far as I know it has no copyright issues, but I will certainly check that with James to find what the provenance of the photo is, though it certainly isn't my work in terms of its origin, which seems to make it doubtful for use.

In any case, I still think it would be better if you could deal with the image for the article - or is that putting too much onto you? I'm sure you have enough to do with clumsy would-be editors like me in the first place! In that regard, you probably notice that I carried out multiple small edits when one good edit would have done in the first place, that obviously made things look worse, and complicated the issue. But I was mainly just rearranging the words into a better narrative, and I tried to be as careful as possible in regard to the references.

What should I do about the existing image on the article? Should I delete that myself, or will you attend to that too? Sorry again for all this inconvenience, and thank you so much for your help. You obviously know the band personally, so you probably already know all the history involved better than I do. I only gained the information by reading about it, perhaps you saw it all happen in the first place.

Thank you once again for all your help

Matthew.hartington (talk) 14:04, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

You might be interested
Hello again 21stCenturyGreenstuff. I hope that you are well. I thought you might be interested in a new discussion that has begun here Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (biographies). While you may not want to add to the conversation I thought you would be interested in the link that Rodhullandemu has found that indicates that the movement away from feminine diminutives continues. Thanks for your time and continued happy editing. MarnetteD | Talk 01:18, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

That's better, thanks.
Yes, that's better. I always thought a period was necessary, but since either way is correct (Jan, Feb, Mar, Apr, Jun, Jul, Aug, Sep, Oct, Nov, and Dec or Jan., Feb., Mar., Apr., Jun., Jul., Aug., Sep., Oct., Nov., and Dec. (May was skipped on purpose since it's already three letters, so it can't be abbreviated since months or days are three letters when abbreviated XD)), that'll work. Thanks! - Zhou Yu (talk) 14:12, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

"...nor is he likely to be one..."
Charming :) <font color="#A20846">╟─TreasuryTag► consulate ─╢ 16:31, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Not meant in any kind of malicious way, but I couldn't see it happening in the near future. I am great admirer of your actual work but I am sure you will admit you can be a little 'irrascible' at times in your dealings with some editors. The administration arena is a highly political place and you can be a little remiss at the 'making friends and influencing people' thing and you don't suffer fools gladly. Your edit summaries when clearing stuff off your talk page often make me laugh ... but I could also appreciate how irking it may be for the people you have deleted. N'est pas? Peace. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 16:40, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I know you weren't malicious :) Anyway, I'm about to be indef-blocked according to KnowIG, so the issue probably won't arise...! And pleased that I can sometimes amuse people, <font color="#7026DF">╟─TreasuryTag► You may go away now. ─╢ 16:42, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Apology.
Whether you believe me or not, I'd like to apologize for edit warring. - Zhou Yu (talk) 23:02, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * No need to apologise, but thank you anyway. As to whether I believe you or not - yes I do and will continue to do so until such time as you prove the opposite is true, so the ball is firmly in your court to that degree. Good luck and I truly hope you can manage to reign in your impetuosity. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 23:08, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Billy Ritchie article
Hi, as per your suggestion, I have begun to create an article for Billy Ritchie. As you also kindly suggested, I have put it onto a user page meantime for editing and suggestions/corrections, before trying to publish it to Wiki proper. As you might guess, there may be some difficulties in use of image etc. The image I've used meantime is a cropped piece of the one you created for the Clouds article. Sorry if there's more mess involved!

The page is USER: Matthew.Hartington/Billy Ritchie (musician). Thank you for all your help Matthew.hartington (talk) 06:54, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

PS Sorry, already began with a sloppy error - the actual page to be edited/corrected is User talk:Matthew.hartington/Billy Ritchie (musician) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matthew.hartington (talk • contribs) 06:58, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Apologies to User SineBot; and to 21stCenturyGreenstuff - the relevant page IS User: Matthew.hartington/Billy Ritchie (musician). I just hope the page itself contains less errors, but I won't count on it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matthew.hartington (talk • contribs) 07:11, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Only had time to have a quick glance (getting ready for a 400 mile round trip to a funeral tomorrow) but it looks quite workable and not a bad effort. I will have a closer look over the weekend. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 21:29, 21 October 2010 (UTC)Reply to Matt

Penarth page
I notice you've done a lot of good stuff on the Penarth page. I note you reverted an entry on the Penarth page referring to the filming of the Sarah Jane Adventures because there was no reference cited by the original unknown editor. I have now found a reference and re-stated the edit. Would it not be better to leave this piece of trivia and encourage others to find a reference. They are hardly controversial. I point this out because a huge number of other pieces of trivia and history on the page are also not referenced. Would it not be better to flag the whole page as "in need of reference?". Because otherwise, if we apply the same standard to the Sarah Jane Adventures we'd be removing huge chunks of the page.--Thegiantrodent (talk) 16:15, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Good point ... I was pretty tired when I did that edit ... otherwise I would have gone hunting for a reference myself. Thanks for your efforts there. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 20:43, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

RAF Harlaxton and RAF Metheringham.
I've had a look at them and i am very impressed, but there is a lack of sources, references and citations holding them back from B-class and probably more.Petebutt (talk) 16:05, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LVI, October 2010
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 01:40, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Corrinne Eleanor Wicks
The birth of Corrinne Eleanor Wicks is registered in the January-February-March period of 1967. Yes, these records give no exact date, but rather the overall three month period. That means Wicks wasn't born in 1968 or in April, as the article currently states. :-) All Hallow&#39;s Wraith (talk) 23:36, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Fulltime v Wholetime - ROC
''Fulltime v Wholetime

Actually the Royal Observer Corps did not consist of parttime and fulltime staff. The terms used were sparetimers and wholetimers. The wholetime officers worked a full 42 hour week in the office but, because they were also involved in training the sparetime personnel, they also worked evenings and weekends - often resulting in 15 and 16 hour weekdays ... and when weekend exercises took place they would also work a 48 hour non-stop weekend. I regularly worked a 120 hour week (several times a year) and over a fifteen year career my average working week was 75 - 80 hours. And that is why we were always termed wholetime officers in all manuals, press reports and job adverts.

We received no extra salary for the additional hours (although we were very well paid) and instead were entitled to 'time off in lieu subject to the exigencies of service' - in effect we never managed to take much of it though. One year I had officially qualified for 15 weeks leave but could not take it all or the office routine would have fallen apart. It was a vocation, not a career. 21st CENTURY GREENSTUFF 13:50, 28 November 2010 (UTC)''


 * LOL! - thanks for the comment - I no longer edit Wikipedia as-such but saw the 'wholetime' usage and thought it must be from one of our 'colonial cousins' using one of their equivalent terms! Regards, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.112.63.208 (talk) 21:31, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Carol Vorderman External Link Value
Dear 21stCenturyGreenstuff,

I placed an external link yesterday which gave credible value to the Carol Vorderman page with respect to the "Pride of Britain Awards 2010" - which has subsequently been removed with claim that RV Links to blogs are deprocated at wikipedia).

The link was directly to a news and information page for the highly respected fashion designer who created the evening wear that Carol was wearing on the evening of the awards, so in my eyes gave something recent to the page.

Most respected news and media services use blogs to publish content - including the majority of the worlds press and journalists. My question is this: if blogs are not to be linked to, then why is it that The Independent, The Times, The Daily Mail and The Mail on Sunday etc can publish external links on Wiki pages whilst using "blog" platforms?

From what I can see, this undo was due to the fact that the sub domain of the websites url is "blog.suzanneneville.com" - yet if we had of called it "insights.suzanneneville.com" it may have been seen differently??

Over 20% of websites created are now using Wordpress as a platform and blog based, du to the CMS attributes of the software - so this surely is going to be questionable as far as monitoring the external links to websites which are built on such platforms, yet do not have the word "blog" in the url? As an example, and purely to show a weak explanation against a strong case, a business which has created such a site - amdinstallation.co.uk - has no mention of the word "blog" in it, yet has 75% of it's content posted through Wordpress due to it's CMS abaility.

Would appreciate your thoughts on this situation, and look forward to working with you to re-establish the link from the Carol Vorderman wikipedia page to add an up to date valuable content point for visitors to see.

Best Regards Darren Moore Myquadbike (talk) 12:19, 2 December 2010 (UTC)Myquadbike


 * Hi Darren,
 * Anyone can create a personal web page, blog or pay to have a book published, then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published media, such as books, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, personal or group blogs, Internet forum postings, and tweets, are largely not acceptable as sources. Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications. Caution should be exercised when using such sources: if the information in question is really worth reporting, someone else is likely to have done so. Self-published sources should never be used as third-party sources about living persons, even if the author is an expert, well-known professional researcher, or writer.


 * Regarding your valid point about newspapers. Several newspapers host columns that they call ‘blogs’. These ARE acceptable as sources, so long as the writers are professionals and the blog is subject to the newspaper's full editorial control. In March 2010, the Press Complaints Commission in the UK ruled that journalists' blogs hosted on the websites of newspapers or magazines are subject to the same standards expected of comment pieces in that organization's print editions. First glance shows that the blog you linked to does not fall in this category. A further concern was that as the 'blog owner' had a commercial interest in that she makes and sells the dresses worn by Carol at a prominent event there could be a perceived element of 'spam' relating to wikipedia featuring it.


