User talk:Cla68/Military history project dialogues

Response to your comment
here

Links
No problem friend. Don't feel some guilt or something like that. I've just done some maintenance. Btw, I am watching your professional edits for some time and must say you look like an expert for World War II. Do you study a history or something similar ? - Darwinek 19:44, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I feel the same satisfaction creating and editing all these articles. Surely it will help many people. I believe Wikipedia will become really a huge encyclopedia in a few years. It just started in 2001, I am here since 2004 and must say it's every year twice larger. Anyway, if you will need some help or assistance in future (I am an admin), just let me know. :) - Darwinek 07:18, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Ooops
Forgot to say thanks for all your help on sources, etc - which was why I awarded the barnstar in the first place! John Smith&#39;s 18:58, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Article for peer review
Hi, I have nominated the article Axis naval activity in Australian waters for peer review and Kirill has suggested that I ask you to have a look at the article. If you've got the time I'd really appreciate any feedback. Thanks, --Nick Dowling 00:31, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot for your comments. --Nick Dowling 10:07, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Battle of Savo Island
Congratulations on your sixth (sixth!) featured article! Here's some champagne to celebrate the occasion! ;-) Kirill Lokshin 02:42, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Japanese links
Hi, Cla68. Do you need to add the links to the Japanese articles, when the interwiki links are already there: "ja:第三次ソロモン海戦", etc. And why as external links? —wwoods 07:31, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Help re WWII Aleutian Islands (Alaska) Campaign
Hi, Cla88. I need some help with the detail regarding Amchitka's role in WWII, and Kirill suggested that you might be able to help. I've found two sources, but these contradict each other slightly, giving different names for the people involved. Can you help with this? Thanks, Jakew 14:54, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for your comments. I've now revised the coverage of the section on WWII, and I'm now much happier with it. The main problem I had was that the sources were giving different names for the makers of certain decisions, but I've decided to omit names. I like to keep some human interest, but ultimately the article is about an island.
 * If the mood takes me, I might do a little work on the main Aleutian Islands Campaign article, as it could certainly use some work. However, I seem to have unintentionally adopted nuclear test sites as a personal project, and there are many more to do once I've finished this one... Cheers, Jakew 11:18, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Where did you find the guadalcanal maps?
I'm looking for a map that zooms in on Kolombongara island, where did you find the solomon islands map so that I can find the others? --Sugarcaddy 18:58, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

I also agree on the ganging up thing, I had to fight 13 people at once. --Sugarcaddy 19:02, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Response to your Japanese War Crime comments
Hey, what was wrong with the testimony edit of the nurse who stated she helped cover up bodies in West Tokyo. It had references and quotes by the people who investigated that issue. The nurses name is Toyo Iishi. If we don't give specifics in that article section people tend to delete it. Then later as time goes on references will get lost or forgotten, then people tend to state that the information is not true. I will try to re-edit it without the qoutes by the investigator which could be seen as POV, I believe they stated "legacy of Japans rampage" or something. But I think the name of the individual who testified needs to be included, otherwise the article which is sensitive to begin with is always being changed with people asking for proof. It reminds me of the holocaust section where some people keep saying it never happened. Anyways I'll add the name of the nurse, but I won't put in the quotes. Please check it out and see if you have problems with it and let me know, thanks. --4.23.83.100 10:50, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Japan dislikes and likes
I guess for me the museum was frustrating because I was with a bunch of people who kept saying how horrible it was, and one stupid girl who said to the Japanese with us "I want to apologize for what my country did to you" followed by solemn nods from other foreigners in our group. But there is no mention of what preceded the bombing, other than the "cold, calculated" process America took to decide what city to bomb. It most definately is designed to elicit sympathy from the rest of the world. Even my own girlfriend said while we were there "I hate Americans." So much for fostering "peace." I have never introduced the atomic bombings into conversations when talking with a Japanese person; they always do.--Nobunaga24 01:36, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Campaignbox Pacific 1941
I think Template:Campaignbox Pacific 1941 should be kept for three reasons. Firstly, if we are following Allied commands in our definition of campaigns/theatres, it corresponds somewhat with the short-lived American-British-Dutch-Australian Command, which preceded the three Allied supreme commands formed in mid-1942 --- the Pacific Ocean Areas (command), South West Pacific Area (command) and the South East Asia Command. Second, I also think that if we combine the Pacific 1941 items in the other two (or three) they will become too big and unwieldly. Third, "Pacific 1941" covers the period of the Japanese offensives up to and including Midway, after which the tide of war turned. Thanks, Grant65 | Talk 07:03, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

More featured articles!
I think you might be the first person to ever have two featured articles promoted simultaneously. Congratulations! :-) Kirill Lokshin 20:49, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Koreans in the Japanese military
It's well-known that Koreans were often used as POW camp guards and some individual Koreans perpetrated some terrible abuses. However, to mention them in that context makes it sound like torture was somehow peculiar to Koreans, when it was really an aspect of the brutal Japanese military culture of the time. Grant65 | Talk 13:42, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Axis naval activity in Australian waters nominated for FA status
Hi, I have just self nominated Axis naval activity in Australian waters for Featured Article status. If you'd like to vote or make a comment, the nomination page is: Featured article candidates/Axis naval activity in Australian waters‎ Cheers, --Nick Dowling 22:58, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your advice and vote of support. --Nick Dowling 07:25, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

For you
Presented for the amazing work you have done on the pacific Theater during WWII. If I can ever be of help please let me know. Cheers--Looper5920 01:25, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Aoba Regiment picture on Wikimedia Commons
Hello. I've read your explanation on my user page for tagging commons:Image:GuadAoba.jpg as U.S. Goverment work. I think that I've found ideal tag for that photo, and for other similar photos: commons:Template:PD-Japan-oldphoto. I've tagged commons:Image:GuadAoba.jpg, and you should only provide image source. Bojan 15:07, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Help with an A-Class review
My apologies for bothering you with this, but might you be able to chip in on this A-Class review? The usual crowd seems decidedly absent, and I'd prefer not to have the article sit in limbo because we haven't been able to round up some reviewers. Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 04:57, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar
moved to user page.
 * I came here, saw this and decided not to start a new section. But anyway:

Battle of Ghazni
Hi There,

Just created this article, Battle of Ghazni during the First Anglo-Afghan War. I was wondering if you could fix up anything which is incorrect or add to this battle or link this battle to other articles so that it generates traffic. Thankyou. Mercenary2k 02:54, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

New Guinea campaignbox
If you have a minute, could you take a look at Template talk:Campaignbox New Guinea? I've done a major expansion/reorganisation and have "compressed" some battles as sub-campaigns. Grant65 | Talk 16:39, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Grant65 | Talk 08:15, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Well spotted. (I had a redlink to Battle of Driniumor‎.) On a related note, after much pondering and changes of mind I have also created Battle of Aitape as a dab and moved "Battle of Hollandia" to Operations Reckless and Persecution with several redirects. Grant65 | Talk 03:23, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Bougainville campaignbox
Looks like we were both working on Bougainville simultaneously. I had decided to group the Japanese counterattacks of March 9-17, 1944, as "Bougainville counterattack", (see http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/USA-P-Rabaul/USA-P-Rabaul-17.html) but I'm assuming that you have split it up into smaller actions(?) I'm fine with it either way -- the problem with the theatre as a whole from the point of view of military history is that there were so many small, interlocking actions. Grant65 | Talk 13:17, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
 * BTW, isn't Landings at Cape Torokina already covered under Battle of Empress Augusta Bay? Grant65 | Talk 13:20, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
 * NM, I just saw your answer at Talk:Battle of Empress Augusta Bay. Grant65 | Talk 13:22, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

After thinking about it, I think it is somewhat confusing to have a "Battle for Bougainville" within "Bougainville campaign". Since you don't mind, I'll change it to Bougainville counterattack, with it showing as "Japanese counterattack" in the campaignbox. Grant65 | Talk 17:24, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
I've just added that photo to the article, replacing the photo of the sub on the back of a truck. It fits in nicely with the photo of the funeral of the Australians killed in the attack. --Nick Dowling 10:42, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Battle of Edson's Ridge
I saw the request for A-class review in the WPMILHIST pages. Nice, complete article. One quick question: &mdash; ERcheck (talk) 21:12, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Background section - 2nd paragraph: Was the goal to secure the islands by night fall of the 8th, or was the goal simply to secure the islands (which was accomplished by the 8th)?


 * The goal was to secure the islands of Tulagi, Gavutu, and Tanambogo as well as the airfield on Guadalcanal (which was accomplished by the 8th). Since it may not be clear enough, I'm going to try to rewrite that sentence. Cla68 23:33, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks.... the article is well on its way to Featured. &mdash; ERcheck (talk) 23:48, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I left an additional comment on the Peer review page. &mdash; ERcheck (talk) 13:56, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Cactus Air Force
Since you are the go to guy for the Pacific War I thought I'd ask you to take a look at the CAF page and let me know what you think about the layout. My biggest concern right now is that it is presented in a logical format where the info flows. Do you think the sections are what the need to be? Any advice you can give is appreciated. Thanks--Looper5920 08:56, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

British Solomon Islands Protectorate
Hi, happy new year from me also. I have changed the terminology at Battle of the Tenaru because "United Kingdom" in military history is usually understood as meaning the British Isles and forces recruited and emanating from there. British Solomon Islands Protectorate is now a redirect to Solomon Islands as the present state is a direct successor of the colonial one.

BTW, I just discovered 15,900 Google hits for "British Solomon Islands Protectorate Defence Force" and 17,300 hits for "BSIPDF"! So that is clearly worth an article too. Sadly ironic that the present day Solomons is a failed state which barely even has a polic force, let alone a military. Grant65 | Talk 04:51, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It's comparable to the situation with the (British) Indian Army, in which units/formations were referred to as "Indian _ Brigade", "Indian _ Division", "Indian _ Corps" etc, when a majority of the subordinate units/personnel originated in India, even if other units in the formation were actual British Army units. Grant65 | Talk 05:50, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I've started a stub article for British Solomon Islands Protectorate Defence Force. Information is very scarce. Grant65 | Talk 11:06, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history/Peer review/Armia Krajowa
Thank you for your comments, I believe I have addressed most of them. If you have time, could you look at the recent dispute on the article's talk page and offer some comments on that issue? I am afraid as long as there are only two opposed voices we are rather deadlocked.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 03:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
I just noticed the acknowledgement on your user page. "Advice on preparing a history article for FA" is a good read too. Grant | Talk 11:35, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Quick question
Was wondering if you thing that Cactus Air Force maybe sonmeday has a chance of being nominated for FA-status. I know it is a long way off but it does have some potential. Was wondering if you thought it was worth a chance?--Looper5920 13:45, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Favor
As one of the editors I really trust I was hoping you could do me a favor and take a read through List of United States Marine Corps aircraft squadrons. You may have noticed that it has been my pet project for awhile. I am still working on the intro but I was hoping you could just go through and copyedit. Right now I still need to add the Post WWII info and edit some of the earlier stuff. It needs a fresh set of eyes to make sure it is on the right track. When it is complete one of these days I am hoping to put it up for WP:FLC. Anyway, if you have a few spare moments please give it the once over. Cheers.--Looper5920 07:00, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

RE: US Navy officer references
Honestly the web has very few resources for lower ranking officers and enlisted personnel, even famous ones. Two that come to mind are Barbara Rainey the first female Naval Aviator and Doris Miller the first African American awarded the Navy Cross neither have significant bios on the internet. You may want to try Arlington Cemetery (If the officer is buried there) they sometimes have decent bios on certain famous officers. Your best bet is the library but even then your limited by the officers notability. If the officer is notable enough they will have a biography somewhere, but thats not to say it will be easy to find. I wish I had a better answer but, I have found most of the time you will have to piece together small tidbits of information from various sources in order to really get anywhere. Sorry I couldn't be more help. As for John McCain Sr. I did find a small bio on Arlington site here Cheers &mdash; Wils Bad Karma (Talk ) 07:58, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Book question
I just purchased Japanese Naval Aces and Fighter Units in World War II written by Ikuhito Hata and Yasuho Izawa (1970) and edited by Don Cyril Graham (1989). I was wondering if you own this one amongst your library and if so have you been using it? It has some numbers for the Guadalcanal campaign and a others but I would want to bounce them off what you have to make sure we are putting a good product out there. Some seem legit and others seem a bit high. Let me know--Looper5920 09:45, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
 * This is the first time I've heard of this book. Does it cite its sources?  One problem, from what I've seen, of Japanese history books translated into English is that they often don't have a reference list or bibliography.  So, it's hard to tell how credible the information they contain is.  Henry Sakaida's book on Japanese Navy Aces is considered credible so that book might serve as a cross-reference for this one, but I don't have that book either.  If the numbers in Hata/Izawa's book differ greatly from numbers in Frank's or Lundstrom's books, then I'd probably go with what Frank or Lundstrom say.  But, that book must have some good information, because in searching the web it looks like it was used as a reference for at least one article in World War II magazine. Cla68 13:54, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Video Still
You made and uploaded the video still for the 190th/Blues and Royals friendly fire article. I need to capture a video still for another article that I'm preparing to start but don't know how to do it. How do you capture a video still into a .jpg or .gif file? Cla68 09:34, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
 * VideoLAN has the built in function to screen capture. I use and recommend that. VideoLAN is also an excellent video player and it can even play corrupt video files to a degree. -- Cat chi? 09:58, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Battle of Savo Island
Hmmm, all I was trying to do was correct Crutchley's name, reinstate Getting's name and maybe one or two other minor touches. I think we were both working on it at the same time and one or two edits got tangled up. I've seen this happen at least once before. I certainly wasn't trying to alter the stuff you are talking about. Grant | Talk 00:48, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations on another one of your articles making the featured article!! Great work! --Kralizec! (talk) 11:11, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

USS Lexington (CV-16)
Hello. Someone today took exception to a bit of text you added back in December. Please see also their comments on the talk page. I guess what would be nice is reverifying that was the text from the book? Shenme 00:49, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Melbourne
I just noticed you added it to your user page. It was announced a week or so ago that its going to be the production base for The Pacific, the successor to Band of Brothers and most of the shooting will be done in other parts of Australia. From what they'e said, it looks like the story will focus on the 1st Marine Div.Grant | Talk 15:11, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I look forward to checking it out when it gets shown here on Japanese cable TV. I was in Melbourne on a work trip so I didn't get to see as much of it and the surrounding area as I wanted to. Cla68 22:57, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Your FPC
Seeing, I thought you might want to support your own nomination - I don't think you'd have nominated an image you didn't like! :) J     Are you green? 23:58, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Bud Holland's DOB
I got his date of birth from the Social Security Death Index. There are only two "Arthur A. Holland"s in the index. One of them (SSN 225-72-0756, issued in Virgina) has "24 Jun 1994" a the date of death. There is no real doubt it's him. You can add a note of that source to the article if you think it is appropriate. http://ssdi.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/ssdi.cgi

66.24.243.60 07:43, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

DYK
Nice work on this article! Kudos, to you sir! --Kralizec! (talk) 16:44, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

contact
Contact is a new service and honor the milhist project has introduced. I want to suggest you as a possible contact. Could you please name some subjects you are quite familiar with and willing to help(answer questions, reviews) within our scope. Wandalstouring 10:42, 17 May 2007 (UTC)


 * You were elected contact (It took so long because I had to reduce my wikitime). You will be notified about peer reviews within your scope. Please help us to find other editors capable of becoming a contact. Wandalstouring 07:50, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Michael Brown Okinawa assault incident Peer Review request
Hi Cla68,

I noticed you listed Michael Brown Okinawa assault incident at WikiProject Japan. I apologize if the instructions there were unclear. The purpose of that list is to inform editors who work on Japan-related articles of relevant peer-review requests that have already been submitted to Peer review. Since this article has not been submitted there, I removed it from the list, but I encourage you to submit it to WP:PR according to the nomination procedure and list it at WikiProject Japan again. (If, like me, you find editing tables tedious, you probably already know it's easy to copy and paste from an old version.)

