User talk:Climie.ca/Archive 3

WikiProject Good Articles May Newsletter
The May Newsletter for WikiProject Good Articles has now been published. Dr. Cash (talk) 22:16, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVI (April 2008)
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:26, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

adoption
Yeah I'll accept:) I'm looking to tidy up a few page realted to my interests to start off-- MMACKNIGHT  Talk 17:29, 3 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I was wondering where you find pages that need a bi of help, but not a complete rewrite- or any pages you would reccomned I could mabye start with?-- MM  (  Talk to Me  ) 11:55, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Horrocks references
I've added more refs to the Arnhem paragraph. I think that should be enough for now but let me know what you think. Thanks. Leithp 06:32, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Re map
No luck with the hard-drive unfortunately - had to start again from scratch :( However, it should be finished today (all I've got left to do are the labels). Apologies for the delay! EyeSerene talk 10:06, 12 May 2008 (UTC)


 * OK, all done (I've put it in the article). For sone reason the "1st Cdn Army" label has moved from over Caen to the very top border (black line at the top of the image) - I'll sort that out when I get the chance, but hopefully it'll do for now! Also the colours etc don't quite match the other map, but without the file I had to approximate as best I could :P All the best, EyeSerene talk 12:10, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

272nd Infantry Division webpage
Cam, Hey, no problem - if you wish, you can cite passages from the book, just use the standard format (author, title, publisher, page number). I started a 272nd Volksgrenadier Division webpage on Wiki, then realized I had to link in with your page on the 272nd Infantry Division, then that led to updating the page on the 216th Infantry Division, since they were all essentially the same division! While doing my research on the 272nd VGD, I gathered massive amounts of information on the other two divisions in the lineage, and thought it would be a shame if I didn't use it here. I'm also somewhat new to web page creation, so you'll notice that I've made lots of format errors and mistakes that I've been trying to correct here and there. Thanks for your patience and I hope you didn't mind that I tinkered with your webpage! Cheers, Doug Nash

272nd Infantry Division
Cam, My pleasure - I've done about as much as I'm able - Cheers, Douglas E. Nash (talk) 01:12, 16 May 2008 (UTC)Doug NashDouglas E. Nash (talk) 01:12, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

New page for MILHIST copy-editors
The coordinators have decided to make it easier for copy-editors to watch the new requests by creating an own page for this purpose. On WikiProject Military history/Logistics/Copy-editing/Requests all new and old requests are listed. Please add this page to your watchlist. Wandalstouring (talk) 11:49, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Battle of Verrières Ridge
Just got your note, and I'll try to get to this within the next few days (been away for a week, so it may take me a little time to get caught up). Maralia (talk) 02:51, 19 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Re the above, I did get your note and have looked over the article (though to be honest with the editors you've already enlisted I don't think I can add much!) The only points I thought I ought to raise were the comments regarding sourcing made by jbmurray in the edit history while we were going through the GA review. These may have already been addressed, but if not it might be worthwhile asking him to take another look. EyeSerene talk 17:55, 20 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Fair enough, just wanted to check! I'm fairly busy with other copyedits at the moment, but if you need anything, you know where my talk page is ;) EyeSerene talk 07:25, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi Cam. Thanks for the update. Though I haven't been very active lately (gross disillusionment with Wikipedia), I do look in from time to time. Good job with the V-ridge article. Lookin' really good. (Oh, I just updated the Ardenne Abbey article, wrt something you asked me long ago.) Esseh (talk) 04:41, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Yep, congratulations from me too - well deserved. I'm really glad your hard work and research has paid off! EyeSerene talk 13:45, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Cheers!
Just wanted to drop you a line to say thanks for reviewing 13th Airborne Division, even if you're still doing it! Thanks for all your help with my airborne-related articles, and here's a little something for you:


 * Hey, I've asked for some clarification on 13th Airborne Division if you wouldn't mind looking. Thanks! Skinny87 (talk) 09:08, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

The FA-Team
Hi. There has been some discussion of how to improve the FA-Team's functioning. It's be grand if you could comment on the new suggested structure, and perhaps also look at our current proposals. Thanks. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 18:35, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

GA review for USS Freedom (ID-3024)
Thanks for taking the time to review the GA nomination of USS Freedom (ID-3024). Some replies to the objections you raised in your review:
 * For the dates, I always follow the guidelines at Manual of Style (dates and numbers) in articles where the established style is to link dates. (If there is no established style, I personally prefer to link dates.) Looking at the table in that section of the MOS, it appears that any of the dates style listed—including dd month year (with a space between the date and the year)—are acceptable and will display according to a user's date preferences (if any). As far as any unlinked dates, all that I see unlinked are either solitary years or month-year combinations for which the MOS discourages linking unless it provides context. In none of these cases is that additional context necessary.
 * For the two instances for which you felt additional citations were necessary, my usage (and understanding of common practice) is that a note covers all the information before it back to either the previous note or the beginning of the paragraph. To address the specific concerns you mentioned:
 * The sentence beginning "The steamer—carrying a cargo of lead and coal tar products…" is part of the paragraph which, in its entirety, is cited to the source listed under note 6.
 * The sentence beginning "Freedom was assigned to the Cruiser and Transport Force…" and the following sentence are collectively cited to the source listed under note 3.
 * If you feel that this method leaves the source of the information unclear to the reader, I can certainly add citations for each sentence, if that would be preferred.

