User talk:Looper5920/Archive 9

Your contributions
You've been adding quite a lot of new information recently. It's encouraging to see you back &mdash; I hope you will continue to have time. Are you receiving e-mail at the address attached to your Wikipedia account? Any interest in helping with December on the Portal? (You've been adding to that New Article box quite regularly.) &mdash; User: (talk) 02:20, 20 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I will be around for about a month more editing full time and then work will cut into that very seriously. I will help where I can with the portal but come January I will be out of pocket for awhile.--Looper5920 (talk) 03:07, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Question and help
Help: I noticed you added a reference link to note that HMH-769 has been targeted for shutdown. That link doesn't seem to go anywhere. I tried to edit it and fix it, but don't see what is wrong with it. It appears to me to match to tools you have on your user page. Could you take a look at it? Question: Is the patch you put on the Al Asad Airbase page a no kidding authorized patch? I see that is is on VMM-263's webpage, but I don't know that it is an official patch, or if it is just something that squadron did up. By you putting it on the Al Asad page, it appears to be official. Thanks again for all the great work. Hebron (talk) 11:33, 21 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the heads up. I just added a reflist tag to the HMH-769 page so you can now see the ref and link to it no problem.  I had just forgotten to add it.  As for Al Asad? I do not know if it is official or not but it is a patch on a government page so I used it.  My mind would tell me that there are no official patches for deployed air bases but then again I do not know.  I think it looks much better than nothing at all and am not sure if it necessarily conveys being official or not.--Looper5920 (talk) 12:12, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

How do you revert a page ?
Basically the title explains my question, thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr.whiskers (talk • contribs) 20:37, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back
Looks like you're back. Look forward to working with you on some content. Cla68 (talk) 15:52, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The Cactus Air Force is still out there to be conquered.--Looper5920 (talk) 15:54, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
 * It's too bad you won't be around longer before you're unavailable for awhile again. The current article I'm working on is the most complicated, convoluted, time-consuming article I've worked on yet.  I've been working on it for two months and probably have another month to go before it's ready.  I do look forward to getting back to the CAF article again soon, though. Cla68 (talk) 06:56, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * By the way, I recently bought Hammel's new book, "Guadalcanal, The U.S. Marines in WWII" which is a picture book of the Marine phase of the Guadalcanal campaign. There's a lot of good pictures in there, including some of the CAF operations that I hadn't seen before online anywhere.  Since almost all are public domain, I'll be trying to scan them into Commons eventually.  One picture from that book is the one I used for the infobox for Battle for Henderson Field. Cla68 (talk) 21:14, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Images available?
Is it possible to find image(s), in addition to the insignia, for VMA-217? Were there any members of the squadron who are well-known? I was revisiting B-class criteria for articles and think the article is pretty complete &mdash; would just benefit from another image or two, and possibly something about the personnel. &mdash; User: (talk) 18:01, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Let me see what I can find.--Looper5920 (talk) 18:02, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I came across one image here but it really is not very good and wouldn't really add anything to the article. Thoughts?
 * I agree, wouldn't add too much. Perhaps small images of their aircraft? &mdash; User: (talk) 18:52, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Likewise for Marine Corps Air Facility Kaneohe Bay &mdash; pictures? There have to be some great pictures out there. &mdash; User: (talk) 18:52, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Just got K-Bay photo. Added it.--Looper5920 (talk) 18:57, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Bit of Help
Basis for request? Notability? Since you didn't create them and are not the sole editor (you could then simply tag db-author, the simplest way is to use prod tag for nominating them. Usage YOUR REASON HERE.  The prod message will expand and give you a template to add to the original author's talk page for notification.  &mdash; User: (talk) 18:33, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Re:BCategory question
I'm a little lost here. I've tried to look it up, but couldn't find it, tell me what cat. I should look up.


 * Tony, it's the Category Puerto Rican Marines--Looper5920 (talk) 19:53, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Looper, on the other hand I have been asked to write about the contributions of Hispanic Americans in the Corps. I haven't been able to find anything prior the Boxer Rebellion. Any ideas? Tony the Marine (talk) 19:40, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Not sure ...let me think about that one--Looper5920 (talk) 19:53, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh I see. Don't let it rub you wrong, my brother. I know and I agree with you that we are all part of that great machine that we call the "Green Machine." Being a Marine is one of the proudest accomplishments in my life.

You know that my objective here is to educate and to encourage others by providing positive role models. This is especially true for Puerto Ricans who have little knowledge of their contributions to our society. When I created the category: Puerto Ricans Marines, it wasn't meant as an ethnic nor racial thing since Puerto Rican is not an ethnicity, it has been recognized as a nationality. I did the same with the other branches.

When I was in the corps, I often wondered if Puerto Ricans had ever contributed to the Marine Corps history, after hearing about our "Chesty Puller" and "Lou Diamond." I found no answers and had I known what I now know, maybe I would have been encouraged to make the Corps my career.