I've added to the instructions and hope they're more clear now. Since it's a wiki, you can of course edit them too.

The article looks interesting and I wish you success in getting a peer review.

Best regards,

Fg2 00:43, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Unrestricted Warfare (book)
Since you are an expert in military history, I wonder if you might have an opinion as to the article on this book. Is being used as a truncheon to beat up on George Soros, but apart from that I wonder if the book is sufficiently notable as to warrant its own article. I am suspicious by the lack of a prominent publisher, and the sensationalist claims being made. --Samiharris 16:05, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks very much for helpful reply and suggestions. --Samiharris 22:55, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Congrats on getting the B-52 article updated!
Gig 'em! — BQZip01 — talk 04:43, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Outstanding! Good work, and many happy returns! Check-Six 05:59, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Review
This review might interest you: WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Battle of Cape Esperance Greetings Wandalstouring 14:51, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Peer review request for Battle of Cape Esperance
There's a new peer review request for Battle of Cape Esperance that may be of interest to you; any input there would be appreciated. Thanks! Wandalstouring 15:00, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, that's me, cla68, that submitted that article. I changed my signature recently. CLA 22:49, 14 June 2007 (UTC)


 * OK, I didn't check that. Wandalstouring

Ironclad Warship
I've made some changes following your comments at the recent A-class review of Ironclad warship and would be interested to hear your thoughts before renominating the article. Many thanks, The Land 13:59, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Peer review request for Attack on Sydney Harbour
There's a new peer review request for Attack on Sydney Harbour that may be of interest to you; any input there would be appreciated. Thanks! Wandalstouring 16:13, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Contribution
Hello. I am currently trying to contribute to a battle in respect to giving a reason why a Viking force had to withdraw from a native attack, which I think was instrumental to the article itself and since the person in question received her place in history for that act. Its my understanding that Wikipedia is meant for contributions, but the people at that region see fit to leave the situation vague. They have told me that I cannot simply copy and past from references and, in short order, I re-wrote the small addition in my own words. I don't see what the problem here is, however, they simply revert my edits and give me vague conclusion to why they have done so. The site is intended to be used for non-commercial reproduction so we have no problems in copyright infringement. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. InternetHero 23:03, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Coordinator election
Congratulations! You have been elected to serve as a coordinator of the Military history WikiProject. When you get a chance, please stop by the coordinators' work area and take a look at the various open tasks and ongoing discussions there. Kirill 00:29, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Congrats!
Congrats on your election as an assistant coordinator. In honor of your achievement, I present you with these stars. I wish you luck in the coming term. TomStar81 (Talk) 01:01, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Congrats to you on your election as an asst coordinator! I look forward to working with you in the future. LordAmeth 13:47, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Coordinator stuff
Just a note: please try to drop by the coordinator work area sometime soon if you haven't already. Thanks! :-) Kirill 15:28, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: Travel
Ok, no problem. Good luck on your trip. Kirill 23:25, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

POTD notification
Hi Cla68,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Burning Grumman F6F-3 Hellcat of VF-2 aboard USS Enterprise (CV-6) on 10 November 1943 (80-G-205473).jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-09-08.  howcheng  {chat} 16:57, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

POTD notification
Hi Cla68,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:U.S. Soldiers at Bougainville (Solomon Islands) March 1944.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-10-05.  howcheng  {chat} 23:35, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Request
I would love to see an article on Battle of Koromokina Lagoon. Could you create it? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦      "Talk"? 19:10, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll try to start a stub article on it this weekend. Cla68 22:43, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Great - yours and the projects work on WWII Pacific theatre is awesome -a pleasure to read. All the best  ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦       "Talk"? 22:54, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Super work. Thanks!! Keep up the great work ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦       "Talk"? 09:01, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

ebird.afis.mil & Blackwater USA, military network only access?
Hi Cla, someone asked on Blackwater USA's talk what was going on with the external links to ebird.afis.mil, which it appears only viewers from a military network apparently? You added the first ones here. Please let us know on the article talk page? Thanks! • Lawrence Cohen  06:07, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Cactus AF
I wasn't suggesting it didn't influence deliveries to Guad, just that it wasn't that simple, & IJA's perceptions of Vandegrift's strength needs to be mentioned, IMO. Trekphiler 08:01, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Tagging/Assessing
Hey, notice you're doing great work on adding the MILHIST tag to talkpages you're creating. Just wanted to pass on a thought- when I do that, I also delete the article from the Assessment Drive list- means that nobody has to come back to it for a while. Cheers Buckshot06 23:10, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Fishy
Have a look at the Tautog infobox? It's showing "struck" rather than "stricken", & won't accept a change to that without wiping out the section entirely. Nor will it accept an add "as built" without putting it in a weird place... Trekphiler 15:56, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * It appears that it's using a different infobox template than the other related submarine articles that uses "struck" instead of "stricken" and doesn't have an "as built" field. The infobox probably needs to be switched from the "Infobox Ship" to "Ship Table Header 01" as in the USS Thresher (SS-200) article. Cla68 20:46, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Second Ostend Raid
Thankyou for your support at the above successful FAC.--Jackyd101 18:33, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi could you expand Mariana and Palau Islands campaign a bit cheers  ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦       "Talk"? 18:04, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Done. Cla68 13:36, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Your're terrific!!! thanks  ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦       "Talk"? 13:54, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks and a request...
Hi Cla68, thanks for providing "references" to articles, but I'm worried that such an addition is misleading. Don't get me wrong, it's good to have the information put in there (assuming they are indeed reliable sources), but I fell it's important we are careful not to give people the impression they were used to actually write the article. They are kind of link additional material that may contain some of the info in the article, but not all, and may contain additional.

Please continue to add the sources, but, please put them either as a (general) "Further Reading" section, or if you can link them to specific info, it's even better if you can add them as in-line cites.

I'd be happy to hear your thoughts on this. thanks --Merbabu 09:21, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I understand what you're saying. Books that aren't actually used for the article should be in a "further reading" section.  The thing is, a lot of those articles are so undeveloped that by putting the book in the "references" section, I'm indirectly advocating that whoever decides to improve that article should really consider using that book.  If I'm the one who ever decides to improve the article, usually with FA as the goal, then I'll probably use that book as one of the references.  Of course, that doesn't mean that the book can't be listed at first in the "further reading" section and then moved to the references section at a later time. Cla68 22:24, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

USS Illinois (BB65)
I found the citation you request on the A-class review page for USS Illinois (BB-65), would you reconsider your poistion on the article? TomStar81 (Talk) 07:20, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Yamashita's gold
Can you do me a favour and take a look at Talk:Yamashita's gold? Thanks. Grant |  Talk  08:12, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't know anything about the subject but it looks like you're correct in your position on the article's content. I'll help you out if you need it. Cla68 (talk) 08:22, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. If you could explain why agree with me on the talk page, I would appreciate it. Grant  |  Talk  13:19, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

VNQDD and Bazin
Done, thanks,  Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 00:01, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Might be able to use something here
Not sure if you are familiar with it but if you go here and type in Provide Comfort there are about 850 images that come up. May be able to use one or two of them.--Looper5920 (talk) 07:16, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. That's actually where I already found most of the images that I have. Cla68 (talk) 07:45, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Yen Bai mutiny
Hi there again. I made some more updates, mainly pruning down the military reform section and forking it. Thanks, ` Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 05:47, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

1962 South Vietnamese Presidential Palace bombing
Hi there Cla. I've gone through and hopefully improved the article. Regards,  Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 09:08, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Changed to support. Good work. Cla68 (talk) 00:00, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Peer Review for Blackwater Worldwide, please help!
Blackwater Worldwide, an article under this WikiProject, is up for Peer Review to move to Featured Article status. Please help out and offer up reviews, advice, or edits to the article or review at:


 * Peer review/Blackwater Worldwide/archive1

Thanks! Lawrence Cohen 14:42, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks and Happy New Year
Firstly, let me wish you a very happy New Year and thank you for all your help in the Milhist Tag & Assess 2007 drive.

Secondly, although the Tag & Assess 2007 drive is now officially closed, you are very welcome to continue tagging and assessing until 31 January 2008. Any articles you tag and assess during this time will be credited fully to your tagging tally for further award purposes.

Thirdly, if you can find the time, it would be great to have your feedback/comments and participation in the recently-set-up Tag & Assess workshop The idea is to see what lessons we can learn from the 2007 drive to make the 2008 one more efficient and enjoyable.

Thanks again for your help, -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 10:34, 3 January 2008 (UTC) Happy New Year —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fdws (talk • contribs) 06:29, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Possible edit warring on project article
There seems to be some issues going on over on the article : Military history of African Americans, in particularly in the section Military history of African Americans. Could you take a look at the article's edit history as well as the discussion, Talk:Military history of African Americans, and possibly give some input? Thanks. Sf46 (talk) 23:56, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I looked at it and left a comment on the talk page. Cla68 (talk) 00:54, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Non-English operational codenames
This might be of some interest to you; it's probably a matter you're more qualified to comment on, in any case. Kirill 14:07, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

re: Help with Matanikau Offensive

 * My pleasure; they were insignificant endash corrections. Best regards, Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 03:45, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Ernie pyle death
Please ping me if you get a better image file of that photo. It can take a little while to handle the correspondence, but people have been surprisingly helpful offsite about these things. Durova Charge! 05:54, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Tutorial: Getting an article to featured article status
Hello, Cla68. I was asked to write a signpost tutorial about how to get an article to featured article. This is my first draft. It is based on my own page: User:Yannismarou/Ten rules to make an article FA, which was inspired by your advice as well. If you have time, check the draft, offer any comments you would like, check the prose, and propose me any improvements you regard as useful. Thank you in advance!--Yannismarou (talk) 15:56, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and by the way what happened to the MILHIST's advice on writing a FA. I click on the link, but I cannot find it. Did they remove it or am I just fool?!--Yannismarou (talk) 16:01, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I left a comment on the page's talk page. Great work.  I'm not sure what happened to the MILHIST FA advice. Cla68 (talk) 22:31, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

You may be interested in this or this. I put this up here just to get it out of the way. :) Ottava Rima (talk) 17:02, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Congrats
Congrats on the USAF incident FAC passing. For future reference, you can use the  parameters so as to have a consistent date. Woody (talk) 09:41, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the tip and for the helpful comments. Cla68 (talk) 12:23, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

asking for your support
Good day, I am soliciting your input and support for reinstating an article that I wrote called Leo J Meyer. Col Meyer was a soldier who started out in pre WWII National Guard ranks. After being called to Federal service and serving in the Pacific for most of 1942 he attended USAAF OCS in Miami Beach Fl along with several Hollywood personalities. His squad Sergeant was William Holden. He continued thru the war to Japan and returned after it to NYNY. He reenlisted in the National Guard and then transferred back onto active duty. He managed to get his commission reinstated and spent the rest of his time on active Army until retiring as a Colonel in 1971. He actually participated in combat in three wars and was awarded three Combat Infantryman Badges (read the article and the article on the CIB to learn the significance).

Besides telling a story of a man who “just wanted to be a soldier” I intended to wet the whistle of readers with a glimpse of US Army history (federalization of NG, WWII enlisted rank system, etc) hoping to encourage further investigation and learning of that history via Wikipedia.

I began posting the article to Wikipedia in late November 2007. By late January 2008 I felt the military biography was essentially complete without telling anecdotal stories about him and his friends like Hugh Casey for whom Camp Casey, Korea was named. That would only point out his personality and not necessarily be encyclopedic. At the end of January 08 a Wikipedia Administrator nominated the article for deletion. Although there were a couple of administrators who participated in the discussions who supported leaving the article, the decision was made to delete.

Obviously I feel that the Military Biographical Article falls in line with other articles of soldiers like Meyer’s friend Frederick Weyand whose article was the example I followed.

I found that those people who participated in the AfD did not read everything published or what was there very clearly, i.e. I hade posted an image of an article from an Army publication which addressed Meyer’s earning his parachute wings at age 51 and I had included from the get go the title of a book about Scrimshaw in which some of his art work was published by the books author. One complaint about this later was that there was no ISBN. I could not find one but I have found the Library of Congress Catalog numbers for the two books referenced.