Again, thanks for taking the time to review the GA nomination. — Bellhalla (talk) 03:44, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * For the overhaul, there was no other information provided in the source, and, regrettably, cannot be further elaborated on.
 * I added the citations for those two sentences. Thanks again. — Bellhalla (talk) 11:11, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Commons Help
Cam, you've been a great help to me, and I was hoping you could do your magic once again. I've found a picture over on Commons that is perfect for Operation Varsity for the infobox, or elsewhere. Only thing is, me being a newbie, I have no idea how to get it there. The picture is here:. I was wondering if you could somehow upload it to wikipedia, and tell me how to do so in the process. I'd be real greatful for any help you can give. Skinny87 (talk) 19:44, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, I think I've managed to do it all myself through messing around. Still be greatful if you could look over the article and give me your impressions. Thanks again! Skinny87 (talk) 22:29, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Totalize & Tractable
Hi Cam. Good work. I'll give them a quick proofreading this eve. As for "thoroughly disgusted", it was about something totally different. Though I have an interest in history, I am actually a biologist by training. I had expanded a stub article into something I thought was quite good (and fully referenced, etc), only to have someone with an axe to grind reverse everything to the former stub. I tried getting help with the individual, to no avail. Finally, 'bout a year ago, I just gave up in disgust. Only recently have I started tinkering here and there, again. Doubt I'll ever commit to trying to seriously expand an article again, though. Oh, well. I'll let you know what I think of Totalize and Tractable. Cheers. Esseh (talk) 22:31, 2 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi again, Cam. I have given Operation Totalise a quick proofreading, and made a few changes. There are some more serious problems that I've outlined on the discussion page - the map, for one, and the listing of units. You have the refs, so perhaps you can straighten that out. Oh, a quote for you: One of my former students was in a reserve artillery battery, and, on learning I was a former tanker, we discussed several things. One quote springs to mind (for a chuckle). "If infantry is the Queen of Battle, then the armour and artillery is the chastity belt that keeps her from getting raped!" I know most of your sources do, but don't neglect the role of other formations. In my (humble) estimation, armour takes the ground, whereas infantry clears and holds it. Neither is any good without the other. Cheers, and I'll look in on Totalise again when I have time. (PS, thanks for the Barnstar - apparently, you're the only one who appreciates the l'il bit I do.) Esseh (talk) 22:31, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVII (May 2008)
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:30, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Re Op Tractable
No problems, be happy to. It may take a few days (same old story, too much to do & not enough time!). It looks, from a quick read-through, that there's only a few MoS issues that need addressing (headings and some bits in the prose). Cheers, EyeSerene talk 07:35, 3 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi Climie.ca. I missed your comment on my talk page until this morning (another comment came a couple hours later, so when I hit the "last change" button, I missed yours). Anyways, I just finished condensing the refs on Operation Tractable, it's down to 29 entries instead of the 70-some it was. I'm pretty sure I've got them all, but if I've missed one, let me know. Again, my apologies for missing that for a week or so, I wasn't ignoring you or anything :) Better late than never, right? Parsecboy (talk) 14:37, 6 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I've tagged your article as under review now - there was another one before yours in the queue, so I thought I ought to do that first (only fair really!). I should be posting something up fairly soon ;) EyeSerene talk 14:27, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Various things
1. T&A automatic awards. I've been meaning to amend to make them request only. Your edit summary provided the impetus to actually do it! "As you go" is very fiddly :) Thanks for the nudge, -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 06:11, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

2. Good luck, with BoVR. I'll take a look in a day or two, and do any emergency CEs that crop up. -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 06:11, 5 June 2008 (UTC)


 * As you've probably seen, I've massaged the copy a bit. Notably, I've expanded the intro from two to three pars per WP:LEAD. I've done sundry other recastings and tweaks to tighten it up a bit. I'm kicking myself about the Juno Beach Centre as I meant to query that with you weeks ago, but forgot. -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 06:48, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:25th_infantry_badge.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:25th_infantry_badge.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 06:56, 5 June 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? OsamaK 06:56, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: Armia Krajowa
Thank you for the help with c/e-ing the article :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 00:08, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Operation Varsity
I have just asked for an A-class review of Operation Varsity, open and any help you could give would be more than welcome! Skinny87 (talk) 18:39, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good articles newsletter
Delivered by the automated Giggabot (stop!) 01:18, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Verrieres Ridge
Hi Cam - I hope you don't mind, I've had a go at cleaning up the "Verrieres under fire" photo on your article. It looked 'washed-out', so I've tried to bump up the contrast and remove some of the speckling (though not too much, as I didn't want to lose the detail). Hopefully it's a bit more eye-catching now as the lead-in to the article? EyeSerene talk 18:52, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry to but in, but I cast a quick eye over the article, and I have to sya its really smashing. One thing that caught my eye, however, was that Ridge is often spelled with a capital as often as not. I was wondering if it should be one or the other? Skinny87 (talk) 21:28, 10 June 2008 (UTC)