User talk:MBK004/Archive 4



Thanks
Incidentally, if you're keen to keep your assessing skills honed, we are currently very short of reviewers for Milhist A-Class reviews. Broadly, the five A-Class criteria are just beefed up versions of the B-Class criteria and anyone with B-Class experience should have no trouble with them. Also, as a reminder, in the wide-ranging A-Class review, it is not necessary to comment on all five criteria: if you're short of time, you can simply focus on the aspects that interest you most (sources, comprehensiveness, prose, graphic content or whatever). You can track which articles are up for A-Class using this template:

All the best, -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 07:39, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Timeline for aircraft carrier service
Thank you for you help with the links in this timeline. I am always interested in anything that makes future work easier. ;) Could you please point me to the wiki article that explains how to use the templetes as you have done here?  Thanks in advance.  Nick Thorne  talk  05:49, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the quick reply. I will be using these templates in future, you can rest assured!  Nick Thorne  talk  06:11, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

USS Nevada commanding officers section
Should I just delete this section? I can't find the list anywhere on the 'net...  the_ed 17  18:26, 1 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I left a notice at Ustye's talk page, as he was the one who added the list...but he hasn't been on in a month!  the_ed 17  18:28, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

USS Iowa (BB-61)
Hiya MBK004. I know you're busy, but if you have amoment I could use another set of eyes here to help with the review. Anything you could do would be apreciated. TomStar81 (Talk) 19:33, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on September 14! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:55, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXX (August 2008)
The August 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:43, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

USS Oklahoma (BB-37)
Is there a reference in any of your books that would confirm this sentence? "The Oklahoma was the last ship of the U.S. Navy to be installed with vertical triple expansion reciprocating machinery instead of steam turbines; she had a vibration problem throughout her lifetime as a result."

Thanks,  the_ed 17  18:10, 3 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Reminder, as requested...also, I have another request two sections down... =D ...Sorry for my pushiness, and thank you. -talk- the_ed17  -contribs-  19:06, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks...
...for this.  the_ed 17  21:20, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Another sourcing question...this time in USS Nevada (BB-36).
I'm sorry to ask another question like this, but would you have a book that would cover the 2 cites of ref #23--"Pocock, Michael (2005-2008). "USS Nevada (BB-36); Builder's Notes". Maritime Quest. Retrieved on 3 September 2008." I cannot tell if it is an RS (meaning that it probably isn't) but the two things that it cites are pretty important, with one being pretty vital (the 65 miles SW of Pearl one).....Thanks for any help,  the_ed 17  00:48, 4 September 2008 (UTC)


 * A reminder again...sorry to bug you about it. -talk- the_ed17  -contribs-  00:04, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Admin help: POV edits to USMC article
I'm sure you noticed that an editor has been constantly changing the wording of the United States Marine Corps article, specifically the subsection of addressing veterans, to be more POV toward those who have had a dishonorable discharge. Specifically, Wrestleforpizza & 71.123.16.83 have made identical changes (example: & ). Wrestleforpizza has been warned once for this (User_talk:Wrestleforpizza), and the anonymous IP has been warned 3 times and blocked by yourself (User talk:71.123.16.83)... if you look at the |article history, you'll see that once the IP was blocked (03:49, 7 September), the person logged in and continued the same edits (16:59, 7 September 2008). I think it's safe to say that not only did the editor not get the hint, but that he has a single purpose account as well, and I would speculate that this individual has recieved a dishonorable discharge as well. I've also left this message at User talk:ERcheck.  bahamut0013 ♠  ♣   16:00, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Re:Featured Topic
Seems that way. Assuming that Bellhalla doesn;t beat us to it we ought to have the first ship FT on wikipedia. TomStar81 (Talk) 15:26, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

SS Normandie again
Hi MBK004, hope you are weathering the hurricane alright. Just to mention, the merge suggestion has been on there for five months now. Perhaps some action can be taken to merge the page histories, etc. as suggested, or the merge suggestion removed for later? Regards. SynergyStar (talk) 00:06, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The September 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fourteen candidates. Please vote here by September 30! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:48, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Can you urgently help Milhist please?
We've had a rather large bombshell dropped on us. The Wikipedia editorial team are aiming to release a version of Wikipedia on CD/DVD in time for the end of year holiday season. They've provided us with a list of 1333 Milhist articles they intend including.

The problem is that the quality of these articles varies considerably.

We've put together review page listing all the articles, in twenty-five article worklists. I'm hoping that 15-20 trusted editors can work through the list, weedying out problem articles and identifying suitable versions for release. The work is as far away from a tagging and assessing drive as you can imagine though, for convenience and ease of use, we've closely followed the traditional Milhist drive format.

This is, at the moment, an invitation-only review. The reason is that time is short and we can't afford too many mistakes. I'm only contacting experienced editors who performed very well indeed in the last two Milhist drives. I guess that working through a worklist of twenty-five articles will take between one and three hours to do. We're aiming to get the preliminary work done by next Sunday, so it's urgent too.