I have modified the article and it is currently at User:Meyerj user page. I am inviting you to read it and if you support reinstating it, helping me to do so.

Thank you for your time. Meyerj (talk) 18:12, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Leo J. Meyer== ==

Please have a look at the DRV for Leo J. Meyer (currently seen at User:Meyerj) located at Deletion review/Log/2008 March. Its my opinion that the article met the standards for verifiability and notability. I would appreciate your input into the matter. MrPrada (talk) 18:23, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Expert help needed
Hi, apologies for taking some of your time. User:Nick Dowling recommended you (see here) as someone who maybe able to help me in a referencing problem for 3 Japan military related articles on subjects from the WWII period. I have already asked this question on the Japanese military history task force talk page but have had no response. Sorry if you have already seen this query there, but I am no expert in Japan or its military history so would appreciate some expert guidance. Any help would be much appreciated, even if it is to advise where/who else to ask. regards ascidian  | talk-to-me  12:04, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm no expert, but it looks like you identified correct sources. I also responded at the Japan MilHist page. Cla68 (talk) 12:38, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for looking at them, its a great help to know I'm on the right track. I'll also try and look at those other two sources you mentioned. regards, ascidian  | talk-to-me  19:32, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey Cla... if you get a chance, mind taking a gander at Bezhin Meadow? It's the one I'm working on now--I've got a ton of sources at User:Lawrence Cohen/work/Bezhin Meadow that I still need to go through. Any early feedback would be appreciated, as in the past. I've got it in for a GA nom, I think it's probably 6-8 weeks from an FA nom, if I can keep up the pace from the past few days and not get sidetracked. Thanks! Lawrence §  t / e  02:04, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks pretty good to me. I don't work much on film articles, but doesn't the film plot section come before the production section?  If not, no big deal.  Also, you might try to explain in greater detail why the Soviet authorities didn't like the film.  After reading their rationale, I still don't understand why they didn't like it.  But, perhaps that's the point.  Maybe their reasoning was contradictory and didn't make much sense.  Also, what was the critical reaction to the film after it was finally released?  And, what type of cinematographic style did it use, surrealism, noir, hyper-realism, etc.?  And whatever style it used, was it the same kind of style used by most Russian film makers of that time?  Anyway, looks like a good start. Cla68 (talk) 02:58, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks! The reason the Soviet authorities sank it is absurdly contradictory, added in by the fact the man mainly responsible may or may not have been an English spy--as far as I can tell, about 1/4 through the sources, a mystery. I put the production before the summary, since it seems like the production itself is more notable than the film. It seems odd to me, as well--the story being the filming of the film, rather than the film itself. I'll look into expanding the other bits based on your suggestions. The sources are rich, but a bear to get through. The reaction/legacy section I think will end up the largest in the end... Lawrence  §  t / e  03:06, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

A-class review of Armia Krajowa
In March you've commented on the Armia Krajowa article, which have eventually passed the A-class review. Since then I have been steadily expanding the article (my goal is to FA it one day), but in recent days a content dispute is threatening to destabilize this article; your comments would be much appreciated here.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 01:45, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Whoa! I don't understand the dispute and talk page is difficult to parse because the participants there seem to be already very knowledgeable in what the dispute is.  Please explain to me what the dispute is about assume (correctly) that I have no background at all in what it involves. Cla68 (talk) 04:35, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The issue involves the lead. Some users want to add this information to the lead. As I explained in my large post at the bottom of this thread, such claims seem undue and fringe. For example, a similar argument would be to add claims about Free French committing war crimes (per this) to the lead of Free French article (which I'd oppose, of course), or claim about US Army committing atrocities to the lead of US Army (per Canicattì massacre, for example) and so on.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 05:56, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * If I were you, I'd take it to the Fringe theories/Noticeboard and post a link and notification about the thread there on the talk page of the article, and perhaps on the talk pages of the editors involved. The editors at that noticeboard could provide some good advice on how to approach the dispute. Cla68 (talk) 12:13, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note about the noticeboard, I haven't thought of that. What to you yourself think about the fringiness (or lack of it) of the information discussed? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:58, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

News! Tag & Assess 2008 is coming ...
Milhist's new drive – Tag & Assess 2008 – goes live on April 25 and you are cordially invited to participate. This time, the task is housekeeping. As ever, there are awards galore, plus there's a bit of friendly competition built-in, with a race for bronze, silver and gold wikis! You can sign up, in advance, here. I look forward to seeing you on the drive page! All the best, -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 11:02, 23 April 2008 (UTC)




 * }
 * }
 * }

KC-X and previous programmes
You're correct the whole thing is bigger than KC-X, yet it would be better I think if it could be named differently. Virtually every aircraft programme the DOD does is bitterly controversial at some point; the B-1A, the A-12, the B-36, the RAH-66, the F-22, the F-35 all come to mind without too much thought. What would you think of a re-name to 'US KC-135 replacement program' (not 'programme,' since this is US)? Your thoughts would be appreciated. Kind regards Buckshot06(prof) 04:41, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Reading my mind! You've already done it. Thanks Buckshot06(prof) 04:43, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Battle of Mount Austen, the Galloping Horse, and the Sea Horse
Closed as passing, Good luck with the FA. TomStar81 (Talk) 04:42, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Nominated . Thank you. Cla68 (talk) 05:22, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Roman-Persian Wars
Cla, any interest in c/e'n this. Its very close just needs a final push. Ceoil Non visto ... Provvedi 22:17, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thats okl; Dank55 saved the day re prose, and Yannis has it covered re content. (  Ceoil  sláinte 09:17, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Robert K. Hall (National Guard Officer)
A little help please. You undid my link for Robert Hall in the Battle for Henderson Field, because it pointed to the wrong Robert Hall. You are right. I was trying to fix it, without success. If you have the skills, please redo the link to point to Robert K. Hall (National Guard Officer). Find it under Robert Hall (disambiguation). Best Regards!! Todd —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jtmilesmmr (talk • contribs) 18:21, 16 July 2008 (UTC)  Update: My Robert K. Hall page has been deleted anyway, I guess it is not to be. Thanks anyway!!! Todd Jtmilesmmr (talk) 19:14, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I didn't know that that page existed. Sorry for not helping with it.  I wish I could have participated in the deletion discussion, because I might could have helped it not be deleted. Cla68 (talk) 23:15, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your support! I have asked for some help in getting it reinstated. If it goes up, I'll let you know so you can add. Best regards. Todd —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jtmilesmmr (talk • contribs) 23:59, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Robert K. Hall update
The Robert K. Hall (National Guard Officer) has been put back. I'd appreciate it if you could re do the link from the Battle for Henderson Field article to point to the right Robert Hall. It would also be great if you could improve on the rather short story I put together. I can't even find birth/death dates, or confirm that he was one of the very few soldiers to be awarded the Navy Cross for WWII service. Thanks! Jtmilesmmr (talk) 11:53, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I worked on the article . I don't think it will be a candidate for deletion now.  I would suggest putting the references in the correct format (see the Battle for Henderson Field as an example) and adding some inline citations.  Otherwise, I think it's a fine start.  Good work. Cla68 (talk) 21:03, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Infoboxes
Hi mate, could you look at an article I'm authoring here (It's only done up to the "incident" section). I want to know what type of infobox I should use, the Infobox Military Conflict or Infobox Aircraft accident??? Cheers Ryan 4314    (talk) 21:29, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * For friendly fire incidents, I use the infobox such as used in this article. Cla68 (talk) 21:36, 17 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Cheers Ryan 4314    (talk) 22:36, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I look forward to reading the article once completed. It's almost inevitable that there's always some kind of coverup after these incidents occur, isn't it?  Cla68 (talk) 23:05, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Late Roman army
Hi. I'm consulting you because you commented on the Battle of Strasbourg review and therefore preseumably have an interest in this period. What I would ask you to do is to read my article Late Roman army through and give me your opinion on whether you think it's A-class.

Wandalstouring recently nominated it for A-class review, but the results of the exercise were disappointing, to say the least. The problem was that we got only one comment, from someone who, as it turned out, knows nothing about Roman history and who only bothered to read the intro and the first few paras. See WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Late Roman army. After my response, the commentator appointed himself copyeditor (without invitation) and proceeded to edit in a way that obliged me to make factual corrections to virtually every para (see the History of the article). The commentator then suggested the article should be transformed into a kind of sequel to the blood-and-sex TV series Rome (see the Discussion page of the article). So what should have been a serious review of a serious article turned into a farce. After the first couple of sections, I had to request that he stop the copyedit. Someone then closed the review after just 4 days and before anyone else had had a chance to comment.

I don't accept that this process was a remotely valid assessment of the article and intend to renominate it in the near future. But first I would like to build a body of support that can weigh in at the appropriate moment. So do let me have your views. Best wishes EraNavigator (talk) 07:59, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Featured topic candidates/Guadalcanal Campaign
The topic should be withdrawn. The nominator is a new account and it is clear that you have done a significant amount of work on the topic, so it should be up to you. Cheers. Gary King ( talk ) 21:50, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Guadalcanal Campaign
What does the article need to get to FA. Burningjoker (talk) 11:09, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm going to finish the Operation Ke article, summarize that article in its own section in the Guadalcanal Campaign article, add citations to the "Aftermath and significance" section in the Guadalcanal Campaign article, then nominate it for A-Class review in WP:MILHIST to get some more eyes on it to make sure its complete. Then, I'll nominate it for FA.  We're probably looking at another few weeks or so before its ready.  I appreciate your help and interest in helping out with it. Cla68 (talk) 14:06, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIX (July 2008)
The July 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) 00:48, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Did some cleanup on Guadalcanal Campaign
how's it. Burningjoker (talk) 19:55, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks good. Thank you. Cla68 (talk) 01:46, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

War Surgery in Afghanistan and Iraq: A Series of Cases, 2003-2007
One of your sentences is missing some words: "Dr. Lounsbury that the book would ultimately not be suppressed." Thanks. Edison (talk) 01:31, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Fixed . Cla68 (talk) 01:40, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Your FPC
Ran into a hitch. Someone didn't like the change at World War II casualties. In order to avoid a quarrel I've opened a noticeboard thread. Thought you should know. Durova Charge! 11:25, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Talk:World_War_II_casualties
 * User_talk:Durova

Allied war crimes during World War II, Monte Cassino
Please see Talk:Allied war crimes during World War II --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 00:01, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I've joined the discussion. Cla68 (talk) 00:43, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Did You Know problem
Hi. I've reviewed your DYK submission for the article James Dalton II, and made a comment on it at the submissions page. Please feel free to reply or comment there. Cheers, Art LaPella (talk) 05:18, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * My bad, I didn't read the rules closely enough and didn't realize stub articles weren't eligible. Cla68 (talk) 06:17, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

A problem with recently passed A-class article
A major rewrite (up to and include a renaming) has significantly changed the Kiev Expedition (1018) article, which you recently supported for A-class. I've commented on talk, but so far we have a revert war in mainspace and comments would be much appreciated. I belive the rewrite has a potential to significantly improve the article, but currently the article has destabilized. Your comments would be much appreciated at Talk:Boleslaw_I%27s_intervention_in_the_Kievan_succession_crisis,_1018.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 17:25, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

James Dalton II
My pleasure, it was an interesting article with some real scope in it, especially when I found out he got the Silver Star. That photo of Dalton with MacArthur at the local library site is fantastic. Would look great on the page. FruitMonkey (talk) 16:59, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Opinion request
Hey, Cla! I just finished reading a book on the Hainan Island incident, which I found really interesting. Looking around, there seems to be a lot of other sources still live on both the Chinese and U.S. sides. Do you think, if I put some effort into it, the article could be improved to FA? Kelly hi! 00:20, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, I think the article can be taken to FA because of the sources available. Unfortunately, two sources that would have a lot of information, Stars and Stripes and Military Times only make available two or three years history of their articles before removing them from their websites.  In spite of this, I think there is probably still enough information available on sites like the NYTimes, Washington Post, LA Times, and others.  If more articles are needed, I think we could ask someone with a LexisNexis account to locate and provide them. Cla68 (talk) 00:30, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK
Thank you for your contributions! - Mailer Diablo 17:19, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Milestone
FWIW, according to my spreadsheet, I have promoted 500 FAs as of today.  Congratulations on another fine job at Operation Ke. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 15:51, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much. Cla68 (talk) 16:02, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Guadalcanal Campaign web section
As I mentioned, several links in the Web section are not cited in the article. For that reason, I would have thought that they should be moved to "Further information"... Ling.Nut (WP:3IAR) 06:34, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Good point. I've done so . Cla68 (talk) 07:02, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Okinawa pic & Pacific Command Chart
Thanks for the offer, but if you want to, by all means go ahead and nominate it.

