User talk:Climie.ca/Archive 6

Operation Tractable
In regards to basic MoS, I don't see anything wrong with it. The prose looks good, although they always find something to improve during the FAC. :) JonCatalán(Talk) 04:05, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXI (September 2008)
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:47, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

GA Reviews
Hey Cam. I was looking over 13th Airborne Division and 17th Airborne Division to see whether I could nom for a Good Topic (I can't, but thats another thing I guess), and I looked at their GA Reviews, and I can't say I'm entirely happy with them. They were done by Redmarkviolinist, and they seem a little on the short side, and a bit too ready to be passed. I reckon that they are GA-Class, but I want to be double-sure to feel like I deserve them. Should I put them up for GAR, or find someone to give them a look over? Thanks for the help, I know that you're busy, Skinny87 (talk) 07:40, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

FYI
Enigma has rightly pointed out to me that I've made a mistake on the Op Totalise/Tractable map :( I'll upload a corrected version asap. EyeSerene talk 17:32, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, that's now fixed, and I've altered the SS counterattacks map to show Canadian national flags instead of the military ones (mainly for clarity and consistency with other maps). EyeSerene talk 17:13, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Chevrons+
I'm speechless, and truly grateful. Thank you! EyeSerene talk 16:52, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Milhist Assessment of Frederick III, German Emperor
Hey, thanks for your comment on the wikiproject milhist review of Frederick III, German Emperor. I expanded the intro as you said and was wondering if you could look it over and let me know if there's anything else I can fix about it, as I know its not perfect. The assessment page where I talk about what I did is here. Thanks if you can help. --Banime (talk) 20:09, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

102d SS Hvy. Pz. Batl.
Reynold's, Sons of the Reich: II SS Panzer Corps, has information interspersed throughout the book, including strengths and losses during specific battles (such as at Hill 112). I'll have to look in other books, including Panzer Tactics (which unfortunate has no index), but I don't think I have much on the SS, unfortunately. JonCatalán(Talk) 01:58, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar
Hey Cam. Thanks very much for the Barnstar, but I don't think I deserve it. I didn't do any copy-editing to the article - I checked my contributions and I don't think I ever edited Tractable. I only participated in the FAC. I'm glad it got passed to FA-Class, but looking through the history of the article, perhaps you got me mistaken with User:Dabomb87, who did some copy-editing?

However, though I don't deserve one, you certainly do, for all the help you've given to me, so here we go:


 * Aha, I see. Thanks for the barnstar Cam. Much appreciated! Skinny87 (talk) 18:08, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Op Tractable
Congratulations on another well-deserved FA ;) EyeSerene talk 11:14, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your gracious award, and congratulations on your new featured article! JonCatalán(Talk) 19:54, 13 October 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)
 * 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)
 * By the way, which books/sources were you going to utilize for Yamato? Cla68 (talk) 03:40, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * 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) 03:52, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * One more thing, there's a message board, if you're interested, devoted to the IJN. It's here and is operated by Anthony Tully, one of the authors of Shattered Sword.  It has a small group of posters, but most of them are extremely knowledgeable about the IJN and post some interesting facts, details, and sources I wouldn't have otherwise known about, such as in this thread. Cla68 (talk) 07:04, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Re Canadian flag/ensign
Comment on my talk page: User talk:EyeSerene Your opinion? EyeSerene talk 07:37, 14 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Okies, I'll change both images (when I get round to it...!) EyeSerene talk 18:55, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Operation Tractable
Operation Tractable appears as a selected article on theCanada Portal. Congratulations and thank you to the editors of the articles that appear in the portal. A selected Canadian article should be well-written and interesting. As a selected article it showcases and promotes finer Canadian content and as such should encourage contribution of Canadian related articles. An excerpt from this article regularly appears on the Portal's main page, it is randomly appearing article Portal:Canada/Selected article/36 .SriMesh | talk  03:13, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Rollback
Also see the current discussion at WT:MHCOORD. -MBK004 04:14, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Re:USS New Jersey question
The Milhist MoS has a section named "pronouns", the "she/it" issue is addressed there. TomStar81 (Talk) 06:10, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

11th Airborne Division
Hey. I intend to get 11th Airborne Division (United States) to FA-Class even if it kills me. Therefore, I've set up a new MILHIST peer review for the article, which can be accessed via the talkpage. Any comments, especially on the prose, would be a real help if you have the time. Cheers! Skinny87 (talk) 17:45, 16 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Hey, thanks for fixing the bits on my userpage. Much appreciated! Skinny87 (talk) 08:02, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

