User talk:Nick-D/Archive 21

Military Historian of the Year, 2021

 * Thank you! This is a great honour. Nick-D (talk) 06:30, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered users
Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:13, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Congratulations from the Military History Project

 * Thanks! Nick-D (talk) 22:08, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Anonymous strangers
Hi Nick, it seems every time I ignore that sage advice, it comes back to bite me! See Special:Contributions/14.200.217.193 this gem of human intelligence from Down Your Way. They've been blocked several times for such behavior, so I'm doing my best to ignore and apply WP:DENY from now on. It'd be so easy to insult him based on his country of origin's origin, but I do try to be above that sort of thing. I know y'all are not all jerks, and I try not to paint with too broad a brush. BilCat (talk) 23:47, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
 * The continuing existence of Australians who view the US as a badly educated or uncouth country never ceases to amaze me. I've been to the US - youse are pretty civilised! (even if many Americans couldn't understand what I was saying for some strange reason). Happy new year by the way! Nick-D (talk) 23:55, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Exactly! And Happy New Year to you too. (Btw, youse is found up here too, particularly in urban parts of the Northeast and Midwest, especially as "youse guys", but not always.) BilCat (talk) 00:03, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Working on Comprehensive Review of Suspected South African White Nationalists/Sympathizers
Just wanted to let you know that I am working on a comprehensive list for review and I understand your frustration with my report. I do think what you're saying makes sense and would help my case. Desertambition (talk) 07:09, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks for that. I'd suggest posting it at WP:ANI when it's ready, remembering to notify the editors you're raising concerns about, of course. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 08:49, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

RfC on bilateral relations
Hello Nick-D, I wanted to point you towards a RfC on the topic of renaming bilateral relations articles. I think it would be beneficial to get your perspective on this given your previous involvement in WP:BILATERAL many years ago. If you'd like to participate, please see the discussion page. Cheers, Pilaz (talk) 03:15, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the notification, but I don't think I have an opinion on that issue. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 10:33, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Black Hawks in Australian service
Hi Nick-D, I added an Australia section (well completely rewrote) in the Sikorsky UH-60 Black Hawk article. It's not as detailed though as the Boeing CH-47 Chinook in Australian service article! --Melbguy05 (talk) 16:11, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * That's a nice little summary! I have considered writing an article on the Black Hawks, but sources seem a bit uneven compared to the Chinooks for some reason. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 07:35, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I rewrote part of it and changed the sources. I was reading the The Australian article about using Black Hawks in Afghanistan again and it mentioned upgrades so I did some research and found Chinooks were also mentioned. I read the sources for the November 2005 upgrade in the Chinook article. SMH's article was pretty much identical to the press release so I substituted it, I added the type of miniguns and also added ADM magazine as a source for the upgrades. I couldn't however find the volume or issue number for ADM's article. Don't know if these two interest you and . Regards,--Melbguy05 (talk) 10:54, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Motivation Barnstar

 * No worries at all. It's a very solid article! Nick-D (talk) 22:36, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you very much for your recent positive feedback regarding my recent edit to the Icelandic Air Policing page. Congratulations on winning The Golden Wiki and the Content Review Medal of Merit (Military history)... keep up the excellent work. :-) Davidsmith2015 (talk) 14:09, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you, and no worries at all Nick-D (talk) 08:56, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Peace Loans
Hi Nick, I was just reading Australian Air Corps (TFA tomorrow) and, wanting to know more about Peace Loans, I came across this citation which is currently ref 7 on Residual-current device. I'm flummoxed. Is there an explanation? JennyOz (talk) 09:20, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi Jenny, How odd! I'd be guessing that the person who added that ref either added it to the wrong article, or got the title of the reference wrong via a copy and paste mistake given it looks very irrelevant. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 21:21, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Goodbye request
G'day, Nick, I am retiring from Wikipedia effective immediately. I have requested that my admin tools be removed; could I trouble you, please, to indef my account so that it does not hijacked? Thank you in advance and thank you for your guidance and insight while I have been involved with the site. All the best for your future endeavours both on site and in real life. Take care of yourself. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 07:11, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm really sorry to hear that. I've really enjoyed collaborating with you, and have appreciated your excellent contributions. I've blocked your account as requested. If you decided you'd like to return to editing, just post an unblock request and it will be actioned very quickly. All the best for your family and future endeavours. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 20:26, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVIII, January 2022
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:45, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Foreign volunteers in the Rhodesian Security Forces
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Foreign volunteers in the Rhodesian Security Forces you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cerebellum -- Cerebellum (talk) 22:01, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

TFA nomination for No. 79 Squadron RAAF
I have nominated No. 79 Squadron RAAF to appear as today's featured article for April 25 (Anzac Day). If you would like to join the discussion, please go to Today's featured article/requests/No. 79 Squadron RAAF. Thanks, and happy editing. Z1720 (talk) 20:54, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Foreign volunteers in the Rhodesian Security Forces
The article Foreign volunteers in the Rhodesian Security Forces you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Foreign volunteers in the Rhodesian Security Forces for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cerebellum -- Cerebellum (talk) 16:01, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Follow-up Request to my Dec 2021 "Quick Question/Answer" Request
Hi Nick-D

I am sorry to bother you again but as per my "A quick question/answer?" Talk of 15 December 2021 (see above) and your answering advice I still hope to insert a thumbnail of the 25 SQN RAAF official unit Crest onto the Wiki's "No. 25 Squadron RAAF" webpage.

Immediately after receiving your response to my December Talk Q to you I rang the RAAF's Brand Manager in Dept of Defence Canberra seeking RAAF permission to insert the Crest. The RAAF's Brand Manager advised that, yes the 50 year rule usually applies to such things but he also said he believed there is some 'overarching' ruling or legislation (?) that gives the ADF (eg the RAAF) unlimited time copyright over such things as unit Crests etc.

His reference to such an 'overarching' ruling or legislation (?) strongly suggests he would not be able to place the SQN's Crest onto the "public domain" as he kindly did at my request with the RAAF photos I inserted earlier onto Wiki's "No. 25 Squadron RAAF" webpage.

However, he did say that after looking into the matter he would send me email approval to insert the Crest onto Wiki's webpage.

Since then I have not heard from him, I think partly due to the Festive Season and to Covid's impact in the A.C.T.

I plan to speak to him again but before doing so I thought it best to request your advice/agreement that if he does send me his official email approval to insert the Crest onto Wiki's 25 SQN webpage that it would be ok to do so if the caption to the inserted thumbnail of the Crest includes a reference (by date and RAAF Brand Manager title) of his (ie the RAAF's) emailed permission?