I do hope you can help but – if it's not too much trouble – if you are unable to participate at the moment, would you please let me know on my talk page? Thank you for your time, -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 17:14, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Re:Welcome Back
Yeah, I finally managed to think about the deletion and not go into a rant immedately afterward, so I think I can handle being back again. Unfurtenly, though, I have a lot of schoolwork to see to, so my collage/busy template is going to start seeing exercise. Good to back though. TomStar81 (Talk) 22:56, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Should we include Clayton Hartwig in the push for FT status? I can see the basis of the arguments both for and against, he was on the Iowa and was accused of caused the explosion in the turret, although later cleared of the charges. I hadn;t planned on including him originally, but I am interested to know what you think. TomStar81 (Talk) 02:51, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I was thinking the same thing, but opted for a second opinion since I did not want to appear to be acting entirely on my own. Thanks. TomStar81 (Talk) 05:36, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Template Box
I saw your comment at the coordinator referendum on Kirill's position just now, and wanted to bring this to your attention since I was the one who first started awarding the five and six star images for coordinators: I intend to award award Kirill the star ensignia created by General John J. Pershing in recognition of his new title of Coordinator Emeritus(?). Pershings star design is unique in that the design uses gold stars rather than silver and served as the first star ensignia for the rank of General of the Armies. Since both of your templates - lead and corrdinator - employ the five and six star pattern I originally used I thought you might like to know ahead of time what I was planning to use in case you wanted to create a userbox with the same image. TomStar81 (Talk) 21:13, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
For reverting that vandalism on my user page...lol, I love it when I see stupid stuff like that! Cheers, &mdash; the _ ed 17  &mdash; 04:54, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

USS Constitution
Sorry about making a mess you had to clean up. I didn't even think about why the "topic" didn't match the topic I placed the article under. Protonk (talk) 19:13, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Shenzhou 7
Hey, thanks for leaving me a message about vandalism warnings. I do in fact have a link to those templates (I saved it on my userpage so I can find it easily); I just wasn't sure if the edit I was reverting was really vandalism or just stupidity. (Although I think they have a template for that, too...). Anyway, I will post a warning at that IP address' talk page, unless you've already gotten around to doing it. Thanks again! &mdash;Politizer( talk 04:59, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see you already got it done. Thanks,  &mdash;Politizer( talk 05:01, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Userbox: Coordinator emeritus
You mentioned you were going to make one ... May I suggest using the Golden wiki as the graphic? I'm going to give one to Kirill at midnight (UTC) and it might be nice to reflect it in the user box. -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 22:25, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmmmm....perhaps take the star-emblem of the coordinators and superimpose it over the golden wiki? Just a thought...Cam (Chat) 06:20, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Seeing as Kirill doesn't use userboxes, this is a non-issue until we appoint another coordinator emertius. We can deal with it then, I guess...-MBK004 06:25, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Congrats!


Congratulations on your election as Coordinator of the Military history Wikiproject. In honor of your achievement, I present you with these stars. I wish you luck in the coming term. -- TomStar81 (Talk) 01:09, 1 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Congratulations from me as well; welcome to the club! ;-)
 * (If you haven't come across them before, incidentally, we have several essays that contain some useful—in my opinion, anyways—advice for new coordinators.) Kirill (prof) 02:59, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

About my removing mass content from term Shenzhou 8
I have paid attention to that you have restored my edit on term Shenzhou 8, and have left a message about this on my talk page. First, I must appreciate and thank your reminder and direction. But I also want to delare that, according to a declaration by Zhang Jianqi from CNSA at 29 Sept 2008 (i.e. two days ago), the 8-ton vehicle that was said to be Shenzhou 8 will actually be Tiangong 1, and Shenzhou 8 itself (whose information in details are in fact still unrevealed) will be another vehicle to dock with Tiangong 1. So, the information on the last version of Shenzhou 8 was mostly wrong, that is the reason why I remove them.

I have now edited the term again, and this time I managed to keep the references in the last version, and left the explanations for removing mass content, as you have kindly directed.

I appreciate and thank your reminder and direction again.

Greeneese (talk) 02:07, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Homely Features
Hey...I wasn't trying to have a conversation with him...I only made one edit and was trying to clarify his statement that seemed to say he would just come back after 24 hours and make the same edits... --Smashvilletalk 02:11, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Revert on Aaron Sorkin
Yeah, I'm sorry about that...I realized afterwards that something like that might have been the case. My apology. madkayaker (talk) 04:05, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Apology

 * Oh no, there's no need to apologise at all. I just don't think it is notable or noteworthy at all. I was a bit worried that if it was on signpost some people might think it was a deliberate political move or whatever, but I don't think it is. Although with all the nonsense that happens on Wikipedia in lots of places, I don;t blame anyone if they do think that. See my talk page for more details.  YellowMonkey  ( choose Australia's next top model ) 08:36, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