 * If the topic is notable then it is likely that there will be other more valid sources that can be used to verify the information. I know how frustrating this can be to editors and I hope my explanation makes things a little clearer for you.


 * Follow the links quoted on your talk page back in February that fully explain the policies regarding links to commercial websites.<b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 14:24, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Dear21stCenturyGreenstuff,

Frustration, yes - you have an extremely good point!

Quote 1: "Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications."

Response: When every man and his dog published the name "Suzanne Neville" within their columns in the press the day after the awards ceremony, and three of the worlds fashion magazines also giving credible editorials on the subject of the outfit that she was wearing to the awards, surely then if that does not point towards a third party publishing credible status, what does?

Quote 2: "Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications."

Response: The extract which has been placed on the page I referenced was actually taken, and credited to the editors of the magazine and online news site who published the content to begin with, TV Choice, Closer Magazine Online, The Mail, The Express, The Mirror - how many more reliable sources should one reference?

Quote 3: "A further concern was that as the 'blog owner' had a commercial interest in that she makes and sells the dresses worn by Carol at a prominent event there could be a perceived element of 'spam' relating to wikipedia featuring it."

Response: Whilst I appreciate that the source referenced was directed towards the blog of the designer, it was not directly to the "commercial" base of the business which is the main site. Should we take this one stage further, most, in fact ALL news websites including "The Times & Telegraph" have more commercial intent by placing adverts to relevant companies within the editorials they publish online - does that not fall under the classification of "commercial intent?"

As for possible 'spam' - nearly all wikipedia pages have commercial links pointing towards businesses in all categories, so I can not see that this would or could be classed as spam based on it is one link from one page, and not multiple links towards one site?

I am grateful of your explanations of the points raised and covered, but find some of it slightly odd to say the least. Although the link was pointing directly to the weblog of the designer who created the dress which Carol was wearing, there was no commercial intent being forced upon any visitor who wished to see, read or add comments to the article in question - much unlike the Times, Telegraph and so on, who constantly force commercial advertising into posts.

At the end of the day, I would still like to publish this external link either through the external link summary area or by placing it as a citation within some structured content about the awards ceremony - so would appreciate your thoughts on how to proceed forward with this.

Again, thank you for your time and efforts to restructure the attribute request.

Regards Darren Myquadbike (talk) 10:35, 3 December 2010 (UTC)myquadbike
 * Unfortunately this is not a personal vendetta on my part and it was not technically "my explanations" - I was in fact quoting from the wikipedia policy that is long-standing and pretty much set in stone. The direct link to a commercial concern you were trying to quote fails on several grounds and is unlikely ever to be acceptable in any context. By all means raise the matter at the village pump, but I doubt you will achieve a change in a very basic and entrenched policy of wikipedia.


 * As an aside I note from your list of wiki contributions to date that you have made four attempted edits to articles in the last 12 months and all of them have been in a similar vein ... potentially commercial links. Could I suggest that you spend some time reading the article What Wikipedia is not to assist you in contributing future edits. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 13:43, 3 December 2010 (UTC)


 * An admin has suggested you raise the topic at [|Reliable Sources Noticeboard] <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 21:41, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LVII, November 2010
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 21:52, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Farrell with Supertramp.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Farrell with Supertramp.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:27, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Question
Hello again and belated Happy New Year. I was saddened to hear of the passing of Gerry Rafferty recently. He was one of my faves back in the day. I especially liked the song that he sang on the Local Hero soundtrack (even though it was barely used in the film.) I am curious if you ever worked with him? On another note (re: previous discussions that have gone on in various places over the years) I have been noticing that all interviews on The Graham Norton Show are with actors. Hope you are well and cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 20:18, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * No I never crossed paths with Rafferty sadly. I am not a huge fan of Graham Norton (I think he is a talented comedic actor who is wasting his talent on populist fluff television) and have never watched any of his current chat shows. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 20:34, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply. I can sure understand the GN comments - "populist fluff" is right. In the last couple of weeks both Elizabeth McGovern and Emilia Fox were acknowledged as actors. At some point I think you mentioned the US resisting the move forward as opposed to the UK acceptance and I feel that this may be an example of that. Thanks again for taking the time to reply. I do appreciate it. MarnetteD | Talk 22:02, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Mr Warwick/Warrick?
Silly me ... I assumed the 'uk' in your handle indicated you were a Brit ... and I couldn't understand how you did not know how to spell Warwick. I see now that you are from across the pond and things become clear. Checkout Warwick and see how it is pronounced - and it sounds as though your Americanised version of the DVD has a spelling error on it. I just checked out the end credits of my Region 2 DVD of the film (just to make sure he wasn't bizarrely named Warrick or even Worrick) and it is definitely Warrant Officer Warwick. "Two nations divided by a common language" eh? <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 22:38, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I watched the film again and put on the closed captions which confirmed that the character's name is "Warrick" and is pronounced that way by both Susannah York and Kenneth More and is written that way in the captions. The credits at the end and beginning of the film, do not give the character's names, just actor's names. I have two different DVDs, a collectors edition and the standard play, actually three different versions when I looked back at the VHS copy, and all agree with the same spelling. I have posted this before on the same article and have not found any other versions with a different spelling of the character's name. FWiW, IMDb is notoriously inaccurate regarding the character names in a film and this is just another example of that tendency. Bzuk (talk) 00:13, 18 January 2011 (UTC).
 * That is the American closed captions we are talking about here is it? If they spelt it correctly as Warwick an American would try and pronounce it something like 'Wore wick' instead of the correct 'Worrik'. Sorry, but this is just plain wrong. Check the spelling in the rest of that dialogue section that has stood stable and unchanged for a very long time ... you now have it spelt as Warwick twice and Warrick once. I see you have also changed forever back to for ever again as well, any particular reason? <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 00:24, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * No, I listened again and again, and Susannah York pronounces it quite distinctly as Mr. Warrick as the camera is on her in a full closeup. I will make sure that changes are consistent, as the rest of the changes are a bit of mess; I haven't gotten back to it yet. The captions are written by the British studio and there are no credits for the character's names. You should go back and listen carefully to your version of the film and turn on the closed captions. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 00:34, 18 January 2011 (UTC).
 * Oh, I am very aware of how it is said ... but that is how we Brits pronounce Warwick. Try Googling 'Battle of Britain Mr Warrick" and you will find that your spelling is outnumbered about six to one by Warwick. Change the article if you have a burning desire to do so, I will not edit war with you ... but you are just plain wrong. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 00:45, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Now I have to call that improbable at best, as the captions are quite clear, the dialogue is easy to hear and, unless you can find some corroborating evidence, and I have now seen a British screen print on the Internet and again, there are no end credits as you claim your version contains. The article is now changed and unless you can find something other than your suppositions as to pronunciation, I will consider the matter closed. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 00:55, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Battle of Britain (film)
See my final comments on this issue of pronunciation] which should now finally be considered resolved. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 22:15, 19 January 2011 (UTC).
 * Don't worry I have been following the thread, BoB is on my watchlist. It is such a minor topic and not worth arguing about which is why I walked away from it two days ago. I have no idea where the error first started or who started it ... but nobody will ever convince me that a British Warrant Officer would be named Warrick ... the name would always be spelt the same as the British town. But it really does not matter because phonetically they sound exactly the same. As a complete aside I met the author of the original book (The Narrow Margin) on many occasions and I spent three weeks helping Derek ferret through the HQROC files when he was updating his history of the Royal Observer Corps "Attack Warning Red" in 1991. Nice working with you. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 22:41, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Listen, I am a fan of the movie, and would be loathe to introduce any errors knowingly, but I have the original script notes for the scene and it is "Warrick" and his name appears thus in the screen credits that were never aired but appeared in the script and in the book by Leonard Mosley (1969), written on the set. I bought the book after the film was first screened in Canada as it was advertised as a Battle of Britain release and was offered by a local bookseller to coincide with the advertising campaign for the feature film. I tucked it away, but returned to it when I wrote major portions of the Wikipedia article on the film. FWiW, TCM, the Turner Classic Movie Network has recently aired the film in North America and gave the cast credits in their website profile including listing a Warrant Officer Warrick played by Michael Bates. TCM maintains a moderator controlled, peer-reviewed site and is written by film historians rather than other sites such as IMDb where I believe the error originated, run as a "fan" site, written by fans that is rarely updated or corrected. At the Film Projects Group where I served as a Film Coordinator, a decision was finally made not to accept IMDb as a verifiable reference source for just this reason. I recently wrote an article on "Pilot No. 5" and found that the IMDB cast listing was woefully inadequate. I only refer to the site as a last resort. Bzuk (talk) 23:58, 19 January 2011 (UTC).
 * I would love to hear how you would pronounce Cholmondeley ... a Brit would say it as Chum lee, Wymondham is Windum, Marylebone is Marlee bone, Dalziel is Dee ell and Menzies is said as Ming iss. Warwick is said exactly as you hear it several times in the Battle of Britain. Honest injun, I have been speaking the language for 60 years. - Oh yes and Belvoir is said Beaver.<b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 00:55, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Honestly, if I heard anything other than "Warrick", I would readily concede but I listened carefully to both the lead actors, Susannah York and Kenneth More and they enunciated clearly the character's name as it was listed in the original screen credits, script notes, script lines and producer's captions as "Warrick." Mosley is a reputable reference, I can cite that but how would you verify anything that is based on interpretation of pronunciation or mispronunciation? BTW, I am Canajan, not a Yank. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 01:54, 20 January 2011 (UTC).
 * I had already guessed you were a Canuuk ... far too intelligent to come from below the border. BTW for the three years I was stationed at RAF Bentley Priory I lived in the Priory Building (then the Officers' Mess), took my after dinner coffee and read the daily newspaper in the anteroom that was the original control room during the BoB ... and part of my duties as the mess's Assistant Entertainment Officer was acting as custodian and guide for Stuffy Dowding's office ... I have often stood on his balcony looking out over London and strolled in the Italian gardens and round the fountain. Every morning I stepped out of the mess front door heading for my office ... and am always reminded of that when watching 'Dowding' and 'Park' walk out of the same door at the end of the film.