Your advice is requested and would be respected appreciated. Thanks. Shellac41Shellac41 (talk) 05:14, 7 February 2022 (UTC)Shellac41 (talk) 05:36, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'm pretty sure that the 50 year rule is a blanket rule applied to all Commonwealth works. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 07:30, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

FAC mentorship and Philippine articles
Greetings, Nick-D. Before I would get on the above topic, let me introduce myself for a bit - I have been on Wikipedia since late 2021, but started editing just a few months into my life at Wikipedia. While I'm writing this message, I have around thirty edits to my name, meaning I'm still a total novice, and yet, I wanted to make this encyclopedia a bit better for everyone.

Right now, the 2022 Philippine presidential election campaign period is just underway, and with all the misinformation and fake news set to become more rampant in the lead-up, articles like Ferdinand Marcos, Manny Pacquiao, and Leni Robredo are going to face a lot of attention.

I am thinking of getting a handful of articles, starting with Corazon Aquino (and progressing into Benigno Aquino III, Benigno Aquino Jr., Ferdinand Marcos, Martial law in the Philippines, all the way to articles of this year's presidential candidates and its related ones), into FA quality. If those articles remain as it stands, I believe that there will be some distrust among the country's voting public that will be generated over time. And that's why I might request for your assistance.

I could help with the sources, provided that I need to easily access them (e.g. sources via the Internet Archive), not on pay-walled ones, although I will also do that if I have access to the Wikipedia Library. MOS? You can throw me all the suggestions that I have to grasp. NPOV? That's a little bit tricky, but can be helped with a little bit of consensus here and there.

Anyway, I am awaiting your response. LunafreyaLaphicet (talk) 10:46, 13 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Hello, I'd be happy to look over those article when you think that they're at or nearing FA standard. I'm afraid that I don't know much about Philippines politics, but could offer an external opinion. Nick-D (talk) 09:58, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

 * Thank you! I really appreciate it. Nick-D (talk) 09:29, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Permission to Insert 25 SQN RAAF Unit Crest on Wiki's "No. 25 Squadron RAAF" webpage
Hi again Nick-D

As Delegate for the Minister for Defence, Mr Patrick Taylor, the RAAF Brand Manager, Dept of Defence, Camberra, ACT has sent me an email (copy below) giving me permission to insert 25 SQN's Unit Crest onto Wiki's No. 25 Squadron RAAF webpage.

It seems that despite the general 50 year copyright rule, all RAAF unit crests and badges remain copyrighted to the Minister (or the RAAF) under section 83 of the Defence Act 1903.

This is confirmed by the Air Force's website "https://www.airforce.gov.au/about-us/your-air-force/brand/badge" which says: Copyright ''Copyright restrictions apply to the use of any Royal Australian Air Force Badge or logo. They are protected nationally and internationally by the Defence Act 1903, Trade Marks Act 1995 and the Chester Herald Act 1939.''

REQUEST: Your assistance/approval is requested as to how I can insert the PDF copy of the 25 SQN Unit Crest attached to Mr Taylor's emailed approval (copy of email without his attachment below) and how I can reference his emailed approval eg possibly by inserting in the caption to the Crest: ''"

Thanks and regards Nick, Shellac41 Shellac41 (talk) 10:05, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

COPY of The BRAND MANAGER-RAAF's email: From: RAAF BrandManager Attachments 10:31 AM (7 hours ago) to me, RAAF OFFICIAL

Good afternoon Peter Thank you for your request to display the 25SQN badge on the Wikipedia entry for the squadron.

All Royal Australian Air Force badges, current and historic, are protected as defence emblems under section 83 of the Defence Act 1903. Use of a defence emblem by any person requires written authorisation of the Minister for Defence.

The request has been considered and approved by an appointed delegate of the Minister for Defence pursuant to the Defence Act 1903. You are authorised to display the 25 Squadron badge in its entirety and original form on the Wikipedia entry for the squadron only.

A screen resolution file of this badge, suitable for the requested use is attached for this single purpose. Regards Patrick

Patrick Taylor Brand Manager – Royal Australian Air Force Delegate for the Minister for Defence Department of Defence | R1-GF-C027 Russell Offices | PO Box 7902 Canberra BC ACT 2610
 * OK, you'll need to upload it under a fair use claim then, that makes it clear this can only be used in that article. I'd suggest also forwarding the email to the Volunteer Response Team as well. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 10:12, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Axis naval activity in Australian waters at WP:URFA/2020
An article that you nominated for FA status, Axis naval activity in Australian waters, has been marked as "Satisfactory" by two editors at WP:URFA/2020. Can you check the article and determine if it meets the FA criteria? If it does, please mark it as "Satisfactory" on WP:URFA/2020A. If you have concerns about the article, we hope that you will fix it up or post your concerns on the article's talk page. If you have any questions, please go to the URFA/2020 talk page or ping me. Thanks for your help and happy editing! Z1720 (talk) 18:56, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVIV, February 2022
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:23, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

No. 79 Squadron RAAF scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the No. 79 Squadron RAAF article has been scheduled as today's featured article for April 25, 2022. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Today's featured article/April 25, 2022, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.

For Featured Articles promoted recently, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.