By creating the category instead of a "list," I am trying to encourage others by telling them "Look, the Marine Corps is a good option, look at these men and women who have distinguished themselves as Marines and you can too." I believe, that there is no harm in the cat. and that this type of encouragement is needed more now then ever when our military forces are made up of volunteers.

If other groups did the same, I wouldn't object because unfortunately our society is composed of diverse groups who as a whole are nonetheless proud to be Americans and the same goes for us Marines, who despite the fact that we come from different backgrounds, we have a common bond that unites us, we are Marines.

Like I said, all I want to state to these people with the cat, is "If the Marine Corps was good for our country and for these people, it can be good for you too." By the way, I hope that you had a wonderful Thanksgiving together with your loved ones. Semper Fi. Tony the Marine (talk) 21:35, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

FYI - semi-protected articles
The constant reverts/vandalism on 3rd Civil Affairs Group and Saint Joseph's Preparatory School are strange. Do you think you know the person who has been making the edits? Is Harrington a real person? I've semi-protected both articles. &mdash; User: (talk) 00:08, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
 * No idea who the guy is but I don't think he liked having his name pulled from the 3rd CAG article. As for the prep edits...no clue.  Just a coincidence that both are on my watchlist I guess.  Thanks for the semi-protects.--Looper5920 (talk) 00:40, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I would hope that, if CWO2 Harrington is a real person, he is not doing this editing. Perhaps a relative? I wonder if the St. Joesph's edits came out of retaliation for your reverts on 3rd CAG.  Well, nonetheless, it will stop for awhile. Unfortunately, the IPs are not fixed; and, the edits are not to the level for permanent protection.  Since the articles are not high traffic articles, I don't think that the semi-protection will be a hindrance to legitimate edits.  But, I've left comments on both talk pages so I can be contacted if a legitimate reason arises to unprotect either of them. &mdash; User: (talk) 00:45, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Buddha
I think you reverted the wrong user by accident on Buddha  Alex ' fus ' co5  01:36, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

North Palm Beach County General Aviation Airport
Hello there, I was just wondering why you reverted the edit I made to the article by the same name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.153.176.207 (talk) 03:09, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Might be able to use something here
Not sure if you are familiar with it but if you go here and type in Provide Comfort there are about 850 images that come up. May be able to use one or two of them.--Looper5920 (talk) 07:16, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. That's actually where I already found most of the images that I have. Cla68 (talk) 07:45, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Able to help with December Portal update?
It's nearly time for the Portal update. Would you be willing to write the blurb for the biography/article. Pappy Boyington will be either the "article" or the "biography". (He was born in December). Any other thoughts? Leave a note on the "Coordination" page. &mdash; User: (talk) 02:53, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Just changed out the Bio and added Boyington. You may want to play with the blurb a bit but it is a pretty good starting point.--Looper5920 13:06, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. How'd you like to to the article and the picture as well? (I added a DYK and updated the quote already.) &mdash; User: (talk) 05:03, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I've chosen an image here. Would you have the time to work up the caption, etc.?  &mdash; User: (talk) 15:30, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I've made the change. I'm thinking about article ... will put that comment below. &mdash; User: (talk) 16:43, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

8th Tank Battalion (United States Marine Corps)
Noticed most recent USMC units had a page but not this battalion, which actually fought in the 1991 Gulf War. I'm no expert on the USMC and you seem to be the lead person here for it, so I thought I'd let you know. Cheers Buckshot06 02:42, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll see what I can come up with. Thanks for the heads up.--Looper5920 03:27, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXI (November 2007)
The November 2007 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 02:06, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

VMF-217 and DYK
Unfortunately, the time has expired for getting VMF-217 on DYK. The time is 5 days from creation; so, articles created on 11/24 and 11/25 have expired. For 217, if you knew why the squadron was nicknamed "Max’s Wild Hares", that might have provided a good hook. I took a look VMF-215. What is the most interesting thing that you found about the squadron when you wrote the article. I don't see a catchy hook in the current article. &mdash; User: (talk) 05:36, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
 * From taking a quick look at |AcePilots.com, I noticed that VMF-215 has 11 aces (as does VMF-214). Is this the most Aces of any USMC squadrons in WWII / Pacific Theater in any branch?  If so, and can be cited, that would make a nice hook.  I think that link above might work -- but, I didn't check each one. &mdash; User: (talk) 13:59, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Never mind, I looked more carefully at the article, added a citation and found a great hook. See the DYK nomination at or near the bottom of Dec 1 noms. &mdash; User: (talk) 17:29, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Articles
One last update to the Portal for December &mdash; the selected article. How about HMM-161? I looked at the photo album on their website. From their Day in the Life at TQ, what do you think about "Here comes the sand" as an image to accompany it? Would you be willing to put this, along with appropriate summary, on the Portal page? &mdash; User: (talk) 16:49, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Alternatively, what about VMA-214? &mdash; User: (talk) 22:00, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Have time? Portal article?  &mdash; User: (talk) 01:16, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