 * If you look at this photo of the Priory [:File:OfficersMessBentley.JPG] the window covered in white shutters at bottom right was Keith Park's office and Stuffy's was right next door just out of shot. The window bottom left was my bedroom for three years. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 02:10, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * My friend and former boss organizes tours to Jolly Ole' and I hope to join one of these Bomber Command visits in the future. I envy your past connections as I have been an aviation historian and filmmaker for over a decade, with interests that have involved mainly the aviation heritage of Canada. My involvement with a Battle of Britain veteran led me to write the biography of the late Squadron Leader Janusz Zurakowski, the one-time test pilot for Glosters and later Avro Canada, hence my interest in BoB subjects. I have also just completed a film on the life and times of a local Second World War airman and have recently taken on a project to build a statue in his hometown to honour the memory of Canada's last VC of the air, P/O Andrew Mynarski. Recently, a generous donor has come forth to assist and we have now completed our fund-raising phase, having raised just under $100,000. He died trying to free his tail gunner in a blazing Lancaster bomber and Mynarski never returned, but we have called our appeal, "Bringing Andrew home" as a symbolic measure, bringing him home in spirit. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 04:16, 20 January 2011 (UTC).

Great repartee at "Gary Moore" article
I am enjoying the friendly sparring over language at the Gary Moore article. In case you think I was trying to promote the American way of saying things, the wording I used was partly verbatim from the article I referenced (the Belfast Telegraph) where it says, and I quote, "But he quit as a teenager," "He moved there in 1970 and, despite two spells in the States," and "to be near his locally-based sons...from his marriage which lasted from 1985 to 1993." Blame the bloody journalist from Belfast, not me, for that wording!

I am a Canadian, if you check my page, and I learned to speak the Queen's English—not bloody American. So there! ...I don't know what happened to the journalist from Belfast. Maybe he was an American "plant" (A person stationed in a given location as a spy or observer). :-)

BTW, vacation -- "noun --

...2. another word (esp US and Canadian) for holiday"

So, I guess you got me there. I need a vacation. :-)

Carry on, 21stCenturyGreenstuff. --Skol fir (talk) 03:12, 8 February 2011 (UTC)


 * My edit summary was done tongue in cheek, no ire intended. I think the Belfast journo has been watching too many reruns of Starski and Hutch. That's OK, I will continue translating your text into English for you and you can carry on correcting my punctuation - together we will arrive at something lucid. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 09:36, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 * One round of Guinness, on the house, coming up! BTW, what good is punctuation without elocution? If Gary could see us now, sparring over words on his behalf, he would have a fit, and "die laughing." -- I must have some of that Irish wit in me, after all. :-) --Skol fir (talk) 10:17, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 * You haven't really tasted a proper Guinness until you have sampled a double-cooled pint at a Temple Bar' boozer in Dublin while listening to some bloke playing 'Wild Rover' in the corner, with a boisterous, packed house singing along to the chorus. I used to go over every few years to watch the 6-nations rugby game at the old Lansdowne Road stadium, but haven't been across the Irish Sea for a while now. I am finding the editing at Gary's page a little bizarre really and cannot believe he is really gone - he was four years younger than me and in much better shape - scary really, you never know which day will be your last do you? I bet the last thing on his mind as he settled into bed on Saturday night was not waking up the following day to start enjoying his holiday. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 10:34, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I am doing a left shuffle here, to avoid falling off the edge of the page (that double-cooled pint sure did the trick! lol)...as for "the 6-nations rugby game at the old Lansdowne Road stadium," do the spectators have to wear extra padding? Yes, it was strange to hear the rumors become reality about Gary's sudden demise. I had just been introduced to him in a duet with BB King on YouTube, and now I will have to live with the memory of what was. I am watching my "old ticker" like a hawk ever since. :-) I happened to be only 2 years younger than him. Not much difference there, except for talent, where he beat me hands down. Was he always playing the "Les Paul" guitar? --Skol fir (talk) 18:36, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 * The atmosphere at Lansdowne Road was boisterous but 'good craic' and well natured, even towards visiting fans (I used to go over for Ireland v Wales games - Wales being my adopted team ever since living near Cardiff and playing first class rugby for Penarth RFC myself in the late 1960s) so spectator padding was never needed. Dublin has a brand new stadium at Croke Park now, which I haven't yet visited. I never met Gary myself - although I did live in the same London Hotel as Thin Lizzy for a time in the 1970s - during my pro bassist days, although not when Gary was in the band. He played several different Gibson models over the years, mostly Les Paul's but also Firebirds, Flying Arrows and occasionaly SGs *adds I have just spotted a photo of him playing a cherry red Gibbo 335 as well* . He often also used Fender Stratocasters if a different sound was needed. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 19:22, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Volume LVIX, January 2011
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 15:05, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LX, February 2011
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 21:03, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Civil Air Guard
You recently questioned the existance of the Civil Air Guard so for your information I have started an article at Civil Air Guard. Needs more work but has the basics. MilborneOne (talk) 23:58, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, noted that ... will be interesting, never heard of them. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 00:06, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Jayne Mansfield
Re your edit summary here...
 * "and Mansfield was a 36DD-24-26 (In Playboys dreams, 40,20,32 would make her a sideshow freak, with a ribcage like Schwarzanegger and the waist and hips of Mr Incredible"

A couple of thoughts on this statement: I think that however one states it, the woman was busty. Cheers, Shearonink (talk) 23:20, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Playboy is a multi-million dollar corporation, their flagship publication has editorial oversight so therefore I would think it would qualify as a reliable source. If there are other reliable sources that differ with Playboy's 'figures' then that information can be added with the appropriate citations.
 * Your remark about Miss Mansfield being a sideshow freak notwithstanding, I am not sure you understand women's measurements. Her bra size might indeed have been a 36DD, where the ribcage is measured at 36" and then the cup-size would indicate how much bigger the breasts are than the ribcage (in inches).  A 36DD would make the actual chest measurement around 40", since a DD indicates a cup size of at least 5 inches more than the ribcage.
 * There was a typo in my summary and it should of course have read 36DD-24-36 (not 26). Playboy may well be a reliable source and you will note that I made no change to the statistics stated in the Mansfield article. However, there is a history of glamour editors being somewhat cavalier with their published stats and my real gripe was not with the bust measurement (which fluctuated greatly during Mansfield's lifetime anyway) ... the point I was making is that she was curvacious and had a classic waist/hip ratio ... the stated hip measurement is just plain stupid. I have made a lifelong study of women's measurements and how they work ... I actually consider myself an expert. Mansfield was in no way a sideshow freak, but the ridiculous Playboy figures would certainly have made her one. Mansfield may have had a 20" waist at the age of 18 but by the time she posed for Playboy that was a dim memory. My comment was only light hearted tongue in cheek anyway. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 23:45, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Box Tunnel Link
I'm a beginner at Wikipedia editing so please excuse any naivety on my part. The Box Tunnel link to the CGWH is a myth, the spur railway served the ammunition depot at Tunnel Quarry and there was no underground between Tunnel and Spring Quarry when the CGWH was constructed. Ukuncut (talk) 19:55, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't doubt that, but a few things about your edit ... always ALWAYS add a brief edit summary that explains the change you have made ... and Wikipedia is sadly not about truth (and what we know to be true) it is about what can be proved with quotable references, so if you can quote a reliable source that confirms that there was no link between the railway and Spring Tunnel you can make the change. It does strike me that even with no direct underground link it would still be a quicker way of getting the PM and their team to Hawthorn than train to Bristol and limo back to Box. With the common misconception that the link exists your edit would be better if, rather than delete the paragraph, you edit the wording to point out that the link does not exist in fact.