Also, I noticed you uploaded Image:PacificWarAlliedCommandChart.jpg. I was thinking about uploading something like that myself. However, the one you uploaded is inaccurate in two respects. The pacific command structure was divided into:
 * the southwest pacific (MacArthur)
 * Pacific ocean areas. This was itself subdivided into
 * North (Nimitz)
 * Central (Nimitz)
 * South (delegated by Nimitz to Robert Ghormley and later Bull Halsey)
 * Pacific fleet command (Nimitz)

The picture omits the south pacific area delegation, and omits the fleet command. Raul654 (talk) 17:39, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

See Image:Pacific WWII command.svg Raul654 (talk) 21:19, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I'll make the change. Cla68 (talk) 07:45, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Never mind, I see you did it already. Cla68 (talk) 07:46, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Re:USS Iowa Turret Explosion
Alright then, I will leave this one to you. Good luck with the rewrite. TomStar81 (Talk) 15:06, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I am not sure if you can make us of this, but when doing some preliminary reserach into the accident I discovered a number a similar incidents with gunpowder explosions that hurt ships, most notable two explosions in the #2 gun turret on the battleship USS Mississippi and an explosion in the #2 gun turret aboard the heavy cruiser USS Newport News (CA-148) that rendered the turret inoperable. I'm not sure if you or will make us of the information, but I thought you might at least like to know about it. TomStar81 (Talk) 20:07, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * One other thing I forgot to mention: Your name and the Turret explosion appear on the page User:TomStar81/Iowa class battleship featured topic work group; if you would like to update the articles status on the page as it moves up the assement chart you are free to do so. Alternatively, me or MBK and track and update it if you prefer not to. TomStar81 (Talk) 01:51, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

RE: Op. Luttich ACR
Hey man, I think I've found a semi-accurate casualty figure for American forces. Could you give the article another peruse if you have time? Thanks. Regards, Cam (Chat) 06:03, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Alright, date issues fixed. Cam (Chat) 04:27, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

MilHist
Cla, NYB's post (above) led me to check your contribs. Which led me to see that editors were entering declarations on the closed Gabon coup FAC (closed only four days ago with serious issues, see the previous FAC talk page). Which led me to realize that the MilHist announcements template wasn't being updated. Which led me back to premature Keep declarations on the Russian Ground Forces FAR. Moral of the story: thank you NYB for sending my day down a black hole: I used to really count on the MilHist Project to uphold FA standards. I'm hoping that you, Roger, Woody, WS and some of the other oldtimers can bring the MilHist Project back to its former glory wrt upholding FA standards. Best, Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 20:16, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I should have looked at it more closely. Cla68 (talk) 01:59, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Possibility of a collaboration
Hey, Cla68, I'm wondering if you'd be interested in considering a collaboration on the articles about Japanese carriers & battleships? Cam (Chat) 23:51, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure, no problem. Look forward to it.  Please edit away and I'll try to help out later.  The Yamato-related articles need some work and they get a lot of views, so it was in that area that I probably was going to start working next, but it will be a few months probably before I get to it.


 * By the way, I recently acquired some Japanese picture books about IJN aircraft carriers and Yamato class battleships which contain some pictures that I've never seen before, and may not be widely available, or available at all, outside Japan. Subject to when I have spare time, I'm going to start scanning and uploading these pictures to Commons and linking them to image galleries for the different ships. Cla68 (talk) 00:12, 14 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Excellent! You're in Japan, so you likely have access to more resources than I do (and different resources).  I'm beginning right with Yamato and then moving onto the rest gradually, so happy editing & uploading! Cam (Chat) 03:28, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll try to get some of the Yamato images uploaded soon. Some especially interesting ones are from the original engineering plans and blueprints, some in color, of the ship's design and construction. Cla68 (talk) 03:34, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * this is just an initial list (this will likely expand, since I haven't dragged out all my Pacific War books yet). Cam (Chat) 03:43, 14 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Jackson, Robert (2000). The World's Great Battleships.  Brown Books.  ISBN 1-89788-460-5
 * Reynolds, Clark G (1982). The Carrier War. Time-Life Books. ISBN 0-80943-304-4
 * Schom, Alan (2004). The Eagle and the Rising Sun; The Japanese-American War, 1941-1943. Norton & Company. ISBN 2-00201-594-1
 * Willmott, H.P. (2000). The Second World War in the Far East. Wellington House. ISBN 2004049199.
 * Looks good. I have Peattie and Evans' Kaigun, Skulski's Battleship Yamato, Dull's Battle History, and Hansgeorg and Jung, Dieter and Mickel, Peter Jentschura's Warships of the Imperial Japanese Navy. Cla68 (talk) 03:51, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Excellent! The last one in that list might come in handy, seeing as it might finally settle some dispute over the statistics on displacement, crew, length etc.  The infobox figures and the figures I have access to have contradicted one another on almost every statistic(that, or whoever wrote the infobox really sucked at converting from metres to feet and knots to km/h!). Cam (Chat) 03:57, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

USS New Jersey
Thanks for the help. I, too, am interested to see what the response will be (if there is any response). I was not aware that the captain of Big J was part of the coverup. TomStar81 (Talk) 01:27, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

USS Iowa turret explosion
Interesting, that contradicts the Navy's official records on who was CNO at the time See here. Neovu79 (talk) 03:58, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Oops nevermind, you're right. I see my mistake. :-) 04:02, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Quality over Quantity, Cla. I am more than willing to wait for your rewrite to wrap up before going ahead with the FT nom. As it as at the moment I have two articles that are not to FA standards yet and likely will not be until after new years. Its been three years in themaking, a few more monthes of waiting in exchange for an entirely FA FT will not kill me :) TomStar81 (Talk) 16:01, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * One other thing I keep forgetting to mention: have you tired to find/found a picture of Clayton Hartwig? I tried for monthes (on again/off again) to find his picture and never did locate anything, and was hoping maybe someone lese could find such an image so as to allow us to put it up here. TomStar810 (Talk) 21:37, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Older FAs
While looking at older FAs, I came across Naval Battle of Guadalcanal and Battle of the Eastern Solomons. They are in incredible shape for articles that were promoted to Featured in 2006; I only did a little minor cleanup work. The external links/further reading sections have become a bit linkfarm-y; I marked one deadlink at the former article (and removed a way-too-broad external link), and at the latter article, commented out several external links to books that appear to be general ship histories. Could you take a look when you get a chance? Thanks. Maralia (talk) 17:46, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Those corrections are great and much appreciated. Cla68 (talk) 03:26, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

RE: Yamato Class Battleship
Hey, I have no issues with you editing the articles simultaneously (I am a fierce opponent of article ownership). Of particular note should be the fact that I have little to no writings on the "Design and construction" section of both the Yamato battleship and the class page. If you could concentrate on those section, I should be able to finish rewriting the "design features" bit by the end of this week. Cam (Chat) 16:40, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Battle of the Coral Sea
I have nominated this very important article for good article listing. It should be much better quality. If you have time, please have a look. Best regards, Jehochman Talk 17:00, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
 * That article is on my "to do" list to try to bring it up to FA standards. I'll probably get to it in another couple of months. Cla68 (talk) 21:09, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Question on naming conventions
one thing I've never quite been able to figure out with regards to ship naming: We call it USS Iowa, using its official designated name. If that's the case, then why do we call the IJN Yamato the Japanese Battleship Yamato? Seems the former would make more sense than the latter. We don't call it United States Battleship Iowa, so why do we apply it to the Axis-power navies? Cam (Chat) 06:01, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * That's been the way it's been done on Wikipedia since before I started editing in late 2005 and I haven't been able to find the original discussion on why it's done that way. I believe the official title for Imperial Japanese Navy ships is, "His Imperial Japanese Majesty's Ship Yamato", which would mean the ship is "HIJMS Yamato".  But, I think the argument against this is that the real name is in Japanese, and therefore the "HIJMS" abbreviation is an English-language approximation, and therefore not completely accurate.  So, we end up stuck with a generic titile of "Japanese battleship Yamato.  I notice that CombinedFleet.com uses "IJN Yamato so perhaps that is the way to go.  If so, we should probably bring it up at either the maritime warfare project page or the main MILHIST project talk page. Cla68 (talk) 06:23, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok, that answers my question. I'll float it around the Coordinators to see if anyone there knows why it ever was drafted that way.  Regardless, I'll begin drafting a proposal to ammend the naming conventions as soon as possible. Cam (Chat) 06:29, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Akutan Zero
I think this could very well become my next FA :). I'm probably going to stop by my University library tomorrow and check out this book. Raul654 (talk) 19:18, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

RE: Naming Conventions
Thanks for the updates. Cam (Chat) 03:48, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

USS Iowa sources

 * Lexis apparently doesn't have the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, but there is an article "Deadly Blast Haunts Battleship's Skipper," Steve Vogel, March 18, 2001, Washington Post. I think it might be the same story with a different headline, because the byline claims that Steve Vogel is a Washington Post staff writer, and it has a direct quote from Moosally toward the beginning, "Then I knew it was horrible." I could send that to you or post it. I could not find it anywhere online. EDIT: Oh wait, there's this, but the meat of the article is not freely available.
 * It has the AP story. I searched the story text in quotation marks, and it appears the story is still online here. Cool Hand Luke 02:59, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

What's the best way to get some MILHIST opinions on an article?
Hi Cla, I know you've done extensive work in the Military History area so I'm seeking your advice. We are having a discussion on an image of soldiers who died during Operation Red Wing, and whether or not it should be included in the article. I've suggested we seek information from those who have written extensively in the MILHIST project with respect to usual practices in such articles; after I suggested that, though, I realised that I don't really know the most effective way to seek those opinions. Any suggestions on a good place to post a request? Thanks. Risker (talk) 02:03, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Just wanted to follow up and say thanks for joining in on this discussion and bringing other eyes to this article. When we have so many well-informed editors on a general topic such as military history, it only makes sense to find out the usual practices and tap in to our resident experts. I've been a tad busy these last few days, but will make my way back over to the article in the near future; I think you and our other colleagues have made some very good points that I find persuasive. Risker (talk) 04:58, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Port Chicago
As promised, I'm letting you know that I'm 99.9% done with the Port Chicago disaster article. Whatever is left undone is of such low importance that I feel I can turn to other interests for a few months instead. Please see what you can do to improve the flow etc. Thanks! Binksternet (talk) 23:30, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

James Newland ACR comments
Hi Cla68. I was a little puzzled by your comments in regards to sources at the A-Class review for James Newland, so I have responded there in the aim of clarifying my confusion and was hoping you would be able to reply? Thanks and cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 10:20, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 13:11, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

USS Iowa turret explosion
I see the article just got bumped to FA. Well done. Hopefully USS Iowa (BB-61) will encounter favorable conditions as well. TomStar81 (Talk) 06:16, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thompson's book gives a lot of good detail, not all of it negative, about Iowa's history after it was taken out of mothballs to when it was decomissioned again. I'll try to add more material to those sections as well as the turret explosion section over the next couple of weeks.  What was your timeline for submitting the article for FA? Cla68 (talk) 06:56, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Apparently now. ;) — Ed   17  (Talk /  Contribs)  06:58, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Guadalcanal campaign
In the Japanese wiki is an image of Major General Maruyama in the article about the Guadacanal campaign. You might want to add this to make the distribution of pictures more even for both sides. Wandalstouring (talk) 14:13, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Fred Moosally
I just wanted to say that I noticed a LOT of hard work you have put / are putting into this article. I admire your dedication, efforts, and writing abilities. Ched (talk) 18:51, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the helpful edits you've made to the article. Cla68 (talk) 23:20, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Quick question on Yamato-Class article
The Yamato class main article is finally beginning to take shape, and I've finally got the page rewritten and heavily cited. That said, there's one statistic I'm missing a reference for. Would you happen to have any references that mention the cost of the Yamato vessels? Thanks for your help, Cam (Chat) 03:34, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I suspect this is going to be hard to pin down with any certainty, but I'll look through my books and throw some numbers and cites out there:
 * The contract for Musashi on April 10, 1938 gave a delivery price of 64.9 million yen- Yoshimura, Battleship Musashi, p. 43.
 * My other books didn't have any cost numbers to I just dropped an inquiry at Tully's Port Index . Cla68 (talk) 07:20, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Elmer Gedeon A-Class discussion
I have responded to your query.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 08:24, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Re:Images
I can do that. Give me a moment and I get back to you when its up :) TomStar81 (Talk) 01:09, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
 * For some reason I could not get the image to come up in my web browser, but by using the text in the address bar and matching them to the picture names I think I got the right one. If so, then the image you asked for should be here, uploaded at the commons and ready for use. TomStar81 (Talk) 01:28, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Iowa Turret explosion
I just noticed that the article was promoted to FA. Congratulations! It's obvious the incredible amount of work and detail you went into on this article. Thanks for the kudos in the FA discussion also. Glad I was able to help. Otto4711 (talk) 11:10, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the help with the article. Cla68 (talk) 07:30, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

question
I know that, sometime back, you mentioned that combinedfleet.com had been identified as a reliable source. Would you happen to be able to provide the link for this for me? I have a hunch that it will get asked in the future FAC of the Yamato class, and I want to have that link as assurance that the site is reliable. Cam (Chat) 01:14, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, this is definitely a link we should always have handy when it comes to using that page as a source. Cla68 (talk) 01:19, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the link. Ooooooh...those tabular records are going to come in handy. Cam (Chat) 01:35, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Japanese destroyer Kamikaze (1922)
Hi. I've nominated Japanese destroyer Kamikaze (1922), an article you worked on, for consideration to appear on the Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the hook for the article here, where you can improve it if you see fit. Thanks, Redtigerxyz  Talk 14:27, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello! there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath and respond there as soon as possible.

range
At Talk:USS Iowa (BB-61) an issue concerning whether the article uses nautical or statue miles has been raised. While researching for the turret explosion, did you find any info that the standard range for the 16in guns was in statue miles, 'cause I was under the impression that all figures given were in nautical mile form. TomStar81 (Talk) 04:24, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry for taking so long to answer. It appears that naval gun ranges are always in nautical miles.  I've never seen anything to indicated that statute miles are used unless it is clearly stated that it is statute miles that are being given.  The default appears to be nautical miles. Cla68 (talk) 01:18, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I apreciate it. Of all things I expected to be called for the difference between nm and sm was pretty far down on the list. Guess it goes to show that the thing you least expect is the thing others will question :) TomStar81 (Talk) 04:22, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:EasternSolomonsMap.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:EasternSolomonsMap.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 06:31, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: FT nom
Before I give an answer I think it best to talk this over with the guys working the FT push for the class; I think it would be unfair of me to to decide anything without consulting them first. I will get back to you when we have a definitive answer, maybe a day or two. Is this ok? TomStar81 (Talk) 02:06, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * TPSing I'm thinking that a FT on the explosion would be an excellent sub-topic of the class FT. See this FT: Featured topics/Solar System. That would mean waiting for the class FT first before this one. -MBK004 02:12, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * That makes sense. Cla68 (talk) 02:16, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Your input is requested here, since you are responsible for the explosion article: User_talk%3ATomStar81. -MBK004 03:52, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Operation: Trailblazer
After a straw poll on the matter I have initiated the FT nom for the Iowa-class battleships. Since your name appears on the list of major contributors I am leaving this message here to inform you of the nom's opening and to offer you a chance to chip on the matter. TomStar81 (Talk) 06:30, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Jon Burge image
If you want to use a fair use of a living person, you can just look him up on google images can't you.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:06, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * When someone is improving an article for GA, A-class, or FA consideration, I try to leave creative control of the article to them, except for helping out with some grammar or copyediting. That's why I didn't do it myself.  I was preparing to participate in the A-class review for the Burge article and looked over the article first.  If you don't want to use a fair use image of the subject of a BLP, or believe someone will object if you try, that's fine.  Cla68 (talk) 07:28, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Forgot to paste this here too.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:05, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I understand very much that a picture would be useful. However, unless we can show him on the cover of something in a way that is relevant to the article, I don't think a fair use image is appropriate.  There are in fact images very high in the search results on the cover of the Chicago Sun-Times.  However, I do not see the newspaper article as significant to his biography.  Thus, I am staying away from fair use.  I apologize if I did not explain myself previously.  I am going to copy this to his talk page.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:35, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Any info?
So I think that I am going to write an article on the never-built Dutch Design 1047 battlecruiser...would any books in your library have any additional info than this? (Otherwise, I will probably have to wait until I buy Conway's 1922–1946 so I can see the history ('background') of the Royal Netherlands Navy up to WWII on page 386 (argh Google Books...)) Thanks for the help, — Ed 17  (Talk /  Contribs)  02:01, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, I only have books that cover the Imperial Japanese and US World War II navies. I'll try to find some book titles that might have information on this subject.  For what it's worth, there probably are some German sources (as well as Dutch) that likely cover that subject, but I don't know if that helps you any. Cla68 (talk) 12:34, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Imperial triple crown
Thank you for contributions to the project, Great work, especially on Operation Ten-Go - a valuable contribution to the project on an important piece of military history. May you wear the crowns well. Cirt (talk) 03:10, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