I had made some changes to Franklin Delano Roosevelt, which were found to be not constructive. I had added the fact that van Roosevelt came from Tholen,Province of Zeeland,The Netherlands. Why did I think that that change was relevant? Because the capital of Zeeland, Middelburg houses the Roosevelt Study Center ( on American Political History) since 1986 and the Roosevelt University (a college of the University of Utrecht) since 2004. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bert Wijntjes (talk • contribs) 01:28, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I forgot to add my name to the last message on Roosevelt. Best regards, Bert Wijntjes —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bert Wijntjes (talk • contribs) 01:30, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Yahoo
Hello. I'm looking for some input regarding the Yahoo section of this article. I found your user name in the list of participants at WGA. As you can see, the article is still growing and has been rated B-Class by five of six of the Wikiprojects that it falls under. The WikiProject San Francisco Bay Area has rated it Start class. I would like to know what your thoughts are regarding this section. I don't think it is helping the article because it's a simple list of items with little prose of value. I placed an external link cleanup tag there two weeks or so ago. I am a major contributor to the article. I've worked specifically on the references. Before I started that process they were a mix of properly formatted refs with some as plain url's. So, would you mind helping me properly asses this section before I chime in on that articles talk page? Thanks! E_dog95'  Hi ' 07:58, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

4 star rank
I gather you know what an "AOG" rank is? I don't. Can you enlighten me? Thanks in advance. Pdfpdf (talk) 13:03, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. That's pretty much what I found too, but like you, I had assumed it was a non-trivial edit and I was puzzled. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 00:36, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Cannon-class Destroyer Escorts
You sent me a message regarding recent edits to the Cannon-class destroyer escort page. While I appreciate the template, I simply regularized the format on the page; I wasn't about to go through all thirty-odd cites to add ' markers. Similarly, the documentation for the transfers to Uruguay are on the linked pages for the original ships. Further, there's no other documentation for other transfers and consistency would involve finding and adding those as well.

If you have free time, you're welcome to do all that; or script a bot that could correct all incorrectly unitalicized ship names throughout Wiki.

I was simply improving the article in the course of my work on the Uruguayan armed forces. If that's actually a reason for you to remove the information (hard to fathom why; it's not the bio of a currently living person & it's an improvement to the article), do add the information to the Talk:Cannon class destroyer escort page so that later editors will know it's there and to look for further information. -LlywelynII (talk) 04:51, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Taskforces
Hey there MBK, sorry for not getting back to you sooner, have been quite busy. In terms of the taskforces, I signed up for maritime because it is one of the ones that I actively monitor anyway and it is the area in which I have the most interest. It was Andrew Browne Cunningham's article that got me onto this encyclopedia in the first place! ;) So, at the moment I would prefer to stay as one of the coordinators for that taskforce. Of course it doesn't preclude from doing anything there, so I hope it is not a big deal? Regards. Woody (talk) 15:48, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Uhh
Yeah I Know, i was about to do that. Thanks for reminding me? And Honestly, I think that page should be protected or the make that user blocked. II MusLiM HyBRiD II 21:34, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Milhist members category
I wrote a message about the milhist members category on the link that you sent me, thanks. --Banime (talk) 17:45, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Rollback request
Thanks for the quick note earlier today. However, I have an unrelated request for rollback rights. However, I am not familiar with exactly what is required to attain them, so I'll just give my case and see. I have over 1200 edits and am a member of a number of projects and the counter vandalism unit. Although I do not spend the majority of my time fighting vandalism (I mainly work on articles, GA reviews, and AfDs) whenever I do I always feel like rollback rights would help out immensely. Is the rollback feature mainly needs based? Because I guess frankly I do not need the feature, it just would help and take away some of the hassle with reverting vandalism. I would not abuse the feature and know that if I am ever in doubt of when to use it, then I should not use it. If it is a question of my experience then that is fine as well. Thanks for your time! --Banime (talk) 18:58, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll read them now. --Banime (talk) 19:07, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I am still interested in the feature if you deem my contribs/experience acceptable. However, if you also make the decision based on need, then since I do not spend the majority of my time reverting vandalism I suppose you shouldn't give it to me.  It is just a hassle when I do fight vandalism to not have the feature as it makes it tedious. Thanks again for your consideration. --Banime (talk) 19:17, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the consideration, if I contribute more heavily later and find it is still a big hassle to undo vandalism then I'll reapply in the future. --Banime (talk) 19:26, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

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

Chosen Help
I added a section on USS Chosin (CG-65) "Ship Name" & added REF for ship name but it was deleted twice, I do not want a 3RR violation, but would like to know what I can do to fix the page so that I can edit it properly, and not get it reverted. I did site a reference and posted it.

Source: http://www.chosin.navy.mil/Site%20Pages/About.aspx Bossman00 (talk) 11:52, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

United States Naval Gunfire Support debate
If you get a chance I could use an extra set of eyes here; to reduce the battleship bias in the article I had to add three new subsection that are not exactly well cited, and I was hoping that perhaps you would be able to add a few citations to the article from your own sources. TomStar81 (Talk) 23:55, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

About edits in 'Astronaut'
Then delete page 'Indian human spaceflight program' as this is also false as you say...User:TUSHANT JHA 18:25, 8 October 2008 (UTC) I am not at all trying to do unnecessary things but only trying to convince you all of India's space program by adding more and more resources. If you are deleting on stand that it is local translation then : 1. 'naut' in 'gaganaut' is not sanskrit 2. Delete spationaut as ESA also doesn't has indigenous spaceflights 3. Delete Angkaswan and Taikonaut on same grounds —Preceding unsigned comment added by TUSHANT JHA (talk • contribs) 18:31, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

hiya mate, i understand you work on the yuri gagarin page. if you are intersted in him, i would like to discuss him with you, if thats okay? im the guy who made the entry about yuri hanging out with the wehrmacht during the war. would you care to see the "evidence"?

