User talk:GELongstreet

Featured List
Thank you for the Award nomination. I have been working on getting the List of North Carolina militia units in the American Revolution approved as a Featured List. It is just about there. The process for getting approval has been a real learning experience how to improve a list or article. Have a happy new year. User:G._Moore talk  Talk to G Moore 22:07, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
 * You´re very welcome, I thought your work deserved that. Please continue with your history editing, and happy new year as well. ...GELongstreet (talk) 20:39, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Happy new year
Happy new year! Dorromikhal (talk) 00:25, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I hope you´ll have the same. ...GELongstreet (talk) 00:30, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Brazilian Military Ranks
I understand your frustration about this but I assure you that the ranks over there are wrong. I am Brazilian and I found this information wrong, so I edited the standard I found on Portuguese wikipedia. But I will find a way to include all the ranks there. A note: It is irrelevant to add the ranks of the Military Police and Fire Department, as it already has a page with this information and these are emergency services and are not part of the Armed Forces of Brazil. Augusto Mello (talk) 16:36, 20 March 2020 (UTC)And it makes no sense to place the equivalent ranks with the NATO code since Brazil is not part of that organization and the ranks have different values. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Augusto Mello (talk • contribs) 16:33, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The article for both title them as reserve and ancillary forces of the army which make them belong there, that there are other pages with said information doesn´t make it invalid. And the NATO codes do make sense, they are of a comparative nature which is why "equivalent" is written there. ...GELongstreet (talk) 16:56, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi
Hello, how is it going? Has editing gotten along lately? NatriumGedrogt (talk) 20:29, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Hey, I´m alright and corona-free (for now). Editing is going well and it has been a very very productive month here on WP with the March Madness event about to end in a few hours (lots of Dutch articles, too). Of course for me this means more tagging and editing than creating or writing articles (as usual), though today I began one of my rare articles (Gustav von Kessel). And how are you doing so far? ...GELongstreet (talk) 20:48, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Just after corona reached the Netherlands, I and my family had all the light symptoms so I hope that I’m immune but I suspect it was something else. Editing is going well once again, after I installed IOS update 13.3 my IPad glitched out every time I tried to edit so is was less active for a few moths. That seems to mostly be resolved and in the meantime in had time to become active of Historum. I’ve read something about March Madness but don’t fully understand what it is, a bunch of routine maintenance and requested article creation it seems? Have a good day, NatriumGedrogt (talk) 19:08, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Essentially, yes. Reducing editing work that accumulated over time, identifying and rating articles and perhaps even creating requested stuff. Always fun and as everything here on wiki free to be done to a degree onseself wants or not. The next event will come, probably in half a year or something like that. Stay safe ...GELongstreet (talk) 19:22, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Good work again - Twice; Congratulations and a Barnstar
Why twice? Because I missed the September 2019 edit-a-thon and just came across the page for it. So I add belated good work and congratulations for your work in that effort to my message. I looked at the project page a few times in Spring 2019, did not see a backlog reduction month and assumed there would not be another one until this Spring. I think I would have contributed at least a little work to the effort if I had not been oblivious. I will subscribe to the Bugle now rather than look at it sporadically, as I should have done some years ago! Donner60 (talk) 05:07, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much, Donner. I appreciate it a lot, especially as I`m not that tireless. You and I still have work for a lifetime and beyond ...GELongstreet (talk) 13:27, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

18th Pennsylvania Cavalry Regiment
Hello —Thank you for looking at 18th Pennsylvania Cavalry Regiment. I would eventually like to upgrade it. It appears the article needs some improvement on references and citations for B-class. Anything in particular that was problematic? Once that is fixed, is there anything obvious that needs to be improved for GA? Thanks, TwoScars (talk) 20:25, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I for one am very impressed by your work. The current rating is Bot-generated, and thus of course not perfect. I´m not sure what he considered missing a reference; maybe a section ending in just a note instead of a ref like with notes 4 and 9? I´ve done a few little tweaks but GA reviews are generally beyond my editing experience. However I think you already know the process, what could need improvement will likely be brought to light by the knowledgeable community once you request the respective review. ...GELongstreet (talk) 21:22, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your help. I put refs in front of notes 4 and 9. I'll let it sit for a while, then put it up for peer review while I'm working some other things. Maybe I can get it to GA by the end of the year. Cheers! TwoScars (talk) 20:05, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