We suggest that you watchlist Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me?  14:46, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you today for the article, introduced (in 2011): "This article covers the history and current role of one of the Royal Australian Air Force's most interesting squadrons. No. 79 Squadron saw combat in World War II between 1943 and 1945, was reformed to be deployed to Thailand for six years during the Cold War, was briefly active as a fighter unit based in Malaysia in the late 1980s and has provided initial jet aircraft training to new RAAF pilots since 1998."! - I have Maks Levin on the same page, DYK? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:44, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Reliable source question
Hi Nick, would this be considered a reliable source? It looks to me like it accepts user submissions, amd is probably self-published. Thanks. BilCat (talk) 00:29, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Forgive me for interrupting this investigation—BilCat, further down the article you can clearly see the author, in this case Miguel Miranda (I clearly stated his name in the Wikipedia article, when adding the source); one of the 5 core-members of Military-Today. A site which is used on several other Wikipedia articles, such as: BTR-80; Peugeot P4; BMPT Terminator; GAZ-66; MILAN, and probably many more. This is not a random "submission" I'm trying to promote (I added at least 2 other online sources, for the record); I'm trying to cite the unsourced figures in the infobox, of which 6 were dependent on this one you just deleted. I just wanted to make that clear.
 * Hi both, given the site's guidelines for writers, I don't think that this is a RS. No expertise is required from contributors, and there seems to be no fact checking or the like. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 07:29, 10 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Thanks, it looked that way to me too. BilCat (talk) 07:33, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you Nick. I will have to trust your judgement then. I guess that means I can freely delete this source/website from other Wikipedia articles as well? And if anyone protests, I can redirect them here?
 * Well, it's only my opinion! I think that this was an open and shut case though given there are no indications that the site has a proper editorial process. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 07:20, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Discussion on Belize Defence Force
Hi... Could you please comment on discussion at Talk:Belize Defence Force. Your valuable input is appreciated. Thank you. Ckfasdf (talk) 23:25, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notification. I've commented there. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 23:37, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Revert
Hi Nick-D, could you elaborate on this? Especially your assertion that the text was dubious. In regards to references, it was trimmed in adherence to MOS:LEADCITE. Thanks. 180.196.70.246 (talk) 08:30, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * A bunch of the claims had no supporting citation (for instance, the INA personnel being conscripts) Nick-D (talk) 08:58, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVII, March 2022
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:15, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Request for FA Review
You are listed as an FA mentor. Would you be so kind as to assist in reviewing the article Texas A&M University? Buffs (talk) 23:00, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Sure, happy to do so. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 08:13, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I think everything's been addressed. Any additional feedback? Buffs (talk) 16:17, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't usually follow up much on informal reviews to be honest (to limit my Wiki workload), so if you think you've addressed my comments or similar that's great! I would stress though my underlying concern that the article was taking a pretty narrow approach to the university, including by presenting some pretty unusual aspects as being not worthy of commentary, and not considering the diversity of experiences and views in the student and staff populations. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 10:28, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I respectfully disagree and explained my points as well. If you have nothing else to say I'll consider the matter closed. Buffs (talk) 06:05, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
 * You don't need to satisfy me, but I don't see how the article could be FA standard if it's focused on the experiences of only white able bodied men who live on campus at this university. A general bit of advice is that FAs need to be much better than other articles. Nick-D (talk) 07:06, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
 * If you think this article is focused on "only white able bodied men" you're not reading the entire article. I bid you adieu. Buffs (talk) 16:14, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I read every word of the article, as you asked for a review of it. Nick-D (talk) 09:24, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

100,000!
Keep up the amazing work! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 15:44, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Nick-D (talk) 08:53, 11 April 2022 (UTC)


 * good to see - keep at it, there's a bit more to do :) JarrahTree 10:05, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I suspect about 20,000 of the edits were fixing my own typos! Nick-D (talk) 10:10, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
 * dont be so hard on your self - your steady always there presence is appreciated... JarrahTree 10:13, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Uploading 1967 RAAF photo
Hi again Nick

Do you have any objection (or do I run the risk of being "blocked" by Wiki) if I upload onto Wiki an official RAAF group/unit photo taken of No. 25 Squadron in Darwin NT in June 1967 (ie >50 years ago)? The RAAF Brand Manager, Canberra has confirmed the RAAF have no surviving copyright on the photo.Shellac41 (talk) 08:25, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:COPYRIGHT. If the image is free of copyright, that's fine and you don't need to ask about this. is the template to use for copyright purposes here. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 08:51, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

New administrator activity requirement
22:53, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

FAC mentoring on John L. Chapin
Hi, Nick! I've had a peer review open for a little over a month now, and I came across your name as a mentor. I know the article is a bit on the shorter side, but you never know. Would you be interested in helping me through this process? Thanks in advance for your time! Bsoyka ( talk ) 20:18, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll post some comments in the peer review. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 22:32, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

Canberra Airport
A question if i may. You recently edited the article Canberra Airport with an edit comment that Virgin Australia will resume service to Sydney with their own aircraft. Just curious as to the source of this information as I cant find anything published in local or aviation media to verify it? Dfadden (talk) 07:48, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh, you're right: I looked on the VA website, but didn't realise that the 737 flights are via other cities. My mistake! Thanks for pointing this out and correcting it. Nick-D (talk) 09:42, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
 * No problem at all! I actually work at (but not for) Canberra airport and have a few contacts in the aviation sector, so this one caught my attention and curiousity. Thanks for all the work you put into maintaining wikipedia! Dfadden (talk) 04:35, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history/Showcase/FP
I just added the 34 MILHIST featured pictures that have been promoted since the last one was added in March 2020 (File:Russian Imperial Family 1913.jpg) - I'm sure that there's ones missing before that, but there's a limit to how much one can do. Hopefully, we don't fall this behind again. I didn't even try to alphebetise them in, though, partially in case you want to check them. I think they're all pretty obviously on the MILHIST side, I ignored anything where I didn't see MILHIST connections mentioned in their article. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs 10:05, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVIII, April 2022
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:23, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Falauyah Lines - Mesopotamia Campaign
Dear Nick,

Our paths have crossed previously, when we had a minor spat on the importance of Chartwell. I hope you are keeping well. I have a military-related query and wonder if you may be able to help. For a number of reasons, I’ve been doing a little on Angus Buchanan (VC). He was blinded by a sniper at the Falauyah Lines in Mesopotamia in early April 1916. I am guessing this was during the Siege of Kut, but it is only a guess. Do you know where I might find out for definite? Also, in passing, are the Falauyah Lines related to Fallujah? An alternative spelling? I don’t actually think so, as Kut is south of Baghdad, while Fallujah is to the west. Any light you could shed on this would be much appreciated. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 13:49, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I don't know anything about that aspect of World War I, and don't have any sources. I suspect that the relevant volume of the British official history might be useful - links to the volumes are at History of the Great War. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 10:17, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Nick - many thanks. The link is really helpful, and I’ve spotted a reference to Falauyah. Shall wade through - the very long! - documents. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 10:48, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

ARC Request
Hi Nick,

I wondered if you have the time and motivation in the near future. Would you be willing to review Battle of Utica? It only needs one review. If so then I'll try to get some time to review Foreign volunteers in the Rhodesian Security Forces of yours. :) Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 06:54, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Sure, but I probably won't have time to look in on that until next weekend. Nick-D (talk) 10:18, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Kathy Barnette
Per the outcome of the first AfD, could Kathy Barnette be redirected to 2022 United States Senate election in Pennsylvania? I'm not sure it's eligible for SALTing at any rate, as it wasn't repeatedly recreated, but recreated only once. Perhaps full protection on the redirect would be the way to go? schetm (talk) 17:59, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Oops, yes I should have done that. Now done - thank you. Nick-D (talk) 08:35, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Just curious, what was the original reason for deleting the page?Paul Siraisi (talk) 18:46, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Please see Articles for deletion/Kathy Barnette. The latest iteration of the article was essentially the same as the version discussed in that AfD. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 08:35, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Kathy Barnette


