User talk:Dipa1965

RE:Battle of Mardia
Hey there Dipa1965, I have had a look at your changes and updates and they are excellent. I have re-assessed it as B to reflect your changes. I was originally unsure as to how comprehensive the article was. After seeing the new structure and looking around at internet sources, it is clear to me that the article satisifies the requirements for a B-Class article. Well done and thanks for all your effort on the article. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to leave a note on my talkpage. Regards. Woody (talk) 22:11, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Trying to move Julian the Apostate
Within a week, I am going post a new request to move the article. Please be ready to come in with support again. Thegreyanomaly (talk)

I have submitted the request to move the page Thegreyanomaly (talk) 01:42, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Proposed move of Julian the Apostate (again)
I am contacting you because you participated in a recent discussion at Talk:Julian the Apostate about changing the title of the page. That discussion closed, and immediately afterwards a new proposal was created to move the page to Julian. Please give your opinion of this new proposal at Talk:Julian the Apostate. --Akhilleus (talk) 19:31, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I think you put your support in the discussion section instead of the survey section, I would suggest you state your opinion within the survey section. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 00:56, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Aah yes, but it wouldn't matter in any case. There will be no change. thanks anyway! Dipa1965 (talk) 05:06, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

don't be so pessimistic. Do as you wish, I guess. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 07:37, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Your vandalism of Year of the Four Emperors
Well, I see this as a display of ill-tasted humour. You added "The summer of the four captains" in the "See also" list. Had you any other intention except for ridiculing Wikipedia? Dipa1965 (talk) 06:33, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
 * It was neither vandalism, nor humour. Would you care to review the material before throwing around accusations? --Dweller (talk) 12:48, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I prefer to continue the discussion on your talk page, if you don't mind Dipa1965 (talk) 16:44, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

WP:SEEALSO
I wouldn't really say I was angry, but I definitely think I could have handled this better, so sorry for that.

I've now looked up the appropriate guideline on the topic, which is WP:SEEALSO. It includes the following relevant text:

"Links ... should be used in moderation, as always. These may be useful for readers looking to read as much about a topic as possible, including subjects only peripherally related to the one in question."

To my mind, the first three bullets correspond to the first half of the bolded sentence and the cricket-related one, the second half. And with just four links in total, the article's still in line with the "in moderation" aspect. Do you agree? --Dweller (talk) 10:32, 25 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Sounds reasonable but the "peripherally related" is (and it couldn't be otherwise) subjective. I for one don't find the link as such. What do you think about the following from the same guideline:

"'Also provide a brief explanatory sentence when the relevance of the added links is not immediately apparent.'"
 * Is there a means to make the cricket link compliant (a small hint would be adequate) to the above suggestion without, of course, harming the intended effect of the line? I couldn't find something myself (more language fluency is needed) but it would address the issue once for all. Dipa1965 (talk) 10:52, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * That's an excellent idea. I'll have a stab at it. --Dweller (talk) 10:58, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Howzat? --Dweller (talk) 11:01, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * :-) You are more addicted to cricket than I am to soccer. And the new version is more than fine. Thank you! Fortunately my temper didn't have the time to push the dispute to the limit, so I am glad that this small link issue ended here. Dipa1965 (talk) 11:42, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll summarise the constructive parts of this discussion at the talk page, for future reference. --Dweller (talk) 12:17, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Thrax's height
I am not suggesting that Thrax would have been of THE size he was specifically described as being (I do not belive he was. Of course it is possible for a man to grow to such height: not very likely, but possible, as more detailed historical examples have shown) - I am saying that he more than probably was a man of greater size than most people of the time. How big he was then? I don't know, but based on all descriptions of him saying he was of greater size than his contemporaries, it is very fair to add the line, which does not state anything specific about his size other than he probably was of greater size than most contemporaries. I do not base this on the discussion page - I merely noted you towards the very reasonable lines there; that he probably was of greater size, even if not a "giant" in sense that he was of the specific size (I am sorry if you misunderstood the edit note wrong). There is also a cituation in the article which says that he might have suffered from over growth to some extent - so, I do not really see the big harm here. --Kurt Leyman (talk) 20:58, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
— Ed 17  (Talk /  Contribs)  15:14, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