File:HollandB-52Yakima1.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:HollandB-52Yakima1.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Chick Bowen 03:33, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Featured Topic
With the promotion of the Iowa class FT, you are now free to proceed with your FTC on the turret explosion. -MBK004 22:16, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. Cla68 (talk) 07:54, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Jon Burge
You may want to comment at WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Jon Burge. The article could use some support for its A-class nomination.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:52, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/MZMcBride
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/MZMcBride/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/MZMcBride/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Tiptoety  talk 02:34, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Well aren't YOU the popular one...
...or at least your articles are in the media. — Ed 17  (Talk /  Contribs)  08:34, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * That's from last year but thanks for telling me about it. Cla68 (talk) 13:18, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Is it? It's in the Signpost for this week... — Ed 17  (Talk /  Contribs)  21:50, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: Iowa reunion
I am not exactly surprised to find that the traffic has increased somewhat, but I was suprised to hear the group will have their reunion in NM. That's right in my back yard (not literally, my back yard is the Franklin Mountains, but behind those is the great state of NM). I may have to go, if I can find the time. Incidentally, have you given any thought to putting the turret explosion article up as TFA on 19 April? TomStar81 (Talk) 07:32, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, with a little luck it may go up on 19 April, but we have had a lit of battleship articles up recently, so I think your right about the wait. Still though its worth a shot. TomStar81 (Talk) 07:44, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Gia Long
Just pasted in the copyedits.  YellowMonkey  ( click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model! ) 07:03, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I should be able to look at it tomorrow. Cla68 (talk) 08:01, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Fred Moosally
My book about the USS Iowa should arrive soon, and next week I can work more on reviewing the article. I still need to look around for other sources. Unfortunately, my time available for working on Wikipedia has been very limited (and I'm not available this weekend). But, this is a top priority of mine. Regards. --Aude (talk) 04:16, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * No worries. The problem I often encounter with used books sellers is that they seem to like to save 5 cents by using book rate postage, which means that it may take several weeks for the book to arrive. Cla68 (talk) 10:58, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Request
Hey, Cla68, I've got a request. Would you be able to add a section to the Yamato class battleships on the symbolic nature of the warships within Japan at the time from the sources you possess? Once that particular aspect of the article is complete, I think that the class page is nearly ready for an FAC. Cam (Chat) 02:17, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure, as a quick start I can copy over some sourced material from the Ten-Go article. Later, I'll check Kaigun and few other books for more info. Cla68 (talk) 02:33, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

TFA
It happened that there was a spot that Raul654 announced would not be filled due to the subject matter and the date, and I seized the opportunity to add USS Iowa turret explosion to the tfa counter. Since your the man behind the article's FA status, I felt it only fair to inform you so you could add your two cents to the tfa request page. TomStar81 (Talk) 20:28, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Good call to add the article when you saw the opportunity. Cla68 (talk) 21:24, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. The article is worth 2 points, but Wehwart informs me that we can add another point to the if you co-sponsor. Thought you might like to know :) TomStar81 (Talk) 21:37, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Speaking of press coverage, here (3/16/2009 post) is an announcment that KLTV will be doing a story on the event. Cla68 (talk) 00:39, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Article of interest?
This article seems like it has your name written all over it.--Looper5920 (talk) 22:01, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know about it. Because this incident happened where it happened, not as much information may be forthcoming about it as if it had occurred near the US.  We'll see. Cla68 (talk) 23:21, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Capture of Fort Ticonderoga
You were kind enough to support Capture of Fort Ticonderoga in its MILHIST A review. I've listed it at FAC; appreciate your comments. Thanks!  Magic ♪piano 23:19, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for your changes to and comments on Australian light destroyer project. Nick-D (talk) 07:43, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Battle of Muar
Hello Cla68. I'm interested in looking for someone to monitor our edits on the Battle of Malaya articles. There are a couple of us interested in improving this area. Would appreciate any help or just keeping an eye out on these articles so we can get them up to standard quickly. If you can find the time to help that would be brilliant. thanks. Tristan benedict (talk) 00:59, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

That is a huge help, thank you mate. I won't ask you to send me the electronic copy of Hayashi's book just yet as i am living in Zimbabwe at the moment (very, very slow downloading in this country). When i next go down to South Africa i will warn you so you could send it then. I will be in touch if i need any help soon. Thanks again. Tristan benedict (talk) 10:05, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Bombing of Kure (July 1945)
Hi Cla, Do you have any sources on this topic? I'd really like to expand the article, but amazingly little seems to have been written on it. Nick-D (talk) 07:44, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I've looked into the sources on the US bombing campaign against Japan and was surprised to find that there apparently is no, "definitive" tome that covers the entire topic. Instead there are books on different aspects of it.  I listed all the references that I could find here, none of which I currently possess.  Unfortunately, the US Army official history of the campaign hasn't been uploaded to the Hyperwar site yet, there's only a placeholder for it there.  The only book I have right now on the topic is this one (B-29 Hunters of the JAAF) and an article from World War II history magazine about Curtis LeMay. Cla68 (talk) 08:00, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Oops, I should have looked more closely at the article, it's not about the B-29 raids. I think I have Frank's Downfall book and that's it.  I'll check to see what other info I have. Cla68 (talk) 08:03, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

USS Iowa Turret explosion TFA
Earlier today, I scheduled the USS Iowa Turret Explosion article for April 19 as you requested. However, a few hours later an OTRSer emailed me asking me to reconsider, as there is an open OTRS ticket on a closely related (BLP) article, and featuring the turret explosion would very likely inflame the issue. I don't know yet what I'm going to do, but unscheduling it is a very real possibility. I'm giving you a heads-up in case that happens. Raul654 (talk) 04:07, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Keith Johnson
Thanks for the copyedit.  YellowMonkey  ( cricket calendar poll! ) 02:57, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

notable examples of the military use of green
Hey Cla, I am trying to help Wrad push green toward FAC here at Talk:Green with some final thoughts on comprehensiveness...and just remembered military use - any other notable ones beside green beret and green line? I am a neophyte on military stuff. Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:26, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Iowa Turret explosion main page request
I sat down and looked over the Iowa Turret explosion, Fred Moosally, and Glimpse of Hell articles this morning. I also read the Moosally talk page and talked with Bastique about it in IRC. In short, I agree with you on basically everything.

I strongly disagree with suggestions that the article should be deleted. It would flatly contravene all existing notability rules and precedents to do so. I have also seen no evidence that Glimpse of Hell should be considered unreliable (Moosally's own self-serving criticisms of it aside, I've seen no evidence anywhere to suggest that the book is wrong. Moosally's court case did not achieve any finding of fact that the book was wrong, nor did the settlement include such an admission. In fact, the letter sent to him afterwards by the publisher seems carefully designed to avoid any such admission. And contrary to Aude's suggestion on the talk page, low sales figure do not impute any sort of unreliability.) Nor have I seen anything in the Moosally article that violates any of our policies - in fact, almost everything is double-sourced. In short, this case boils down to someone who doesn't like the fact that his biography paints the same unpleasant picture of him that reliable sources do.

With that said, I'm going to be unscheduling the Iowa turret explosion article from the main page. I don't usually explain these decisions, but in this case I feel that I owe you one. It wasn't an easy decision - the fact that it's the 20th anniversary of the explosion (and the 10th anniversary of the book) argue in favor of its selection for that day. So does the fact that, despite much hand wringing, as far as I can see both the Iowa Turrent explosion article and the Moosally bio are in full compliance with our policies. And I am loathe to let a self-serving BLP complaint (which, at least so far, seems to have no merit) cause the Turret explosion article not to be featured on the anniversary. On the other hand, the Moosally article is inextricably linked to the explosion article, which is why I don't think your compromise would help. Most importantly, I don't want to inflame the OTRS issue or make things harder for Aude than they already are. I'd be happy to put it on the main page once the she finishes reviewing the article. (Although when I asked Bastique for a time-frame for wrapping up the issue, he could not give me one. If that doesn't happen in a reasonable amount of time, I may reconsider.) Raul654 (talk) 19:58, 17 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Just to clarify, Cla68, and to make sure that everything I said on IRC gets reflected in context. I personally believe that Moosally is not notable enough to have an article and we would otherwise have no problem removing it.  I also personally believe that you're an exceptional contributor to Wikipedia, and would regret to see all your hard work go waste.  So it makes this a difficult situation, at best.  Bastique demandez 20:49, 17 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Raul, I appreciate your careful consideration of the issue and for taking the time to explain your decision. The real-life reactions to this and the Moosally article have been interesting.  As you may have noticed in other discussions about the main article, soon after someone made this edit to the article's talk page, almost all of the images related to the explosion disappeared from the DoD's image database.  Anyway, after Aude completes his/her review of the Moosally article and Thompson's book, hopefully we can renominate the article for main page listing on next year's anniversary.  Cla68 (talk) 22:39, 17 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I guess he did remove the turret explosion after all. So sad, it will be sometime before we will be able to get it back up. I guess all we can say is that we tried. - TomStar81 70.245.127.65 (talk) 09:49, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Changes to the essay on Operation Charnwood
I like some of your changes to the wording of the essay but I question your removal of 'had' because your replacements are circumlocutions.Keith-264 (talk) 08:06, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I make mistakes sometimes in my copyediting. Please feel free to change back anything you don't agree with. Cla68 (talk) 08:10, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

I do too. I try to make edits laconic but I also try to avoid repeating words, which sometimes means agonising over analogies. I'll leave yours alone because I know the feeling :o)Keith-264 (talk) 09:35, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

VC
Were you thuinking of writing about the VC?  YellowMonkey  ( cricket calendar poll! ) 01:51, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * If I do, probably nothing much more than starting stubs right now. My "to do" list is long enough to keep me busy for awhile. Cla68 (talk) 01:58, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: Battle of Muar sources
Thanks for all the book references mate, am looking for them now. Really appreciate all the help Cla. Tristan benedict (talk) 13:35, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Nice work!
Your WWII featured articles are bad ass, man. Excellent job! I'd give you a barnstar for all of this, but it looks as if you've already received all of the essential ones. In regards to FAs, I'll have to catch up to you some day, considering how you have about twice as many featured articles under your belt than I do. Cheers.-- Pericles of Athens  <font color="#0000CD">Talk 19:02, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Congratulations also from me on the Battle of the Coral Sea article - your work on this article and creation of supporting articles was very impressive. Great work. Nick-D (talk) 23:58, 20 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Piling on... Excellent Battle of the Coral Sea work! Congrats. Binksternet (talk) 03:07, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Japanese Indian Ocean raid (1944)
Hi Cla, do you have any references on this operation? I recently created this article and am thinking of developing it to at least A-class standard. Thanks, Nick-D (talk) 11:07, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I have two books that have some information on the event:
 * Mark Felton's Slaughter at Sea has one entire chapter on the Behar massacre.
 * Eric Lacroix's Japanese Cruisers of the Pacific War has some detail and background on the status and operations of the Japanese cruisers involved, but little detail on the actual operation itself. If you don't have access to either of these books, please remind me when you're ready and I'll go through and add any information from these two sources which seems to be helpful for completing the article. Cla68 (talk) 11:37, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Hey Cla, does Lacroix have any additional information on the "Super A Type" Design B-65 cruisers that Google Books does not show? Thanks, — Ed   (Talk  •  Contribs)  03:41, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Those cruisers, with 12-inch guns, appear to be more like battlecruisers than normal cruisers. I'll check Lacroix and the other books I have on the IJN to see what information I can find. Cla68 (talk) 04:02, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, you can just reply here (I have this page watchlisted ;). While they do look like BCs, Conway's says that "Super A Type cruisers" = heavy cruisers, and so I figured that it would be safer to put it at Design B-65 cruiser. Thanks for your help! — Ed   (Talk  •  Contribs)  04:09, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I looked through all of my IJN books, including Evan's Kaigun, Lacroix, Watts' IJN, and Jentschura's Warships and added some material. I believe the article now contains all of the information on those cruisers which is readily available in English sources.  Please feel free to change around the text that I added to the article as you think appropriate. Cla68 (talk) 11:30, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks a bunch! The only source I have that directly deals with the B-65's is Garzke and Dulin's two or two-and-a-half page blurb in the Yamato class chapter, so that was a great help. Cheers, — Ed   (Talk  •  Contribs)  21:08, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I would certainly like to get it to FA, but I didn't think it was possible. What did you have in mind? — Ed   (Talk  •  Contribs)  17:18, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll try to add a background section about the "Decisive Battle" strategy and how that drove the proposed construction of these cruisers and their predecessors. After that, the article might need a little more detail on why they were canceled if you have that information.  Hopefully, that should be sufficient. Cla68 (talk) 07:43, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
 * That would be awesome; I know very little about that strategy, so it'll be a learning experience. :) G&D don't say anything about why the B-65's were canceled, but it says this in the Design A-150 section on page 85: "At this time [late 1941], war seemed imminent, and there was such a demand for aircraft carriers, cruisers and smaller ships that design work on battleships would never be resumed." Could that last sentence be applied in the B-65 article, you think? — Ed   (Talk  •  Contribs)  03:03, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks :) Don't worry about time; B-65 can wait if you have more pressing article priorities. — Ed   (Talk  •  Contribs)  13:39, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of 2008 Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point AV-8B crash
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article 2008 Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point AV-8B crash, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process&#32; because of the following concern:
 * non notable military accident no civilian casualties