A tag has been placed on Kathy Barnette requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Articles for deletion/Kathy Barnette. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Chris Troutman ( talk ) 16:28, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Looks like someone remade the article over your redirect. I deleted it G4, then restored your redirect revision and full-protected the redirect as "salting". Please feel free to amend these admin actions of mine if you have any objections. {&#123; Nihiltres &#8202;&#124;talk&#8202;&#124;edits}&#125; 16:50, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Great, thank you Nick-D (talk) 00:31, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Timor Leste Defence Force
Hi Nick, I am currently shoring up East Timor as part of WP:The Core Contest. Included in the article is a section on Foreign relations and military, of which the Military portion appears to be the lead of Timor Leste Defence Force. As it is taken from a lead it has no sources, and I'm also looking into if an update is needed given it focuses on the events immediately post-independence and post-2006. Seeking not to reinvent the wheel given there's a FA, I looked through the FDTL article and sadly found the references I wanted to look at offline. Given you work on the article, I thought it worth asking if you would be able to recommend one or two recent sources that would best provide a high-level summary of the military, and perhaps on its role in foreign relations, if any. Best, CMD (talk) 08:12, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, The Military Balance is the best source - it provides a short summary of the F-FDTL's role as well as its funding and structure and is updated annually. Unfortunately there aren't any other relatively easily accessible sources on the topic, and it needs to be cobbled together from multiple sources. The East Timorese government used a copy and paste of the Wikipedia article as its official website for the military for a while! (complete with text noting problems with leadership, corruption, etc!), so the Wikipedia article might even be the best source. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 08:51, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks, didn't see that there were more options for that beyond WorldCat. I don't think too much is needed on the main page, so The Military Balance will do. Often a challenge to find good sources on East Timor sadly. Best, CMD (talk) 09:27, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Dear just to advise regarding "The Military Balance," Australian Government publications dating back to 2011 appear to indicate the two battalions are long gone. There was a colonel commanding the land component at the old 1st Bn base in Baucau. Probably back to the independent companies that the FALINTIL were used to. Can't find the exact sources now, however. Buckshot06 (talk) 05:02, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
 * That's really interesting! The Military Balance 2022 says that the two battalions both exist, but obviously could be wrong given information on the F-FDTL is scarce and it's a low priority for most analysts. Nick-D (talk) 05:14, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Ah, I think you know the business I'm in, Nick. Contact me by e-mail should you wish to follow up. Buckshot06 (talk) 06:09, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Kathy Barnette Salting
I had been working on a Draft article Draft:Kathy Barnette and after I submitted it for review, I was shocked when it was immediately rejected.(I've created another draft that is still being reviewed 3 months later) I worked on it without knowing the deletion history behind it. Since the title is now salted, no new page (or draft) will ever be approved. The reason why it was repeatedly deleted was for notability concerns. 7 days since it was deleted last, Barnette is now in the news everywhere, and I would like to know if your opinion has changed on if she is non-notable and if you could maybe remove the salting. Many thanks!-- Physeters ✉ 01:52, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'm Australian and have no opinion on her notability: I deleted and salted the article as the same article had been repeatedly recreated, with the most recent iteration not making any new claims of notability. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 09:55, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

User:LordHood2552
Dear Nick, I began to go to WP:ANI to start a complaint against this user, who does not seem to understand the hierarchical category structure, persistently putting articles (and even new categories) in several levels of the category structure at the same time, despite warning at User talk:LordHood2552. I have been trying to follow him around to clean up this mess he is creating. But it said also that one could consult currently active admins, of which I know you're one. I have just been reverted for removing overcategories at The Prince of Wales Rangers (Peterborough Regiment). This editor does not seem to understand that Category:Ranger regiments of Canada is a subcategory of Category:Infantry regiments of Canada and the articles should not be in both categories. Can you advise please, or investigate yourself should you wish? Buckshot06 (talk) 01:13, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'd suggest taking this to ANI if it's still ongoing. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 03:54, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

User:Buckshot06
Dear Nick, I apologize I have to write this and I hope I'm posting this in the right place, but it seems I'm not having much choice. Since the start of the month, User:Buckshot06 has been interfering on articles I have been working on, most of which were ones which I had authored personally. I am still relatively new to editing and writing wiki pages having only really started back in late November. I'll admit there are some things here I am still learning to do right. However, in my view the categories I was adding were ALL relevant. If some of them were in fact doubled, it was only intended because they overlapped with others. For example Buckshot listed mine regarding Category: The Prince of Wales Rangers (Peterborough Regiment). The ones I had added in fact overlapped with said categories and I considered them relevant and applicable. For the purposes of searching, I consider more information for when people are searching to be helpful than less. Another thing to note was I was in the process of creating a category page however when I made it live, the main page for it I had created it for had been deleted. Checking the page history, I had found that User:Buckshot06 had in fact deleted it from the categories before I considered it ready to go active. In another instance, I had received a notice that a categories page I had created was being considered for deletion because it was empty. After checking the relevant pages, I had found in the page histories that User:Buckshot06 had in fact removed the categories from the main pages resulting in the page becoming "empty". In another case, User:Buckshot06 had done the same thing to another category page of mine that resulted in it being deleted. For nearly the past month, I have let this pass and attempted to correct some these so-called "overcategories" that User:Buckshot06 has called them. However he has also been removing categories from directly relevant pages as well. For the pages I have worked on researching, collecting references and citations and writing out rough drafts for on my PC BEFORE publishing frankly I find it aggravating that my work which I take pride in is essentially in my view being undermined. I don't mean to sound pretentious or like I know better than you might. If I was in fact adding overcategories to certain pages, it was because I felt they were relevant to the topics at hand. If I don't understand the "category structure" as User:Buckshot06 has suggested, then maybe its because what I was doing sounded relevant or made sense to myself. I replied to User:Buckshot06 kindly asking him to stop, but then he responded by reporting me to you here. So here I am trying to put my side of the story here. I'm still new to this so most likely I will make some mistakes till I get the hang of things. Can you advise please?

Kathy Barnette's 3rd Nomination
In Articles for deletion/Kathy Barnette (2nd nomination), you mention salting the earth to prevent a new article. Is there a difference in the article? It has since been recreated and there is currently a debate around Articles for deletion/Kathy Barnette (3rd nomination)--Mpen320 (talk) 20:28, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, the new version of the article was quite different so avoided the problems I responded to. Nick-D (talk) 09:52, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXCIII, May 2022
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:55, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

"Just War Theory Doctrine wikipage" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Just War Theory Doctrine wikipage and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 31 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 21:52, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

New Guinea campaign
I've been considering expanding the coverage of the US 41st Infantry Division in World War II, and was curious as to what secondary scholarship you could recommend on the Nassau Bay landing and Salamaua, Hollandia, Biak and the Mindanao liberation, as someone who works frequently on the Southwest Pacific campaign articles. I've already found Taaffe, but what other sources would you recommend that cover the Americans well in this theatre? Kges1901 (talk) 16:21, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, the sourcing on those battles is pretty thin, unfortunately. and  have done great work on them, and the sources listed in the articles should be useful. The main sources remain the Australian and US official history series, supplemented by works on individual battles such as those written by Phillip Bradley on Salamaua. Edward Drea's book on the role of code breaking in the theatre is very useful on that topic, and has some useful snippets on other related issues. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 10:18, 9 June 2022 (UTC)