3rd Century Crisis
Hi, thanks for your note. I am generally against those templates, which is why I removed it. They sit at the top of articles for months or years, and are usually ignored. Plus, I think they are redundant- everyone who edits here is supposed to be adding references, correcting errors, etc. However, since this article is not a long-term project of mine, if you prefer the template, that is ok with me, I am not looking for an argument, and I genuinely appreciate your point of view, although it differs from mine. I would note that since you seem to have some knowledge and you certainly seem to care, you ought to make those edits to the article that support your points on my talk page that modern historians have a different perspective on the Crisis, etc. Get those citations in there if you can! Best regards, Kaisershatner (talk) 02:10, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Ancient Greek maps
I will see what I can do - I made several other maps too. Not sure where I saved them, but I will have a good look for you, and would be happy to create some more if you need them.

I did it some time ago using Adobe Photoshop - so in my own file I have the possibility of retyping the names, if that's any use to you? I could also try emailing you the files, if you have Photoshop too. Unfortunately they won't upload to Commons because of the file type.

I wonder if it's possible to create the file in a more commons-friendly format instead. For changing names on labels, I know svg is good and Commons accepts that. But the background map is a screenshot from an online mapping utility that releases the images created into the public domain, so that's essentially bitmap (I understand that the underlying output from the mapping utility is actually a vector graphic, but I don't know how to "grab" that). I don't know if it's possible/desirable to make an svg file, where the names of towns should be fairly easy to change, using the bitmap as background. Do you know anybody who might be more knowledgeable than me on these issues? TheGrappler (talk) 00:41, 20 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Rather pathetically, I can't work out how to email you. Will need to find that file first though, it's been a while since I worked on it! I was looking at some of your other excellent contributions; it struck me that Nicopolis ad Istrum could do with a location map. Those clever location templates hadn't been invented when I made a lot of my maps. I wonder, do you think it would be possible to use them to create the same effect as Lechaeum.png (once I dig out the background map) in a way that would get around the language problem? TheGrappler (talk) 15:01, 20 July 2009 (UTC)


 * (Also, if you're interested in the Battle of Lechaeum, there's a query by an IP editor about the claim that this really was the first time that a hoplite force was defeated by lighter infantry. The original author, User:Robth, had written that it was, but didn't give a source; Robth has no left and the IP editor has now claimed it was "one of the first". I wonder whether you have access to sources that might resolve the issue? TheGrappler (talk) 15:23, 20 July 2009 (UTC))


 * Still no luck finding the bitmap I used for lechaeum.png (I have the feeling I saved it onto an old USB drive some time ago) but I have discovered that years ago I uploaded the original bitmap from demis.nl at File:Corinth.png. I remember that I had to remove the Corinth canal, which is an easy job and can be accomplished without losing very much. Do you know if some of the other water courses should have been removed as well?


 * The svg you made doesn't seem to render that well at 200 pixels unfortunately, I wonder whether the text should be made bigger? But other than that it looks good. Any reason to remove the label for the Peloponnese? (I suspect there is, but as a non-expert on the region can't think what in particular - I found it useful to orient myself.) TheGrappler (talk) 00:01, 21 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm alarmed if I got the position wrong although that is clearly possible! If so then I suggest that the png images I uploaded are put up for deletion. Your sources are obviously better than mine (Barrington Atlas is pretty definitive). I was using a map from the University of Chicago who had been doing excavations in the area:, and I think I double-checked with Robth that it was ok, but he may not have had access to Barrington. Looking back at it, they've clearly marked on the modern location too. This also means that some other files, including File:Lechaeum.svg - only just spotted that, looks like somebody else vectorized before you did! - are also wrong. I will go around checking what needs to be deleted or amended on Commons if necessary.


 * As for your file I think it does look acceptable at 200 px (judging from here) even in Firefox, except that the "s" of "Athens" gets cut off (so maybe that caption can be moved left). It's not immediately obvious to me why how the captions are formatted (it's clear you've wanted to give modern Corinth in black, for instance, but is there a systematic explanation for the others, e.g. for "PEIRAION" in red capitals?). For consistency it would seem logical to write "Peloponnese" and "Isthmus of Corinth" in similar size font, for example, but this is only minor nitpicking :)