10.5 cm leFH 16 Geschützwagen Mk VI 736 (e)
Thanks for your help with this little article. I put it up and then realized I did not have the umlaut in the title. Not good. I did not know how to fix that, so that was a big help. Also the article's talk page. I have made a few articles but I do not know how to go about creating a talk page. Done. You're doing good work. Thanks so much! Gunbirddriver (talk) 04:00, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * You´re welcome. Looking on your contributions you have done both page moves and talk page templates before so you´ll do fine. So thanks for writing about military history and please continue with your editing ...GELongstreet (talk) 09:36, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I did?! I really do not recall doing either. Certainly I could copy the article and create it again under a new title, but how would I move the article's edit history? I will take your word that I did, but someone must have talked me through it. Anyway, the important thing I wanted to convey is that I very much appreciate your help! Gunbirddriver (talk) 17:43, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * You can move an article (including talk page and everything) by using the "Move" button which should appear after hovering over the "More" button which should be diretly left of the search bar (more info at Moving a page). As for the talk page template of WikiProject Military History you´ll find all info on Template:WikiProject Military history. ...GELongstreet (talk) 17:58, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Ah, very good. Yes, that "Move" button feature sounds vaguely familiar. Okay, I am copying this stuff down. Thanks again. Gunbirddriver (talk) 08:14, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Nominations for the 2020 Military history WikiProject Newcomer and Historian of the Year awards now open
G'day all, the nominations for the 2020 Military history WikiProject newcomer and Historian of the Year are open, all editors are encouraged to nominate candidates for the awards before until 23:59 (GMT) on 15 December 2020, after which voting will occur for 14 days. There is not much time left to nominate worthy recipients, so get to it! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:45, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Siege of Olomouc
Hi GELongstreet, it appears that the user Johnson05678, whom you reverted is back on a new account Johnvan123. Are you going to open a WP:SPI? -- Ashley yoursmile!  17:40, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Hey, thanks for the revert. Just did so, right over here. ...GELongstreet (talk) 18:30, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
 * And added the two impersonator socks as well. ...GELongstreet (talk) 17:33, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * And another one ...GELongstreet (talk) 20:29, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * GELongstreet, thank you so much for reporting all the sock accounts. I'm appalled to see them using usernames to impersonate you and me. Its extremely annoying. -- Ashley yoursmile!  05:57, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
 * You´re welcome. Now we just have to hope the case soon gets a clerk to work on. ...GELongstreet (talk) 09:01, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho


Donner60 (talk) is wishing a foaming mug of Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding to your friends' talk pages.

Hello
Hello,

You reverted one of my edits on the battle of Rorke's drift. I changed ranks of the officers as they where wrong. After editing this it was changed and i was accused of vandalism. i believe otherwise and i would say it wasn't vandalism and i would like it changed back. I am appreciate your job as a editor for Wikipedia and i would like this to be flattened out.

Thank you, 19IQ (talk) 18:47, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, 19IQ. I´m glad your edits aren´t meant as vandalism. However that still leaves them to be the alternative: factually wrong. Both men served as Lieutenants at the time of the battle, the ranks you added where the highest-achieved ranks during their respective careers, not reached until years later. ...GELongstreet (talk) 18:58, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you 19IQ (talk) 19:07, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

List of Medal of Honor recipients for the Battle of the Wilderness
GELongstreet - Thank you for adding the project and task forces for List of Medal of Honor recipients for the Battle of the Wilderness. If I wanted to get it to AL, is there anything that quickly stands out as something that needs to be done to it? TwoScars (talk) 14:24, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
 * You´re welcome; and not even the slightest clue. ...GELongstreet (talk) 17:39, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for Lee/Fitzhugh
Many thanks for pointing out the family connection. Valetude (talk) 00:40, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
 * You´re welcome. ...GELongstreet (talk) 01:25, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Survey about History on Wikipedia
I am Petros Apostolopoulos, a Ph.D. candidate in Public History at North Carolina State University. My Ph.D. project examines how historical knowledge is produced on Wikipedia. You must be 18 years of age or older, reside in the United States to participate in this study. If you are interested in participating in my research study by offering your own experience of writing about history on Wikipedia, you can click on this link https://ncsu.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9z4wmR1cIp0qBH8. There are minimal risks involved in this research.