 * I gathered a lot of materials on these campaigns years ago, but never got around to writing them up, so I am willing to help you with the writing. I presume you have already got a hold of a copy of The Jungleers. The Australian official history of the New Guinea Campaigns is available online from the Australian War Memorial, and the US ones can be downloaded from the Center of Military History. The 41st Infantry Divisions report on Biak can be downloaded from here. Roger Lawless wrote a two-part account of the Biak operation in Military Review (May and June 1953) which can also be downloaded. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  03:19, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

PR request
Hello, Nick-D. Apologies for the random message, but I was wondering if you could leave comments at Peer review/Bad Romance/archive4. I plan to take the article to FAC sometime. Thank you either way. FrB.TG (talk) 16:39, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, as that's one of my least-favourite songs of all time, I think I'll pass on this one I'm afraid as I don't think I can be neutral. Please ping me if you'd like comments on articles covering better songs! Regards, Nick-D (talk) 10:14, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protection
Hi Nick, a while back you helped me out with a dynamic IP farm from Australia that was making persistent disruptive edits with occasional uncivil comments. Well, they've never really gone away, but seem to focus on 1 to 3 articles at a time. Right now they've been targeting the McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II article. Could you look into semi-protection for the article. They have several IP ranges that they use, so direct blocking won't really help. Thanks again. BilCat (talk) 03:00, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, I've semi-protected this. I have to say that the IP here is engaging in some of the saddest edit warring I've ever seen: surely they have something better to do with their time! I hope that all's well in your part of the world. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 10:16, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Nick, if you're still online, they are currently at Special:Contributions/124.170.226.146. They seem to swap IPs quite regularly, and may even be more than one person, but every little bit helps. Thanks. BilCat (talk) 00:55, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Jokes in article space
Hi Nick,I just wanted to make you aware of this edit, in case it has been or becomes a recurring problem. Thanks. BilCat (talk) 07:53, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Given how much the US Space Force seems to be inspired by Star Trek, I wouldn't be surprised if it was the motto! Regards, Nick-D (talk) 08:51, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * And thank you too. His response here is odd. I've certainly not had that experience! BilCat (talk) 10:27, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Australian Flag article issue
Hi Nick, see Talk:Flag of Australia. I want to make sure I'm not missing something of such great historical importance to Australian that a photo of relatively nothing should be kept. Thanks. BilCat (talk) 02:34, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * That's a bad photo of an easily photographed thing (it's in the very centre of downtown Sydney), so you were right to remove it. I've never heard of this flag being flown in Sydney before, though I don't take much interest in flag history. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 10:09, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Another Australian editor chimed in, and the user has backed off. BilCat (talk) 21:28, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Bugle
Did we not publish the June Bugle? I could have sworn we did, and updated the newsroom to July accordingly. Did I mess up? Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.9% of all FPs 21:09, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Not published yet. Nick-D (talk) 10:18, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I really am sorry for that, then. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.9% of all FPs 13:57, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
 * No damage done! Thanks for your contributions. Nick-D (talk) 10:19, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Australian War Memorial Vietnam War photos
Hi, recently I have been pillaging the AWM website for public domain Vietnam War photos and adding them to Commons. This exercise has revealed some gaps in the coverage of Australian involvement that you may be able to resolve. Are you familiar with the 1st Field Squadron? Were they an RAAF or Army unit? Was Australian Advisory Force Vietnam the same as Australian Army Training Team Vietnam or did AATTV fall within it? Was 161 Reconnaissance Flight an RAAF or Army unit? regards Mztourist (talk) 06:23, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, The 1st Field Squadron would have been an Army engineer unit. I'm not sure what the Australian Advisory Force Vietnam was. 161 Reconnaissance Flight was an Army unit (No. 9 Squadron was RAAF, and all the other aviation units in Vietnam were Army, aside from the flight of Navy helicopters that was attached to a US Army unit). Regards, Nick-D (talk) 10:20, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that, I'll do some more digging on Australian Advisory Force Vietnam. regards Mztourist (talk) 03:28, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I think Australian Advisory Force Vietnam was a mislabelled photo caption, which should have been Australian Army Force Vietnam. As a separate issue, why is the Army not Royal, unlike the Air Force and Navy? Mztourist (talk) 08:32, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Martinvl @ Meta-Wiki
FYI, I thought you should be aware of this discussion, it's possible you may be asked to comment. I see that Martin has already pinged you. Regards, WCM email 13:18, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but I'm not active on Meta and honestly have no recollection of what the issue here was so I don't have anything to add to the discussion. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 09:06, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
 * It was nearly a decade ago, he remains blocked because he insists everyone has wronged him. WCM email 09:08, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh dear, that's not going to work out for them! Nick-D (talk) 09:22, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXCIV, June 2022
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:43, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Paul Keating - "otherwise controversial" threats to good-faith editors
You posted warning for editing an article about Paul Keating. You claimed I was "inserting unsourced or poorly sourced defamatory or otherwise controversial content". I was, in fact, quoting, in good faith, an article by ABC News, which seems to be a perfectly good source, reporting what seems to be a genuinely held opinion in the public realm. . You claimed that I could be blocked for including "otherwise controversial content" in an article. What is your source for that threat? I didn't find it in the BLP guidelines. How is Wikipedia to reflect politics if it does not reflect the widest range of different views on policies and political actors? "Controversial" is weasel word that means everything one person doesn't want to others to read, hear, or say, which is why Wikipedia is so often subject to attempts by PR firms to whitewash clients' articles. Perhaps you didn't or don't spend much time reflecting on the edit. I'd suggest it does Wikipedia is disservice if administrators weigh in with such poorly considered notices. Burraron (talk) 15:24, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
 * It's throw away and single dimensioned abuse of a complex person who has attracted a wide range of commentary, including criticism, for a very wide range of issues. As such, it's plainly unbalanced and lazy editing (so lazy that it's actually a copyright violation) and you will be blocked if you re-insert it for a third time. I hope that's clear. Nick-D (talk) 22:55, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
 * You clearly don't understand copyright law either. Please could you report yourself to someone more responsible on Wikipedia for your unpleasant and repeatedly threatening behaviour? Burraron (talk) 11:00, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't mean to burst your bubble here, but you are actually in the wrong. Please don't copy and paste text from news stories into Wikipedia, and please also take care with editing articles on living people. Thank you, Nick-D (talk) 11:25, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history/News/July 2022/Articles
Hey, Nick! Trying to make things a mite easier on everyone. Do you know if the three listed are the only A-class promotions for June? I'm happy to write up summaries for all of them, just wanted to check before I made something look finished that wasn't. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.9% of all FPs 16:11, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
 * There's a bot that automatically adds all the promotions to that list, so yep that should be the lot. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 11:08, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Okay, will finish that up today. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.9% of all FPs 11:38, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