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. MilborneOne (talk) 19:55, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the message, it is only a proposed deletion you can just remove the notice in the article if you do not agree and I or somebody else can then raise it at AfD if it is thought still not to be notable. MilborneOne (talk) 21:20, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of 2008 Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point AV-8B crash
I have nominated 2008 Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point AV-8B crash, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/2008 Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point AV-8B crash. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. MilborneOne (talk) 10:10, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

An exciting opportunity to get involved!
As a member of the Aviation WikiProject or one of its subprojects, you may be interested in testing your skills in the Aviation Contest! I created this contest, not to pit editor against editor, but to promote article improvement and project participation and camraderie. Hopefully you will agree with its usefulness. Sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here. The first round of the contest may not start until September 1st-unless a large number of editors signup and are ready to compete immediately! Since this contest is just beginning, please give feedback here, or let me know what you think on my talkpage. -  Trevor  MacInnis   contribs  23:57, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

1982 British Army Gazelle friendly fire incident
Over a year in the making, it's finally here as promised

It's already been on "Did you know..." and is currently undergoing an A-class review. <font color="Black">Ryan <font color="CornflowerBlue">4314   (talk) 14:31, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Ton That Dinh
About the NYT article that you mentioned, can you email the contents to me, I can only see the start of it. Thanks  YellowMonkey  ( bananabucket ) 06:12, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, it appears that that article has since been moved behind the pay wall of the NYTimes. One way to obtain it would be to ask someone with LexisNexus access to email a copy of the text to you.  I don't have that access, but most of the participants at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Law have access because they use that tool for legal research. Cla68 (talk) 06:20, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Japanese ship names
Cla, I don't know if your interests extend this far, but a question involving naming conventions for IJN ships has arisen at Featured article candidates/Amagi class battlecruiser/archive1. If you can shed any light on the area please take a look. Regards, Kablammo (talk) 17:49, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

I was just coming to ask you the same thing. Appreciate if you could poke your nose in there; even if all you have to offer is OR, it has to be better than my OR :) Maralia (talk) 17:59, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, you guys caught me on the weekend when it's hard for me to get on the computer for more than a few minutes at a time. I'll address this as soon as I'm confident of enough time to give it adequate attention. Cla68 (talk) 23:30, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, I've answered. It appears that the battlecruiser was named after a town and the heavy cruiser after a mountain, but I'm still trying to confirm which was which. Cla68 (talk) 05:15, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for looking into this. Kablammo (talk) 03:45, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Heya again Cla, what page does Lacroix say that on? Thanks :) —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  contribs)  03:50, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Advice
Here is some advice on preparing advice on preparing a history article for Featured Article: make sure you work in the correct namespace. &mdash; RHaworth 13:58, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * What did I do wrong? Cla68 (talk) 21:22, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Kongo Class
Hey, Cla68, I'm in the middle of a rewrite of Kongo class battlecruiser, with my sandbox located here. I've found resources for just about everything (design, each ship, armament, propulsion) but I've found next to nothing on the armour specifications of the class. All I have is thicknesses. Would you happen to have any information on the composition of the armour of the Kongo class? Cam (Chat) 20:54, 11 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Cam, I placed some more information on User talk:Climie.ca/Sandbox/Kongo-class.  Kablammo (talk) 03:44, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Australian forces
Uhm, yeah, I agree. Thanks for the correction. --Sageo (talk) 21:51, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi again
Heya Cla, you're my go-to guy on anything Japan-related now I think. ;-) Would you be able to/know anything that could help resolve the image issues (see here) raised at Amagi-class battlecruiser's FAC? Thanks so much, —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  contribs)  21:39, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I left a comment at Elcobbola's talk page and added more info to the image files. Cla68 (talk) 23:03, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Cactus Air Force
There has been a series of edits to this article by an IP editor. Most seem simply matters of preferences; I doubt there was any improvement, and some changes were made to cited text, which always raises red flags. I have done some cleanup but it may have been simpler to revert, as was done with respect to the same editor's wholesale changes on two other articles (once by me, and one by another editor). When you have time, please take a look to see if the changes should be kept or reverted. Regards, Kablammo (talk) 14:10, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Japanese carrier images redux
Heya again Cla. I know that you said "[t]he publishing date of the pictures in the book by the Kure Maritime Museum, (edited by Kazushige Todaka), Japanese Naval Warship Photo Album: Aircraft carrier and Seaplane carrier, is April 23, 1949", but it appears that the book was published in 2005, not 1949. Did the book state that the images were first published then? —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  contribs)  20:18, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I've provided further comment on Commons and will check the FAC discussion again to see if progress is being made. Cla68 (talk) 23:48, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for all of your help Cla! :-) —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  contribs)  15:06, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Battle of Morotai‎
Hi Cla, if you have time, would you be able to have a look at the Battle of Morotai‎ article and let me know if you have any suggestions on how it could be further improved (or just add them yourself, of course!). I'm thinking of nominating this for FA status this weekend. Thanks, Nick-D (talk) 10:15, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It's been awhile since I nominated an article for FAC, but from what I've observed lately many of the reviewers have really been focusing on minutiae, especially concerning images. I went through the images and tried to make the sourcing more clear on each image's Commons pages.  I see that you already have the alt text done, so that should take care of that.  I checked the footnotes and refs to make sure they were properly formatted and didn't see anything out of place.  So, I think as far as the MoS is concerned, it's good to go.  Prose-wise, I think it's excellent but I'm often surprised by what the reviewers come up with.  Good luck! Cla68 (talk) 09:57, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Arrow (missile) A-class review
Care to reconsider? Flayer (talk) 20:31, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Merge discussion for K-ASROC
An article that you have been involved in editing, K-ASROC, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. 4wajzkd02 (talk) 07:13, 7 November 2009 (UTC) --4wajzkd02 (talk) 07:13, 7 November 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) 18:23, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

B-class article
Attack on Pearl Harbor. I don't have the history books in hand, but I can do some copy editing. Are you game? Jehochman Talk 15:08, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Cla, I will help with this as well if you decide to do it. :) —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  04:32, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. This really is an important article, so perhaps I should put it high on the "to do" list. Cla68 (talk) 12:41, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Help with Tosa?
Can you take a look here? Thanks :) —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  20:30, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Iowa class battleship FAR
nominated Iowa class battleship for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. TomStar81 (Talk) 00:53, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Operation RY
Hi, I've been reading this aticle with intrest as I am actually writing a whole article about the japanese occupation of Nauru in the french wikipedia. From what I've been reading, one of the factors leading to the second attemp of invasion was the raid of Makin in August 1942 which was a proof of the wickness of Japanese forces in the Gilbert area at this time. References can be find there. Best regards --Kimdime (talk) 12:06, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
 * It was written with material that can't be find online, specially this book, it is still a work in progress, many things have to be added perhaps even a subarticle about Nauruan exile on Truk Islands, but I have a question, what is exactly called "Operation RY" ? Is it the first attempt of invasion, the first plus the second or the whole period of occupation of the Island by japanese troops? Regards.--Kimdime (talk) 07:31, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Need advice on writing history articles...
I find your essay on how to write history article is most helpful, but since I'm still new at this, I really hope to get more advice from you.

Right now I'm involved in a content dispute over how much "human elements" is needed in a milhist article. Would you mind take look at the article Battle of the Ch'ongch'on River and see how to improve the "human elements"? Jim101 (talk) 22:19, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your advice, I'll work on it right away. Jim101 (talk) 23:16, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Yamato
Hey, Cla68, I've got a bit of a problem.

Japanese battleship Yamato is currently at FAC, and an oppose has come up arguing that I have relied too heavily upon combinedfleet. Would you happen to have any major literature on Yamato that could replace some of the citations in the article? Thanks in advance, and sorry for the short notice; I didn't think this would be an issue, but apparently it is. Cam (Chat) 04:32, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Just throwing this out there: if you have access to Skuski's The Battleship Yamato, we would love you forever. —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  06:16, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
 * When it comes to the IJN, I have just about everything in English. I've been kind of busy lately, but I'll try to work on it later today (JST). Cla68 (talk) 06:22, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
 * There's a few comments regarding the "Cultural Significance" section which only you have the sources for. If you have a moment, could you pop over to the talk-page section of the review and take a look? Cam (Chat) 05:58, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Lacroix/Wells
Heya Cla. From Google Books, it looks like Lacroix and Wells' Japanese Cruisers in the Pacific War has some good information on the Japanese battleship Tosa (sandbox link), but I can't access most of it. Is there any chance you can add information from there to the article? Many thanks, —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  05:28, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure. Will do.  It might take me a few days but I'll get to it. Cla68 (talk) 13:00, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * There's no real timeframe. That thing has been languishing in my userspace since September, so....a few days won't hurt. :-) —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  15:38, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Just a quick poke to ensure that you haven't forgot. If you haven't, sorry. :) —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  20:50, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for reminding me. I'm going to try to get it done today.  Kaigun also has some information, so I'll be adding that also. Cla68 (talk) 22:38, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Further note to remind myself to check if I have any other pictures of the ship that I can upload. Cla68 (talk) 05:29, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I do have three other pictures of the ship I can upload if they aren't already in Commons. One is of the ship coming off the slipway, another of it being prepared for the explosive testing, and another of it being prepared for scuttling. Cla68 (talk) 12:03, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Wow, thanks a lot! I wish I had a scanner like yours... my university's scanner always leaves artifacts, like this. I can Fourier them away, but it's not the same. :/ —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  20:17, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, one last request: can you doublecheck the paragraph with the dubious tag? If I remember right, there was a contradiction between Lacroix and Breyer on either the amount of water or the list... —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  20:20, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

quick poke, I think you missed this because of the comments below :) —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  02:19, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey Cla, are you finished? If so, I'll move it to the mainspace and DYK it. :) —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  01:32, 22 April 2010 (UTC):
 * No problem at all. Thank you so much for your additions; I really appreciate it. —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  01:41, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

References question
I see that you have an interest in WWII events related to the Pacific. I recently expanded Raid at Cabanatuan while using multiple sources found online and in my local library. Before pursuing FA at some point, one area that I have been unable to find details on is the Japanese reaction to the raid. Do you know of any sources that cover this (all of the ones I have used are mostly pro-American and don't focus on Japanese except for death counts)? If you know of any other sources that would be helpful for the article, I'd appreciate it. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:18, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for replying. I would appreciate anything you stumble across, and I'll continue to keep looking. I know that is something that would be brought up at FAC, so hopefully I can at least find one source that includes even just one quote from the other side. The language barrier is going to be difficult to pursue Japanese sources on the event, if any even exist. Anyway, thanks again. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:48, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Japanese battleship Tosa

 * Thanks for your help with this, Cla. —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  08:44, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

One last Tosa question
This was a point brought up in the FAC. Would your sources happen to say exactly where she sunk? Lengerer seems to say that it was off Okinoshima, Munakata, but all other sources I have say that it was in the Bungo Channel... —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  02:09, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Unless there is another Okinoshima that is not on Wikipedia? —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  02:12, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Shenyang J-11
I believe you acted in good faith as I found the Kyodo News article that states this but historically Kanwa Defence Review has not been the most reliable of sources. I'm not citing this as an encyclopedic source as it is a forum and the fact that it is a cesspit of stupidity and useless unproductive discussion but if you scroll down to the 12th post, there are images of the J-11 participating in the PRC national day parade (See). I have no objection to your edits, but would like to err on the side of caution and add that information in when a more reputable defence source like Janes reports on the matter. If you find that acceptable, would it be okay to remove that information from the article for now?