cheers mate

karl —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr doris (talk • contribs) 19:30, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

hiya mate, i understand you work on the yuri gagarin page. if you are intersted in him, i would like to discuss him with you, if thats okay? im the guy who made the entry about yuri hanging out with the wehrmacht during the war. would you care to see the "evidence"?

cheers mate

karl

oh i forgot, would you please contact me with karl.lambley@btinternet.com#

ta —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr doris (talk • contribs) 19:31, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

USS New Jersey (BB-62)
After New Jersey leaves the mainpage it will be nessicary for us to check all the article linked to USS New Jersey and ensure that no subtle vandalism crept into them by means of the USS New Jersey article. Are you willing to help? TomStar81 (Talk) 19:58, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

response on User talk:Politizer
I have responded to your comments at my own talk page, just in case Benea has any more comments. Thanks for your input, &mdash;Politizer( talk • contribs ) 05:18, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Rollback
Cheers mate, be sure i'll make good use of it. --Eurocopter (talk) 13:21, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Response on eliminating the pronoun "she" from Coast Guard related vessel pages
You left me a message stating that I shouldn't change the pronouns on articles about Coast Guard ships without discussing it first. I did not think that was necessary to discuss as the Coast Guard themselves document that it is improper to refer to Coast Guard vessels as "she". See http://www.uscg.mil/mag/style.asp, Interestingly, the U.S. Navy is still OK with it -- just not the U.S. Coast Guard. I have only been writing and editing the Coast Guard Articles. If you want, I could bring it up on the WikProject Ships talk page, but there really isn't anything to talk about. The Coast Guard says referring to their ships as "she" is improper. Pmarkham (talk) 20:40, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

I went ahead and added the question to the WikiProject Ships page as you suggested. I'll be interested in the response. Pmarkham (talk) 21:12, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Middim13 is wondering if this editor is biased or simply "misguided".
Just stating the facts as they are truely known to be. Information on Royal Navy Submarines is accurate/correct and factual. SEE: John Philip Holland/Arthur Leopold Busch articles etc. etc. etc. Recent information is unearthed/and has resurfaced to accurately reflect on this information about Royal Navy Submarines. Do you hvae some sort of problem with the "nature" of this subject? I am not here to be biased or politically (in)correct in anyway. I have a certain amount of good character with integrity. Others do not. Only here to share information that is sourced and documented. Please don't rush to your judgements. Thanks for your unbiased understanding as you keep these things "Kosher". Of course, the truth cannot always be so. With understanding and all good wishes I am --Middim13 (talk) 21:17, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

If you have a problem with what is known to be true (in shipbuilding circles) than you are indeed doing this system of shared information a great disservice. I hope that I am wrong about your true character and that you are not so slanted in your approach to having integrity.--Middim13 (talk) 21:25, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Your Understanding is certainly appreciated here. I am done "with ships".
Just letting you know that the information you edited from the Royal Navy site (first submarines) is accurate, correct and ideed true! Why you can't find a way to simply come to this "neutral" agreement I'll never understand! You may as well butcher the information about this (very same) subject that I contributed on the History of the Royal Navy page also. It's too bad that the honest truth will be suppressed many times by "specially priviledged" groups for all the wrong reasons! Please behave yourself as I will certainly do the same.--Middim13 (talk) 21:36, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Great work on the Eastern Front but ...
would you be able to take on one of the W07 checklists? Someone with your wikignoming skills will just eat through them (it's mostly pasting). If you can take one it would be really appreciated, largely because if we can cross this job off, we can move on to other things). on? They're here. Many thanks for your time, -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 05:40, 16 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I'll pester you Friday! In the meantime, hit the sack and good luck with the exam! -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 05:45, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thank you for reverting the vandalism to my user page! Regards, NcSchu (Talk ) 19:49, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

W07
You asked to pester remind you about this. -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 17:43, 18 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Great! It's much easier than it looks by the way. -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 17:53, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Heh
Thanks for this. An oops by me. :) &mdash; Ed 17 for President Vote for Ed   03:06, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

A-class review
Oops, looks like I forgot to end all the procedures in those two ACRs. Cheers mate for closing them! --Eurocopter (talk) 19:44, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry bout that
Just having a little fun with it, won't happen again =) Crazyconan (talk) 01:37, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Line of Succession to the British Throne trimming proposal
An editor recently boldly trimmed Line of Succession to the British Throne. Another editor objected. Please contribute to the discussion to determine if there is a consensus to support this bold edit. davidwr/ (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  15:43, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

James Forrestal
Sir or Madam, The information I placed in the article was properly cited to the Hoopes/Brinkley biography. In going back to the history page, I noticed you seem to have overlooked those footnotes (though I did forget to cite H/B when citing the names of Forrestals' parents). I have added back the information and the citations and furthermore added page numbers for all material I have added. I hope this will suffice.Kitchawan (talk) 23:58, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

