User talk:Eurocopter/Archive 8

Another try, part deux
Sure. I think instead we should shoot a bit lower, like GA status instead. I'm concerned that the FAC is too high of a bar for us to pass with such a long article. I'm not sure that there's been any significant change since the first FAC, except a splitting up of the post WWII section that I did between Europe and Asia. It's not really that good (the splitting up part), but it helps. There's a good piece of the Joseph Stalin article that I like that does a better summary and is more neutral about the Soviet geo-political viewpoint, regarding just the post-WWII part. Another thing is that there's sooooo many different viewpoints that finding enough agreement will be difficult. I'm not opposed to trying, but I think taking smaller steps will be the better course. Hires an editor (talk) 20:23, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey. I'm surprised you withdrew the FAC...what was the rationale? I see that you took your name out of the maintainership section of the discussion page. I hope that everything is okay with you. Hires an editor (talk) 22:54, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on September 14! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:07, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Cold War
Hi, Eurocopter tigre,

Thanks for your message. I'll look over Cold War later today. By the way, nice article! Best, twelsht (talk) 16:15, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I have presented an argument in favour of substantive rewrites at User_talk:Dhatfield. I guess you have it watchlisted, but just in case. Dhatfield (talk) 14:46, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXX (August 2008)
The August 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:01, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: assessment of SS West Caruth
I don't want to clutter up the assessment page, so I'll ask here: What, in your opinion, would get SS West Caruth to a B-class rating? For criterion 2, as to completeness, there's nothing more from reliable sources that can reasonably be found about the ship (and I'm assuming that it was not marked "no" for inaccuracies). As for criterion five, it contains an infobox, but I've found no images of the ship. Thanks in advance. — Bellhalla (talk) 19:39, 9 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the good suggestion for using an image of a similar ship. I've added one of a sister ship from the same shipyard to the article. As to the gaps in the record, I suppose if I spoke Italian or Japanese, I might have some more success. Oh, well. — Bellhalla (talk) 22:46, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Operation Epsom
I have to protest very strongly here, but what are playing at claiming one authors work as someone elses? Several citations were added in by myself from a Lt-Col Jackson work, who you removed and replaced his name with Montgomerys while keeping the page numbers from Jacksons work! That is just not on and i have reverted those edits.--EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 18:29, 15 September 2008 (UTC) All a misunderstanding--EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 11:58, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The September 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fourteen candidates. Please vote here by September 30! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:55, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Battle of Berlin
My reason for reverting the introduction was because the additions were only describing the Battle in Berlin not the whole strategic operation that is usually called the Battle of Berlin. For example the dates given were 20 Apr to 2 May, not 16 Apr to the end of the war. To fix it would have taken more time than I want to devote to the article. Probably the easiest approach to writing the introduction would be write one or two sentences on each of the major sections, so that one to four short paragraphs describes the article. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 13:22, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Regarding WP:MILHIST coord. Election
Hi, I noticed you left several supports as "a small encouragement :)", please stop doing this. It is just plainly unrighteous to make someone feel diminished like that, and could be considered a violation of BITE. Consider yourself warned... :) &mdash; §unday  { Q } 20:52, 18 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I certainly can't speak for Eurocopter, but I assumed good faith and took what he/she wrote at face value—as "an encouragement". Compared to some of the other candidates, the ones that received those support comments, while potentially great contributors to the project, are perhaps a little less experienced than some of the others receiving votes. Nothing would be more discouraging to me than to receive no votes at all. Unless there's some joke of yours I'm not in on, I think your warning is misdirected. — Bellhalla (talk) 05:52, 19 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks Bellhala for your response, it was certainly welcome as I was away this weekend. So, no offense Sunday, but those are quite inexperienced editors who received my vote not because they would be appropiate for this position, but rather as an encouragement - in order to encourage them to participate in future elections (as they should gather experience in such time if really interested in this project). All the best, --Eurocopter (talk) 14:46, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
 * No offense taken, notice the smiley face. &mdash; Sunday   | Speak  21:49, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

PT-76s in RGF
What's your source for only being used in the Naval Infantry? IISS MilBal 2008 says 150 in service with the RGF. Buckshot06(prof) 15:13, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
 * It's warfare.ru again - link: http://warfare.ru/?lang=&catid=244&linkid=1773. They state that the marines are using only 30 PT-76s left. --Eurocopter (talk) 15:33, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
 * With your agreement, I will readd the note, and say specifically that sources disagree: IISS: 150; Warfare.ru: only Naval Infantry. Is that OK? Buckshot06(prof) 15:48, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok, if you think IISS is up-to-date, no problem then. --Eurocopter (talk) 15:51, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Re Epsom copyedit
Will do, as soon as I'm finished with my current copyedit ;) All the best, EyeSerene talk 09:48, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

