User talk:Btphelps/Archive/archive10

612th Tank Destroyer Battalion
Hello Bruce, My name is Steve Dike and I've been researching tank destroyer units for several years. Last fall, while copying TD documents at the Eisenhower Library, I acquired a series of 16 pages which indicate that the 612th did not receive a DUC. They start with McClernand's initial summary of events and recommendation, up the chain of command to a "Not favorably considered" from First Army and back down the chain to the 3rd Bn/395th IR.

Additionally, Army Pamphlet 672-1, Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register, does not list a DUC for the 612th

I would very much like to establish contact with you since you are the primary contributor to the Wiki page and I also found your name on the 612th's website. I will be happy to send copies of these documents. I realize this is a sensitive issue but if my files tell the true story, it needs to be corrected. Do you have any information, such as orders or the actual citation, which backup the DUC claim?

This is my first time on a Wiki talk page, I hope this is the proper place to contact you and I did it correctly? My apologies if not.

Respectfully, Steve Dike S dike (talk) 23:25, 9 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Steve. I didn't know the association had added info about my article to their web site! I don't know who on the association web site I gave that info to, but I'm glad to see it there. I based the Wikipedia 612th Tank Destroyer Battalion article on the information found on the sources cited (612th Tank Destroyer Battalion Presidental Unit Citation). Since the information you found is in conflict with what appear to be other reliable sources, I think both ought to be stated. I also suggest you provide the information you found to the webmaster of the 612th Tank Destroyer Battalion Association. If you have copies of the source publications, that would be helpful. Feel free to update the article, or you can send me an email on my contact page and I'll reply with a direct email and you can then send me a copy of the publication. —btphelps (talk) (contribs) 06:24, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK for George E. Goodfellow
Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:02, 21 March 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) 04:22, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Hartford City Glass Company
It looks like the HC Glass Co review was closed before I was done with it. I still plan to address all issues, and it will probably take at least a month. My biggest challenge is the active voice, which I will try to clean up last. Some of the general issues, such as the quotes from the newspapers, are being cleaned-up one section at a time. Thank you for your help. TwoScars (talk) 17:03, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Closing the review simply means the review was completed, not that you've necessarily decided what to do with my input. So take your time, no rush. You can still edit the review and add comments. I'm still incorporating comments I received during a peer review 3 months ago. — btphelps (talk) (contribs) 00:26, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Hey
I saw this and wondered if you knew I was Psky now. I have no bits on EN WIKI and likely never will. I am still an admin on Commons and an OTRS person. Thanks for the post on my talk page. Pumpkin Sky  talk  17:49, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Yea, I only connected the dots that you had a new ID after I posted this, at which time I had to get going. Was intending to return and revert it later which I've done. Glad to see you're around. — btphelps (talk) (contribs) 18:55, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Pumpkin Sky   talk  22:33, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Problem with an article you contributed to
Since I think you were the primary contributor, please see my comments at Talk:White_Stag_Leadership_Development_Program. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 06:30, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll see what I can do. — btphelps (talk) (contribs) 16:21, 23 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) 15:46, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Wyatt Earp: Frontier Marshal
Hello! Your submission of Wyatt Earp: Frontier Marshal at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Easchiff (talk) 11:52, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Wyatt Earp: Frontier Marshal
The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Precious
  heroes

Thank you for quality articles on heroic and devoted people, such as the longest search and rescue operation of the Vietnam War, and Richard Phelps, and for a heart-warming campfire, - repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian (4 November 2009)!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:58, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of John C. Handy
Hello! Your submission of John C. Handy at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:23, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for John C. Handy
— Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:04, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

John C. Handy
These things don't read right:
 * "Heney named his sister Cornelia Holbrook administrix of his estate, ..."

Shouldn't that be 'Handy'?


 * "She said that Haney had been the one who threatened and ambushed Handy."

Shouldn't that be 'Heney'? Shenme (talk) 00:18, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Caught that already, thanks. — btphelps (talk) (contribs) 07:05, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Happy Memorial Day!


 Zappa  O  Mati   is wishing you a Happy Memorial Day! On this day, we recognize our fellow countrymen who have fought our nation's battles for the past several hundred years, protecting our freedom and safety. We remember those who paid the ultimate price and we support those who continue to willingly sacrifice their safety for the sake of their country. Happy Memorial Day!

Share this message by adding {{subst:Memorial Day}} to a fellow American's talk page.