AfD of Carlo Kopp
I have nominated Carlo Kopp for deletion. You recently weighed in on my PROD of this article so feel free to contribute to the AfD. Vladimir.copic (talk) 00:15, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know Nick-D (talk) 08:43, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Talk:Wade Keyes
What is wrong with the "Referencing and citation" and "Structure" in the article Wade Keyes? Creuzbourg (talk) 19:20, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
 * That's not an article I've had any involvement with, and I have no views on the topic. Nick-D (talk) 08:22, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXCVI, July 2022
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 20:28, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Reverted
Hi Nick, see this partial revert of one of your edits to an Australian topic. Normally I wouldn't even mention it, but the same IP was used a few days ago to make the same sort of edits we've had trouble with from the Australian IPs before. They used another IP to revert the reversion of those edits, but sometimes they've returned to a previous IP. (It may all be automatic, but I have no idea.) Anyway, I thought you should at least be aware of it. BilCat (talk) 07:10, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
 * That seems OK. It's generally best to avoid calling things "controversial". Regards, Nick-D (talk) 07:25, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
 * No problem then. I just wanted to keep you the loop. BilCat (talk) 08:26, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Australian insults
I've had people from all over the world try to insult me on Wikipedia, but the strangest attempts have been from Australian users. See here for the latest attempt by our IP farm from Down Under. Would an Australian really be insulted by something like that? BilCat (talk) 03:26, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
 * If I called any of my staff a 'numpty' they'd be offended, as the term basically means 'ineffectual idiot', but in a relatively kindly sort of way. It's not too bad when applied to strangers (e.g. saying "the guy running the restaurant is a bit of a numpty" to a friend wouldn't stop either of you going there, but you'd just expect a slightly odd experience). We have plenty of terms that are much more insulting, and "lazy and neurally-challenged" seems much worse. The IP editor seems to be a bit of a drongo, so I've blocked them. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 08:33, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

This is just plain strange!
Hi Nick, see here. We do get all kinds! BilCat (talk) 22:56, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
 * That is really quite strange! Nick-D (talk) 10:33, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Proposed Text Revision of en.Wikipedia's "No. 25 Squadron RAAF" Website $ Uploading of 2 Photos
To Wikipedia Help Desk with cc’s to Ruthven, Yann and Nick-D “Talk” pages

Hi Wiki Help Desk

1. I have placed a proposed revision of the text of en.Wikipedia’s No. 25 Squadron RAAF website with supporting additional footnotes in Wiki’s format onto the webpage’s “Talk” section.

For convenience the text’s revised sections are underlined.

2. As suggested by Wiki Commons Information Team Member JJ Clark by email on 18 Aug I have also re-uploaded 2 over 50 year-old RAAF photos onto en.Wikipedia’s No. 25 Squadron RAAF website using jpeg files and the template, being

( and



As a not too computer literate, nearly 80 year-old ‘user’ I hope not to invoke any further Wikis censures or deletions so request any advice or comment you or any Wiki adminstrators’ (including the 3 receiving cc’s of this email on their “Talk” pages) are willing to offer about the acceptability/suitability of 1. and 2. above is requested and would be appreciated.

Wiki User Shellac41 21 August 2022 ~ Shellac41 (talk) 09:59, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history/News/August 2022/Articles
Could you check which articles I included? Shepseskaf or Royal necropolis of Byblos might be a little too unconnected. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.1% of all FPs 16:50, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for this Adam. Shepseskaf seems in-scope as he would have commanded the military forces (or equivalent), but I think that the Royal necropolis of Byblos is out of scope. We try to keep the length of the blurbs fairly short and punchy, after feedback a while ago that they were going unread. The ACR nominators who provide ready-made punchy statements in the nomination have been in my good books ever since! Regards, Nick-D (talk) 10:11, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

August 2022
From your listing at FAC mentors, you are listed for possible interest in History. For the past several months, I've been working on the president's article for James Madison and have made a successful GAN promotion. Madison was active during the War of 1812. After the successful GAN promotion, it then had a very nice GOCE copy editing done by a good reviewer which enhanced it more. Is there any interest for you to have a look at it to see if a new co-nomination for FAC might be possible for this distinguished fourth president? ErnestKrause (talk) 14:38, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll look over it this weekend. I have to say I don't know anything about him. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 11:06, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Really strong comments from you on the Talk page there, and I've left some responses for you at that Talk page. The changes are also reflected in my adjustments to the article which you can adapt further as needed. Any interest in a co-nomination at FAC for this famous president during the War of 1812? ErnestKrause (talk) 15:33, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
 * No worries. As I don't know anything about this person beyond his fairly unflattering portrayal in Hamilton, I wouldn't be well placed to assist with nominating it for FAC I'm afraid. I think that the article is in good shape, but just needs a bit of polishing to be reading for FAC. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 08:52, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for those comments on the peer-review for James Madison back in August which were really useful. I've now gone ahead with a FAC nomination and thought to ask if you might stop there to make some support/oppose comments for the article? ErnestKrause (talk) 23:19, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Always precious
Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:28, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXCVII, August 2022
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 08:59, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Congratulations from the Military History Project

 * Thank you! Nick-D (talk) 07:40, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election voting opening soon!
Voting for the upcoming project coordinator election opens in a few hours (00:01 UTC on 15 September) and will last through 23:59 on 28 September. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. Voting is conducted using simple approval voting and questions for the candidates are welcome. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:27, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Correction to previous election announcement
Just a quick correction to the prior message about the 2022 MILHIST coordinator election! I didn't proofread the message well enough and left out a link to the election page itself in this message. The voting will occur here; sorry about the need for a second message and the inadvertent omission from the prior one. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:41, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election voting closing soon
Voting for the upcoming project coordinator election closes soon, at 23:59 on 28 September. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. Voting is conducted using simple approval voting and questions for the candidates are welcome. The voting itself is occurring here If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:13, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXCVIII, September 2022
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 21:31, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Hawkesbury and Nepean Wars
Hi User:Nick-D, I've noticed we've become entangled in a little dispute over the Hawkesbury and Nepean Wars. Now I know you're a far more experienced editor and I'm not going to dispute that, but regarding my edit which you reverted on October 2, I was merely removing an unsourced addition made on 5 July 2022 to the lede. Now I know that this page is part of a contentious period in Australian history, but irregardless of what you feel about the edits in question I'd just like to again note that they are both unsourced and clearly violate WP:POV. Now if you choose to revert my edit again I won't contest it, but I'd like you to just look over it again before you do so. Thanks, 92.233.84.68 (talk) 23:20, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Proposed Text Revision of en.Wikipedia's "No. 25 Squadron RAAF" Website
Hi Nick-D I would like to publish the changes I propose to Wiki's "No 25 Squadron RAAF" website as per the proposed changes on the site's talk pages. For convenience of others I underlined most of the changes. Question: I request your advice as to how, if I now "publish" the changes onto the site, do I remove or prevent the underlining from being published? Shellac41 Shellac41 (talk) 06:06, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, I imagine that you can just leave out/remove the coding around the underlined sections? I haven't ever used this coding, so am unsure what it is. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 06:56, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks Nick-D will try. Shellac41 (talk) 01:04, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXCVIII, October 2022
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:38, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Foreign suppliers
Hi Nick, do you think there's any support for removing the "Foreign suppliers" field from Template:Infobox national military altogether? It's almost always unsourced, and is generally just a flag farm. I really don't see it as being very useful at all. Thanks. BilCat (talk) 19:00, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I suspect that there probably would be. I don't think I've ever seen it used in a useful way. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 08:33, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