If you have any questions, please let me know. Petros Apostolopoulos, paposto@ncsu.edu Apolo1991 (talk) 17:30, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I´m not residing in the US so I guess I´m out. Meanwhile limiting your survey to the US will accordingly limit the results in regards to wikipedia as it is a thoroughly international community. ...GELongstreet (talk) 17:53, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you
GE Longstreet, Thank you for the spelling corrections to the SS and Police Leader article. Some were due to my carelessness and some were incorrect in my source document. Greatly appreciated. Regards. Historybuff0105 (talk) 19:32, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
 * You´re welcome. ...GELongstreet (talk) 19:37, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Sri Lankan Generals
, In Sri Lanka Major Generals are called generals, also lieutenant generals are called generals as Sri Lanka was a British colony. Please explain it further, why have you reverted my edits?

Please, see Category:Pakistani generals and Category:Indian generals where all persons in these categories are not full generals (four star generals/the rank above lieutenant general). MN Namiki (talk) 12:54, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I think I explained that to you very easily on your talkpage. That those subordinate categories have not been made for all countries doesn´t negate this. However I´ll not fight you over this as I don´t have the time for that. ...GELongstreet (talk) 14:14, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I must say I´m a little surprised at your course; re-reverting, commenting and immediately putting it to AN and then to the project. ...GELongstreet (talk) 15:04, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Generals categories
Partly spurred on by the above conversation, I'm thinking about splitting out Category:British Army generals. I haven't done anything with categories before, but assume it would just be a case of creating Category:British Army lieutenant generals and Category:British Army major generals, and moving some over to Category:British Army brigadiers (it's currently just for post-1928 brigadiers, but this could be expanded). What do you think? Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 18:05, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Basically that indeed is it. Just lots of work with so many articles. ...GELongstreet (talk) 18:33, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Lots of work, but probably worth it..! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 18:54, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Introduction and request for Advice
Hello. I am new to Wikipedia, and am focusing on revamping a lot of the OOBs for 1864 and 1865. I wondered if it is kosher to include unit strengths (with sources cited) in the OOBs for regiments, brigades, and divisions? I've included some for the Cedar Creek, Wilderness, New Market, and Piedmont Confederate OOBs, though a user not part of the ACW task force keeps trying to undo them. ThoughtfulPug (talk) 19:16, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Task forces switched
I noticed that you switched in  "Wikiproject Military History |Biography" the taskforce "South-East Asia" to "Napoleonic" I have no objection to adding the Napoleonic label, but why deleting the "South-East Asia" label? Undoubtedly Ver Huell played a role in Indonesian military history, even if he wasn't born there, and even if it was a "nefarious" role. Ereunetes (talk) 17:06, 17 March 2023 (UTC)