 * When you said you corrected the water flows (I went with the map data except that I removed the Corinth canal), does that mean you've tried to adjust them back to what Barrington suggests they were historically? Or that you think the original map data from DEMIS may have been wrong? (I'm interested in this because errors in DEMIS would be a pain - there are many DEMIS-based maps on Commons.) I can tell that you've moved Sicyon (I was obviously way out), but I can't see a change in the position of Lechaeum (possibly because between the two versions you uploaded, and, the map shape changes too - but the change in location for Heraion is more obvious than for Lechaeum). Overall I'd say it's looking good, and hopefully if it's developed your skills in Inkscape you'll be able to add more maps of other places in future. TheGrappler (talk) 14:33, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Don't have time to make much of a comment right now - will leave a fuller one later :) DEMIS not being correct about water features really rings alarm bells since I used DEMIS for several other maps for articles ABOUT water features! :/ I'll need to give them a good look-over too at some point. Hm, I think that somewhere on wiki there is now a mapping wikiproject who have tried to come up with a standardized label system for maps, so you might not need a legend to explain your labelling system (which sounded pretty sensible to me). TheGrappler (talk) 16:57, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: Maximinus Thrax
Hi Dipa1965. Thanks for the feedback. I'm in the process of adding sources and citations for as many of the Roman and Byzantine Emperors and usurpers as I can. It's long and tedious, but essential. I'll see how long my enthusiasm lasts! :) Take care. Oatley2112 (talk) 11:56, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Dacia
Hello! I've been working to set up the WikiProject Dacia to organize better the articles about Dacia and improve their quality. We need help expanding and reviewing many articles, and we also need more images. Maybe you find it interesting and wish to join. Thanks and best regards! --Codrin.B (talk) 04:17, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Re: Luukanen-Kilde
Dipa1965, stop your Wikipedia vandalism.

Luukanen-Kilde's referenced credentials are known well enough in her native Finland and they are available in authorized, written form from Bevolution.dk. Deleting any referenced material and calling it "unsupported" is a purely schizophrenic act from you. Is there a proof that you are mentally well? If so, I would like to see an official medical certificate verifying your mental state, preferably in written form. Thank you in advance.

As to Dr. Kilde, I advise you not to delete any referenced material. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.155.234.89 (talk) 03:51, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Rauni-Leena Luukanen-Kilde
Sorry I took so long to get back to you. I made one revert and posted on the Talk page but the IP editor is entrenched. I posted a note at WP:FTN. - LuckyLouie (talk) 01:00, 15 March 2011 (UTC)


 * You did the best you could to explain WP policies to the IP, it's not your fault they don't get it. As for their Talk page antics, WP:ROPE will likely apply. - LuckyLouie (talk) 15:12, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

"Battle of Nessos"
What happened at the battle of Nessos? I've googled it but i can't find any info. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alphasinus (talk • contribs)

WikiProject Military History introduction
 Hello and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.

A few features that you might find helpful:


 * Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
 * The announcement and open task box is updated very frequently. You can [ watchlist it] if you are interested, or you can add it directly to your user page by copying the following: WPMILHIST Announcements.
 * Important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you [ watchlist it].
 * The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, detailed article and content review, writing contests, and article logistics.
 * We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, periods, and conflicts.
 * We've developed a set of guidelines that cover article structure and content, template use, categorization, and many other issues of interest.
 * If you're looking for something to work on, there are many articles that need attention, as well as a number of review alerts.
 * If you have an idea for improving the project, we have a strategy think tank that provides a dedicated forum for discussing it.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask any of the project coordinators or any other experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome, and we are looking forward to seeing you around! --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 22:33, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Spear Article
Hi, I see you've recently made an edit to the spear article. I'm trying to drum up some editors to help me with the article as it was the most commonly used weapon in history it's significance cannot be underestimated. Unfortunately the article itself is in need of work, in many cases because the spear is such a ubiquitous tool that is has been used in virtually every country and theatre of war it needs additional content to reflect this wide and varied use. If you could help I'd really appreciate it. Master z0b (talk) 06:45, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Mat ty. 007 20:17, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Mat ty. 007 17:35, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Just a follow up about protection......
....if you have not done so, please read our Rough guide to semi-protection. Protection really should be the exception, and not the rule, as we still aim to be the encyclopedia that everyone can edit. Every protection is so to speak a move against our five pillars. And as for an example as when protection is needed, have a look at the article history of Ashton Agar of some days ago...that was sustained vandalism.