List of United States Marine Corps battalions
Have you put any more thought into my idea? In the big picture thinking, I'm still thinking that the best way to list Marine units to to have a list for each element of the MAGTF, and cut down in descending size, from MSC to regiment/group to battalion/squadron. An alternative is to divvy units up by MEF, but there are a ton of units that float outside of MEFs and would make up a very long and disorganized list of thier own (with probably the majority of them as redlinks). I also think that having a list for all decommissioned units is a good idea, we can add to the inactive aircraft squadron list. ''' bahamut0013 ♠  ♣  23:51, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, to be honest, I dislike the idea of dividing the Ground Combat units into infantry and and seperate units. Two reasons behind that. One, it breaks down the hierarchy and chain of command (going from division to regiment to battalion). Two, it creates two short lists that would be better as one longer list; seeing the single unified division makes it easier to grasp how the GCE is structured, easier to find a specific unit, and easier to reference from a unified list.
 * One thing I'm getting at is that I'd like to kind of blur the lines between a list and an article here. A person could click a single link, learn about what the CGE, ACE, and CSSE are/do, and what units make them up. To that end, you wouldn't be surprised that if I was selfish & had everything my way, the List of active United States Marine Corps aircraft squadrons would look much like the List of United States Marine Corps battalions: Wing>Group>Squadron, instead of the current format of organizing by type. But if we dig a bit deeper, we might be able to find a way for both of us to have our cake and eat it too. The lists could be formatted like you desire, by type of battalion/squadron (thus making the list of ground combat units and logistics units look much like the list of squadrons, sectioned by mission), and I could make articles about the three elements of the MAGTF with the hierarchy as a section. It might wind up with some duplication, but I thinks that we get the best of both worlds that way.
 * Thinking further, I suppose I have to agree with you on the issue of decommisioned units. 90% of the links would be red, and that can be the mark of death to some editors (we'd probably see it in AfD unless we wrote a ton of articles on these inactive units.
 * Sheesh. Maybe I'm overcomplicating things here. I hope I've summoned the eloquence to express my thoughs clearly enough (I've thouroughly confused myself reading this over). I await your thoughts. ''' bahamut0013 ♠  ♣  20:19, 4 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I am not to tied up about how the GCE and LCE unit pages look. I can work with anything and kind of agree that it does help to keep it together by unit so someone can see what a division is composed of.  Maybe we shouldn't try so hard to limit the number of lists.  We could create lists for unit types and by MEF.  Both are legit and would help people understand the structure of the Marine Corps.  I am not sold on having to reduce it down to the absolute smallest number possible.


 * That being said there are few things that I really care about on wikipedia but one of them is the lists of active/inactive aircraft squadrons and the USMC aviation page you spun off of it. They represent over a year and a half of research and many purchased books so if you try and really change them I will have major issues.--Looper5920 20:32, 4 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh, believe me, I have no intention of erasing any of that. I kind of used them as a model of what a good page looked like when I was a new editor, which is why I decided to discuss my thoughts with you in the first place.
 * So it seems we have come to a consensus: Make a list and an article for each. I invite you to assist me in this endeavour if you so desire (and can manage it, practically). ''' bahamut0013 ♠  ♣  21:46, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Northeastern Regional Airport
Did this used to be a USMC facility? I ask because you added the link to the USMC Portal. ''' bahamut0013 ♠  ♣  21:46, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * From 1942 until 1959 the airport was known as MCAS Edenton. I just haven't gotten around to expanding the history section of the article yet to reflect it.--Looper5920 (talk) 04:36, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

HMM-261
Haven't heard back from you on portal article. I noted that I had suggested HMM-261 back in Feb 2007, along with a fighter squadron &mdash; which was used. So, I'm planning to go with 261 (first Helicopter squadron to appear on the portal). I'm planning on using Image:Phrog 1.JPG. Did you take it? Or, is there a weblink? &mdash; User: (talk) 01:45, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * That pic is mine.--Looper5920 (talk) 04:37, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Check the Portal:USMC &mdash; HMM-261 is the selected article. Please feel free to edit the summary.  &mdash; User: (talk) 04:47, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Jimmy Murray Old Photo.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Jimmy Murray Old Photo.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the media description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, fair use media which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. High on a tree (talk) 05:40, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