AMS Experiment
I don't copy-paste. I'm a researcher at a university involved in this experiment. - JarahE —Preceding unsigned comment added by JarahE (talk • contribs) 20:10, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Tila Tequila
Hi, I have a favor to ask of you. I was wondering if there was any way that you could protect the Tila Tequila article? I left a note on the talk page, but received no response. If you look at the page history, for the past month or so it's been vandalized at least twice a day. Thanks in advance! Lady <font color="#fe2c96">★ <font color="#ba6afd">Galaxy  00:04, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

The Wikilink Barnstar

 * Talking of barnstars, would you mind please looking at this and, if you think a clear winner has emerged, closing it and awarding the applicable barnstar? Thanks, -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 05:23, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Iowa Class FT
Hey, MBK004. Given the sudden news of Tom's retirement (which I must admit I could not have seen coming in a million years), the Iowa Class FT drive has been thrown into the limbo. I've cracked through the shelves of books (and believe me, there's a lot to go through), and I'm wondering if, for Tom's sake, we should make that final drive for Iowa-Class Featured Topic? All the best, Cam (Chat) 00:34, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok. it's been watchlisted.  Cam (Chat) 02:25, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Not to worry, I've already responded ;) Cam (Chat) 02:33, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Rollback
Hey MBK, a month ago I requested rollback rights from you and I'd like to request again. Your reasoning at the time was I didn't have need for the tools and of course I understand. I've been fighting vandalism more and more now and of course the annoyance of having to manually undo or revert has come back so I figured I'd request again. For a quick overview of me (and you can look at all of my contributions) I have over 2200 edits (over 800 more than last month) and while I'm mostly working on getting this one article to FA, some DYKs, and GA Reviews, I have been working on vandalism fighting more. Before I go on I'd like to bring attention to my one mistake so far, which I reverted wrongly, however I immediately apologized. Along with my reverts I just had a long "adventure" I guess you would say after unfortunately having to block a vandal and then realizing he had over a dozen sockpuppets and having to get them blocked. Anyway if you think I have a need and can be trusted with rollback I'd appreciate it, and if not then I'll go on my way, and probably in another couple months when I get annoyed with undoing again I can ask again (unless you'd rather me not). Thanks for your consideration. --Banime (talk) 19:53, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you! --Banime (talk) 20:14, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for protecting World War III and blocking that anon. He has been putting the same piece of vandalism for some time now and today it was just getting out of control. Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 17:15, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Navigation
Hi. I noticed your navigation template that you put at the top of all the pages in your userspace, and I was wondering if you would mind if I stole the idea and used something similar for my own userspace. It being your idea I will of course not if you would rather me, but I think that it looks pretty cool and would like to do something fairly similar. Thanks, Joe  ( Talk ) 00:47, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
 * You're more than welcome to use it. I'd appreciate the proper attribution if you decide to keep the images currently on it and just change the links to your userspace, but if you want to tweak it, go right ahead. -MBK004 01:25, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
 * All right, thanks. I'll put a note on the page I use for the template that I got the idea from you. I'll probably keep some images and change others. Joe  ( Talk ) 01:31, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, I've added it, only keeping one image, I think, and credited you on the template page. Thanks again. Joe  ( Talk ) 20:09, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Dick Scobee
So are you saying that everying you [removed a fact tag for] is cited in the NASA bio? One thing I checked was the names of his children- completely uncited in the external links. The point was that there aren't footnotes for some of the claims made in this article. Maybe instead of reverting whole edits, you could just try to improve wikipedia. Thanks --DerRichter (talk) 06:07, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Cheers!
Thanks for completing the closing processes for those two ACRs instead of me. I just went out a bit and was planning to complete them now, but seems it isn't necessary anymore. Cheers! --Eurocopter (talk) 19:10, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXII (October 2008)
The October 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:27, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Female soldiers
I'm not well versed with the wikipedia HTML language. I figured I would just get the ball rolling on the subject.

If you want a cited article, then I leave it to you. I'd rather have somebody who knows what they are doing with wiki's HTML then have myself butcher the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Richco07 (talk • contribs) 04:20, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Ship assessments
I'm sorry - it never occurred to me that I could be doing anything that might be considered edit warring!

I noticed last night that a lot of articles on warships which patently weren't stubs were rated as such, so I've been regrading them; between then and this morning I went through about six hundred of them before giving up in exhaustion, perhaps half of which looked like they needed changed. As far as I know I didn't change any twice (though if so, my apologies - it's hard to keep track) and most seem to be cases of it having been graded a year or more ago and the article having developed since then. I figured that if I left a note each time, people would quickly get annoyed with me asking for their approval dozens of times - something as simple as rerating an article which is no longer a stub shouldn't be contentious, surely?

