User talk:ERcheck/Archive 2

This is Archive 2 of my talk page. It is archived using the Cut-and-Paste method.

Below the line, you will find the talk portion of the page from April 2006 through May 30, 2006. (May 31 discussions contain threads that moved forward into June, and thus will be included in the June/July Archive.

Diva (software)
I have no strong feelings, but given that I provided a bit more information, you may want to re-evaluate Articles for deletion/Diva (software). Either way, take care! -Harmil 03:30, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Re: Operation Iraqi Freedom AfD
I've commented there. Our existing convention is to redirect to the relevant war/battle articles in cases where they exist, since operational codenames are usually poor article titles. Kirill Lok s h in 01:28, 4 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Part of the problem, of course, is that Enduring Freedom is technically still ongoing, so it's difficult to sum it up as the "War of Foo" or "Invasion of Bar". Thus, it gets its own article (for the time being, anyways).  Iraqi Freedom, on the other hand, has concluded, so it's a bit easier to determine its scope. Kirill Lok s  h in 01:44, 4 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Just a point...OIF is not over and is still ongoing. All US personnel deploying to Iraq still do so under Operation Iraqi Freedom.  It is ongoing just like Enduring Freedom.--Looper5920 11:19, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Dyess
Thanks for bringing Dyess to our attention, that he's an Eagle Scout and MOH recipient. I've updated the four articles on the men this applies to accordingly. Rlevse 15:27, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Re: Robert Brooks (congressman)
ther original Robert Brooks article was twofold, combining the football player and the congressman. I split the article into separate articles. Upon further research, Brooks is in fact a State Representative rather than a congressman, so I will probably request a deletion over him being non-notable. Thanks for pointing that out though. --Wizardman 23:31, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, he is not even a state representative - rather a candidate. &mdash;ERcheck @ 23:59, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Portal Bio
Since you have the most vis on the USMC bios it might be better for you to update that portion of the Portal. Ira Hayes has been there awhile. If this is an issue let me know but with the amount of articles you have thrown together recently I figured you would have better vis on the good ones. --Looper5920 11:17, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry for dropping the ball recently. I needed to take a break from the USMC articles. To much Hoorah in a 2 month period and just got burned out for a bit.  I have been spending some time sorting stubs and doing touch-up work.  I have a trip for work coming up in a week so I hope to reengage tomorrow or the next day on USMC articles and get some quality edits and finish up loose ends before I go away.  I won't have access for the last 2 weeks of the month.  I guess for that time the portal will be all you.  Just wanted to give you a heads up. Take it easy--Looper5920 10:14, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

James Webb disambiguation page
Per Manual of Style (disambiguation pages), disambiguation pages shouldn't contain any extraneous links (i.e. links that don't disambiguate the topic), and also they shouldn't have the disambiguation link piped. Also, "Entries should nearly always be sentence fragments. When the entry forms a complete sentence, do not include commas or periods at the end of the line." --rogerd 03:15, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:MoH.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:MoH.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 04:05, 22 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Licensing tag -- PD-USGov-Military-Award -- added. Image had just been uploaded at 03:51, April 22, 2006 (UTC) - was looking for correct tagging in tag list. &mdash;ERcheck @ 04:08, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about deletion
Sorry about deletion. There are not very many people who contribute to Smedley Butler, when they do there changes are minor, and they never come back again. I have no problem with the medal of honor medal, just maybe putting it somewhere else in the infobox. What do you think? Sorry if I offended you--you can keep it in the same place, if you insist, but I suggest moving it somewhere else in the infobox.

I apologize if I offended you. Like I said, most people make one minor change to this wikipage, and move on. Since making major changes and adding extensive footnotes a few months ago, which was praised on the talk page, I simply just mindlessly monitor the page to make sure their is correct info, and no vandalism.Travb 00:48, 25 April 2006 (UTC)


 * The picture itself looks better, but a tiy picture next to a larger picture simply looks terrible. Give me a second and let me see if I can tweak the box.Travb 01:26, 25 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Check out my unorthodox solution on Smedley Butler, now if you can just program the infobox this way, (hopefully, if you like the change) we would all be happy. Visually setting a smaller picture next to a largerer picture looks bad.


 * Even if the medal was the same size as Smedley Butler this would be the first info box I have ever seen which has two photos side by side, I think visually, it is much better to have your wonderful medal down in the medal's section, as per the new Smedley Butler page--what do you think?


 * I apprecaite you changing the color--the medal looks much better now, but my comment was not in regards to the actual image, but the location of the image.Travb 01:44, 25 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I like Hershel's better. But it is your call. I really don't care, and I obviously care less than you do.  Far be it from me to stiffle your artistic flair ;-) .Travb 01:46, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Re: Infobox conversion
Great work on converting the infoboxes; I'm very grateful for your help. One minor request, if I may: if you're leaving notes about the conversion on the article talk pages anyway, could you perhps add WPMILHIST and WPMILHIST British military history task force there as well? Kirill Lok s h in 02:16, 28 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks! Don't substitute them, though; those templates don't change very frequently, but they do change. Kirill Lok s  h in 02:28, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Robert G. Robinson
GREAT article! Good job...hope to see more like it soon. Jmlk17 07:03, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Memorial High School disambig article
I noticed you added a "Memorial High School (Houston, Texas)" to that list.