 * Always happy to offer advice if you need it as you settle in to Wikipedia. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 20:28, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Care to take a look at Prince Harry of Wales?
Hi, I reverted two subsequent edits to your version, and have now been labelled a vandal. Could you point to this consensus for "Henry" as against "Harry"? Cheers. Hengist Pod (talk) 23:01, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry Hengist (Carry on Cleo??) I have been away for a couple of days. I have hunted far and wide for that Harry discussion - it wasn't on the Harry discussion page it was in one of MoS subpages and I cannot track it down now, but the concensus then was that the page should be called Harry (sighs) but first mention and the lead photo should be Henry. It has stayed stable in that format for some time now till recent days - but to be honest I have thrown my hands up, and run out of the steam for arguing anymore - I give in the chittering masses on this one. I am pleased to see your 'vandal' situation seems to have eased and worked itself out in the meantime. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 23:10, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I couldn't find it either, but TBH, I'm not that bothered. Senna sends her regards. Cheers. Hengist Pod (talk) 23:21, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXI, March 2011
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 01:05, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXII, April 2011
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 21:42, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

How di license an image?
How am i supposed to show that the picture is authentic? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saimcheeda (talk • contribs) 14:41, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * It is not a question of the picture being authentic, it is a question of permission and copyright. You cannot do a capture of a TV programme and claim it as your own work because the TV production company own the copyright. You cannot lift a picture off a website on the internet because the website or original photographer hold the copyright.


 * In practical terms you can only upload pictures from sites like Flicka where the photographer has granted a Commons freeshare licence. That is why so many articles have no images, it is a minefield and wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 15:03, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for helping with the article on Northfield, Birmingham, I see you were born there. South Birmingham OK (talk) 19:03, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes and lived there till I was 14. That article has been bugging me for ages but it was only your interest that sparked me into doing something about it. Keep adding stuff and finding good references. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 19:07, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Will do. South Birmingham OK (talk) 19:20, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIII, May 2011
To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 21:57, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIV, June 2011
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 22:20, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXV, July 2011
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 21:22, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

ROC Images
I've said my piece on the Commons page... Be terrific if you can scan/upload the original. Pity it'll be King's Crown only, but I've asked Sodacan to have a crack at the badge as per here: http://www.fotw.net/flags/gb%5Eroc.html but he's not replied as yet. Watch this space... Regards <font face="american uncial" color="red">Endrick <font face="american uncial" color="red">Shellycoat  17:06, 20 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Have you seen these?





What an effort - fantastic!

Regards <font face="american uncial" color="red">Endrick <font face="american uncial" color="red">Shellycoat  18:03, 18 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi. endrick.shellycoat@yahoo.com    <font face="american uncial" color="red">Endrick  <font face="american uncial" color="red">Shellycoat  08:37, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVI, August 2011
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 17:25, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVII, September 2011
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 01:45, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVIII, October 2011
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 07:45, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Avatar revert
Hello,

I'm curious as to the reasoning behind the revert to my revision on the first paragraph of the wiki: Avatar (2009 film). The edit in question is in regard to the term "4-D". I had made a new section on the discussion page to raise the issue. However as you had made the revert I am mainly seeking information from you specifically. I've copied the text from the talk section (and made a few edits):

Can someone explain this more clearly--in regard to 4-D? When I first read this I had assumed a new format of motion pictures existed. The wiki page for it 4-D Film describes 4D as a marketing term, not a specific format. However, the page itself has been marked for additional citation for a year and contains one citation so the content could be dubious. I don't see any other described standard for a clear definition of "4-D viewing" from searching elsewhere(google and such). I don't think the term is appropriate even though it does bear the quotation marks.

Can "4-D version" be described as a release? Since it was only "released" in one specific place inside korea and cannot be replicated, copied, or transferred like any other media format or audio(visual) art forms. I guess it could be rebuilt in other locations like how Shrek 4D was, but even then I saw users describing differences between cities. A line from one of the references I found to support my point reads: "'We (started to) prepared the 'Avatar' 4D ride last summer,' says Tom Oh, prexy[sic] of 20th Century Fox Korea." Rather than calling it a 4D version or 4D film, the Fox exec calls it a 4D ride. So how exactly is 4-D viewed since it is marketed often as feeling, smelling, movement and using senses besides vision? From browsing the filmography section of 4-D film wiki and non-wiki sites, it seems 4-D is often at specific location as an attraction (sometimes, but not always found at amusement parks--that happened to be the first place i thought of). All seem to often be designed for experiencing in only one location. That is to say there is no traditional film release or version to be (solely) viewed. Lastly, in the revert you did you wrote: "4d does not relate to amusement park rides. 4D cinematic release was to those Asian cinemas set up for 4D experience" I think that second sentence is close to how it should read in the wiki. To be specific, its a brand of Korean theaters, CJ CGV, that programs an array of effects for every movie it presents--it's possible Fox or anyone else related to the actual filming of the movie had nothing to do with choosing when to turn on fans or spray water mists, etc. The same Variety article goes on to state: "Ten films have been shown with 4D effects designed by CJ-CGV's 4D programmer over the last year." There is some ambiguity but I think it could mean there is one person who works for CJ CGV and decides what to cue when, without any input from the studios or film makers themselves. At the very least, I feel it should have some minor correction or rewording. To be specific, rather than reading: "viewing formats, and "4D" viewing." It could be written as "viewing formats, and "4D viewing"" since it is not viewed in a traditional, literal sense. Like you said its a 4D experience so perhaps: "viewing formats, and for 4-D experiences in select South Korean theaters"

Variety article

Tunafizzle (talk) 21:37, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your time and your anticipated response. I think this is an uncommon area of speech so it should be treated as such.
 * Yup I think that just about nails it. You final suggestion "... viewing formats, and for 4-D experiences in select South Korean theaters" would fit very well in the Avatar article. Go for it. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 21:43, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIX, November 2011
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:05, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Military Historian of the Year
Nominations for the "Military Historian of the Year" for 2011 are now open. If you would like to nominate an editor for this award, please do so here. Voting will open on 22 January and run for seven days. Thanks! On behalf of the coordinators, Nick-D (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:30, 15 January 2012 (UTC) You were sent this message because you are a listed as a member of the Military history WikiProject.

The Bugle: Issue LXX, January 2012
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 Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:35, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited West Heath, West Midlands, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Weoley (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:31, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:PS Waverley.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:PS Waverley.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Finavon (talk) 11:23, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXI, February 2012
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 Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 09:25, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXII, March 2012
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 Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 01:56, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Re:Minor Point
Hi again 21stCenturyGreenstuff

Hi at 00:36, 6 April 2012 you left me a message "I note that several infoboxes you have created include the word 'station'. We don't use that in articles ie. RAF Blob or Royal Air Force Blob ... but not RAF station Blob. You are also omitting the RAF Ensign from the infoboxes ... see RAF Coleby Grange for an example."

My question is who told you this and is there a link for it?

Thank You Gavbadger (talk) 15:37, 8 April 2012 (UTC)


 * I would not know where to look for it now ... it was a couple of years ago and will be well buried in an archive in the Military History Project pages somewhere. Why do you ask? <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 17:38, 8 April 2012 (UTC)


 * A new RAF article was being built and it had a military structure infobox so i told the creator about it was the wrong one and about not having the word station in the infobox and he said that as it is clearly wrong all RAF stations are stations which is why they are called RAF stations and never RAF airfield or RAF anything else

But i will ask the group now. Gavbadger (talk) 18:13, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
 * They are RAF stations, we just don't use the word station in the article title ... and the infobox carries the same name as the article title. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 22:05, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

RAF Thorney Island
Hi

I am currently working on the article but i'm a bit stuck about one of the unit types, what is a "Servicing Echelon" ? They only stay for a short period of time but i have no idea what it is and what they do.

Any ideas?

Gavbadger (talk) 22:40, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
 * It is not a term I am familiar with, even after working on hundreds of RAF station articles. It almost sounds like a phrase made up by someone not overly ofay with RAF terminology. Servicing flight maybe, Servicing Squadron or Servicing Wing are all familiar to me, but never echelon. Skip over it for the time being and look at that aspect later would be my advice (or ask MilborneOne who is very knowledgable). <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 22:53, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

RAF Thorney Island (again)
Hello again

I am currently making the article within my sandbox "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Gavbadger/sandbox" and i do not know what to do about the images. Would it be best if i had them evenly spread out with the article with relation to the squadron or at the bottom in a gallery?

Gavbadger (talk) 21:36, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Pick one to feature in the infobox and dot the rest throughout the article at suitable points (unless you have a large number to include). The lead should not stand on its own, it should instead be a brief synopsis of what follows ... so the first para in the main article should be the detailed station history with suitable sub-paras.