Thanks, Vedant (talk) 12:59, 19 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Also, sorry for reverting your edit immediately, in the future I'll try to discuss edits so that there is consensus before any action is taken. If you feel up to the task though, one of my major to-dos is the article on the PLAAF as it features a ton of unsourced information as well as inaccurate service numbers. Vedant (talk) 18:20, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Cheonan
Hi, you just added a citation of the Washington post to the sinking of the Cheonan article and said it was from the 13th of May. Di you mean the 20th of May (today)? Gregcaletta (talk) 03:09, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, it should be 19 May. Cla68 (talk) 04:08, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Kirishima photos
Hey, Cla68, I just started my rewrite of Japanese battleship Kirishima, and I'm wondering if you might have any photos that would be useful for the article (I'm most in need of stuff from 1915-1926, essentially pre-reconstruction). Cam (Chat) 22:38, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm on the road at the moment, but as soon as I'm back home in a few days I'll check to see what I have and try to get them uploaded in a timely manner. Cla68 (talk) 15:16, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. Cla68 (talk) 11:48, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank-you very much my good sir! Cam (Chat) 01:04, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Please let me know when you get closed to finished and I'll add any additional details I have from my library. Cla68 (talk) 02:48, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * One other question related to Haruna FAC: Does any of your literature on the IJN say what a "special service ship" is? Cam (Chat)(Prof) 02:02, 8 September 2010 (UTC) p.s. - we're still running into trouble with the copyright stuff. What year was the book you scanned it from published? Other option: Does it say who the photographer was and when they died?
 * The book does not give a copyright date, which is common with Japanese books, and does not give the photographer's name, which is also common in Japan when the photographer is working for a large organization, either government or media organization. In this case the photographer was almost certainly working for the Imperial Japanese government, which is one reason why the images are public domain.  I'll look to see what a "special service ship" is. Cla68 (talk) 02:07, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Cactus Air Force
Cla, a question has been raised at Talk:Cactus_Air_Force. I have replied, but do not have a copy of Sherrod. As time allows could you look into this? Regards, Kablammo (talk) 19:24, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Cla, I just found your library subpage and see that Sherrod's history is not listed there.. Kablammo (talk) 15:13, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Yea, I didn't have anything to add that you had already said on the talk page. Cla68 (talk) 01:12, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment/Japanese_aircraft_carrier_Kaga
Hiya, sorry to hit you with something on the day you get back from your semi-wiki-break, but your "mild oppose" is (almost) the only thing holding this up, and it's been suggested the ACR should be closed for lack of progress, and it would be nice if we don't all have to do this all over again. I'm asking the same question of Sturm: is it your sense that modern sources are using or avoiding the term "Kate"? (Watching) - Dank (push to talk) 03:13, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * If I have time today I'll go through and change all the references to "Kates" and "Vals" to their proper designations then remove my objection. Cla68 (talk) 03:20, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I let Sturm know, and I believe that works for him. I'm still curious which terms modern English sources tend to use; I'll do some digging before FAC. - Dank (push to talk) 03:30, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Akagi
Just to give you a heads-up, but sometime in the next several months, I'll be bringing up the Akagi article for ACR as well. You might want to work your magic before hand.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:27, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Will do. I think I'll put it at the top of my to do list. Cla68 (talk) 22:16, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

FAC for Kaga
You've done a huge amount of work on the Kaga article, more than I ever expected you to do. I'd be happy to share credit at FAC and make you a co-nom if you'd like. Just let me know when you're done with the article and I'll make the nomination.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:38, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * You did most of the heavy lifting on the article, so I don't think I deserve a co-nom. I'm not quite finished with it yet.  I hope to have it done by this Thursday or Friday, including starting stubs on the red links I added. Cla68 (talk) 22:23, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Heavy lifting be damned, you've done an outstanding job filling in details. Many of which I knew nothing about and to the article's benefit. Mind you, I'm not entirely altruistic about this, as I'm contending for the WikiCup and it would be very handy to be able to submit two articles at a time for FAC. Especially as I have a number of articles about Japanese carriers by Lengerer and friends on hand and can do the basics while you add in stuff from Hata, etc. Otherwise I'm going to have to get my own copy. Again, I'd ask that you reconsider and let me get you the recognition you deserve for your work.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:05, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, another reason is that I'm probably going to be away from a computer for a couple of weeks very soon so I wouldn't be available to help with the FAC nomination and responding to the reviewer's comments. That's why I want to finish the additions by this week. Cla68 (talk) 00:29, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not going to nominate it yet before the beginning of July and would be happy to delay for an extra couple of weeks if necessary.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:37, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, okay. We can talk about it when I return around the 4th of July. Cla68 (talk) 01:12, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Have you had a chance to add the pictures that you wanted to? Considering the volume of changes that Dank's made to the article I think that a triple co-nom is in order. What do you think?
 * Yes, I've added the pictures I wanted to. A triple co-nom seems fine to me. Cla68 (talk) 05:39, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Aichi D1A
Cla68, what's the reasoning behind splitting Aichi D1A into two separate articles? Are they really that different, beyond different Type numbers and spats? The article certianly wasn't a long one, which is one major reason for splitting aircraft articles. - BilCat (talk) 05:31, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * For that reason only, because of the different Type designations. If you prefer that they remain as one article, I have no objection and will help recombine them. Cla68 (talk) 05:34, 15 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, I've raised the issue at WT:AIR for further input, as I do not know much about the Japanese aircraft to give a good opinion on the issue. But from the content of the articles themselves, I'd say separate articles aren't warranted at this time. - BilCat (talk) 05:38, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

FAR
Just the messenger, an article you have worked on: Michael Brown Okinawa assault incident, has been nominated at FAR: Featured article review/Michael Brown Okinawa assault incident/archive1 -MBK004 19:43, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for letting me know. Cla68 (talk) 01:16, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Weird, I was just coming here to tell you that the Stars & Strips has done something to their archives...I was looking for some of the original articles from the Michael Brown trial and they appear to have moved. Ugh...  Kelly  hi! 03:46, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * If I remember right, Stars and Stripes article links used to go dead right around the three-year mark, which means I was operating under a deadline with both that and the Ehime Maru article to get the articles finished while the links were still available. Once the links go dead the only way I know of for me to access the articles is at the newspaper's archive at Hardy Barracks in Tokyo. Cla68 (talk) 04:42, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * If there are any other Stripes articles you're worried about losing, let me know and I'll help archive them with WebCite. Kelly  hi! 05:01, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure thing. Thank you. Cla68 (talk) 05:05, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * No worries. BTW, I'm on Okinawa right now...don't know for how long, though. Kelly  hi! 05:06, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * While you're there, I suggest going to Okinawa Churaumi Aquarium if you haven't been already. It's well worth the trip.  It's best if you get in there right as it opens before it gets crowded.  I like the shark tank up to the left of the main tank in the "learning room" the best. Cla68 (talk) 05:13, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, yeah - I lived here for several years (99-02). The aquarium is great. My favorite attraction is the Underground Naval Headquarters complex where Minoru Ōta made his last stand. Kelly  hi! 05:22, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh okay, then there's nothing I can tell you about that island that you probably don't already know. I visited the underground IJN complex also.  I remember the sleeping room that was so small that the IJN troops had to sleep standing up during breaks in the battle.  Please enjoy your time back on the island.  Isn't the Okinawa triathlon around this time of the year over near White Beach? Cla68 (talk) 05:29, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Triathlon? Oh man...I'm still working toward my first marathon. That said, I hope you eventually turn your inestimable ability toward the Battle of Okinawa - your Guadalcanal stuff is fantastic and I'd love to see this expertise expanded to the later war...maybe Iwo Jima too? (fingers crossed) Kelly  hi! 07:19, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The Battle of Okinawa definitely needs work. Fortunately, it is one of the few Pacific War battles with extensive sourcing on the Japanese side as well as the US.  I hope to get to it someday soon.  I meant watching the triathlon, of course.  Good luck on the marathon training. Cla68 (talk) 07:23, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Cool - I can actually walk out on my balcony and see Hacksaw Ridge and Sugar Loaf Hill... Thanks for all your work, brother - both on articles and behind the scenes. Kelly  hi! 07:26, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi, are you going to refute Ironholds or respond to his comments by editing the article?  YellowMonkey  ( vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll )  07:22, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of 2007 USS Harry S. Truman E-2C crash
I have nominated 2007 USS Harry S. Truman E-2C crash, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/2007 USS Harry S. Truman E-2C crash. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. YSSYguy (talk) 07:47, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Japanese battleship Hiei
Hey,Cla68, I just completed my rewrite of Japanese battleship Kirishima (now at GAN), and am moving onto Japanese battleship Hiei. As per my usual request at this point in the article-writing process, would you happen to have any uploadable images of Hiei that I could use for the article? Thanks in advance, Cam (Chat)(Prof) 05:04, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

P.S. - Also, Haruna is undergoing a pre-FAC copyedit at the moment. Anything you can add to the article is greatly appreciated.
 * I'll check for both Kirishima and Hiei today or tomorrow. Cla68 (talk) 05:50, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I have more pictures of the two ships than I thought, so it may take me several days to get them all uploaded. I found two more images of Kaga also, including one that might should be added to that article. Cla68 (talk) 23:04, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Hiei is done. Cla68 (talk) 11:57, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I just noticed that I had already uploaded all the photos I had of Kirishima. So that one is done as well. Cla68 (talk) 09:16, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Michael Brown FAR
Hi Cla68! Are you still working on the Michael Brown FAR? If so, there is an unresolved image issue on the page, and Ironholds should probably be pinged to get any further comments from them. If you are still interested in working on the article, please let me know when you feel you have addressed the comments already on the page and I (or you) can begin pinging other possibly interested editors to try and get some further reviews. Thanks! Dana boomer (talk) 15:40, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, I forgot about it. I'll get to it probably tomorrow. Cla68 (talk) 15:42, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Ping? Ironholds has left some final comments and there is one image issue to be resolved. Dana boomer (talk) 14:27, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

torps
Hey, Cla68 We've got a bit of a discussion going on over at Japanese battleship Yamato that you may be able to help with. Do any of your sources mention the Yamato class being outfitted with torpedo tubes? Cam (Chat)(Prof) 20:44, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm traveling right now and don't have access to my library. It will be about a week until I can look this up.  In the meantime, you might ask at Tully's about it. Cla68 (talk) 12:55, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey, Haruna is at FAC and a minor issue with regards to image sourcing has come up. Do you have a source for the author's date of death for the Shizuo Fukui photos? Cam (Chat)(Prof) 23:59, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

more photos
Hey, Cla68, Thanks for all of your help so far with finding photographs of the Kongo battlecruisers for use in the articles; it's been a massive help. I'm rewriting Kongo as we speak, and I'm in need of high-quality photos of her from all periods of her career. Would you happen to have any? I promise you this will be the last time I ask for photos of the Kongos (seeing as this is the last of the five articles to be rewritten). Cam (Chat)(Prof) 15:11, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Also,

Japanese carriers
I know that you've been busy of late, but I'd just like to remind you that Kaga and Hosho are ready for you to work on whenever you are to do so.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:04, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey, I just did some major surgery on the design section of Hosho. See how it reads for you.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:43, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks good! Cla68 (talk) 12:03, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

fuso class
Cla68, First off, I am sorry to hear about everything that's gone on with the recent CC case at ArbCom. In my experience, your conduct as an editor of the 'Pedia has been phenomenal, and your advice and assistance on Japanese Navy articles of an incalculable value. Secondly, I've started rewriting the article for Fuso class battleship and find myself in dire need of images of the class (I think there's a grand total of two or three on all of Commons). Would you happen to have any from your books that you could upload to commons? Thanks again! Cam (Chat)(Prof) 19:47, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll try to get whatever images I have uploaded this weekend. There's a typhoon approaching Tokyo, so it should be keeping me indoors most of Saturday and perhaps Sunday. Cla68 (talk) 22:32, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
 * By the way, do you have Anthony Tully's book, The Battle of Surigao Strait? If not, I'll help out with that part of the article. Cla68 (talk) 14:39, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't have that particular book. I've managed to order Breyer (battleships & battlecruisers 1905-1970), Garzke (axis & neutral bbs in wwii), and Skulski (the battleship fuso) via interlibrary loan, but I think The Battle of Surigao Strait would probably come very much in handy. Thanks in advance! Cam (Chat)(Prof) 16:33, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
 * And best of luck dealing w/ the typhoon. that can't be fun. Cam (Chat)(Prof) 16:37, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Garzke won't be much help, he only deals with the Yamatos on. :/ Breyer is pretty brief, but he always seems to have nuggets of information no one else has. Not exactly sure why that is. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 17:15, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The typhoon didn't end up being very severe. I have a ton of photos of both battleships.  The usual delay is getting my wife to translate the photo captions for me before I can scan and upload them.  I'm working on it. Cla68 (talk) 00:49, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, Fusō is done. Yamashiro next. Cla68 (talk) 10:49, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Cla, use commons:Template:PD-Japan-oldphoto for the images -- "50 years after the creator's death" doesn't work when you don't know the creator :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 14:24, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Will do. Actually, the creator of those photos is implicitely known.  The photographs were owned by the Imperial Japanese Navy which is why they're public domain.  But, I understand us knowing that and convincing the FA reviewers of that are two different things. Cla68 (talk) 22:25, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Exactly, but what's awesome is that oldphoto works for any photo taken before '46, regardless of creator. :) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:59, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Yamashiro is done. Cla68 (talk) 10:58, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Featured article repair
It's a shame that Attack on Pearl Harbor still needs repair. What do you think? Jehochman Talk 18:17, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I completely agree. It's next on my list after me and Sturmvogel finish Akagi.  I just ordered some books on it yesterday, and they may take a few weeks to arrive.  I'll let you know when I get started on it. Cla68 (talk) 22:45, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Wow, you have a cool user page.
What a bunch of articles you have done. I just came to read the FA article. My old man was in WW2 and even became a bit of a Nippophile (is that a word) after the war. He actually transhipped the bombs from the Indy to Tinian (or was it Saipan, can never keep those two straight). And he was supposed to do some heroistic thing in Korea going under a bridge on the Yalu river counting trucks for intel, but it was called off. Still earned a designation from the NK as a war criminal (long, funny story). And he did something secret later on when his ship dropped out of moverep in the 50s or 60s, but he would never tell me what and then he died. Anyhow...can't think of anything that special, but if you did an article related to it would be cool. Oh...and I wrestled in high school. What a sport. Nothing like spending the winter wrestling to give some confidence as a young small male!TCO (talk) 01:11, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

next
Akagi is pretty much ready for your loving attentions. I'll probably put some effort into Ryujo while you're working on Akagi, although the sources are a lot scantier than on the other carriers. I didn't photocopy the portions of Sunburst on the carriers, but I think Dank might be able to add anything I've missed from Peattie. Sources are also scanty on the Soryu and Zuikaku-class carriers. Do think that we should work on the class articles first or the individual ship articles? I'm looking pretty far ahead in our long-term project, but your thoughts would be welcome regardless.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 03:09, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm about ready to get started on Akagi. After that, I'm planning on getting occupied with Attack on Pearl Harbor and related articles.  That article (Pearl Harbor) will probably take me about six months to get ready for FAR.  In my opinion, it's better to get the individual ship articles to FA before the class article, because you can copy paragraphs from the ship articles to the class article (parts to the whole).  I need to get up and run in the morning. Cla68 (talk) 16:04, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Help needed with a poor quality article
Cla68, could you take a look at the last few sections at Talk:United States and state terrorism and maybe recommend sources and examples of how to fix up that article? Jehochman Talk 21:07, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll check it out, but I don't think I know any more about that topic area than the next guy. Cla68 (talk) 23:47, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I left a comment. The problem is that I just don't have time to get involved and help fix that article.  This is an example of where a Citizendium-type editing model would work better, keeping an article like this in "development space" until it's ready for publication. Cla68 (talk) 00:03, 1 January 2011 (U

