User talk:Kirk!/Archive1

Hi - welcome to Wikipedia!

Midshipman
I'm currently reviewing Midshipman and would ask you to do the suggested improvements. Wandalstouring (talk) 09:19, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry if my restructuring of the Midshipman article didn't meet your goals. What did you have in mind when you put the copyedit tag on that article? I felt restructuring might improve cohesion of the article. I spent 4 years as an NROTC midshipman in the 1960s and then taught at an NROTC unit for 3 years in the 1970s. I perceive the present article as larger than it should be because it attempts to cover the international subject of naval officer apprenticeship and training rather than focusing on history of the midshipman concept as it has evolved within the Royal Navy and English-speaking countries. I might suggest leading off with the Royal Navy history of the term and then having individual sections for each of the major navies using the term midshipman. The sequencing of subsequent sections might follow the sequence of independent divergent actions by those countries, so the United States section including 19th century changes to a naval academy would precede the Canadian section including the 20th century combined forces concept. A final section might include a short summary or list of practices of other naval officer apprenticeship programs (like naval cadet and officer candidate programs) emphasizing links to other articles -- either by nation (like Soviet Navy) or program (like Officer Candidate School) -- with appropriate transfer of text to those articles. ...but those were just my thoughts and I would defer to your preferences in view of your efforts on this article. Thewellman (talk) 15:13, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Midshipman New Zealand
Hi, I've corrected your page Midshipman page. A guy at the NZ Navy museum told me that NZ Navel Offers get their commissions when they become Ensigns, not Lieutenants —Preceding unsigned comment added by Steven.phoenix99 (talk • contribs) 10:16, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Ping. Are you providing the missing sources or removing the unsourced material, so I can make it pass GA? Wandalstouring (talk) 11:27, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The rules require that all images have captions. I put citation tags on them. you don't have to cite, but write what the image shows. Wandalstouring (talk) 18:52, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, can't help, as I don't speak Dutch. Regards. Chwyatt (talk) 12:35, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to WP:MILHIST!
 Hi, 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 style guide that covers 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 and copy-editing alerts.
 * The project has a stress hotline available for your use.

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! — Ed 17  (Talk /  Contribs)  17:30, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

History of the U.S. Navy
Never looked at the article before now, I thought this would be an excellent article by now but actually it's pretty basic isn't it?

Unfortunately I have neither the time nor the resources to contribute much to this article ATM, my own knowledge of the subject area is actually pretty shallow, although I am gradually building upon it. I do have a good book on the navy's history I haven't got around to reading yet.

I will certainly bear in mind your request, but with so many projects currently in hand, it might be a while before I can contribute anything useful. Sorry I can't be of more assistance right now, but thankyou for the invitation. Gatoclass (talk) 20:55, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

ACR notice

 * Hi, I'm sorry to say that unfortunately I had to fail Midshipman's A-Class review, as it was open for more than one month and did not have any activity in the past ten days. However, I took a quick look through the article and I have to say it is quite good and encourage you to submit it for a new ACR as soon as you'll make any necessary fixes (I was even surprised that it hadn't got any supports). The article seems quite important within its topic as well. Good luck and best regards, --Eurocopter (talk) 20:03, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Boarding axe
Did you have permission to take text from that webpage wholesale?Geni 17:04, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVIII (April 2009)
The April 2009 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) 23:31, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Surgeon's mate
Hello! there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath and respond there as soon as possible.

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XXXIX (May 2009)
The May 2009 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) 03:10, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Royal Australian Navy minesweeping after World War II
Hi, Thanks for your review of this article. I've just added an infobox and an image as you suggested - is this sufficient for it to reach B class? Nick-D (talk) 23:18, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that, and thanks again for your original review. Nick-D (talk) 07:34, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Midshipman request
I'm very sorry, but my current schedule will not allow me to take on any additional Workipedia right now. Good luck with the article, though! Scartol •  Tok  22:07, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XL (June 2009)
The June 2009 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) 23:00, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Acting and Sub-Lieutenant articles
Hey! Just saw some changes - I changed the acting example back to master seaman since that is very common in the Canadian Navy. Though I appreciate that you've never come across it, I think that that's a great example to use since it is simple and illustrates the point. Since we already have the acting SLt example, I figured we needed a non-officer one also. I do have a question though - I saw the removal of caps for the acting subby and others in the subby article - is there a reference for that? I didn't change it because I was unsure myself but what is the rules regarding this? My sussing was that since they were all part of a title they'd have to be all capitalized but not sure. Any official insight?--Cpt ricard (talk) 17:58, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acting_%28rank%29#Addressing - added a section I think you removed due to the caps thing. What I was trying to point out was that the rank of A/SLt is addressed differently depending on whether or not it's addressed orally.  Hope that it's clearer now.  BUT!->I'm having a bit of a problem linking the sub lieutenant in the doc - it seems to only want to link if it's capitalized.  Any fixes?--Cpt ricard (talk) 21:42, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Para class DYN
I expanded Pará class destroyer with refs to meet the DYK criteria. It was interesting to learn a bit about the Brazilian Navy but warships aren't my area, so please will you check it to make sure I've got it right? Thanks Thruxton (talk) 19:53, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you so much for starting to review nominations! Hopefully the good karma you earn from that will mean lots of reviewers leave insightful comments on your nomination as well :) Good luck! Karanacs (talk) 19:59, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
— Ed   (talk  •  contribs)  22:27, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Michman
Hi. In short, according to the Russian Wikipedia ru:Мичман: in the Russian fleet it was first introduced in 1716 as NCO rank (I'm not expert on comparing military ranks, I mean here a corps of under-oficer ranks - in Russian унтер-офицер, in Polish "podoficer"). In 1732 to 1917 (apart from 1751—1758, when michman was NCO again) it was the first officer rank. It was given to garde-marines (Rus. гардемарин, probably equivalent of officer cadet) who pass theoretical and practical exams. From 1917 or 1918 it was probably canceled, though it is not put clear in article. In the Soviet period, michman rank was returned on 30 November 1940 as "a higher rank of Starshinas" and it lasted until 1972. With introduction of Praporshchiks and michmans in 1972, michmans became a separate category of naval ranks, higher, than chief naval starshinas. They have status close to junior officers (in article ru:Главный корабельный старшина you can read "Glavny korablenny starshina (chief naval starshina) was introduced to the Navy on 18 Nov. 1971. By that time, analogical rank with analogical insignia, was michman"). Pibwl &larr;&laquo; 23:54, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