File:Josephine-Sarah-Marcus-c1881.jpg
Hi there Btphelps: In reading the article about Josephine Earp the image of her from File:Josephine-Sarah-Marcus-c1881.jpg is used. However, I have just been watching a documentary with an interview by an author who has researched the life and photos of Josephine Earp who claims that this is not an image of Josephine. Please see the entire segment at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgKAbDPsjk0 ("Who Was Josephine Earp? A Photo Analysis by Cary Lane (4/8)", YouTube, 7 minutes). Perhaps you can find another suitable yet authentic image that is not being disputed by biographers and historians. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 10:49, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the info. This is the only source I've heard to dispute an image that has long been accepted as a valid image of her. I'll look at the video later and make a decision then. — btphelps (talk) (contribs) 17:38, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Template VisualEditor
Hey Btphelps

I'm sending you this because you've made quite a few edits to the template namespace in the past couple of months. If I've got this wrong, or if I haven't but you're not interested in my request, don't worry; this is the only notice I'm sending out on the subject :).

So, as you know (or should know - we sent out a centralnotice and several watchlist notices) we're planning to deploy the VisualEditor on Monday, 1 July, as the default editor. For those of us who prefer markup editing, fear not; we'll still be able to use the markup editor, which isn't going anywhere.

What's important here, though, is that the VisualEditor features an interactive template inspector; you click an icon on a template and it shows you the parameters, the contents of those fields, and human-readable parameter names, along with descriptions of what each parameter does. Personally, I find this pretty awesome, and from Monday it's going to be heavily used, since, as said, the VisualEditor will become the default.

The thing that generates the human-readable names and descriptions is a small JSON data structure, loaded through an extension called TemplateData. I'm reaching out to you in the hopes that you'd be willing and able to put some time into adding TemplateData to high-profile templates. It's pretty easy to understand (heck, if I can write it, anyone can) and you can find a guide here, along with a list of prominent templates, although I suspect we can all hazard a guess as to high-profile templates that would benefit from this. Hopefully you're willing to give it a try; the more TemplateData sections get added, the better the interface can be. If you run into any problems, drop a note on the Feedback page.

Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 21:51, 28 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for thinking to include me! I'm honored. I actually haven't made a lot of edits to templates, though I've dabbled here and there. I'm pretty limited in what I can do in the near future, but if there's no rush, I can take this on piecemeal as I have time. Let me know. — btphelps (talk) (contribs) 23:02, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Bikini - thanks, and please stick around...
Thanks for your recent edits to bikini, from one military history aficionado to another! Really appreciated your cleaning up my grim edits to the second paragraph of your etymology section, which themselves followed another user's edits... BTW: I enjoyed your article on the Rescue of Bat 21 Bravo! Good stuff.

I would really like to see bikini evolve to the level of a Good Article, and believe this could be possible with a modest effort. I hope you'll consider contributing more to the article with this in mind. (iirc, bikini sees approx. 2000-3000+ page views per day!? (that seems like a healthy number to me!)) It's very, very nice to have a fresh pair of eyes and different perspective editing the text... Any chance you'd stick around for a bit with an eye towards improving the article for GA-status, or at least reviewing it informally to prepare for a later nomination? Genuinely, any constructive feedback would be welcomed, as I'm stagnating on the article after being one of the sole editors this summer (though it has improved during that time, and I don't want to quit the page before it could be nominated). Cheers!  Azx2  21:47, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Just checked the stats: "Bikini has been viewed 55409 times in the last 30 days." <<< Idk if that's a lot or a little relative to other articles, but it seems like a lot to me, and indicative of an article that merits editing-up to GA-status! btw: do you know if there is a "bot" that can automate the task of converting all of the dates in the article to a single format, whatever that may be? I noticed that the date-formating throughout the article and citations = a real mess. :/  Azx2  21:53, 14 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your generous praise. I loved writing the Rescue of Bat 21 Bravo article and giving credit where credit is due to our brave and self-sacrificing service members. And sure, as time allows, I'd be happy to help. This past week I actually spend a bit of time improving the semi-related Bikini Atoll article--the etymology thing got me started. I didn't consider how many views the bikini article gets. Why don't you start an outline on the talk:bikini of possible areas for improvement? I haven't given any thought as to what could be added. That way anyone can add to the list and contribute to the article. — btphelps (talk) (contribs) 22:08, 14 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Just to clarify, I mean "Newly-involved" (or newly-(re)involved?) with this particular article... You're obviously a highly-experienced, sophisticated Wikipedia contributor! Thanks again for helping w/ bikini (and for adding the new images), and I really did enjoy Rescue of Bat 21 Bravo, to such a degree that I'm going to try to find a copy of the newer book (post-declassification of records) detailing the endeavour. Cheers!  <b style="color:#F50">Az</b><b style="color:#600">x</b><b style="color:#000">2</b>  05:38, 18 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Gotcha. Thanks for the kudos. — btphelps (talk) (contribs) 06:17, 18 August 2013 (UTC)