Anyway, I've given up in exhaustion now, so you have no more need to worry :-) Shimgray | talk | 19:30, 16 November 2008 (UTC)


 * When I say I gave up, I meant my eyes were glazing over :-) I went through all the battleships yesterday, and aircraft carriers this morning (I think these were the ones you objected to, on checking), but in the interim checked every one of the ~5-600 articles tagged with UK-mil-ship-stub; I think I upgraded a couple of hundred of those, both on talk and by removing the tag - at least a third of which were already assessed on talk as start, but still tagged as stubs. If you feel like biting the bullet, the articles tagged with US-mil-ship-stub probably have a similar error rate.
 * I think you're probably right in that I erred slightly more towards start than stub, especially at first, but by the time you've got a couple of solid paragraphs of meaningful text I figure it's worth counting. Quite where to draw the boundary is vague, isn't it? Thanks for the note - I'll try and be a little more conservative next time. Shimgray | talk | 19:43, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

HMS Mahratta
Hi, just seen your grading and assessment for the article. You grade the Coverage and Accuracy criterion as "not met". What needs doing to meet the criterion? Mjroots (talk) 21:55, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

WP:AN
Hi. I'd like to say sorry here, too, I in no way intended to report or complain about anyone I listed there. Do you think I should inform all other editors I mentioned and the admins who protected the respective pages, too? Oh, and the User talk:MBK004/Anon page is just what I meant with "scratchpad", which is what I've seen a number of editors call their version of it. Cheers, Amalthea Talk 22:17, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Most of us who have been here for some time consider it a common courtesy whenever our names are mentioned at either AN or ANI to be notified. No offense taken BTW. -MBK004 22:22, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * OK thanks. I'll go ahead and notify then. Cheers, Amalthea Talk 22:39, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, if I'd known how much high profile attention I was going to generate with that I would have used fewer examples. ;) Done, anyway. Cheers, Amalthea Talk 23:01, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Closing articles
Hey, you might want to take another look at how to close AfDs. I noticed you closed this one, but didn't put the afdtop and afdbottom templates around it to signify it was closed. I have now done this, I am merely letting you know. Have a nice day. <font face="Trebuchet MS">&mdash; neuro(talk) 06:49, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

List of ships captured or attacked by Somali pirates
Hi, you modified the ship names earlier on... I was wondering if you could do it again. A lot of entries were added since your last edit. -- Cat chi? 09:53, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure thing, I'll have another go through the article. -MBK004 21:33, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks! -- Cat chi? 03:06, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Coordinator discussions
It would be helpful to have some input on the following discussions, some of which you may have missed:


 * WT:MHCOORD - Proposal for filling the last three TF coordinator slots


 * WT:MHCOORD - Job description re task forces. Some input already but much more welcomed so we can get a summary/checklist in place.


 * WT:MHCOORD - Views welcomed on whether in principle Milhist should adopt C-Class.


 * WT:MHCOORD - Finishing touches on getting the reappraisal review in place.

Very many thanks :) -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 09:53, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Rollback
Hey, I saw your reply earlier at my ANI and I wanted to respond then but unfortunately I forgot, and I haven't been watching it super closely. I just wanted to let you know you can trust me with the rollback tool, if you have any doubts please feel free to comb my contributions. Rollback has been a real help with vandal fighting, its much quicker and easier, and so far I haven't made any mistakes. Of course, if you'd like, you may always remove it and I can do the old fashioned way, however as I've stated before its just a hassle when dealing with vandalism and slower. So, I just wanted to let you know! Thanks. --Banime (talk) 23:03, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIII (November 2008)
The November 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 16:59, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Nevada
The picture on the main page...did we want that one or the one of her sunk at Pearl Harbor? The latter would be to emphasize the Pearl Harbor connection...I dunno. I just noticed it ans I thought the I'd ask you. :) Cheers! — Ed   17  (Talk /  Contribs)  00:04, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Need help on a page move
I screwed up moving the page Maritime Disaster by moving it to List of Maritime disasters. I didn't realize that someone else had used List of maritime disasters (The title I had intended) as a redirect to the original page. Could you take a look? Shinerunner (talk) 01:05, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks MBK004! I think this falls under the old saying "Look before you leap or be prepared to limp." Shinerunner (talk) 01:14, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry
Sorry about the vandalism, I had been drinking too much red bull that night and had gone berserk on the computer. I promise not to do a bad edit again.--SUFCboy (talk) 19:24, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

North Carolina Class
Sorry if I stepped on toes, but the links are so messed up that I thought it was a painfully obvious edit. Please check it out more closely. Wezelboy (talk)

Darn it!
Sorry for forgetting to post all of the notifications around for Lexington-class battlecruiser's ACR.... :/ — Ed   17  (Talk /  Contribs)  22:30, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Champions Forest
Hi! If you want to please look over Champions Forest, Texas - I know you are from the area, so please take a look at it WhisperToMe (talk) 00:47, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I would really appreciate photographs of the neighborhood - Maybe a sign that says "Champions Forest" and the Klein ISD schools that serve Champions Forest (Klein HS, Kleb IS, Brill ES) - As for the history and genesis, the Houston Chronicle has free archive access, but its search function won't let me simply search for "Champion Forest" - What I may do is do Google News first and then get an exact Chron copy afterwards. BTW, Gulfton, Houston should be a model for other neighborhood articles as it has GA status. I hope to eventually take it to FA. :) WhisperToMe (talk) 01:24, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