MILHIST review archivals
I believe I have told you this before, but I'll do it again. When you want to archive a MILHIST review, PLEASE notify a coordinator and we will do it. Your recent archival of the peer review for Midshipman did not require any page moves. It will take me 15 minutes to fix a mess that should have never been made. -MBK004 03:32, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Seems a little harsh, MBK, he had no way of knowing that Mediawiki software sucks at some things :) - Dank (push to talk) 19:59, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Statue of Liberty
Hi, could you return to the FAC and see if your concerns have been addressed? Many thanks for your constructive comments.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:17, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

USAir 405
I think I've addressed your concerns at the article's nom. I would be grateful if you could check to see if the issues you raised have been resolved. Thanks in advance,  WackyWace  converse 17:22, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I've removed one of the two times the small fires are mentioned—I assume that's what you mean about some text being duplicated in a quote. Regards,  WackyWace  converse 16:30, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LIII (July 2010)
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:37, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Ciao!
Ciao Kirk! I'm interested on the greetings ahoy-hoy and aye aye, and their differences. --Nicola Romani (talk) 09:05, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

The Milhist election has started!
The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. You are cordially invited to help pick fourteen new coordinators from a pool of twenty candidates. This time round, the term has increased from six to twelve months so it is doubly important that you have your say! Please cast your vote here no later than 23:59 (UTC) on Tuesday, 28 September 2010.

With many thanks in advance for your participation from the coordinator team,  Roger Davies  talk 19:16, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LVI, October 2010
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:11, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LVII, November 2010
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:45, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Midshipman and its etymology
Ciao Kirk, yesterday searching some terms on various English dictionaries I found that the first known use of "amidship" is dated 1662. "Midship" is dated 1779, "shipman" is used since before 12th century, and "midshipman"... so remembering the latin word "mesonauta" (meso = mid - nauta = shipman) I've found this:. --Nicola Romani (talk) 11:15, 21 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Check this, the question is not about the duty of "officer candidate" but the very first origin of the term, interesting is also the fact that exist a Midshipman fish and a Mesonauta fish (ok but different), look also at this . About your request two days ago I was reading the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies Navy regulations of 1818... as you probably know that navy was strongly influenced by English advisors during the Napoleonic wars. In this regulations I found that on 1818 the officer candidate were called (from the higest to the lower rank) "Brigadiere" (Brigadier), "Sotto brigadiere" (Lower brigadier or underbrigadier) and "guardiamarina" (Navy guardsman -->from the French rank garde de la marine) later the uniforms were like you can see here but on that time (1818) according with this regulation the officer candidate was wearing a single gold epaulette on his left and a  small gold cord on his right (of his shoulder I suppose) anyway I can find more info for you, i''ll let you know. Ciao! --Nicola Romani (talk) 08:04, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

History of the US Navy
It looks like a really splendid article. However, I noticed that there are a large number of redundant citations. For example, Sentence 1. (ref1) Sentence 2. (ref1). It would be better to do this: Sentence 1. Sentence 2. (ref1). Under the Continental Navy section I made a number of grammatical corrections and removed the unnecessary citations. You might want to look at what I did. Since it appears that someone else has been in the article within the last hour or so, I'm going to move to a different article for now. If I get a chance to do some more grammatical fixes, I will do so, but I hope you will remove the other redundant citations at your convenience. In my opinion, they do not disqualify your article from B-class; it's just that they look messy. Thanks for reviewing my d'Aspre article. Djmaschek (talk) 05:51, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Alfred Gibbs: Thanks
Thanks for your comments, your assessment and the work that you did with the citations and references.Donner60 (talk) 00:40, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Action of 1 January 1800
se I believe i have fixed the last remaining issue with the article, ive replaced several of the allen citations with citations from palmer and williams.XavierGreen (talk) 22:50, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Volume LVIX, January 2011
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 16:07, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for George C. Kimble
Materialscientist (talk) 12:03, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

HMS Speedy (1782)
Be happy to join you on this one at FAC, your call. There were a bunch of unanswered questions in the last one that I can research, there are always prose questions I may be able to help with, and I did a fair amount of work on this one. - Dank (push to talk) 02:22, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of USRC Virginia (1797)
Hello! Your submission of USRC Virginia (1797) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Mjroots (talk) 14:15, 1 March 2011 (UTC)