New Article
I would like to nominate my article Action This Day (memo) re Bletchley Park for a mention in The Bugle. Hugo999 (talk) 00:35, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, the article news section covers new A-class and featured content only. Unrelatedly, I suspect the article may be misnamed as Churchill was famous for sending out lots of memos and notes he marked 'action this day'. Nick-D (talk) 09:55, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

 * Thank you! Nick-D (talk) 07:24, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Seeking an FA Nomination
Dear, I was wondering if the article on Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed which I've expanded extensively would make the cut as an FA. It's currently pending review for GA, but I think its detailed and comprehensive enough to feature on the main page with a little sprucing up. Do have a look and let me know if/how this can be taken forward, as this is my first attempt at getting an FA and I'm unsure how to go about it. Cheers! Ashwin147 (talk) 06:43, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Hello, I'm afraid that I don't know anywhere near enough about Indian politics to be able to comment on whether this article is at FA status at present. It looks very comprehensive and well referenced. I'd suggest adding more images if you can. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 09:51, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXCIX, November 2022
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 10:32, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Grey's Scouts insignia
Hello. I would like to preface by stating that I would very much appreciate it if you would notice me; through my talk page, of any potential copyright infringements that my works would have. If I did not follow the Grey's Scouts article I wouldn't have known about this issue. As of writing this I have looked at similar vectors from Rhodesia, the Rhodesian flag file claims that the flag was once under Crown Copyright. However, given that Rhodesia was a de facto independent state, although not internationally recognized, I am inclined to disagree. Zimbabwe became a member of the Berne Convention in 1980. Does the Berne Convention work retroactively? Are works that were made in Rhodesia covered under the Berne Convention in Zimbabwe? I don't know, but I have contacted Fidelis Maredza of the Zimbabwe Intellectual Property Office (ZIPO). I have yet to receive an answer, however. I will inquire The National Archives of the United Kingdom tomorrow, and ask there as well. If it is indeed covered under some form of copyright, I will reupload the file as a non-free file directly to Wikipedia instead of on Commons. Someone will have to remove the current file hosted on Commons, however, I would ask you to please refrain from doing so until a clear verdict is reached regarding this issue. Thank you. Sprucecopse (talk) 20:03, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Hello, The best advice for now seems to be https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/Zimbabwe This states that government images from what's now Zimbabwe are under copyright "for 50 years from the end of the year in which the work is lawfully made available to the public or, failing such an event within 50 years from the making of the work, 50 years from the end of the year in which the work is made". See also https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-Zimbabwe which notes that images needed to be free of copyright as of 1996 to be able to be hosted on Wikimedia Commons. As the Grey's Scouts were formed in 1975, their badge is presumably under copyright until 1 January 2026, so this is a copyright violation under Zimbabwean and US law. I note that you are also uploading these images under incorrect claims that you are the copyright holder, which is also problematic for obvious reasons. Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons take a conservative approach to copyright, so I don't see how these images can be retained in either if the advice on Commons is correct, which it usually is. I'd suggest that you nominate the images for deletion. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 07:22, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Hello again and thank you for your quick answer. If I uploaded these images under the claim that I am the copyright holder, that would be an unintentional mistake on my part. I simply selected the "This is my work" box when uploading, as I reasoned that the file is technically my interpretation of physical badges, done at my own discretion. This is evident in the Selous Scouts vectorization, which differs somewhat from the real badge used. Additionally, although not a valid excuse for all files, I would like to point out that many artists that recreate vectors here on Wikipedia do so whilst retaining a creative-commons license over that material. Since I have at times used several assets from other such works, hosted on commons, which fall under such a Creative-Commons ShareAlike license, I must do the same with my own work, per the rules of the ShareAlike license. I am unsure why you don't see how these images can be retained on Wikipedia as a non-free file, as a plethora of vector use the "Template:Non-free Crown copyright", as using a smaller version of these files with the express intent of it being for an educational purpose is generally considered to be fair use under United States copyright law. However, this of course seems to apply to British Crown copyright, if we look at the actual document that "PD-Zimbabwe" is based on, the "Copyright and Neighboring Rights Act", educational use of a copyrighted work is allowed so long as the following three criteria are met:
 * (a) The use is compatible with fair practice; and
 * (b) the extent of the use is justified by the purpose; and
 * (c) sufficient acknowledgement is given.
 * I believe my works meet this criteria. I would therefore argue that it can indeed be hosted as a non-free file on Wikipedia, rather than Commons. Finally, I believe that the removal of the 7 Independent Company vectorization is unjustified, as the work contains two elements, the Rhodesia Regiment badge, which is now public domain, and a patch in the colors of the French flag. The metallic badge is the only part of this file that can be claimed to be under copyright, as it is sufficiently complex, the patch cannot as it is a simple geometric shape with three colors. I can therefore not see why this file would be a copyright violation. Sprucecopse (talk) 19:51, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, you're right, they could potentially be hosted on Wikipedia in a much smaller form under the fair use criteria. Regarding the 7th Independent Company image, I'd imagine that the combination of those things would constitute an original work and thus be under copyright, especially if it includes a non PD element. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 09:28, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your answer, I'll take the necessary steps to ensure that the images are hosted as non-free files on Wikipedia rather than on commons, and make sure that these kinds of slip ups don't occur again. Your help has been much appreciated. Sprucecopse (talk) 14:03, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Army Restructure??
G'day @Nick-D, I have recently stumbled on an apparent restructure by the Australian Army, which is full of corporate speak and marketing... do you know what exactly is going on? Is just a bunch of smaller changes that is being championed as one big reform? If it is significant, then it probably deserves a mention on the main article if not a dedicated article itself... just like Plan Beersheba back before I deleted after it lost its relevance. Thanks for considering this inquiry/confusion edit. P.S. the sources I'm paraphrasing are their youtube channel and their website. P.P.S. They are calling it the Army Objective Force (whatever the hell that means).