VMFA-251
I am new to Wikipedia. I hope this was the right protocol to contact you. I noticed that you removed NATO exercise information from teh VMFA-251 entry. I understand the point that you are making regarding limiting material to combat history, but as a CW Vet myself I am continually disappointed at the lack of material available on this period. In fact, the official histories from USMC and VMFA-251 gloss over this period entirely. I thought this was the perfect forum to include such information. The NATO exercises referenced were particularly important and took place at the critical time leading up to the defeat of Communism. 1984 was especially uneasy and this was one OF the closest times we came to open war with the old Soviet Union. This is a part of our national heritage in that the Cold War was not characterized so much by combat actions as by aggressive show of force and determination. The very large and provacative exercises in the north were an integral part. I was in Bodo in 1984 and we invited the Soviets to witness as guests how we were going to defeat them if they tried to make a northern end-run. So, I would hope that you would consider re-including the material. What is the point of having a history if it is only selected history? Thanks in advance. DaleLeppard (talk) 17:59, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Just wanted to mention that I re-added a mention (name only) of the Danish deployment in September 1982. This is apart from my request above. After the NATO exrecises were removed, the article was left stating that the Squadron was on alert for Lebanon before returning to the USA but the previous sentence was about Iceland. The unit was on alert while in Denmark. So I added a scaled down mention of just that place so that the facts were correct. I do hope that you reconsider adding the others back in. The mention of the MUC was kept and it was in part directly achieved through Norway 84 (which stands omitted at this point). That was literally included in the text of the award (Norway) and Bodo was the only such exercise in Norway during the period (1983-1986). Further, the 1984 exercise in Bodo (Norway) was above the Arctic Circle. I think this may have been the first time Marine Air was stationed that far north for these execises and it was almost certainly the first and only time for the Squadron. That should be a milestone worth noting I would think. I would suggest a rewrite to include a brief mention of the exercises rather than the original details that I included. This is a significant and little defined part of our national history apart from the individual Squadron lineage. There is no easily accessible website that contains this information in so far as I am aware. Much of the original version was drawn from the unit veterans site but it is a compilation of many individual sections and accounts there. I don't want to be argumentative, but I wasn't sure you grasped what significance the major NATO exercises played in winning the Cold War. I did not mention the hundreds of CONUS and other deployments that the Squadron had over the years and from 82-85 alone there must have been 15 deployments in addition to the two NATO exercises. Anyway, thanks for considering my request. If you still wish to keep the original edit would you consider a brief mention of Bodo for either the Arctic Circle or the MUC? Thanks in advance. DaleLeppard (talk) 21:42, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Haven't heard from you yet, but I see that you are very busy with many entries so it may take some time to review and get back to me. I re-read the article myself and agree with you that there are unnecessary exercises (including MANY still remaining) which should be removed because they do not denote any significant contribution. If you have no objection and I have the time, I will edit the article again this weekend and remove the remaining extra stuff. I wanted to add a few updates anyway. Again, if you have no specific objection I would also like to reinclude the NATO exercise above the Arctic Circle. When it's done, have a look and see what you think. Hopefully the end result will be a balance that we will both like. Thanks in advance. DaleLeppard (talk) 21:29, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Honored
Looper5920, you are my friend, so I want to share with you an unexpected honor which I recieved. Check out the Resolution section: Press Releases. Not bad for a guy that started out from the wrong side of the tracks, right? Tony the Marine (talk) 07:21, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Congratulations Tony on the honor. Very well deserved based on your amazing contributions over the years.--Looper5920 (talk) 07:30, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

DYK

 * Hope you get a chance to see entry on the Main Page: "Did you know"

...that during World War II, Marine Fighting Squadron 215 established four new U.S. Marine Corps records in the South Pacific including having the most ace pilots?
 * &mdash; User: (talk) 12:11, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the help with this. Glad it made it to the main page.--Looper5920 (talk) 12:33, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Great ... I'm glad you were here to see it on the Main Page. &mdash; User: (talk) 13:07, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:JeremiahWeed.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:JeremiahWeed.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the media description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, fair use media which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. High on a tree (talk) 20:20, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Vernice Armour
Where did you find Vernice Armour's awards and decorations? I wanted to add them but I didn't know where to look. I assumed that there was some DOD web page for looking them up. Sbowers3 (talk) 05:13, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Found them here. The PUC and Sea Service I added because she would have rated them also for being there.--Looper5920 (talk) 05:16, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I never would have thought of looking there. Thanks. (I don't know why the DOD doesn't make it easy to find that info.) Sbowers3 (talk) 18:53, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Opinions, thoughts?
What do you think? If you don't have access to Wikipedia on a regular basis, feel free to e-mail me your Portal thoughts. &mdash; User: (talk) 12:19, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

AC-130
They just never WILL learn, will they? Mark Sublette (talk) 02:23, 11 December 2007 (UTC)Mark SubletteMark Sublette (talk) 02:23, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