 * The resident squadrons should be presented in a table format to cut down on space used (see RAF Metheringham for an example). <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 21:55, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cher
Hey, you should take a look on Cher's article at the Wikipedia in portuguese. It's well ilustrated, very well written, complete and have a big number of references. It's also a featured article. You may translate it to english. Lordelliott (talk) 20:24, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cher
 * Well I might have done if I could read and speak Portuguese, but sadly it is not one of my language abilities. Umm, but we have a quite comprehensive article about Cher in the English wikipedia. I am not sure what more could be added of great value. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 20:28, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Help with Peer Review needed: Jayne Mansfield


A mid-importance article supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers that was reviewed by Version 1.0 Editorial Team and selected for Version 0.7 and subsequent release versions. The article has come a long way from a fan boy mish mash to a fair enough GA. Now is the time to take it to the next level. Currently it's going through another peer review. Please, lend a hand. Aditya (talk • contribs) 10:10, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXIII, April 2012
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 Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:45, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

RAF Jurby
Hi, any luck with getting a copy of "Kniverton's "Manx Aviation in War and Peace" ?

Gavbadger (talk) 18:00, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Not yet, could not find any available on Ebay but I have an old friend living in Peel on the Isle of Man and he is searching local bookshops for a copy over the next week or so ... I will get one eventually though and am convinced the three articles will need massive copyvio deletions (I feel it in my water). <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 18:35, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree with you there was one on for £9.99 but i'm not paying that much. I have added a few references from Halley1985 - "The Squadrons of the Royal Air Force & Commonwealth 1918-1988" but it's incredibly specific meaning you get the following from the squadrons Name of station <BR> when the unit arrived and departed which aircraft they used and that's it. Well i can see the construction and all the information about the crashes going incredibly quickly.

(P.s i've also put a message of the Mil:Hist talk page in case anyone has it.) Gavbadger (talk) 18:43, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Jurby again
Hello

This might sound a bit cheeky but hey-ho if you get bored on Wikipedia at some point can you change the timeline section on the RAF Jurby article as apart from the dates and spacing (which i changed) it is a blunt copy from within the history section of the website mentioned below. It might be worth to remove it completely if you think it cannot be saved.

http://www.controltowers.co.uk/H-K/Jurby_Isle_of_Man.htm

Thanks

Gavbadger (talk) 16:09, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I had spotted that. It is probably OK to keep as a quick reference tool but needs to be reformatted as a table and should be shifted down the page to after the history text. No rush and it can be done when reviewing the rest of the content in comparison to the printed sources. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 16:52, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey, I've got something you should see, See the latest post on my talk page. Gavbadger (talk) 19:38, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

RAF Stanmore Park
The aerial photography is available on Google Earth under the 'Historical imagery' option, and was created by the National Collection of Aerial Photography in 1945. Harrison49 (talk) 17:40, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Re:Image Request
As far as I'm aware I haven't requested one. I added the WikiProject Birmingham template, but that's about all. Paul MacDermott (talk) 13:27, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
 * But you set the Birmingham template with the field showing as IMAGE REQUIRED:YES. I assume you lifted the template off another page by copy and paste, but did not reset all the parameters to match West Heath. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 13:39, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I lifted it from WikiProject Edinburgh. About to go offline for a couple of hours now, so I'll take a look a bit later to see what's happened. Cheers Paul MacDermott (talk) 16:14, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi, I've just looked at this and can't see anything obvious. There's no IMAGE REQUIRED field on the page, so I've no idea why it would request an image for West Heath. Would adding IMAGE REQUIRED:NO fix the problem? Paul MacDermott (talk) 18:50, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
 * S'OK fixed it for you ... changed image required to no on the edit page.<b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 19:48, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I see now you were referrring to the template's appearance on the West Heath talk page rather than the template itself. I've been tweaking that around this evening, and managed to inadvertently fix a different problem. :) Paul MacDermott (talk) 21:37, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Birmingham
Paul MacDermott (talk) 11:15, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Keep an eye out for RAF Jurby and the others
Hi My copy of Knivetons book has arrived and already the first paragraph is blatant copying

I think the user may need a copyright esque notice when I have finished

Gavbadger (talk) 18:27, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Why am I not surprised? It makes you wonder how valid all of his other efforts on steamships are as well, let alone the RAF Andreas et al airfield ones. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 18:41, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

RAF Gravesend
Good Afternoon

I have been looking at the RAF Gravesend article as with your advice about the spliting of the Thorney Island (West Sussex) the RAF Gravesend article has had a merge to Gravesend Airport since August 2009 and i wanted your opinion on the matter.

Gavbadger (talk) 11:07, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I have commented at the Gravesend Airport talk page. In doing so I have spotted that RAF Crosby on Eden needs splitting off from Carlisle airport. Doh <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 12:25, 16 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I will take a look a bit. Gavbadger (talk) 12:51, 16 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm working on the Carisle airport part but the merge on the Gravesend article has me completely confused so can you do it please? Thank you.Gavbadger (talk) 14:59, 16 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Yeah I see what you mean. I suggest you go ahead and just build and develop the RAF article as you would do normally. When you are about finished we can delete all of the airport article and substitute a redirect to the new RAF page. That seems the easiest option. Not sure what the copyvio issues MilborneOne was referring to there on the talkpage, unless the bulk of the airport info was copied and pasted from somewhere else. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 15:28, 16 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Well i think that the IP editor just copied the information from the RAF article to the airport one without leaving a notice on the talk page because it says at Merging you need to place a template because it is required by the "CC-BY-SA". Gavbadger (talk) 15:37, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Shakin' Stevens page
Hi,

I'm attempting to remove inaccurate and blatantly contentious material from this page, and replace it with authorised copy from Shaky. Once I've done that I'll be going through it again to reference the material in the previous edit and adding the references back in. You're undoing my work and replacing it with the previous version is hindering me accomplishing this, and each time you undo it you're reinstating a page that contains an unauthorised photograph which blatantly infringes the copyright and trademark of HEC Ltd, which I represent. The image and page have been reported and I've been advised to replace the material with factual content.

Could we please resolve this.

Thanks,

Lloyd Sloan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lloydsloan (talk • contribs) 15:52, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The photograph you claim is copyrighted is sourced currently from Wikipedia Commons and came originally from Flicka where it was published under a valis licence that permits its reproduction here. To get it deleted you need to notify Wikimedia Commons adminstrators. Once and if they delete it from Commons it will no longer be used on the Shakin' Stevens page.


 * You cannot remove items from the page that are sourced and referenced. On wikipedia what counts is not what is true or false but what can be sourced and backed up. Additionally you cannot cut and paste text from another website, even the official and authorised copy from the Shaky site, because of copyright issues.


 * Wikipedia can be extremely frustrating for new editors in your position and operates under rules and guidelines that can drive a sane person to distraction. Good luck in your efforts, but tread a little slower. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 16:04, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

There are no copyright issues because I represent the company that owns the trademark. I am authorised to provide this content. I have not cut and pasted anything from any website, this biog has been written specifically for presentation here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lloydsloan (talk • contribs) 16:14, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I thought that may be the case. At which point I direct you to read Conflict of interest and No original research before you attempt any further editing. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 16:18, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

I didn't claim the image was copyright. The image infringes on the trademark and copyright of HEC Limited. For your information the international trademark is licensed in Europe (trademark #005784285) and this image is covered by international classes 9, 16 and 24 - it is not licensed legally, and is presented on the Wikipedia page without consent from the trademark owner. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lloydsloan (talk • contribs) 16:24, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * As I have already informed you, you should take this issue up with Wikimedia Commons administrators. As long as a Commons Licenced image remains on Commons it can be used in the appropriate article. However, if the image was taken at a public concert by a fan and uploaded to Flicka under a Commons licence I think personally that you will struggle to argue a case. But that is thankfully not my decision to make.


 * Please add a 'signature' to your talk comments by typing four tildes at the end of your post. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 16:33, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Worthy Down Barracks
Hello 21stCenturyGreenstuff

It's me again.

I'm a bit stuck on which infobox Worthy Down Barracks should have, I think it should be a military structure infobox but i'm not too sure because it had runways between 1939 and 1942.

Articles about raf airfields that turn into barracks always trip me up as i never know quite what infobox to give them and if they need their own article like "Baker Barracks" from the RAF Thorney Island.