Camp Chapman attack
Hi Cla68,

I've just seen that you have added a reference to Camp Chapman attack. In autumn 2010, the CIA has concluded an investigation, and has communicated some of the findings. I would very much like to add this to the article, but I have limited time right now. The article is a Military history A-Class article right now, and I think it could be nominated for Good article status. Cs32en  Talk to me  23:58, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure, but you know A-class is considered to be a higher level than Good Article? I think if a little more details from the CIA report are included, and some information on subsequent, related events is added, then the article could be nominated for FA. Cla68 (talk) 01:23, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't know much about the details of the article classification systems. One problem with nominating the article for FA status would probably be the scarcity of available information on the event, and the propensity of internet-based sources that support potentially controversial content to disappear from public sight without notice. Cs32en   Talk to me  02:53, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Dead links are ok if the source is adequately cited (author, publication, publisher, date of publication, date retrieved). I think the article covers the topic well, but I'll give it a harder look when I have a chance. Cla68 (talk) 04:17, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Hosho FAC
You might want to look over the comments on the Hosho FAC and on the article talk page, particularly those by Cryptic. He wants to move the CV silhouttes from the Notes section and has some other stuff that you might want to consider.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:49, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure thing. Cla68 (talk) 07:09, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Looking for sources
I was thinking of expanding the article on the US Navy fleet oiler USS Neosho (AO-23), perhaps bringing it up to FA-standard if I can find enough information. I haven't worked on an article involving an auxiliary ship of the US Navy before. Would you know of any book titles or other sources of information that I might look for which might have information on this ship's history? Cla68 (talk) 06:43, 12 March 2009 (UTC)


 * No Big Book of Navy Auxiliaries that I know of, but here are some suggestions for research angles:
 * Obviously from the article, the DANFS entry has been used, but often I've found that other ships' DANFS entries can sometimes have other useful information, too. The USN Historical Center (I can't ever remember what their new name is) will sometimes have extra things beyond DANFS, too. (Google search.)
 * the HyperWar site at ibiblio.org often has an assortment of primary and secondary sources for WWII topics. A google search turns up Neosho's action report from her sinking, and from the Pearl Harbor attack
 * I'd also suggest books on the Pearl Harbor attack and the Battle of Coral Sea, too. A Google Books search for Coral Sea turns up several that look promising.
 * Newspaper searches for the building, launching, commissioning timeframe might be helpful, too. Also, according the GlobalSecurity.org, Neosho was the world's largest oil tanker at the time of her launch.
 * Good luck on the research and writing. I'll be happy to answer any other questions. — Bellhalla (talk) 12:11, 12 March 2009 (UTC)


 * That's very helpful thankyou. Cla68 (talk) 22:59, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Targeting Yamamoto
If you choose to focus some energy on the Operation Vengeance article, let me know. One thing it needs is a map of the flight plan, another is a better reading flow, less bouncing around. Binksternet (talk) 20:00, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * It is on my to do list and I have all the books that I need for it. I'm not sure when I'll be able to get to it, however.  Hoepfully soon. Cla68 (talk) 00:06, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * There's no time limit, of course! It took me this long to notice you were living in Japan, a fact which gives me some hope that you'll have access to more sources than I do in California, me speaking only American English with a kitchen-table smattering of other Romance languages. I imagine that you might have a better understanding of Warrant Officer Kenji Yanagiya's version of events, an invaluable objectivity.
 * Congratulations on the FT Guadalcanal Campaign getting the decennial spot at Main page! Great work—fantastic, really. Binksternet (talk) 00:38, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you. By the way, I took a picture of Yamamoto's grave in Tokyo a few weeks ago and will try to get it uploaded soon. Cla68 (talk) 09:01, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Guadalcanal FT on main page
Hey Cla, as part of Wikipedia's 10th anniversary celebrations, your Guadalcanal FT is going to be on the main page. See Today's featured article/January 15, 2011. :-) Congratulations! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:45, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Sam Jaffe
Hi. I found one source that says actor Sam Jaffe was a veteran of World War I, but I can't find anything about this. Any ideas? Viriditas (talk) 09:23, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * On Tuesday (Japan time) I can check Infotrac to see if there is anything on him. Infotrac goes back to 1981, so if it produces any obituaries, that might have some information on his relationship with the Great War.  I'm hoping to have access to LexisNexis soon, also.  There are a few message boards related to WWI and someone on one of those might know where to find info.  Otherwise, I don't know enough about the literature of WWI to know where to look for more information.  Let me think about it a few days and see if I can come up with any other possible avenues for information.  I'll post anything I find or think of on your userpage. Cla68 (talk) 10:40, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but I don't want you to go out of your way or anything. I'm just curious, where do armchair researchers go to check up on and verify military service?  This has come up before, with another article I was working on, Claude Anshin Thomas. Viriditas (talk) 08:59, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
 * This probably constitues OR for Wikipedia, but from what I understand historians usually begin by requesting a copy of the person's service records brief from the US armed forces personnel archive which I believe is located near St. Louis. I'll have to search around the contact information. Cla68 (talk) 13:10, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I just emailed you some possible sources I found. It appears that the place to go to access service history is here. Cla68 (talk) 01:03, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your help. Viriditas (talk) 02:57, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Drone edits
WRT: " Everything in that text is in the sources." Nope and the tag makes what is not

"The "by whom" is the journalist who wrote the report." Click on the link and you will find the place that explains to you how to fix it.

Please do not wonder if people remove stuff that is just crap. Please do not take content issues to my talk page as the articles talk page is a better place. Thank you. IQinn (talk) 01:46, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Question
Hey Cla, I have a word document on the Design B-65 cruisers that was emailed to me by someone (I don't remember who...) awhile back. It uses "Perfect Guide to Japanese Battleships, pp. 140-141" as a reference for one part, but I can't find a book by that name. Can you offer any help? (I found a "perfect guide" to Japanese aircraft carriers, but not much more) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:58, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
 * The "Perfect Guides" appear to be a series of Japanese publications on various topics by the Gakken company. I think I've seen some of these in local bookstores.  I've never bought any of them, if I remember right, because they don't usually include any glossy, public domain pictures suitable for scanning and I figured I could get all the data from English publications. Cla68 (talk) 23:47, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
 * By the way, the title of this mook says Japanese Battleships with a subtitle in katakana directly underneath saying "Perfect Guide". I can't read much more than that on the cover. Cla68 (talk) 23:56, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Photo with Japanese writing
Hi, I found a photo taken on a Japanese carrier during WWII. Would it be possible for you to translate the text on the photo? Thank you Cobatfor (talk) 20:34, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The photo appears to be of Shōkaku or Zuikaku, but I can't read the photo caption. I've asked for help here, and if that doesn't do it, there are a couple of off-wiki forums that should work to ID the photo. Cla68 (talk) 22:49, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot. Cheers from the other side of the world! Cobatfor (talk) 22:58, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

WWII Pacific Theater articles
I had an inquiry by someone I know who asked me where they could find more detail regarding WWII Pacific Theater information and I referred them to your userpage and told them to check out the articles you have listed in your Content section...I doubt anyone else on this website has doen the level of work you have in that area of interest. Is there a list of any other WWII Pacific Theater articles that can be linked to so I can shoot another email to the interested party?--MONGO 15:56, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Also...wanted to add that I am glad to read above that you are safe, but having been in disaster relief situations in the past and looking at the extent of damage that we have available here stateside, the loss of life there must be enormous.--MONGO 16:02, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the concern. The devastation in northeast Japan is stunning.  I'm still having trouble getting my mind around it.  Anyway, probably the best link for Pacific War articles is the Pacific War article itself, because everything else basically branches off of that one.  Also, the Majestic Titan project includes a number of articles on capital ships which were involved in the Pacific War. Cla68 (talk) 23:50, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Good idea...follow the blue links...excellent. I will pass that on and thank you for your assistance and for all the excellent article work you have done.--MONGO 22:04, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Source for Japanese aircraft at Pearl Harbor?
What's the best source for the detailed organization and targets of the Japanese aircraft at Pearl? There's no equivalent of Lengerer for the other four carriers once I get around to doing them.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:51, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll check my books to see what I can find. Cla68 (talk) 22:14, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I haven't forgotten about this. I checked At Dawn we Slept last night and it didn't have the information.  I'll keep checking. Cla68 (talk) 22:00, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

*To answer the question posed by the header only; that would be those military sea going vessels capable of launching and recovering aeroplanes, widely known as "aircraft carriers"! LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:39, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Your analysis is shallow; the source is iron extracted from the ground, which came from the explosion of a dying star, which came from protons formed shortly after the big bang. Beyond that, it's all original research. ATren (talk) 23:30, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
 * LOL = Laughing over little. Binksternet (talk) 00:01, 25 March 2011 (UTC) :P

2007 nuclear weapons incident
Hello, sir! Since you happen to be the author of this FA, is there any chance you know the exact unit this ill-fated B-52 was (is) assigned to and especially its tail number? Thank you very much. --Comiccar (talk) 15:57, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, I don't believe that I saw that information anywhere. I believe that, along with the aircrews' names, the USAF kept that on close hold. Cla68 (talk) 22:11, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Nice
Thanks for the good adds/edits on death of Osama article. jengod (talk) 23:11, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem. Everyone is really doing a good job on the article. Cla68 (talk) 23:13, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Fred Moosally
Sorry Cla68, but I don't understand. Even if your man didn't meet WP:SOLDIER, how could he fail to meet the general notability guideline? Drmies (talk) 02:43, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I think the subject violates the spirit, if not the letter, of our policies and guidelines. Cla68 (talk) 04:07, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
I'm afraid your addition was inaccurate, and I undid it. I watched and copied the NHK program. Japan knew the US developed atomic bombs, but did not know/suspect exactly what the Tinian planes planned to do. Please rewrite the information. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 16:53, 8 August 2011 (UTC) The program was about how they monitored radio messages of US planes and what they found out and thought. And what the Imperial General Headquarters did and did not. This is the summary of the program. On August 6, Japan should have been more cautious of Straight Flush first and Enora Gay, The Great Artiste, and Necessary Evil later and should not have lifted the air raid alert. On August 9, they ditected the same pattern happening and reported it to the top five hours before the bombing, but the Imperial General Headquarters did nothing. Japan should have tried to intercept Bockscar. There were Kawanishi N1K, the one and only possible type to fight against B29, at the Omura air field and they could intercept. The Nagasaki bombing might have been prevented. In short, people in the Imperial General Headquarters were a bunch of fools, the program looks very serious and maybe it's really serious though. Oda Mari (talk) 08:00, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * It appears we have different recollections/interpretations of what the program was saying. Since Japanese is your first language, I accept what you say the program said and ask that you please rewrite the section to ensure that it is accurate.  Thank you. Cla68 (talk) 05:00, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but I don't think I can rewrite well.
 * Ah, thank you, I understand better now. I'll rewrite the section. Cla68 (talk) 08:10, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Almirante Latorre
Got a question for you, seeing as you are Japan-based and are much better-suited to answering this question... do you have any sources that say parts from the Chilean battleship Almirante Latorre were used to restore Mikasa? I haven't found any pre-Wikipedia sources that say it. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:11, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * And if I've asked you this before, just tell me. I have a poor memory. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:12, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't think you have asked me this before. Let me see what I can find out. Cla68 (talk) 00:18, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Just a quick poke on this. If you can't find anything, that's fine. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:08, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Japanese aircraft carrier Akagi
I'm thinking about sending Akagi for an ACR pretty soon. Do you want some more time to work on it or is it OK as is?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:56, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I think it's ready for A-class. There are a few more sources I would like to check before it goes to FAC, however. Cla68 (talk) 04:11, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Akagi ACR
There are some issues at WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Japanese aircraft carrier Akagi regarding sourcing of photos and formatting of notes that you need to address.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:44, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
 * When was the Kure Museum photo book published? And do you remember where we had a long discussion at a FAC about the proper licensing for it?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:05, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm traveling right now, but I'll try to find it as soon as I can. In the meantime, please ask Oda-san, as she was involved. Cla68 (talk) 03:28, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I found the original, lengthy, discussion on the Haruna FAC thanks to comments on Oda-san's talk page. What material would you like to add before I sent it up to FAC?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:37, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorta related, but what books would you recommend for articles on the later IJN carrier classes? I have the Osprey, which is pretty useless and know about the stuff on combinedfleet.com, but it's going to be hard to write the class articles without more info on intended use, etc. Is Ugaki's memoirs actually useful for late-war carrier-related things?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:00, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Battle of Guadalcanal
Can you shed any light on the mysterious classification of this action as the 'second' Allied offensive of WW-II Pacific? MacArthur had just had to threaten to resign so as to conduct a forward defense (see Brisbane Line, but better yet pp-290-300 of American Caesar.) when Nimitz sent the Marines. The Japanese initiated the Kokoda Trail Battle, their second straight defeat at the hands of MacArthur and the Aussies (and later GIs) fighting along that trail. (It doesn't qualify as a campaign despite some editors calling it that.) In short, I've never ever encountered a single phrase elsewhere which even suggested it was the second offensive in 57 years. // Fra nkB 02:51, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Your changes seem fine to me (except please don't refer to the Japanese as "Japs"). Cla68 (talk) 22:46, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Guadalcanal Campaign
Hi, Due to fiddling by a few editors, the first two paras of this article no longer make much sense. It seems to claim that the Allies launched the Kokoda Track Campaign, and bizarrely states that this and the Guadalcanal Campaign aimed to protect the line of communications between Australia and India. The stuff about protecting Australia from invasion is also nonsense. Could you revert this back to whatever the last good version was? Cheers, Nick-D (talk) 08:00, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the delayed response. Looks like you took care of it.  Thank you. Cla68 (talk) 01:36, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I didn't actually, but I just did :) Cheers, Nick-D (talk) 09:48, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
 * By the way, I'm planning on getting Air raids on Japan up to A class standard over the next few weeks. Any comments on the article as it currently stands or changes to it would be great if you have time. Nick-D (talk) 09:49, 23 November 2011 (UTC)