A tip about warning users for vandalism
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. When using certain templates on talk pages, don't forget to substitute with text by adding subst: to the template tag. For example, use &#123;&#123;subst:uw-test1&#125;&#125; instead of &#123;{uw-test1}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 15:06, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks...
Thanks for trying over at Villanova University -- your idea made sense. I really can't get over how completely stupid this situation is. &mdash;  Music  Maker  5376  16:29, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Silver Star discussion
You might be interested in providing your thoughts on a discussion that I started on the Silver Star talk page on the inherent notability of Silver Star recipients. &mdash; User: (talk) 01:23, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Aviation units added to Iraq War order of battle
Hey great work on this Looper. It's a good addition. However what would make it even better is a source. Could you please specify some sources for your data though, here, as a footnote, or in references somewhere? Thanks, best regards, and happy Christmas.. Buckshot06 (talk) 02:01, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

References for Louis A. Johnson
Between the two of us, I think we really cleaned up that section. It went from this to this. Just wondering: since all the books in the Bibliography are listed in the Notes, do we really need the second list? ~ MD Otley (talk) 04:52, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

VMFT-401
Noticed you made edits recently to this page you created. Here is a reference (now added to the article) that you might be interested in to further expand the page. As it is a DoN page, you can use images as well: &mdash; User: (talk) 14:30, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll see what I can do.--Looper5920 (talk) 14:31, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Mumia
I would prefer not to relax protection just yet. The banned user targeting this page was last active on 9 December, so it's only been a week since the last activity. I've made the edit suggested on the talk page. DrKiernan (talk) 08:20, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Some question about 1/1
Hi, I saw you made some nice changes to the 1/1 page--it reads much more smoothly. But I was wondering about your thoughts about the unencyclopedic information, specifically regarding the traing leading up to the OIF deployments. While I had written most of this information, I also inserted the 'tone' template. I guess I'm wondering why you thought the info was unencyclopedic? I agree the tone was not encyclopedic, but how is the information not pertinant to the unit? I was thinking about putting training information back into the article, but in a more encyclopedic tone, and I wanted to get your thoughts on it. Thanks, Rhetth (talk) 03:32, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I see you're doing some more editing to 1/1, and I'm thinking of adding some more stuff, but I have a feeling you're going to edit it again. Before you edit it, could you post something in the discussion about what you're thinking about and we can discuss it?  Thanks, Rhetth (talk) 02:26, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your thoughts, and I appreciate you taking the time to respond. Here are some reasons why I think this information would be a good addition to this article: These are my reasons for including this information. What do you think? Rhetth (talk) 01:51, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * It is too much information. If anything think about starting an article on pre-deployment training for Marine units heading over to Iraq.  That way almost every battalion could have an article linked to it.   To put it in an individual battalion's page is too much information.  Then we would be looking at the same for every conflict and the page would be too long and unreadable.  The operational history of the unit is sufficient.  As for the casualty...again too much inofrmation.  A number per deployment is sufficient.  Are we going to list the individual circumstances for every 1/1 Marine injured or killed at Peleliu? Probably not an option so we shouldn't be listing 1 WIA here either.--Looper5920 (talk) 10:12, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Regarding too much information: I agree that, if every unit page includes the same level of detail, then yes, this would be too much information.  But what I'm proposing is that we include information that is important relative to this unit.  That only one Marine was injured during the 2nd OIF deployment is a notable event.  If 200 were injured, then detailing every one would not be important, it would be more appropriate to describe in broad strokes what happened, which other unit wikipedia pages have done (see the Army's 3ACR).  In addition, considering the history of the unit, this injury represents a part of that history as a watermark for the volitility during the deployment.  In addition, the wikipedia page is a living thing, and should change according the individualities of each topic.  What is notable in one page is not necessarily notable in another, I believe.
 * Regarding predeployment information: If you started a page detailing predeployment training, it would most likely include how different units trained.  For instance, a mountain division would train differently than an airborne one.  In the case of 1/1, part of the notability of the predeployment training information is how the commanders made the decision of how to train.  They received real-time information about events in Iraq and Afganistan and adapted their predeployment training to the particularities of what training opportunities were afforded them.  Not all units train the same way, and even if they wanted to, physical, time, and resource constraints would not allow it.  This individuality makes the predeployment training information unique and notable.

More questions
Hi, I see you've removed some of the changes I made to the article with regards to our ongoing discussion. I have noted my changes in the article's talk page, but since I didn't see any objections to the reasoning for my changes, I have made them. I am wondering, did you remove them for some other reason than your previous reasons? I'm hoping to include the information, so if we can find a common ground, I think that would make the page much better. Thanks. Rhetth (talk) 22:15, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * "rv...the additions are very poorly written, add way to much detail for this type of article and should not be added" Ah ha! Now we're communicating, even if it is through the remarks on the history page.... I'll take what I can get.  As for your ideas, here's my reasons for reverting my contribution:
 * Poorly written - if there is something poorly written, you can improve it! Improve the writing, don't just remove it.
 * Too much detail... - if there is too much detail, should a seperate page be constructed? If so, then do it and copy the information.  If you don't do it, then put it in the discussion section and let someone else do it or discuss it
 * ...for this type of article - what kind of article is this? Is there a wikipedia guide to types of articles and what information should or should not be in it?  Maybe you think it's not notable, and if that is the case, you should say so and people can discuss it.  As for notability, training for each battalion is specific and unique.  This uniqueness, combined with the fluxuating demands of the current theatre of operations makes the training for a battalion notable, especially when seen as a continuum and reflection of military priority and military intelligence.