Thanks

Gavbadger (talk) 22:22, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Strewth, that is a right mixed bag ... Royal Navy Air Service, RAF, Fleet Air Arm and then the Army. If it were me I would rename the article RAF Worthy Down start a new RAF Worthy Down page and treat as normal with an airfield info box, then mirror with a Worthy Down military HQ article ... and with 'RNAS Worthy Down' redirected to the RAF article. But this one is definitely a bit of a judgement call, so I would suggest it on the talk page and see if there are any real objections first. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 23:04, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXIV, May 2012
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 Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 14:15, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Anwick
Hi, I have added a bit more history stuff and refs, and tweaked. One of the things I've changed is the distance from Lincoln. I find it useful to use http://gridreferencefinder.com/ which has a measuring tool. Is the "low secure independant hospital" low security or a building that is not very tall ? - I didn't want to change it unless I got the sense wrong. Best wishes, Acabashi (talk) 20:46, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I also used to use gridreferencefinder but it calculates the distances as the crow flies ... I came to feel it was better in village articles to indicate the actual distance you have to travel if you drive the journey (using multimap), but no biggy - it is six of one and half a dozen of the other. Low secure is the phrase that Doulton Lodge Hospital uses to describe itself on its website and yes it a low security care home for men with behavioural difficulties. Hope that helps. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 20:59, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for that. There seems to be no WP guidance advice I can find as to which distance calculation is better: crow flies or road distance. As roads can be direct or very roundabout I tend to use the former. I might use multimap and both calcs in geog secs if there is a wide variation and just state "A is Xmiles from B by road" if there is a wide difference. I might bring this up on a relevant project page, if there is one. Cheers. Acabashi (talk) 22:32, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

RAF Tinwald Downs/RAF Dumfries
Good Evening 21stCenturyGreenstuff

There is a merge proposal to merge RAF Tinwald Downs into RAF Dumfries and i would like to invite your opinion on the matter please.

Thank You

Gavbadger (talk) 17:51, 29 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your contribution. Gavbadger (talk) 19:04, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

RAF Brampton vs Brampton Camp, RAF Wyton
Good Evening

I have noticed your revert on List of Royal Air Force stations about the naming of the Brampton Site yet the articles about RAF Wyton, RAF Brampton Wyton Henlow and RAF Brampton all have the notice about the disbandment of RAF Brampton Wyton Henlow and the renaming to Brampton Camp, RAF Wyton. The following is the reference used http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafbramptonwyton/aboutus/index.cfm and your revert is now being reverted.

Gavbadger (talk) 18:30, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * That works better than the previous redlink to a non-existant Brampton Camp article. I happened to drive past the main gate there just last week and the signboard still said RAF Brampton - the change is obviously currently in progress. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 18:54, 30 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Agreed, the ip editor changed the old unit name as well without reading the article which i thought was weird. Well i guess that aren't in a hurry to get all new signs to show the general public that they have lost the designation also i re-read the reference and noticed they are closing Brampton at the end of 2013 anyway. I was thinking about moving the article to the new name however i currently do not see the point in moving the article to a new name as it would be best known and remembered as RAF Brampton. Do you agree? Gavbadger (talk) 19:09, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah RAF Digby has been JSSO Digby for over five years now but the gate signboard only finally changed a few weeks ago ... and the red and white road signs still say RAF. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 19:26, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Maintenance Units
Hello

Do you have much knowledge about RAF Maintenance Units?

Gavbadger (talk) 21:00, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Only broadbrush. I was stationed at RAF Carlisle - 14MU for two years ... and attended several planning meetings at RAF Quedgeley - 7MU while organising annual summer camps for the ROC. Why specifically do you ask? <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 21:41, 30 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Well i'm trying to create a list of maintenance units as there are loads of red links on a number of the articles. So far the list is at my sandbox User:Gavbadger/sandbox3 but the durations of the unit are a bit puzzling as the formed and disbanded dates are rarely mentioned and any mention of what aircraft they worked is hard to come by.

Gavbadger (talk) 21:54, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Whoa ... biting off much? You can add 43MU at RAF Pengam Moors who dismantled various marques of fighter aircraft for shipping to various overseas theatres of war. Bear in mind that MUs did not just deal with aircraft ... there were clothing MUs, motorised vehicle MUs, furniture MUs. If an RAF station wanted a sergeants' mess mantlepiece clock, a mop and bucket or a pair of welly boots there would be an appropriate MU to approach. There were dozens of MUs established all over the UK and NI just after the war to break up the no longer needed fleets of aircraft. 7MU Quedgeley was where I went for the hundreds of bunk beds, mattresses, desks, chairs, blackboards, bedding and curtains needed for the ROC camps. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 22:24, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * 14 MU was huge and spread over four sprawling sites crammed with hangars, sheds and offices. They stocked all sorts, welly boots to flying helmets, bullets to radar domes (even radar sets), spare wings for Panavia Tornados to fire extinguishers.
 * There was an AoCs Command Inspection while I was there in 1980. The AVM spotted a massive crate in one shed and asked the station commander what was in it, the Group Caption asked the Wing Commander and so on down the line to a brown coated civvy storekeeper - nobody knew what it was, so they opened it and found a complete Auster aeroplane left over from the war that had just been forgotten. The same command inspection turned up three pairs of bomb doors for Lancasters. Fun times. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 22:37, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * That is amazing, did you ever find out what happened to Auster? Gavbadger (talk) 22:45, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * No idea. It was still there months later when I was posted to Northern Ireland. But it was in beautiful nick, all wrapped up in oiled greaseproof paper and no corrosion on any of the metalwork or the engine. It just needed assembling and it would have been perfectly airworthy, like straight out of the factory. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 22:51, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * No. 272 MU RAF St Angelo
 * Thank you i'm still working my way down on the list, currently on No. 44 MU.Gavbadger (talk) 23:07, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Logo RAF Jurby.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Logo RAF Jurby.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 05:31, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

List of Royal Air Force Maintenance units
Hello

The List of Royal Air Force Maintenance units from No. 3 MU to No. 99 MU is now live and any assistance in filling gaps and making it more complete would be greatly appreciated also i am still currently working on No. 100 MU + in my sandbox so i will upload them when i get to the top No. 100 range and so fourth until every unit is completed. Thanks Gavbadger (talk) 14:20, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

RAF Driffield
Hello

I was looking at the RAF Driffield article and the language which is used looks like a copyright issue.

Do you own or do you know any editor who may have this book?

Halpenny, Bruce. Action Stations: Military Airfields of Yorkshire v. 4.Patrick Stephens Ltd, 1982. ISBN 978-0850595321.

Gavbadger (talk) 23:43, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry no, I have his Action Stations:Lincolnshire but not the Yorkshire one ... but I agree that article looks VERY suspicious. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 00:23, 18 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks, yeah I know as soon as I read the second paragraph of the lead the phrasing of my action stations book came in my head then when I looked at the references it pretty much confirmed it. Gavbadger (talk) 00:41, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

RAF Alconbury
Hey

I'm a bit stuck of which infobox RAF Alconbury should have.

It used to have an airfield but now it is only housing and technical buildings being used.

Any ideas?

Gavbadger (talk) 00:03, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Borderline decision but I would still go for an airfield infobox. It had three runways which need listing in the infobox, although obviously the text in the article will explain that this is no longer extant. I always look at the station on Google Earth before starting on the text - helps locating admin and accommodation sites in relation to the station - If you look at Alconbury from the air you will see that most of the main runway still exists ... enough for an emergency landing by a light aircraft even today.<b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 00:39, 22 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Ok thank you. Gavbadger (talk) 00:43, 22 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Also your favourite article RAF Jurby has been completely cleaned now and needs some work if you ever get bored :) Gavbadger (talk) 00:52, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

GOCE July 2012 Copy Edit Drive
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 Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:34, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

RAF St Angelo
Hi

I'm going through the "Category:Military history articles with incomplete B-Class checklists" working on the RAF articles and noticed RAF St Angelo which i rated as C class because it has two un-referenced paragraphs at the top of the "History-World War II" and noticed that you did a lot of edits to it last June and i thought i would pop by and say if you could find the references i will rate it as B-class if your interested.

Gavbadger (talk) 23:56, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Second World War
Thanks for letting me know. During the featured article nomination of RAF Northolt it was stated to me that "Second World War" is preferred for articles written in British English, so I've taken that as meaning articles about the British military should use that rather than "World War II". I much prefer the use of "Second World War", and will keep a look out for the bot as a result. Harrison49 (talk) 17:50, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Action Stations
Hello again

As you own Action Stations - Lincolnshire can you have a look at the RAF Wickenby article and see if they are any copyright problems there please?

I know the lead is copied from somewhere but unsure about the rest.

Thanks

Gavbadger (talk) 13:14, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Will do; May be later this week as I am a bit busy for the next couple of days, but no problem. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 14:46, 15 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Good Evening, did you get round to checking the RAF Wickenby article for copyright problems? Gavbadger (talk) 22:09, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I haven't forgotten about it but last month British Gas turned up to lag my loft free of charge ... and to allow them access everything out of the loft came down and was stacked in my office ... I am waiting for No 1 son and his pal to turn up and put the stuff back ... until they do I cannot get into the room let alone get a book off the shelf. My son displays all the urgency of a modern day teen and twenty.


 * I will get round to it eventually no worries <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 23:06, 1 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Gavbadger (talk) 23:56, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Epstein and cars
I've started a new section on the Brian's page. You've got me interested in this now. :))--andreasegde (talk) 12:24, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXVI, July 2012
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 Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 09:00, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXVII, August 2012
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 Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:35, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Military history coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject has started its 2012 project coordinator election process, where we will select a team of coordinators to organize the project over the coming year. If you would like to be considered as a candidate, please submit your nomination by 14 September. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact one of the current coordinators on their talk page. This message was delivered here because you are a member of the Military history WikiProject. – Military history coordinators (about the project • what coordinators do) 08:30, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Redheugh Gardens War Memorial
Hi Greenstuff!