 * You're welcome, and thanks for continuing to improve the article. I'm unable to devote time to editing it this week, but please reach out if any potential issues develop w/ either adding or removing content or restructuring the information architecture such that it's opposed or responded negatively to by the other involved-editor(s). I am not predicting that, or trying to jinx the project, but I also know that there are distinct perspectives and intellects and cultural-whatevers driving the editing, even if it's more-or-less harmonious at present. I'd hope any differences could be worked out in advance on talk page. But otherwise, I've enjoyed the rapid evolution of the article since your involvement.  <b style="color:#F50">Az</b><b style="color:#600">x</b><b style="color:#000">2</b>  20:45, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Saw that a photo you added to the bikini article of Miss Afghanistan Vida Samadzai was just deleted?  <b style="color:#F50">Az</b><b style="color:#600">x</b><b style="color:#000">2</b>  18:19, 23 August 2013 (UTC)


 * That's a new award I hadn't heard of! I actually haven't paid much attention to the talk page debate. I figure well-sourced good writing stands up for itself. And thanks for the recognition. — btphelps (talk to me) (what I've done) 06:09, 25 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks again for the hard work you put forth on bikini, even if your contributions weren't universally appreciated :/ ...  <b style="color:#F50">Az</b><b style="color:#600">x</b><b style="color:#000">2</b>  01:34, 4 October 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) 00:30, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Frederick Russell Burnham FAC
Hey, I saw on your page that you are a part of the Wild West group and that your family is from Connecticut. I nominated an article to FAC that I think would be of interest to you. Burnham is descended from Connecticut stock and he is also a frontiersman. His earliest American ancestor, Thomas Burnham, arrived in Connecticut around 1640 and bought from the Potunk Native Americans most of the land that makes up South Windsor and East Hartford. Below is a quick summary:

Frederick Russell Burnham -- Born on a Sioux Indian reservation in Minnesota in 1861, he moved to the American Southwest and learned scouting from some of the last of the old cowboys and frontiersmen. After the American frontier closed, Burnham moved to Africa, became Chief of Scouts and a major in British Army, taught scouting to Robert Baden-Powell (founder of the Scouting movement), and was decorated for his heroism by King Edward VII without ever giving up his U.S. citizenship.

If you would, please take a look at Burnham's FAC and post a your comments. The article now has 4 supporters and one opposed. The one person who opposed the FAC refuses to provide any actionable items that we can work on, so we are looking for someone who is more interested in helping. Thanks! Ctatkinson (talk) 11:08, 16 September 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] 18:14, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Douwe Blumberg
Hello! Your submission of Douwe Blumberg at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! – Muboshgu (talk) 19:44, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Pinging again: it is important that you respond promptly, and take action based on the review. If you're no longer interested in pursuing the nomination, please do let us know. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:27, 1 October 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) 00:25, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Edits in Battle of Buna–Gona
I approve of your language edits—the whole piece needs much work—and I think they help flow but you are also introducing explicit errors while massaging the language. For example you changed my language that clearly noted the Small Ships Section activities in the initial stage explored the route that made the large ship operations of Karsik and the following Lilliput convoys possible to indicate that Lilliput was the small ship operation. You added "Australians" as sending the small ships to Milne Bay and that was the U.S. Army under the orders of GHQ. Now, and I'm trying to catch up, you have the geography of New Guinea scrambled:

My "Before the Allies could deliver supplies via large ships and establish the regular convoy operations of 'Operation Lilliput' they used small vessels on a route between Milne Bay and Goodenough Island."

became your "Before the Allies could deliver supplies via large ships and establish the regular convoy operations of 'Operation Lilliput' they decided to use small vessels to deliver cargo around the southern tip of New Guinea from Milne Bay to Wanigela."