Thanks for your thoughts, and please leave me a note on my talk page if you have any questions. Cheers. --Rhetth (talk) 02:34, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I see you took out my revisions, again; I reverted them, per my previous reasons. Say, do you have some ideas how we could come to a conclusion about this back-and-forth thing? I'm sure your ideas could make the page better regarding why my reasons for keeping the information don't jive. Thanks for your thoughts, Rhetth (talk) 20:39, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Another article
I just read your new article on VMF-413. Very nice. I was thinking about nominating it for DYK. In thinking about an appropriate hook, I thought "heckling missions" would be something. However, there is no article on Heckling mission, though the term is readily found in a G-search. Would you be willing to write a short, referenced article (stub is ok) on this topic? (within the 5 day limit for DYK) &mdash; User: (talk) 16:50, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I can do that but I am just about to put another article up that may be a bit better than the last. Give me a few minutes.--Looper5920 (talk) 17:08, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * You are becoming quite prolific again. I'm enjoying reading and learning new things. &mdash; User: (talk) 17:35, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

On your pointing me to Matthew Bogdanos &mdash; lots of material available for working on this. I'm going to work in in my Sandbox, rather than make numerous edits to the article. &mdash; User: (talk) 21:44, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, made a major first pass at the article. Give it a check. &mdash; User: (talk) 23:41, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Stalker?
Seems like every article in my watchlist has an edit by yourself right after mine. Either we have a good natural teamwork, or you are a very sneaky fellow. Cheers, mate. I have some time off for the holidays, and I was going to hammer out some books on Marine History. Specifically, David Sullivan's four-part series on Marines in the Civil War. I know aviation and units are more your forte, but if you can find them in your local library, it would be fun to do another collaboration with you. ''' bahamut0013 ♠  ♣  12:59, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I can see how it would seem that way. I have pretty much every USMC unit/organization page on my watchlist so when I see activity I always check it out and then add updates if needed.  Can't say I know much on Marine History during the CIvil War but I'll pitch in where I can.  I am actually on a big final burst before I go very quiet for awhile due to work.  Have a great Christmas.--Looper5920 (talk) 13:07, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I understand. Sometimes, it can be hard not to feel defensive when someone edits "your" article. Just out of curiosity, how many articles does that make (in your watchlist)? ''' bahamut0013 ♠  ♣  15:24, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Hovering around 2,400 at the moment. Most are USMC related but not all.  It is not that I am defensive about the articles it is just that when I look at the changes I usually see more that need to be done.  SOmetimes you just forget about articles and don't see them that often.--Looper5920 (talk) 15:33, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 15:51, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Re: For your watch list in 2008
I have to chuckle at the your subject line. I noticed on your talk page that you have a great number of articles on your watch list. Mine is out of control, bordering on 4,000!

Your plan sounds good. Will you be around to collaborate on it? Or, will you be off? &mdash; User: (talk) 01:25, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I have about 1 week of econtributing to articles left and then it is just monitor mode/reverting vandalism for a long time.--Looper5920 (talk) 01:33, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Do you have either of the books? Can you expand on Haldane's bio? (I see you found the working version.) &mdash; User: (talk) 05:58, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I have the Sloane book and read the Sledge book this morning and took some notes on it. Keep it in the sandbox for now as I will add info as I go through the Sloane book.  Great job getting it started...I think this article will really be something in the future once the mini-series comes out and will be a big reference source once it does.--Looper5920 (talk) 06:02, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
 * It would be great if you could, perhaps, get a picture w/permission to use from his nephew (retired USMC Major). &mdash; User: (talk) 06:11, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you
Looper, thank you for the info. Yes, it seems as if Fontana was Italian, I'll fix that. That is the interesting thing about Hispanics, especially when it comes to Puerto Ricans. In the latter part of the 19th Century hundreds of families from Germany, Italy, Corsica, France and Ireland moved and settled there (I myself am descendent of Corsicans). That is why sometimes you have a person with a non-Hispanic surname who is Hispanic. Can drive a person crazy sometimes.