What I do understand of course is that it is tedious to revert vandalism once so often, and one can get the impression that the article is popping up on the watchlist incessantly. If you want to get a feeling for vandalism, have a go at new page patrol, just for a change...if you have not done so already, I have not checked.

And thank you for accepting the decision in good grace, and for the heads-up. And as Mark Arsten said: do not hesitate to contact one of us; if the vandalism picks up, pending changes level 1 might be the way to go. Cheers and happy editing. Lectonar (talk) 21:12, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks again; and what keeps me going although I believe man to be intrinsically good, but also have been an admin here for a long time now, was always this. The anonymous editors here have done much good, and much of the really bad thngs were done by confirmed users (see Essjay controversy) . Keep up the good work, and perhaps I might recruit you for PNT; although I have ancient Greek, modern Greek is very far from that, and the odd Greek article pops in once in an while. Lectonar (talk) 06:47, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Greek help needed
Hello Dipa1965, I'm contacting you because we need some Greek translators to help with the deployment of the new VisualEditor on el.wikipedia. There are help pages, user guides, and description pages that need translating, as well as the interface itself. The translating work is going on over on MediaWiki: Translation Central. I also need help with a personal message for the Greek Wikipedians. If you are able to help in any way, either reply here, or head over to TranslationCentral. Thanks for your time, PEarley (WMF) (talk) 18:29, 22 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi! Just started translating the VisualEditor User Guide. If you think that there are other, higher priority, pages that need translation, please leave a message.--Dipa1965 (talk) 22:30, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey Dipa, thanks for helping out! That page is priority. Good to have you on the translating team. PEarley (WMF) (talk) 22:44, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Visual Editor update
Hello Dipa, hope you are well. We are planning on rolloing out the VisualEditor to el.wiki soon, on September 24th. Would you be able to translate another message for me, an official update for the Greek editing community? Best regards, PEarley (WMF) (talk) 18:15, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Dipa, thanks so much. I know this is a longer one, don't worry about getting it perfect.  Just enough to be understandable and so I don't sound like a complete fool! Message follows. You rock! PEarley (WMF) (talk) 01:20, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Greetings from the Wikimedia Foundation, Greek Wikipedia editors. I am posting to let you know about the VisualEditor (VE) editing interface. It is a new, visual way to edit Wikipedia. We would like to deploy VisualEditor on this Wikipedia soon, and we would like to get editors' opinions on the new platform.


 * To test VisualEditor, you can enable it by going to "Preferences" "Editing" → "Enable VisualEditor". After doing this, you will see two options for editing an article. We welcome your feedback, and would like to know about any problems or "bugs" experienced on el.wiki. It is also important that VisualEditor's buttons and labels are translated into Greek, along with several important help documents. If you have English skills, you can help out at Translatewiki.net and VisualEditor's TranslationCentral on mediawiki.org. You must have an account on Translatewiki.net to translate.


 * We expect to enable VisualEditor here on Tuesday, 24 September unless there any critical bugs with your particular Wikipedia that you find during testing. Enabling VisualEditor here for everyone will help the software to be developed and improved to meet the needs of all users. After the rollout the new editor will be displayed side-by-side with the button to edit using wikitext. Once VisualEditor is enabled you will have the option to disable it in your preferences so that you will no longer see it while it is in beta testing. We hope that you do not chose to do that because it would limit the opportunities to find out how we can make VisualEditor better for the XX Wikipedia. The option to edit using wikitext will not be going away. Thank you for your comments, and happy editing,

Battle of the Utus
I will add this to my watchlist but I assume you are more likely to see problem edits faster than I will. I guess it depends on what times we are on line and when the user may pop up. With the break between edits, I would have thought the IP had given up but unfortunately he has reappeared.

I looked at the history of the article. It makes little difference in this situation but it seems to me almost certain that the same person made one of the edits from a different computer because one edit came from a different IP. I say it makes little difference because all the other edits come from the same IP so the responsible user would be easy to identify.