question
I posed a question at the Weaponry task force talk page, but since I haven't gotten a response, I thought I'd ask the coordinator directly. Abbreviated: I have some inside knowledge of a new weapon in USMC inventories, but no public references. Would it be improper for me to create an article referencing documents that the public, and thus average reader, has no access to? I'm leaning in that direction, and thinking about just waiting until the public picks up on this new rifle; but I have a wealth of information just begging me to post it, and I fear the temptation might soon overcome me.  bahamut0013 ♠  ♣   17:09, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXI (September 2008)
The September 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:31, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Botoşani
OK, have a look here: Talk:Uman–Botoshany Offensive. Biruitorul Talk 22:19, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I've done so, and I promise to reply very soon. Best, Biruitorul Talk 00:41, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Rollback
Also see the discussion at WT:MHCOORD. -MBK004 04:18, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Image permission problem with Image:Su-25K.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Su-25K.jpg I noticed that that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the image (or other media file) agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the GFDL or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org permissions-en@wikimedia.org], stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the image to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the image has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org permissions-en@wikimedia.org].

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the image's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Images lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MilborneOne (talk) 17:40, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Image permission problem with Image:PeruSu-25.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:PeruSu-25.jpg I noticed that that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the image (or other media file) agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the GFDL or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org permissions-en@wikimedia.org], stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the image to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the image has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org permissions-en@wikimedia.org].

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the image's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Images lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MilborneOne (talk) 17:53, 2 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the message, I have no problem about the the emails they just need to be fed into the OTRS system which just makes the permission problem go away. The procedure is at WP:COPYREQ. MilborneOne (talk) 20:59, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Articlehistory
When editing articlehistory, please scroll to the bottom of the article talk page to see if the red error category is lit up. Instructions are at Template:Articlehistory. Thanks! Sandy Georgia (Talk) 23:29, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Battle of Berlin
Please see Talk:Battle_of_Berlin --PBS (talk) 14:23, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Russian submarines
I am trying to achieve consistency and raised it at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ships. Kittybrewster  &#9742;  17:59, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Image permission problem with Image:MacSu-25.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:MacSu-25.jpg I noticed that that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the image (or other media file) agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the GFDL or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org permissions-en@wikimedia.org], stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the image to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the image has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org permissions-en@wikimedia.org].

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the image's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Images lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MilborneOne (talk) 20:34, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXII (October 2008)
The October 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:52, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Goodwood
"Though it was expected to be costly in terms of tanks and crews, Dempsey had high hopes of a breakthrough.(Williams, p. 161)"

Hi there, i know you own this book by Williams. Is it possible that you can double check what he has wrote on page 161 about Goodwood in regards to Dempsey having high hopes for a breakthrough; does he deffo use that word?

Cheers--EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 21:20, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:A-380.2.jpg
A tag has been placed on Image:A-380.2.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on  explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Soundvisions1 (talk) 20:22, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:A-380.3.jpg
A tag has been placed on Image:A-380.3.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on  explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Soundvisions1 (talk) 20:23, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:A-380.4.jpg
A tag has been placed on Image:A-380.4.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on  explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Soundvisions1 (talk) 20:24, 17 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)

Romanian generals notability
Hi. May I ask you to weigh in on this discussion? Thanks a lot. -- Biruitorul Talk 06:31, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Articlehistory errors
Just a note, when you finish building an articlehistory, you can scroll to the bottom of the talk page to see if the red articlehistory error category is lit. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 22:56, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Special Forces Club
I see from the Wiki Military History pages that an entry for the Special Forces Club in London is required. I'm putting together an entry on this subject and will post it online soon. --KizzyB (talk) 01:10, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIII (November 2008)
The November 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 16:23, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Re Operation Cobra
I'm a little busy at the moment, but I'll try to take a look as soon as I can. All the best, EyeSerene talk 08:20, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Zanzibar Revolution ACR
Hi Eurocopter, I was going through the A-Class reviews when I spotted that the above had been passed by you a few hours previously, but not removed from the review page. Having a bit of a look around, I also saw that you had forgotten to remove the review from the announcements, move it to the archive page, update the article's rating on the talk page, etc. I have taken the initiative and done most of these, but as I am not a Coordinator I did not feel right about updating the project ratings on the talk page or the article's history. When you are able, would you be able to do this please? Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 23:01, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Ahh, I figured there must be a reason as you always seem to be pretty efficient when it comes to closing the A-Class reviews. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 22:35, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Su-25T5.jpg
Hi there. This image which you uploaded here and was subsequently transferred to Commons is up for deletion there. Did you, or do you have an email from the photographer confirming the license status of the image which you could submit to OTRS. Thanks for your help. Adambro (talk) 17:51, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

USAF portal
Hey, ERcheck and I noticed that the USAF portal hasn't been maintained in a while. I woas hoping that you, as one of the aviation coodinators, could help to rally some editors to take up the monthly updates. See Portal talk:United States Air Force and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/United States military history task force.  bahamut0013 ♠  ♣   19:00, 23 December 2008 (UTC)