Oh, Looper before I forget, I would like to wish you and your loved ones a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. Tony the Marine (talk) 02:32, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

DYK

 * Congrats! And top entry with image no less. &mdash; User: (talk) 16:20, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Human Rights and the United States - police brutality
Why did you delete the section I added about police brutality? Do you feel it doesn't exist in the U.S.? Or it's not a human rights issue? I added this topic to the discussion page of the article.122.31.178.226 (talk) 14:55, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Read the comment I left...bright one.--Looper5920 (talk) 15:00, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

On Robert Leckie (author)
I am trying to find some citations for the critiques of his writing. If you read the interview, he mentions leaving out footnotes in his Okinawa book. However, he mentions that he had them in earlier books. In addition, some of the reviews that I have been reading mention his bibliographies; so, I think that comment may not be generally true. The information on his writing style may be WP:OR. I do think it is valuable to include a section on it. From reading his interview, he is quite colorful. &mdash; User: (talk) 15:23, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

On VMA-233
Just to let you know, I've nominated the article for DYK. There is a very long list of nominees from that creation date, so we'll see. &mdash; User: (talk) 23:34, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Aces table
I went to the website. Although in the title of the article it says 118, if I count the names, there are 123 names. (Did I miscount?) So, matching the print and the internet seems the only way to figure out why the apparent discrepancy. &mdash; User: (talk) 06:01, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, the acepilots.com site is inconsistent with in itself. Their full list page titles the article with 118, but the USMC ace intro  says 120.  &mdash; User: (talk) 06:04, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Then once again Mr Sherrod is correct.--Looper5920 (talk) 06:05, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

DYK nomination of VMF-441
Hi. I've nominated VMF-441, an article you worked on, for consideration to appear on the Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the hook for the article at Template talk:Did you know, where you can improve it if you see fit. Black Falcon (Talk) 07:13, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Yo
Good point... thanks for the revert. :) Jmlk  1  7  08:13, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Sherrod book - catalog link
You might consider putting the OCLC in for Sherrod (since there doesn't seem to be an associated ISBN for the 1952 book.  If you want to use it, here is the citation:



Take care. &mdash; User: (talk) 20:14, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

DYK: VMA-233

 * Congrats on another new article on DYK! &mdash; User: (talk) 21:47, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Mablogob.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Mablogob.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:56, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Do-or-die.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Do-or-die.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 07:02, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Don clune.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Don clune.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:GabiSimsonStuff.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:GabiSimsonStuff.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 18:12, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Money for nothing.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Money for nothing.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 22:23, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:NRPaerialcolor Web.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:NRPaerialcolor Web.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 23:46, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

HMM 268
Hi there! I recently ammended a piece on the HMM 268 article to include some of the Squadron COs. Is there any chance this could be added into the various military unit articles at some point? I think it would be appropriate to help fill out the history of the units. Or, perhaps a separate list at the bottom showing the succession of command would be more fitting? Thanks! Never, Never, Never Give Up. (talk) 19:12, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Meetup/Philadelphia 6
 You're invited to the

Sixth Philadelphia-area Wikipedia Meetup

January 2008

Time: January 26th, 5:00 PM

Location: The Marathon Grill, 10th and Walnut RSVP (view/edit this template) You have received this message because you are on the invite list, you may change your invite options via that link. BrownBot (talk) 21:08, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Small Wars Manual.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Small Wars Manual.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:39, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIII (January 2008)
The January 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) 00:26, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

HMM-268 Squadron Insignia
Hello! I've noticed that you're doing a bit of editing on the HMM-268 page. As a former squadron member (1979-82) I've got a paragraph about the origins and meanings in the Red Dragons insignia. It comes from our 1982 WestPac tour book. I'll be glad to share it with you if you'd like to add it (or at least see if it's worthy of adding), as I'm not sure I'd get all the code right if I did the edit. Also, if you do start adding CO's as one other user suggested, I'll be glad to help with the first couple of commanders. Jollie Ollie (talk) 04:42, 5 February 2008 (UTC)


 * If you have some info on the Dragon patch drop it on the unit's talk page and we'll edit it and add it to the page. I am still not a big fan of adding CO's names just for the sake of adding them.  Unless they are necessary I think it just adds ugly lists to pages.  Take a look at any Air Force page and you'll see what I mean.  I am limited at best in my ability to edit so please give me some time to do any corrections.  Cheers.--Looper5920 (talk) 09:23, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I'll get on the patch info later this evening (hopefully). I understand about the CO lists, and it is certainly not (in any way) a line-item with me. Thanks for all your work!Jollie Ollie (talk) 20:39, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator elections
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 February 14! Kirill 03:31, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

MEU article, etc.
Thanks for the note. I'll keep a watch.

Hope all is well and remains safe.

If you get a change, take a look at the USMC portal &mdash; drop me any comments or suggestions.