The problem is it is the exact same school as the "Memorial High School (Hedwig Village, Texas)" - You see, the school is not located in Houston but it has a Houston postal address. WhisperToMe 16:54, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject Newsletter - Issue II
The April 2006 issue of the project newsletter is now out. You may read this issue or change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you by following the link. Thanks. Kirill Lok s h in 18:37, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

User page
I like your quote from Einstein. Wallie 18:03, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

New MOH category
I'll start from the Z's if you want to start from the A's??--Looper5920 04:38, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me. I put the first entry in as Dan Daly.  Semper Fi! &mdash;ERcheck @ 04:42, 9 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Re: Robert Edward Femoyer Though I'm familiar with how you've set up your MOH cats, I want to point out that Femoyer was in the Army Air Corps, not the Army. It's always been my understanding (I used to hunt MOH imposters) that Air Corps MOH recipients fall under the Air Force, not the Army, for this purpose.  Please advise. Rlevse 23:17, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Sure, I'm just trying to help..
 * https://www.airforcehistory.hq.af.mil/PopTopics/MOH.htm
 * http://www.afa.org/magazine/valor/valormoh.asp
 * Note, some Army sites claim the AF ones as "Army" but also generally list them separately aside from the regular Army ones as "Air Service" for WWI, "Army Air Corps/Force" for WWII. So, there is some inter-service rivalry here. Now, if you're talking the USAF-specific design of the MOH that came out in 1960, then of course you're only talking Vietnam era recipients. When I had my MOH web site, I listed pre-1960 ones as Air Force category, not Army ones as, after all, they were aerial combat, not Army.  FYI, I'm not AF, I was in the Navy, so I have no bone to pick here-;) Rlevse 23:38, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


 * To me, saying the USAAF was part of the Army is like saying the USMC is part of the Navy (it's not, it's part of the Dept. of the Navy). This situation is similar, yet we don't say Marines in WWI are credited with being Navy MOH recipients.  A case can be made for either side, but I'd go with putting WWI/WWII USAAF/USAAC recipients in with the Air Force.  It's up to you as you're working those categories.  Just please let me know what you decide. Rlevse 01:40, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

USMC Portal help
Someone has decided our portal deserves to be deleted. Could use your vote here. If there are others you know that can give us a vote please put the word out. --Looper5920 11:20, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I voted to keep the USMC portal. Rlevse 11:42, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Re: Question on task force templates
Yep, that's right. Due to the way the main WPMILHIST template automatically adds categories, it can't be used inside of a category page without causing problems; so we're using catwikiproject there instead. Hope that helps! Kirill Lok s h in 23:59, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Re: Discussion location
I think the main peer review page would be fine; I don't think I've ever seen peer review talk pages actually used. Kirill Lok s h in 01:23, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Re:Segarra
Thanks for writing. I will look into it and get back to you. I would like to know if he is only the first Hispanic Master Gunney within his MOS or the Corps. I asked Looper to wait a least a week before recommending it for deletion. Tony the Marine 00:54, 16 May 2006 (UTC)


 * ERcheck, how are you? I may be wrong in my response but, this is what I posted in Frankie Segarra's talk page:

''"I must admit that as author of the article, I made a mistake. Looper pointed out that there must have been a Hispanic Master Guns before Segarra and after further investigation I discovered that he is right.  Before Segarra there was a Mexican National, Master Gunnery Sergeant Guadalupe Denogean, who served and was wounded in Iraq.  Segarra however, was the first Puerto Rican Master Gunnery Sergeant. not only in his MOS but, in the Corps.  I believe that the recommendation of the deletion of the article should be reconsidered.  Segarra is notable to millions of Puerto Ricans (he's important enough to be featured in the local papers) and to the Hispanic community in Wikipedia.  What I'm trying to point out is that Segarra's accomplishments within the Corps may well serve as a motivational factor to our young ones in the military, especially those of Hispanic heritage who may have access to the "Pedia" and who may not know that the United States had Hispanic military heroes. When I was in the Corps, I didn't even know that there once was a Marine Lt. General Pedro Del Valle (Whose article I wrote), had I known, I may have continued my career in the military. I therefore, believe that being the first Puerto Rican Master Gun and being featured in the press makes Segarra notable."'' What do you think? Tony the Marine 03:45, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Jennygrl34
damn yer fast... LOL - Adolphus79 01:16, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Most seems to be reverted, see Special:Contributions/Jennygrl34. The user currently tries to be nice after attacking me. Let's see how this ends. Thank you for fighting vandalism, Kusma (討論) 01:49, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for the imput. I posted most of your rewording in the article because I couldn't have done it better. I also included a quote by Segarra. I don't know maybe he isn't notable enough but, I still think that he maybe a source of inspiration to others. On the edit summary I credited you with the idea of rewording it. You're an O.K. guy and it's a pleasure to interact with you. Semper Fi Tony the Marine 05:30, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

(P.S. If you want to reword it furter, please do.)