This is an odd situation because the person may believe they are making legitimate edits but it seems to me, and obviously to you as well, that the sources are not reliable and the conclusions are original research at best. I am not sure exactly how to characterize the IP user but I think that in the absence of a better source, his edits to this article should not be accepted. Donner60 (talk) 22:50, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Battle of Lake Benacus
Thanks for catching that. Apologies, I don't have access to Watson and had assumed it was a typo. Cheers - Dumelow (talk) 21:22, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

your comment at marcocapelle's talk
Interesting - the whole thing of surrogate, third party murder is prevalent in a number of cultures/countries (maybe all?) where powerful people use middle persons as assassins/murderers to avoid recrimination - any links from your perspective - or is there already an article that I have missed... ? JarrahTree 01:25, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

I don't have any specialized link or book on the matter but Richard Billows' narrative of organized political crime in 60-50's BC Rome in Julius Caesar - The Colossus of Rome, Routledge, 2009, is ok for me. Plus I have read some well-documented narratives of powerful Greek politicians of the past who were consistently using murderers or even whole bands of bandits for intimidating or eliminating their political opponents (unfortunately, in Greek only). I don't think there is/was a universal culture of constructing such an image of corrupted elite people, mostly I think this was a real phenomenon in most periods of human history (on the contrary, the image of the socially-sensitive robber is indeed a construction). But I admit that I do not know much on the subject. But it is due to your question that I started reading Bandits in the Roman Empire - Myth and reality. Thanks!--Dipa1965 (talk) 10:18, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

User group for Military Historians
Greetings,

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

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:29, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

April 2018 Milhist Backlog Drive
G'day all, please be advised that throughout April 2018 the Military history Wikiproject is running its annual backlog elimination drive. This will focus on several key areas:


 * tagging and assessing articles that fall within the project's scope
 * adding or improving listed resources on Milhist's task force pages
 * updating the open tasks template on Milhist's task force pages
 * creating articles that are listed as "requested" on the project's various lists of missing articles.

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

The drive is open to all Wikipedians, not just members of the Military history project, although only work on articles that fall (broadly) within the scope of military history will be considered eligible. This year, the Military history project would like to extend a specific welcome to members of WikiProject Women in Red, and we would like to encourage all participants to consider working on helping to improve our coverage of women in the military. This is not the sole focus of the edit-a-thon, though, and there are aspects that hopefully will appeal to pretty much everyone.

The drive starts at 00:01 UTC on 1 April and runs until 23:59 UTC on 30 April 2018. Those interested in participating can sign up here.

For the Milhist co-ordinators, AustralianRupert and MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:53, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Battle of Ctesiphon (363), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 6.3 ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Battle_of_Ctesiphon_%28363%29 check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Battle_of_Ctesiphon_%28363%29?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:32, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

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

The Bugle: Issue CXCIV, June 2022
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:42, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXCVI, July 2022
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 20:27, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXCVII, August 2022
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 08:58, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations opening soon
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are opening in a few hours (00:01 UTC on 1 September). A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:51, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election voting opening soon!
Voting for the upcoming project coordinator election opens in a few hours (00:01 UTC on 15 September) and will last through 23:59 on 28 September. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. Voting is conducted using simple approval voting and questions for the candidates are welcome. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:26, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Correction to previous election announcement
Just a quick correction to the prior message about the 2022 MILHIST coordinator election! I didn't proofread the message well enough and left out a link to the election page itself in this message. The voting will occur here; sorry about the need for a second message and the inadvertent omission from the prior one. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:41, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election voting closing soon
Voting for the upcoming project coordinator election closes soon, at 23:59 on 28 September. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. Voting is conducted using simple approval voting and questions for the candidates are welcome. The voting itself is occurring here If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:13, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXCVIII, September 2022
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 21:30, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXCVIII, October 2022
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:37, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXCIX, November 2022
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 10:31, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CC, December 2022
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:55, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 201, January 2023
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 19:44, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 202, February 2023
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:26, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 203, March 2023
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 21:28, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 204, April 2023
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 21:29, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 205, May 2023
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:34, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 205, May 2023
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 08:04, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 206, June 2023
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 18:29, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 207, July 2023
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 19:57, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 208, August 2023
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:28, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 209, September 2023
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 21:36, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 210, October 2023
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 19:25, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 211, November 2023
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 18:17, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 212, December 2023
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:59, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Voting for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2023 is now open!
Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2023! The the top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki. Cast your votes vote here and here respectively. Voting closes at 23:59 on 30 December 2023. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:55, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 213, January 2024
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 18:31, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 214, February 2024
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 19:08, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 215, March 2024
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:56, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 216, April 2024
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:08, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 217, May 2024
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 20:19, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 218, June 2024
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:42, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 219, July 2024
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:08, 13 July 2024 (UTC)