Have a nice day, without any confusion-induced headaches, IronBattalion (talk) 03:30, 18 November 2022 (UTC).
 * This the the first I've seen of it, but I imagine that you're referring to https://www.army.gov.au/our-work/armys-transformation ? It looks like some major changes are being made, including establishing entirely new regiments and brigades. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 09:25, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Eileen Collins
Could I trouble you for an image review of Eileen Collins at WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Eileen Collins? The A-class nomination has three supports, and only needs source and image reviews to sign it off. Hawkeye7  (discuss)  21:34, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Sure, happy to. I've just posted it. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 05:55, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Re the very weird revert - Apology, sorry I have no idea how that happened, for a moment I thought I had been hijacked, but it must have been something else. JarrahTree 01:02, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Loser
Changing edits for no reason other than to be a dick 2600:1011:B13B:10A7:3119:7E67:C97D:2FE9 (talk) 09:13, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Aren't you a charmer! Nick-D (talk) 09:25, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Needs to go to FAR?
I saw you left some sourcing concerns at the Kruger FAR. Would you also be willing to take a look at William Harper (Rhodesian politician)? I don't think Young and Smith are great sources, I think Wood has been challenged before, and some of the other sources look questionable to me. It's one of the oldest at WP:FARGIVEN, and the original FAC nominator has vanished, so I'll probably take it to FAR soon after Kruger clears if it's problematic. Hog Farm Talk 20:12, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
 * At this stage I suspect that there's a good case for taking most, if not all, of Cliftonian's remaining FAs to a review. The text of this article seems OK - a white supremacist and reactionary is presented as such. The heavy reliance on Wood is problematic though: while he's been published by some professional but not particularly high quality firms (Osprey for instance), the works here were self published. I'd suspect that they wouldn't meet modern FA standards unless other historians have cited them fairly widely and/or expert reviewers have praised them. I've been critical of material cited to both books in previous FA reviews, so I doubt they make the cut in this context. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 21:29, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

RIC FA nom
Congratulations on the Rhodesia Information Centre FA nomination. You've really done some great work on this. It is nice to see that something inspired by a fairly small (in Wikipedia article terms) court case could have become such a great article. If you need a hand with anything while its going through the FA process, please just let me know.  The C of E God Save the King!  ( talk ) 10:02, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you - I should have noted that the excellent Bradley v Commonwealth article is what got me interested in this topic, and will add that to the nomination now. If you have capacity to do so, you might be interested in reviewing the article, which would be great given your knowledge of this topic. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 10:20, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Special Control Service
Dear Nick, I meant to take a copy of this article and its talkpage offline after it was deleted. Despite the author having some dubious credentials, the organisation definitely exists (see 12th Chief Directorate) so I want to file a DRV, potentially after a rewrite. Would you mind dropping a copy of this and its talkpage in a userspace of mine so I can take it offline? Buckshot06 (talk) 05:58, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Not a problem - it's at User:Buckshot06/Special Control Service. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 10:07, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks!! There is no talkpage attached - did you check? Buckshot06 (talk) 17:44, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

World War II
I was wondering if you think User:DavidNo1Fan is a return of the banned User:HarveyCarter? Jack Upland (talk) 09:16, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, definitely: I've just blocked them. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 10:02, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest Coaching / Explanation help
Hi, I am a somewhat casual editor (>400 in 6 years) looking for help. I was working on some COI edit requests when I ran across your post: We can't possibly use text drafted by an employee of this company, and you should not be proposing this ''(on this page Talk:LendingClub).

However, the COI guidelines for paid editors, employees, etc.(linked in the section title) include this:
 * you may propose changes on talk pages by using the request edit template or by posting a note at the COI noticeboard, so that they can be peer reviewed;

Can you please clarify or reconcile this seeming inconsistency? Thanks in advance. Duke Gilmore (talk) 19:00, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:COIRESPONSE. Large chunks of text drafted by an employee of a company needs to be treated with great scepticism. This is especially the case for articles such as the Lending Club article (and the article on the company's founder and, from memory some other related articles) where there has been significant promotional editing concerning the company over the years. The editor here was also violating WP:COITALK as they were drafting text without explaining how it was different to what was in the article - again, given the article history this is highly concerning. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 10:09, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CC, December 2022
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:56, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Project Waler scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the Project Waler article has been scheduled as today's featured article for January 4, 2023. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page blurb, you're welcome to do so at Today's featured article/January 4, 2023, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so. If you wish to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article, you can do so at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/January 2023.

I suggest that you watchlist Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:01, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Sock
After the my first reply I suspected it was a sock too, but was unsure. I actually went to report it but was unsure the Diffs were clear cut enough. Slatersteven (talk) 09:49, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
 * No worries. Please let me know if you spot another socks from this person - they seem to be making a comeback at the moment, tediously. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 09:54, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

THis may be one []. Slatersteven (talk) 12:03, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, agreed. Nick-D (talk) 09:54, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Is it yet time for talk page protection? Slatersteven (talk) 11:11, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Very close. I'm reluctant to protect the page as it regularly attracts good faith comments from IP and new editors but it might be necessary. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 07:22, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

And another []. Slatersteven (talk) 16:14, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Agreed, but it looks like another admin beat me to it. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 10:06, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
 * This antisemitism is a new low for this person as well. Nick-D (talk) 10:09, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings

 * Thank you Nick-D (talk) 01:18, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings

 * Thank you, and the same to you and your loved ones. Nick-D (talk) 09:42, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

G'day
G'day Nick, hope you are having a great break and had a good Xmas. I noticed that you are a member of WP Australian politics, and wanted to share that I am on a bit of a mission to improve bio articles on SA pollies who served, as a bit of a break from Yugoslav WWII topics. I recently improved Ernest Roberts (Australian politician) (who served two tours in the Second Boer War) to GA, which is currently at MH ACR, and have Jack Critchley at GAN. Even though I've got a couple of pollies to FA in the past (Bill Denny and Arthur Blackburn, I'm not sure how much interest there will be in some of these other guys from MH members as in some cases their military service is incidental rather than the basis of their notability. I'd appreciate it if you would consider taking a look at any that pique your interest when they appear for review. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 18:57, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Sure, happy to do so. I have a copy of Chris Coulthard-Clark's book Soldiers in Politics: The Impact of the Military on Australian Political Life and Institutions if helpful - it's very useful for subjects like this. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 07:14, 1 January 2023 (UTC)