edit war
Hi MBK004

I'm again involved in an edit war with a user who delets my comments from the talk page of the crossbow article. Could you please tell him to stop that and explain him the reasons why such a behaviour isn't acceptable. Thanks a lot. Greetings Wandalstouring (talk) 15:53, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Need an opinion
Hi MBK004, we're kicking around ideas on how to list entries on the List of maritime disasters page and we need some spanking new opinions. If your interested please pop in on the talk page. Shinerunner (talk) 11:46, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Page move
Hello again MBK004, I need help with a page move. The article Arandora Star should be moved to SS Arandora Star which is being used as a redirect. Thanks again (and I'll quit pestering you for a bit) Shinerunner (talk) 12:01, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Navigation Template
I too would like to use your navigation template that you have at the top of your page. I will credit you and put your name under it if desired. --Kurtcool2 (talk) 00:02, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Timeline of spaceflight vs List of [rocket] launches
Hi. I noticed you've been copying information from timeline of spaceflight articles into articles such as List of R-7 launches. I thought you might want to know that there is a slight difference between the two formats which your conversion of the launch information seemed to miss. The "Result" field in TLS articles refers to the outcome of the entire mission, whereas the "result" field in lists of launches by a specific rocket only refers to the outcome of the launch itself (for example, the Soyuz 1 mission was launched successfully but later failed, so should be listed as a failure in 1967 in spaceflight, but a success in List of R-7 launches. I thought this might be helpful if you intend to copy more launches between articles of these two formats. --<font color="#115566">GW_Simulations<font color="#000000">User Page 11:29, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Book on Iowa conversions
Thought you might like this "limited preview" Google book. Apologies if you have already looked at it. :) <font face="Impact"> Allanon  ♠The Dark Druid♠ 05:51, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Holiday Greetings
Wishing you a Merry Christmas or a Happy Holiday Season and a joyous and healthy 2009! Postoak (talk) 20:02, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Multiple Designations
Hi MBK004. Was looking at USS Oklahoma City page, which is titled USS Oklahoma City (CLG-5). Would be preferable to name it (CL-91/CLG-5), but not only do I not know how to do it, and not sure I should do it myself, but also wondered about formatting conventions. Is there a convention that handles this situation? Also, could you look at the South Dakota intro idea on my page? ThanksBusaccsb (talk) 16:08, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the Response
Hi MBK004. Thanks for taking the time to look at this on your vacation. Dates were already linked, so I didn't mess with them. Was thinking about conversions as well, so will fix that. Decided to go ahead and put that chunk up, but will fix as you suggest. Will also make similar fixes to anything else I have done.Busaccsb (talk) 05:59, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Tons to What?
Hello again. Have done the converts, but the tonnage has me stumped. Not sure what units to use, and can't find an example. Inset boxes seemm to convert everything except tonnageBusaccsb (talk) 07:59, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Problems with Convert
Sorry to be asking all these questions, but I'm taking a few days off and have time to learn this stuff and get a significant amount of work done here. I'm having trouble with undefined undefined. Can't figure out how to make it help me write "... mounted 15 6-in.(152mm) guns" or 6-inch. All I get is "..mounted 15 6 in (152mm) guns", which could be confusing. I've done this to a couple pages. Once I learn the correct way to do it, I'll go back and fix it.Busaccsb (talk) 21:21, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * TPS'ing here... You may have to just write it out longhand w/o a template...I took a quick glance at convert and I don't think that it supports using hyphens. Otherwise, you will have to write "15" out - even though you are only supposed to do that for numbers under 10, you really don't want to confuse any readers. :) Cheers, — Ed   17  (Talk /  Contribs)  21:30, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Greetings (and some Milhist business)
First, happy new year!

Second, I've raised a couple of things here which could use swift responses. May I trouble you please to check them out?

Thanks! -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 19:33, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
...for the welcome back, and for looking after my FA articles in my absence. I do apreciate it. TomStar81 (Talk) 23:51, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thats odd, they show up for me on both Mozilla and IE7. Did you click the either of the to show tabs after clicking the show button on the master "barnstars and awards" part? If not then they may not have shown. They are there though: User:TomStar81/Awards leads to the page. TomStar81 (Talk) 00:11, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Case closed then :) I was actually quite suprised to find I had been award the chevron w/oak leaves award; although in hindsight it dawned on my that after resigning adminship coordinatorship I was in fact eligible for it. I am thrilled to have received the award, as I am sure the others (yourself included) were; its on of wikipedia's rare awards, and proud to have the honor of displaying it. TomStar81 (Talk) 00:17, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I created Requests for adminship/The ed17; I left a spot for your co-nom as well. When you have filled out, pass this along to ed so he can fill out the three questions and well be in business. TomStar81 (Talk) 02:32, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * (I'm a T-P-S-e-r) One minute after I reply?!? Thanks :)
 * Um, can you par that down to one GA? CB-4, CB-5 and CB-6 are that boilerplated text, and I have to merge them into Alaska-class cruiser still. — Ed   17  (Talk /  Contribs)  02:39, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Ed's rfa
I can not get the talk page stats to show, can you give it try? TomStar81 (Talk) 04:16, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ -MBK004 04:29, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Only the second time I have filed one of these, so it stood to figure that I would be unable to handle one little thing. In this case, the edt stats turned out to be that thing :) TomStar81 (Talk) 04:44, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * It's only my third, but a bot used to do that. -MBK004 04:45, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Ocean liner ship-name style
I appreciate your comment and will await outcome of discussion. One effect of my edits is that there is now a consistency which will greatly aid future consistent change of whatever nature is desired. Regards Bjenks (talk) 05:24, 6 January 2009 (UTC)