W0.7
Gentle nag? :))) -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 15:15, 19 October 2008 (UTC)


 * [Chuckle] Indeed. As you'll have noticed I've broken up the ranges to make them a bit less daunting. All we need do now is get a few people working on them. I do appreciate you heroically soldiering on :) 05:57, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks very much. I'm going to start processing the links etc for the completed checklists. We may not finish it all in time but at least we'll get some of it done. -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 05:58, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Oil shale extraction
Hi, Climie. As you are a member of the FA-Team, I would like to ask you assistance. The Oil shale extraction was a FAC, but was not promoted, mostly because of the prose. I wonder if you could be interested to help bringing this article to the FA level. Thank you in advance. Beagel (talk) 20:39, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

11th ABN MoS
Sorry, got to dash to class in a sec. Could you give 11th ABN a quick MoS check before I submit it to FAC today or tomorrow? Cheers mate, Skinny87 (talk) 12:51, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Yamato
I added a lot of design detail to the Yamato article, then realized it probably should go in the Yamato-class battleship article instead. I don't want to screw up your work there, so if you'd like to find a way to include it somehow, please copy it over. Cla68 (talk) 08:04, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, I feel like I'm screwing up your writing on those articles by trying to add material at the same time that you're building them. I think I'm going to wait until you're finished adding the information from the sources you have, then I'll add additional detail, if needed, from the sources I have. Cla68 (talk) 22:29, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Adopt me, PLEASE!!!
Hi there Cam, I recently joined Wikipedia and only discovered Wikipedia Adoption earlier today. I would dearly love to be adopted and you seem to be my best bet. I'm on Wikipedia every day from around 3:00p.m. to 9:00p.m. Thank you! TopGearFreak (talk) 17:31, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Tractable
Hello Cam, I've been dropping in on 'Tractable' since I read Read's book on Totalise. I like the detail in it now but if I might be permitted a quibble I don't know of a '11th SS Pz Div'. Could this be a typo? Keith-264 (talk) 10:31, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Heads up
You may wish to comment here. -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 06:23, 2 November 2008 (UTC)


 * If you have a moment, would you mind please looking at this and, if you think a clear winner has emerged, closing it and awarding the applicable barnstar? (incidentally, you should start thinking about adminship. It's almost long overdue.) Thanks, -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 06:37, 2 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks very much, Cam. -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 07:10, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Iowa class FT
I assume you've got the working group page watchlisted. If not, here's the link again: User:TomStar81/Iowa class battleship featured topic work group. I plan on undoing the talk page redirect to facilitate work on this. I'll have my response done there within 30 minutes. Also, like what Roger has said above, when you're ready for  let me know and I'll gladly offer a co-nom for you (I assume that Roger would as well), like I did for Tom. -MBK004 02:19, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
 * You already missed it. I replied here: User talk:TomStar81/Iowa class battleship featured topic work group two minutes before you posted to my talk page the second time. -MBK004 02:31, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Um, not be like...mean, or anything, but from what I have read TomStar81 did say he would return, and the tone of your messages suggests that you do not belive he will. I am certain that Tom won't leave completely, it is obvious that wikipedia and the military project means a lot to him and I am quite sure that he will find his way back in time. Also, I was wondering why the Obama article was not within the military project's scope when McCain is. I meant to ask MBK, but I can not edit his page for some reason, so I was hoping you could pass that along to him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.31.27.143 (talk) 07:24, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, that wasn't the way I was intending to sound. Optimistically, Tom will return.  I would prefer for Tom to return (and am in no way suggesting that I am in any way shape or form glad that he's gone.  It strikes a massive blow both the project and the coordination team), and hope that he eventually will.  That said, the project he's devoted most of his wikitime to (The Iowa Class) should not be allowed to be mothballed while he is gone.  MBK004 and I are of the opinion that the work needs to continue despite Tom's sudden departure.  Did the American guerillas in the Philippines give up when McArther left the island?  Nope.  Did McArther promise to return?  Yes.  Did he?  Yes.  The principle remains the same (just less lethal). Cam (Chat) 07:32, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Re Tom etc
Yes, I had noticed, and left a note on his talk page. ATB, EyeSerene talk 08:55, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

PS Just seen Roger's comment above re Adminship, and fully agree - when you decide the time is right, I'd be honoured to co-nom. Let me know ;) EyeSerene talk 09:05, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