&mdash; ERcheck (talk) 23:53, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Vanguard logo.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Vanguard logo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:32, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Amoroso logo prod.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Amoroso logo prod.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:41, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Milhist coordinators election has started

 * The February 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 fifteen candidates.  Please vote here by February 28! --Eurocopter tigre (talk) 17:33, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:9thMarineregimentlogo.jpg
A tag has been placed on Image:9thMarineregimentlogo.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 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 (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. Hennessey, Patrick (talk) 05:54, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:HMM-261 new insignia.gif
A tag has been placed on Image:HMM-261 new insignia.gif 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 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 (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. Hennessey, Patrick (talk) 06:32, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:MAG49.jpg
A tag has been placed on Image:MAG49.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 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 (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. Hennessey, Patrick (talk) 06:42, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:MASS2SqnLogo.jpg
A tag has been placed on Image:MASS2SqnLogo.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 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 (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. Hennessey, Patrick (talk) 06:43, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:MATSG-23insignia.jpg
A tag has been placed on Image:MATSG-23insignia.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 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 (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. Hennessey, Patrick (talk) 06:44, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:Mclb barstow insig.gif
A tag has been placed on Image:Mclb barstow insig.gif 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 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 (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. Hennessey, Patrick (talk) 06:46, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:New miramar logo.gif
A tag has been placed on Image:New miramar logo.gif 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 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 (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. Hennessey, Patrick (talk) 06:47, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:VMX-22 insignia.jpg
A tag has been placed on Image:VMX-22 insignia.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 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 (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. Hennessey, Patrick (talk) 07:13, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIV (February 2008)
The February 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) 04:58, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Logo northmainheader.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:Logo northmainheader.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 12:38, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Money for nothing.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:Money for nothing.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 14:53, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:March-banner-logo.gif
Thank you for uploading Image:March-banner-logo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:17, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Good to hear from you
Good to see your message on my talk page. It is nice to know you are safe and occasionally checking back in and contributing to Wikipedia. RL is so busy lately that I've not been nearly as active. I'll try to make some additions to the Lehew article. &mdash; ERcheck (talk) 01:04, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

tail codes
Do you have a good reference or listing of USMC tail codes? I think it might be worth adding to some articles, what that squadron's tail code is/was if it hasn't changed too often (maybe find a spot in the infobox). I recently noticed this because I bought a model kit, and the included decals had VMA-231's tail code as WP, not CG. ''' bahamut0013 ♠  ♣  13:32, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:2_1_in_Fallujah.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:2_1_in_Fallujah.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. 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 specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 14:57, 28 March 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MECU ≈ talk 14:57, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

You're invited!
 You're invited to the

Sixth Philadelphia-area Wikipedia Meetup

April 5, 2008

Time: 5:00 PM

Location: The Marathon Grill, 10th and Walnut RSVP (view/edit this template) This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:42, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXV (March 2008)
The March 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) 01:52, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:An F4U-N Corsair on display at FLAM in 2007.JPG
Thank you for uploading Image:An F4U-N Corsair on display at FLAM in 2007.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Polly (Parrot) 18:21, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVI (April 2008)
The April 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) 01:28, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Article visited
Looper5920 - Good to hear from you; hope all is well. Thanks for pointing out the Merlin German article. Take a look &mdash; I made some preliminary upgrades. &mdash; ERcheck (talk) 18:50, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Lucy Brewer - much harder to work with. BTW, have you been watching the monthly Portal:USMC updates?  &mdash; ERcheck (talk) 01:54, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Planning for the 7th Wikipedia Meetup
The planning for the summer Philadelphia meetup has begun. We would appreciate your input. You're getting this invitation because you're on Wikipedia:WikiProject Philadelphia/Philadelphia meet-up invite list. BrownBot (talk) 21:39, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Comments
Wow, your talk page is getting long. (Time for archiving?) Did you check out this month's Portal? &mdash; ERcheck (talk) 23:57, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * yeah, yeah...I only get on for a few minute spurts at a time so I haven't gotten around to it. I'll archive it here shortly.  I haven't checked out the Portal in awhile.  I'll try an take a look a bit later today.  Thanks for taking a look at the 2 articles I threw on your talk page.  Hope all is well.--Looper5920 (talk) 00:06, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Fallujah
The version you reverted to still contains much of the junk added by one of those IPs, and does not have some of the apparent good text they removed. I presume the massive revert I made may have eliminated some good changes to the article, but sentences like "The Chemical weapons caused Congenital deformation between every five children Born in fallujah."--added by one of those IPs, completely unsourced and probably made up, and poorly written--cannot stand. In addition to these sorts of additions, lots of text was removed over that time--some perhaps appropriate such as to a forked article--and many numbers were changed without references. See the diff between my massive revert and the latest status quo. If you want to glean through the entire article, go for it, but otherwise I think the long revert should remain or at least form the baseline. —Centrx→talk &bull; 03:44, 8 May 2008 (UTC) (copied and slightly altered to User talk:Looper5920)

Burlington, Colorado
Stop changing that page, it's not as if you're even from there son. We are and we are proud to have a student going there, so please stop changing our edit.

Thank you very much. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.53.0.85 (talk) 20:02, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Burlington, Colorado
Would you please stop changing this page? We are proud of having a kid go to that college, now you stop changing it please.

Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.53.0.85 (talk) 20:04, 23 May 2008 (UTC)