 * [You wrote] Please stop your changes to the article until there is consensus on the talk page about them. Also, I'd appreciate it if you'd bring this up at WT:SHIPS so other like-minded editors have a chance to comment since they all might not watch this particular article. -MBK004 04:56, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Have done, but please can we discuss openly on the article talk page Bjenks (talk) 05:46, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

USS Iowa (BB-61)
With the passage of USS Iowa turret explosion only this article remains off the FA-list. I opened the FAC to get Iowa into the FA-club, and assuming that this passes we will have our first FT in about six weeks. TomStar81 (Talk) 06:18, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

A contest you may be interested in
Hello, MBK004. There is a new contest for U.S. and Canada roads that you may be interested in. To sign up or for more information, please visit User:Rschen7754/USRDCRWPCup. The contest begins Saturday at 00:00 UTC. Regards, Rschen7754 (T C) 01:32, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

An unblock request that might merit review
It's one of yours, being discussed here.&mdash;Kww(talk) 22:18, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIV (December 2008)
The December 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) 03:55, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

RE: new adminship
Thanks. Now I can join that epic Admin-Coordinator Cabal you've all been talking about! Cam (Chat) 05:01, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Admittance is automatic upon passing the two requirements. -MBK004 05:03, 12 January 2009 (UTC)


 * But only for Class of '08. Class of '09 need to start their own one :)) -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 05:17, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism
How do I prevent Vandalism on my user page, etc? --Kurtcool2 (talk) 22:34, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the info. --Kurtcool2 (talk) 22:40, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

RE: WikiCup Newsletter
Sure, simply add yourself to User:Garden/WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. <font color=#cc3333>Garden. 22:43, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

USS Texas Peer Review
Hiya MBK. USS Texas (BB-35) is due for a routine PR, and when that concludes lets move ahead with the FAC. I will leave the opening of the FAC nom to you since you've done the latter half of the push for FA status, but will be watching the page to help address any issues that come up. This will be a huge boost to the push for WWI FA quality articles, and since we are coming up the centennial of the first world war I think the time is right to finally get this article in the FA game. TomStar81 (Talk) 08:45, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Sold! :) I'll have the ACR up this evening (I want to take a careful read through the article first to make sure the I's are dotted and the T's crossed. Locating and addressing potential objections before they become a problem is always preferable to having a problem brought to ones attention.) TomStar81 (Talk) 20:14, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Our first priority will have to be the links: Checklinks: USS Texas (BB-35) reveals that some of the external links have flags for being dead or moved. This will have to be addressed during the course of the ACR before moving to FAC. TomStar81 (Talk) 02:38, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I added a few hidden comments in the infobox. Would you or Tom be able to check them? Thanks :) — Ed   17  (Talk /  Contribs)  02:40, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Operation Iron Resolve
Ok, the ACR isup and running. With a little luck we can do this without too much trouble. And to all watching TSPers, welcoming aboard. Your help is appreciated :) TomStar81 (Talk) 02:48, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Its possible the figures account for modernizations and the loss of equipment like secondary battery guns. I can't find any printed references her in the house, although I may have better with that information Tuesday when school starts and the library reopens. TomStar81 (Talk) 03:22, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Wait. Were the three inch guns added during WWI? I doubt that they were included in the design, as they were AA guns (right)? If so, that would probably be why those are not in Conway's or U.S. Battleships... — Ed   17  (Talk /  Contribs)  03:25, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Could be. I suspect this is also the reason why the numbers for the Iowa's fluctuate so much: they were continually updated, and the personnel needed aboard those ships shifted as a result. Losing 120 AA-guns which need 2-3 men to operate accounts for a lot of sailors over time, the same could be said here. TomStar81 (Talk) 03:39, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Give a range for the sailors, similar to Alaska-class cruiser (though I kinda want to change that explanatory note now)? — Ed   17  (Talk /  Contribs)  03:43, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

←Thats depressing. It would appear that Texas is in even worse condition than I imagined as well. Heres hoping they get that dry dock built soon. TomStar81 (Talk) 23:44, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

RE : List of ship launches in 1946
I have no objection to recreation or restoration of the article. Looks like you guys have consensus on the discussion. - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 19:41, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me. I understand that consensus can change, so long you guys are able to establish one at the Wikiproject talkpage that is perfectly fine. :) - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 19:49, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * There's a trick with the templates for ship names to just display the individual name of the ship without prefixes or pennant numbers. See first entry in the table. Mjroots (talk) 20:36, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

NROL-26
Moved to USA 202. Happy gnoming. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 23:46, 18 January 2009 (UTC)