I thought I'd pop over here, too, because I've written Redheugh Gardens War Memorial this morning. Hopefully the map that I put on Talk:West Hartlepool War Memorial‎ helps, too. The Redheugh Gardens WM is on the very upper right of the map. If you keep clicking on the map it will open all the way so you can see the detail. Redheugh Gardens War Memorial is just below the word "Hartlepool" right by the Lighthouse where it says "Light F 84 ft."

The West Hartlepool War Memorial is roughly in the midst of the streets. I'll try taking a look at the coordinate map (click on coordinate on the infobox or top of the page and see if I can more directly locate it.

Thanks for chiming in though! It's great to have the company!--CaroleHenson (talk) 12:31, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I tripped over the situation by accident from its mention at WP:ANI and, both curious and fascinated, spent the best part of two days trying to work out just what Mr Judge was upset about and trying to achieve. Through his tortuous English and interminable rambling sentences that can last a whole paragraph (not that he ever uses paragraphs) I am still none the wiser. Even tracking his contributions through other forums it does not get much clearer, although it seems to be tied up in who is financially responsible for the various monuments' upkeep and some sort of vague web of international political conflicts, coupled with the role of the English monarchy in war and bizarrely the Royal Albert Hall. One wonders though if his fixations, jumbled reasoning, obsession with minutae and apparent inability to clearly state his thoughts may be down to a mild case of autism or similar.


 * A big Yay to you for taking it on and you are doing a great job. Not sure I can help a great deal but will throw in any suggestions that come to mind. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 13:29, 10 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks, sounds good! I think I'm finished with what I can add at this point - so I'm just going to copy-edit. I'm not sure what was happening - but I think he had good points mixed in there. I got so confused I just had a hard time making sense of things. I was good when someone stepped in - I think his name was Paul who seemed to get some threads that I could work with. I think the article is better as a result! If you want to take a spin copy-editing that would be nice. For some reason it usually takes a day or two away before I catch things as well as I should. Again, thanks for chiming in!--CaroleHenson (talk) 14:25, 10 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I am so sorry Greenstuff!--CaroleHenson (talk) 18:05, 10 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Peter, I will answer you on my page.--CaroleHenson (talk) 18:05, 10 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi 21stCenturyGreenstuff, I suggest you just revert and ignore if you get any more of this stuff - and if you want your talk page temporarily protected to keep him away, just let me know. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:08, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the offer. Hopefully it will not prove necessary. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 22:14, 10 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Please don't blame autism for this. 8-( If an autist or an aspie wishes to communicate, they may do so at some rather long-winded expanse, but they're also likely to do it with more detail and precision than one could ever wish for.  Andy Dingley (talk) 13:01, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
 * There was no question of blame involved in my above statement Andy, merely a possible explanation for the minutae of Mr Judge's many contributions. I had a favourite and rather sweet autistic uncle and thought I recognised a similarity in the style and sheer depth of presentation. I feel a genuine sympathy for Mr Judge as he obviously deeply cares about something, but seemingly lacks the ability to express the specifics to the rest of us. I have turned myself inside out for over four days, ploughing through the mound of his posts all over the internet, trying to get to the core of his concerns - and getting more and more frustrated that I have so far failed miserably to penetrate the veil. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 13:54, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

I told you not to revert it!
I have been telling everyone that Rihanna lives in Birmingham! Where else would she live?Pdiddyjr (talk) 17:45, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
 * There is an easy answer - back it up with sources and valid references and you can reinstate it. Without them the entry cannot be included. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 18:57, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

The Beatles poll
Hello &mdash; this message is to inform you that there is currently a public poll to determine whether to capitalize the definite article ("the") when mentioning the band " THE BEATLES " mid-sentence. As you've previously participated either here, here, or here, your input would be appreciated. Thank you for your time. Jburlinson (talk) 03:23, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXVIII, September 2012
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project and/or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Nick-D (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:20, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Forward operating base
Good Afternoon

I'm trying to clean up the Forward operating base article and i want to move the "FOBs in Afghanistan" section to a new article called List of forward operating bases. I have already set up a post on the talk page about it. Can i just move the section or is there an official way just to move a section to make a new article? Gavbadger (talk) 15:21, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * No special way, just create the new article and copy/paste the section you need across and add to it as necessary. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 18:34, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, will do. Gavbadger (talk) 18:35, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Robb Douglass
From a very old post on the creator's page, I surmise you ma have some knowledge of this. Just to let you I've sent it to AFD with venerability concerns. You may be able to help.--Scott Mac 12:34, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXIX, October 2012
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, Nick-D (talk) and Ian Rose (talk) 02:10, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedians
You joined the Category:Wikipedians who are not a Wikipedian, which is being discussed at its entry at Categories nominated for deletion.

You may wish to join the category Category:Wikipedians working towards even enforcement of civility.

<font style="color:blue;background:yellow;">Kiefer <font style="color:blue;">.Wolfowitz 10:32, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXX, November 2012
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) 02:12, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXI, December 2012
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) 09:54, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXII, January 2013
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) 13:54, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Observer Corps photos
In August 2008, you uploaded File:Mickelthwaite.jpg, which you labeled as "I created this work entirely by myself."

Since your userpage states that you were born in 1949, I find the notion that you were the photographer to be somewhat dubious. Could you fix that, please? Thanks. DS (talk) 18:47, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorted. It was uploaded in my very early days on wikipedia and before I was familiar with the photo uploading and licensing protocols. <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 15:07, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Infobox Military Structure
Gavbadger (talk) 19:03, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXIII, February 2013
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) 08:11, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXIV, March 2013
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) 04:45, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

File:CTC Two Bar.jpg missing description details
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:CTC Two Bar.jpg is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

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

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. — Theopolisme ( talk )  01:19, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXV, April 2013
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) 16:07, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXVI, May 2013
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) 14:00, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXVII, June 2013
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) 09:38, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXVIII, July 2013
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) 16:15, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXIX, August 2013
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) 00:52, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Skegness Grammar School Badge.png)
Thanks for uploading File:Skegness Grammar School Badge.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Werieth (talk) 13:18, 27 August 2013 (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, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Kirill [talk] 18:22, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXXX, September 2013
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) 00:50, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCI, October 2013
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) 23:36, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCII, November 2013
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) 06:46, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCIII, December 2013
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) 00:38, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCIV, January 2014
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) 13:50, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCV, February 2014
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) 23:56, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCVI, March 2014
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) 12:38, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCVII, April 2014
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) 14:59, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCVIII, May 2014
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 May 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCIX, June 2014
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) 15:40, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

You seen this???
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Royal-Observer-Corps-WIKIPEDIA-by-Russell-Jesse-5513120968-BOOK-ON-DEMAND-LTD-/171341416439?pt=Non_Fiction&hash=item27e4be87f7

Cheeky sods - that's my picture they've used, although I didn't keep any rights to it. Still, seems wrong to me to be apparently making money from someone else's hard graft. Mostly yours where this article is concerned. Rab-k (talk) 02:56, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes I had spotted that ... an odd decapitation as a book frontispiece <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;">21st CENTURY</b> <b style="font-family:arial; color:green;"> GREENSTUFF</b> 19:33, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue C, July 2014
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) 03:47, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CI, August 2014
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) 15:22, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CII, September 2014
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) 02:24, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Wartime buildings on the dock beach.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Wartime buildings on the dock beach.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 15:35, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Penarth docks.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Penarth docks.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 15:35, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Entrance to air raid shelter.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Entrance to air raid shelter.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 15:35, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Penarth storm.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Penarth storm.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 15:38, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Esplanade Hotel 1970.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Esplanade Hotel 1970.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 15:38, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Oldpenpier.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Oldpenpier.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 15:38, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Penarth dock 1897.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Penarth dock 1897.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 15:38, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Trinity Church, Penarth.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Trinity Church, Penarth.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 15:38, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Cosmeston Medieval Village.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Cosmeston Medieval Village.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 15:38, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Lavernock Fort forward observation post.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Lavernock Fort forward observation post.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 15:38, 20 September 2014 (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, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:06, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CIII, October 2014
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) 14:32, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CIII, October 2014, Redux
NOTE: This replaces the earlier October 2014 Bugle message, which had incorrect links -- please ignore/delete the previous message. Thank uou! 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) 01:52, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CIV, November 2014
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) 12:27, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history Wikiproject's Historian and Newcomer of the Year Awards are now open!
The Military history Wikiproject has opened nominations for the Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year. Nominations will be accepted until 13 December at 23:59 GMT, with voting to begin at 0:00 GMT 14 December. The voting will conclude on 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:35, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history Wikiproject's Historian and Newcomer of the Year Awards are now open!
The Military history Wikiproject has opened nominations for the Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year. Nominations will be accepted until 13 December at 23:59 GMT, with voting to begin at 0:00 GMT 14 December. The voting will conclude on 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:40, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

This message was accidentally sent using an incorrect mailing list, therefore this message is being resent using the correct list. As a result, some users may get this message twice; if so please discard. We apologize for the inconvenience.