No, the geography is wrong. That wartime new route from Milne Bay to Oro Bay is a route along the north coast, rounding the NE point of the NG mainland and taking an inside passage previously avoided. I think your attempts to smooth flow help, but please take care to make sure language changes do not scramble facts and geography. I just added a map from "Operation Lilliput" that clearly shows the route.

As a note, the small ships were deeply involved from the start and got right up to the forward areas. Hariko that is just a few miles from Buna itself. That is where "the Alacrity, the Bonwin, and the Minnemura— joined by the Japanese landing barge, which had just come in from Oro Bay, left Embogo for Hariko. The Alacrity was carrying ammunition, and the equipment and personnel of the 22d Portable Hospital. The Bonwin was loaded with rations and ammunition, and the Minnemura, largest of the three luggers, held ammunition, rations, radio supplies, 81-mm. Mortars, .50-caliber machine guns, and other heavy equipment not easily carried by the troops. The Japanese barge, also heavily laden, carried two 25-pounders, their crews, and all the 25-pounder ammunition for which space could be found. (Milner, Victory in Paupa p. 169)" with General Harding aboard Minnemura when the ships came under air attack on 16 November. See Byron Darnton for another air attack on those small ships. Palmeira (talk) 12:17, 1 October 2013 (UTC)


 * I really appreciate your valuable contributions to the whole supply side of the battle. Thanks for alerting me to the errors. I couldn't always make sense of what was intended and gave it my best shot. For example, I couldn't make sense of what the Lilliput Operation was -- when it first took place and what it comprised. It was referred to in three places but not sufficiently described in any one of them. I assumed it referred to the small ship operation. There was also a reference to the Karsik before the ship's first supply trip was mentioned. Please feel free to fix up anything I screwed up! — btphelps (talk to me) (what I've done) 20:45, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Your "I couldn't always make sense of what was intended" is exactly why it is good to have other eyes on anything written. What makes sense when quickly writing, even something carefully done, may not make sense to someone without the same perspective or background. A bad assumption on my part was that someone would look at Operation Lilliput linked in the opening paragraphs. I'm going to double link it because not everyone will read from top down clicking links. For the most part I'm adding piecemeal here as all is sort of byproduct of some research I'm doing for entirely different purposes. Perhaps that shows sometimes in less than complete additions. By the way, and the article seems to brush over that western flank part of the approach, reading Campbell's The Ghost Mountain Boys some years ago revived my interest in this particular struggle to get organized after several decades lapse. One bit there struck me. MacArthur, never in my opinion a soldier's general, and his staff apparently scheduled things with little regard to terrain and gave that arm of the attack a schedule pretty much impossible over what they actually encountered—indeed spookily beautiful Ghost Mountain. As a result exhausted, malnourished and often very sick men came to the combat area—to fight apparently equally malnourished, very sick men who eventually resorted to cannibalism. Palmeira (talk) 21:54, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm actually pretty familiar with that western flanking "attack". I didn't know my father and one of the few things I did find out was that during WWII he didn't take his socks off for a month. That prompted me to research his unit's activity. I read Campbell's book and another on the unit's history. That's how I found out my dad was a Sergeant in the 105th QM Company, 126th Infantry Regiment, 32nd Infantry Division, and how I learned that he hiked the Kapa Kapa Trail. I think it's an understatement to say MacArthur was not a soldier's general. The guy appeared to have more concern for how he was portrayed by the press.


 * FYI, the Japanese didn't "eventually" resort to cannibalism. There is evidence that they were eating prisoners on the advance over the Kapa Kapa Trail, and that they practiced cannibalism systematically, not just when their supplies ran low. — btphelps (talk to me) (what I've done) 22:18, 2 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Ole "Dougout Doug"? I credit him for some good staff and making do there in the low priority SWPA, assembling that local fleet and some innovations in communications. Otherwise he leaves a bad taste (though I think he did some good in Japan post war). The description in the book we are mentioning of him on the verandah of the luxurious house in his silk robe, if I recall griping about the slow trek your father's bunch was doing, sort of summed up other incidents. He and Patton are overrated in my opinion and people like Patch and quite a few others under rated. Cast your eye over Ghost Mountain and the third paragraph. I see you edited there and something seems off to me concerning "the operation was cancelled" as the march across the trail to Buna did take place. Palmeira (talk) 23:18, 2 October 2013 (UTC)