One or two regiments?
Is the Essex Scottish Regiment the same as The Essex Scottish Regiment? Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 22:49, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I made Essex Scottish Regiment a redirect. And you are not the only person to do something like that (I did it with some airports that are military bases). CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 00:31, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Questions from TGF
Hi Cam. I was wondering how to achive my page and I came across the Cluebot III page, which tells you how to archive your talk page. I tried to follow the instructions but couldn't understand them. Can you give me a simplified version on how to archive my page? Thanks, TopGearFreak   Talk  17:21, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

From TGF
Can I use Image:Hannover7908.jpg on my UserPage? I found it on Wikimedia Commons but in the Fact Box underneath it says it has a special kind of licence and I'm not sure if I can use it. Best, TopGearFreak   Talk  17:03, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 * No, check that last question. I asked Roux. It's OK. Thanks anyway, TopGearFreak   Talk  21:48, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I signed up to Twinkle, but when I pressed 'xfd' (one of the Twinkle tabs) a message came up that said 'your account is too new to use Twinkle'. How old does my account have to be before I can use Twinkle? Thanks once again, TopGearFreak   Talk  16:52, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

13th Airborne Division A-Class Review
Hey Cam. I was wondering, if you had the time, you might be able to comment on 13th Airborne Division (United States)'s A-Class Review that I've got running at the moment. You're comments are usually really helpful, so anything would be appreciated. Cheers, Skinny87 (talk) 07:42, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXII (October 2008)
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:24, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Howdy, Thanks so much for the Barnstar You didn't need to do that. You know if you need help on something you just need to ask. Thanks and Have A Great Day! Duke R. Oliver I His Duchy 18:52, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

GA reform redux
I've recently had a chat with a couple of the contributors, and we think it may be worth revisiting the GA reform proposal put together by the working party during the Summer. Since you contributed to the proposal's development, I was wondering if you'd care to comment? I've left a brief recap at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Good articles/Reform; your input would be much appreciated. Thank you, EyeSerene talk 13:28, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Review
Hi! Be wary, this message is asking for a favour. ;) I've been nurturing an article, 2008 Nord-Kivu conflict, and I was wondering if I could get some pro help in evaluating and fixing it up (read:reviewing). I'm fairly experienced with formatting and organization, but I figured I'd ask a MILHIST coordinator to assist. So, what do you say? :) Thanks for the consideration! Cheers, Master of Puppets  Call me MoP! :)  00:28, 19 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks a metric ton! :) Cheers, Master of Puppets  Call me MoP! :)  01:02, 19 November 2008 (UTC)


 * No worries, friend. I'm not in any rush. Good luck on the homework! :) Cheers, Master of Puppets  Call me MoP! :)  00:34, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thanks for the barnstar! JonCatalán(Talk) 16:57, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Coordinator discussions
It would be helpful to have some input on the following discussions, some of which you may have missed:


 * WT:MHCOORD - Proposal for filling the last three TF coordinator slots


 * WT:MHCOORD - Job description re task forces. Some input already but much more welcomed so we can get a summary/checklist in place.


 * WT:MHCOORD - Views welcomed on whether in principle Milhist should adopt C-Class.


 * WT:MHCOORD - Finishing touches on getting the reappraisal review in place.

Very many thanks :) -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 09:51, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Greetings


 * The student Somertime02 is no longer actively editing the article Bone grafting. If I am not mistaking; you had her on your watch list as part of the WikiProject AP Biology 2008. I wish to thank you for your efforts and regret any inconvenience this may have caused. --JimmyButler (talk) 18:21, 24 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)
 * According to this the IJN didn't use an official prefix for its warships, unlike the USN.  So, perhaps that's why we use "Japanese Battleship Yamato".  However, I think the official title for each ship is, "Imperial Japanese Navy battleship Yamato" and I don't see why we wouldn't want to abbreviate that in the article titles, even if its our own convention.  Cla68 (talk) 01:47, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * By the way, here's another message board with good discussions on the IJN . Cla68 (talk) 02:05, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

13th Airborne Division FAC
Hey Cam. I don't know if you'd be interested, but 13th Airborne Division (United States) is at FAC at the moment; any comments you could give would be greatfully received. Skinny87 (talk) 11:41, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: With thanks
Thank you very much for the barnstar! :-) Kirill (prof) 12:48, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks a lot for the suggestions on cannonball jellyfish. --Desert fox2009 (talk) 19:24, 5 December 2008 (UTC)