Voting for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year now open!
Nominations for the military historian of the year and military newcomer of the year have now closed, and voting for the candidates has officially opened. All project members are invited to cast there votes for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year candidates before the elections close at 23:59 December 21st. For the coordinators,

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:32, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CV, December 2014
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) 12:51, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CVI, January 2015
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)

The Bugle: Issue CVII, February 2015
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)

Image question
I came across an image of the ROC Center, which says it is entirely your own work. Given your bday in 1949, and this appears to be an image from WWII, I'm curious what the case is here? Maury Markowitz (talk) 12:12, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CVIII, March 2015
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)

The Bugle: Issue CIX, April 2015
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)

The Bugle: Issue CX, May 2015
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) 23:03, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

John Herbert Thomas Simpson
Hi - Thanks for the edits on John Herbert Thomas Simpson. Do you have some in line references so we can take the tag off the top of the article? Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 13:37, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXI, June 2015
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)

The Bugle: Issue CXII, July 2015
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)

The Bugle: Issue CXIII, August 2015
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) 11:45, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXIV, September 2015
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)

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)

The Bugle: Issue CXV, October 2015
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)

RfC Battle of Britain
Some fresh input on what the sources say about the subject would be welcome at this RfC. Martin Hogbin (talk) 08:34, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXVI, November 2015
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)

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) 13:47, 24 November 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) 05:04, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Season's Greetings
To You and Yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 17:20, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXVII, December 2015
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)

Possibly unfree File:Air Commodore in Chief ROC.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Air Commodore in Chief ROC.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Greenshed (talk) 07:34, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXVIII, January 2016
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) 11:23, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXIX, February 2016
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) 14:14, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXX, March 2016
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) 12:15, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXI, April 2016
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) 01:37, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXII, May–June 2016
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) 12:04, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXIII, July 2016
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) 12:44, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXIV, August 2016
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) 07:57, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXV, September 2016
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, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election
Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway, and as a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 23 September. For the Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:00, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXVI, October 2016
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) 14:17, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXVII, November 2016
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) 11:30, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXVIII, December 2016
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) 14:09, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry, merry!
From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 00:31, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Voting for the Military history WikiProject Historian and Newcomer of the Year is ending soon!
Time is running out to voting for the Military Historian and Newcomer of the year! If you have not yet cast a vote, please consider doing so soon. The voting will end on 31 December at 23:59 UTC, with the presentation of the awards to the winners and runners up to occur on 1 January 2017. For the Military history WikiProject Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:00, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

This message was sent as a courtesy reminder to all active members of the Military History WikiProject.

The Bugle: Issue CXXIX, January 2017
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) 23:07, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXX, February 2017
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) 04:45, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Prestfelde Badge.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Prestfelde Badge.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:58, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

March Madness 2017
G'day all, please be advised that throughout March 2017 the Military history Wikiproject is running its March Madness drive. This is a backlog drive that is focused on several key areas:


 * tagging and assessing articles that fall within the project's scope
 * updating the project's currently listed A-class articles to ensure their ongoing compliance with the listed criteria
 * creating articles that are listed as "requested" on the project's various task force pages or other lists of missing articles.

As with past Milhist drives, there are points awarded for working on articles in the targeted areas, with barnstars being awarded at the end for different levels of achievement.

The drive is open to all Wikipedians, not just members of the Military history project, although only work on articles that fall (broadly) within the military history scope will be considered eligible. More information can be found here for those that are interested, and members can sign up as participants at that page also.

The drive starts at 00:01 UTC on 1 March and runs until 23:59 UTC on 31 March 2017, so please sign up now.

For the Milhist co-ordinators. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) & MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:23, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXXI, March 2017
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) 23:19, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXXII, April 2017
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) 23:50, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXXIII, May 2017
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) 03:01, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXXIV, June 2017
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) 12:52, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXXV, July 2017
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) 07:34, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXXVI, August 2017
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) 13:37, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXXVII, September 2017
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) 23:32, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

2017 Military history WikiProject Coordinator election
Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway. As a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 29 September. Thank you for your time. For the current tranche of Coordinators, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:39, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXXVIII, October 2017
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) 23:41, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXXIX, November 2017
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) 13:29, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXL, December 2017
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) 11:16, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

User group for Military Historians
Greetings,

"Military history" is one of the most important subjects when speak of sum of all human knowledge. To support contributors interested in the area over various language Wikipedias, we intend to form a user group. It also provides a platform to share the best practices between military historians, and various military related projects on Wikipedias. An initial discussion was has been done between the coordinators and members of WikiProject Military History on English Wikipedia. Now this discussion has been taken to Meta-Wiki. Contributors intrested in the area of military history are requested to share their feedback and give suggestions at Talk:Discussion to incubate a user group for Wikipedia Military Historians.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:30, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Seasons' Greetings
...to you and yours, from the Great White North! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 17:45, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXLI, January 2018
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) 13:15, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXLII, February 2018
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) 07:16, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXLIII, March 2018
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) 10:35, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXLIIV, April 2018
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) 09:55, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXLIV, May 2018
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) 14:59, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXLVI, June 2018
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) 10:35, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXLVII, July 2018
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) 12:11, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXLVIII, August 2018
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) 08:35, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXLIX, September 2018
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) 22:19, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CL, October 2018
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) 07:00, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLI, November 2018
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) 09:39, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLII, December 2018
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) 10:33, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLIII, January 2019
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) 23:57, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLIV, February 2019
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) 12:18, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLV, March 2019
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) 10:59, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLVI, April 2019
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) 21:59, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLVII, May 2019
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) 11:03, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLVIII, June 2019
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) 13:07, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLIX, July 2019
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) 12:00, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLX, August 2019
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) 09:40, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLX, August 2019
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) 09:41, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXI, September 2019
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) 09:17, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXII, October 2019
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) 12:40, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXIII, November 2019
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) 21:44, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXIV, December 2019
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) 12:47, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXV, January 2020
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) 12:56, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

The Bugle: IssueICLXVI, February 2020
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) 13:04, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXVII, March 2020
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) 01:51, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXVIII, April 2020
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) 05:21, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXIX, May 2020
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) 15:02, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXX, June 2020
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) 04:21, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Westbourne School Badge.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Westbourne School Badge.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:31, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXI, July 2020
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) 11:45, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXII, August 2020
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) 14:29, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue Issue CLXXIII, September 2020
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) 12:52, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Skegness Grammar School Badge.png
Thanks for uploading File:Skegness Grammar School Badge.png. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:51, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXIV, October 2020
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) 12:21, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXV, November 2020
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) 15:50, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVI, December 2020
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) 22:48, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVII, January 2021
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) 00:06, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVIII, February 2021
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) 14:57, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVIII, February 2021
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) 15:01, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXIX, March 2021
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) 12:56, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

April 2021 WikiProject Military History Reviewing Drive
Hey y'all, the April 2021 WikiProject Military History Reviewing Drive begins at 00:01 UTC on April 1, 2021 and runs through 23:59 UTC on April 31, 2021. Points can be earned through reviewing articles on the AutoCheck report, reviewing articles listed at WP:MILHIST/ASSESS, reviewing MILHIST-tagged articles at WP:GAN or WP:FAC, and reviewing articles submitted at WP:MILHIST/ACR. Service awards and barnstars are given for set points thresholds, and the top three finishers will receive further awards. To participate, sign up at WikiProject_Military_History/April 2021 Reviewing Drive and create a worklist at WikiProject Military history/April 2021 Reviewing Drive/Worklists (examples are given). Further details can be found at the drive page. Questions can be asked at the drive talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:27, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXX, April 2021
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) 02:08, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXXI, May 2021
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) 00:57, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXXII, June 2021
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) 03:06, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXXIII, July 2021
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) 12:29, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXXIV, August 2021
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) 15:48, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXXV, September 2021
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) 13:58, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXXV, September 2021
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) 14:02, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXV, October 2021
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) 12:51, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:ROC post observers.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:ROC post observers.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 20:29, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVI, November 2021
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) 11:25, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVII, December 2021
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) 13:09, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVIII, January 2022
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) 09:44, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVIV, February 2022
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) 22:22, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVII, March 2022
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) 09:14, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVIII, April 2022
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) 22:22, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXCIII, May 2022
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) 15:54, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXCIV, June 2022
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) 11:42, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXCVI, July 2022
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) 20:27, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXCVII, August 2022
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) 08:57, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXCVIII, September 2022
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) 21:30, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXCVIII, October 2022
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) 15:37, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXCIX, November 2022
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) 10:31, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CC, December 2022
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) 12:55, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 201, January 2023
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) 19:44, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 202, February 2023
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) 23:25, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 203, March 2023
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) 21:28, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 204, April 2023
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) 21:29, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 205, May 2023
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) 11:33, 7 May 2023 (UTC)