Marine Barnstar
ERcheck, please accept this "Marine" Barnstar in recognition of your tireless dedication to Marine Corps related articles. You are truly one of the few. Tony the Marine-

Michael Hagee
Quite welcome. Tbjablin 01:26, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

A thanks
ERcheck, thanks for the welcome! Raizer 05:24, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Re: Question on process for restoring blanked material
Easiest way (assuming that the other material isn't valuable) would be to simply rewrite the article to be about the band. If the other material is valuable and going to be retained, then you can just create Fashionista (band) with an edit summary like "Split out material from Fashionista" and copy the material from the history into it. Hope that helps! Kirill Lokshin 12:42, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Coker
We recently crossed on the MOH and portal issues. I saw your edits to Coker's article. I personally know him as we're both involved in Scouts in Virginia Beach. I am the one who nominated him for the DESA and also presented it to him last year. He's a great man and very humble and quiet about his wartime experiences. Rlevse 01:14, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi: Let's use your page for this thread (I have a watch on it), that way we're not jumping back and forth. Yes, I think your additions are positive. I drafted the Coker article and put it up for DYK, which it made. I just moved the photo on top of the info box and the portal tag to the bottom. The portal tag should be on the bottom. The question is: does it look better with the photo or box on top. Let me know what you think. I'll ask George about a military photo and permission to use it. Rlevse 10:16, 24 May 2006 (UTC)


 * George says this is okay. I should get this done by Fri, maybe even today, Wed. Rlevse 14:09, 24 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I've put up George's photo, taken just after his POW release. I played around with photo and info box layout.  When I had the box near the top, it leaves a big blank spot on the left, so I moved it to the military section.  Feel free to test alternate layouts from the way I left it.  Rlevse 01:01, 25 May 2006 (UTC)


 * This makes a nice addition. From the point of view of Wikipedia notabiity, his military service and heroic action are most notable.  With that in mind, my first thought is that the military info box should be on top (see John Ripley (USMC) for example).  The other photos would then go in the corresponding sections of the article.  See my example in my sandbox.  What do you think?


 * Completing the photos &mdash; (1) it would be nice to have an "official" photo, perhaps taken early in his Navy career to go in the military infobox image section; and (2) perhaps one with his Navy Cross (to go alongside the citation). If he has a single photo with the Navy cross, it could go in the infobox.
 * There is a sensitivity to his privacy, so I wouldn't want to ask for / add anything that Commander Coker would feel intrusive on his privacy.
 * &mdash;ERcheck @ 01:31, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I added the only other military photo I have of him, he says it's okay. I like the layout better now, but the intro, personal, and Scouting sections could use some fill in for the white spaces, which I filled in a little. Rlevse 02:28, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Everyone here in Scouts that know of George and his war experiences is in awe of him. But, he's so humble and quiet about it, most don't know it. He rarely talks about the war. I once asked him if he thought some of our guys were kept there and he said some say yes, and some no; he didn't want to say one way or the other. Now, it is a proven fact the Soviets kept some of our guys after WWII and Korea. My guess a least a few were kept after Vietnam. George is quite a guy. Rlevse 02:34, 25 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I am honored to learn of him. I don't want to overstep here, but, I expanded the introduction to include dates and location of his capture/captivity; and that he continued to serve in the Navy after his release.  &mdash;ERcheck @ 02:46, 25 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks. We work well together, I don't mind you adding to the article. The article is much nicer now due to our combined efforts. Rlevse 10:05, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Chat
Thanks for the message. I checked out the article and sounds, great! This weekend is a time to think about and remember all the heroes that have given their lives for our great country and for what we stand for. May the lord bless you and your loved ones always. Tony the Marine 00:50, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

(P.S. I'm down with the flu, so could you do me a favor and sign me up for the "newsletter"? I would like to receive it.  Thanks.)


 * Thanks for the prayers. I think that a link will be O.K.  Semper Fi Tony the Marine 02:14, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Chat (2)
Wow. I'd hardly edited the Shinseki piece, and there you go and clean it all up so shipshape, right off the bat.

That was my first edit ever on Wikipedia, and while I did put some time into it, you've spurred me on to tackle the next one harder yet, to try to get the polished, professional look you've given Eric Shinseki

Thanks for the effort and education, and have a great weekend.

Dgf77 16:40, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Military history Collaboration of the Fortnight
You supported Battle of Wake Island, which has been selected as the Military history WikiProject's new Collaboration of the Fortnight. Please help improve this article to featured article standards. Kirill Lokshin 02:38, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for the portal update, it is great. I'm feeling much better now, thank you. To tell you the truth, I got the idea of posting the Corps hymn from you. Here, I want to share this with you, the person who I am glad to have befriended:


 * 1) When I met Hall of Fame pitcher Tom Seaver, we hit it off since he is a former Marine. He signed everything I had including a 30+ year old picture of me in my Marine uniform holding a copy of the Daily News declaring the N.Y. Mets World Champs. He even wrote his serial number.

Semper Fi Tony the Marine 00:59, 30 May 2006 (UTC)