 * The geographical task forces in biography pages are usually tied to the present or historically/geographically corresponding nations the respective person served, and aren't included for simply being the locations said person served at for a time. As in his case Dutch automatically adding the European task force, not the East-Asian one. I am not hell-bent to leave it out though, colonial ties make things complicated. ...GELongstreet (talk) 00:11, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Please put it back in then. The Dutch colonial wars in present-day Indonesia are an important subject for the military history of both countries. I think colonial ties make it not only complicated but interesting. I also noticed that this historical era (the early days of the Indies, not as a colony of the VOC, but of the Dutch state (Batavian Republic and Kingdom of the Netherlands) is rather underdeveloped in the English Wikipedia, so there is more to come. Ereunetes (talk) 19:58, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Rating of Alexandre Charles Joseph Ghislain d'Aubremé
Could you please explain the assessment of the Alexandre Charles Joseph Ghislain d'Aubremé article? Specifically what is wrong with the references and the lede/"scope"? Ereunetes (talk) 20:01, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Hey, sorry for the delayed answer, wasn't much around over the last weeks. Remember that the assessment was automatically done by a bot so I can only guess. Not sure about the scope at all, though I'd probably try to reform the lead section into several sentences. As for the missing references I assume this could be triggered by the notes that don't contain own references. As said it is a bot assessment, which still are a bit rough. If you write a new (military history) article, or considerably improve/expand an existing one, and would like an assessment by a human being you can always request that at WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Requests ...GELongstreet (talk) 00:45, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I had't even noticed that the lede was one long sentence :-) I have now cut the sentence in three. As to the notes without references: two of them are comments with no need for references. The last one contains three references. That leaves only the note about William I being the Governor-General of the Austrian Netherlands at the time he appointed d'Aubreme military governor of Mons. But the wikilinks should cover that (see for instance William I of the Netherlands), and Sovereign Principality of the United Netherlands). I think you should update your bot, because it has become something like a blunt instrument. Please try it again to see if the change in the lede makes a difference. Ereunetes (talk) 19:11, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I am not involved in the operation or coding of the bot. ...GELongstreet (talk) 19:13, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for invariably improving content, and more importantly, sourcing on enwiki's ACW content. You're a credit to the site, and we're lucky to have you. jengod (talk) 18:38, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
 * You're very welcome, and thanks for the praise. I'm not very good with sourcing or new sites but I help when getting motivated by having e.g. your new articles to work on. ...GELongstreet (talk) 20:13, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for catching my mistake on the edit to List of American Civil War generals (Union). I did indeed delete the wrong Ramsey. You did some work on this list article in the past. I am removing brevet generals who were not full, substantive grade generals and whose names are on the brevet general list. You were doing this in 2016. I just happened by the talk pages tonight. I noticed some comments from Spacini and you from 2016. I have been replying to some old and new posts on the page and planned to write a note to let you know I was following up as one of those replies.

The main list was written (not by me) before the brevet general list. The stated reason for including some prominent brevet generals from the outset was the supposition that the brevet generals list did not exist and might not be written. (I wrote the initial brevet general list about 10 years ago.) I just rewrote the introduction to the substantive grade list to remove the statement about including brevet generals and to indicate that they belong on another list. I have even found some "might have beens" in the list. These are mostly the never confirmed posthumous appointments but there are at least a couple of very odd cases. My default, like yours, is to include them on one of the lists, at least if the officers are listed by the Official Memorandum, Warner or Eicher. Explanatory footnotes or comments in the last box on the lines for each general should cover the reasons for including any apparent exceptions to the full commissioning process.

The number of brevet or might have been entries has continued to increase so some time needs to be taken to clean up the article. I won't ask you to watch the article to a greater extent than you already may do. I will let you know when I am finished so that you can correct or let me know of any mistakes or any changes that should be discussed because I think someone knowledgeable should check on this. I think not all of it may be straightforward.

I also need to rewrite and probably prune the introductory sections to the brevet general list and add a few citations - a project for later.

Glad to see you still working on ACW articles. Thanks again. Donner60 (talk) 06:41, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

List of American Civil War generals (Union)
I have finished deleting the brevet generals from this list, checking that they are listed on the brevet generals list and in one or two instances transferring the listing. I have kept, with notes, the officers who were not confirmed but are listed as generals in various sources and are not on the brevet list. I will be working on the text in the brevet list article as I have time. Thanks for looking at these. Please let me know if you see something that needs to be changed. Donner60 (talk) 08:56, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:41, 28 November 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) 23:56, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the drive!
Welcome, welcome, welcome GELongstreet! I'm glad that you are joining the drive! Please, have a cup of WikiTea, and go cite some articles. CactiStaccingCrane (talk)18:51, 1 February 2024 UTC //en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:GELongstreet&action=purge refresh via JWB and Geardona (talk to me?)

Disambiguation link notification for May 15
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Isaac F. Shepard, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 3rd Missouri Infantry Regiment.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 15 May 2024 (UTC)