User talk:Noclador/Archive 1

Image
Hello, have you got source file for your very good image Image:Czech Forces.png? I would like to translate it to Czech language. --Snek01 21:55, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
 * And there are missing few diacritical marks. For example Tabor should be Tábor and Prostejov should be Prostějov and many more.
 * It is only part of the army in the image. There are other two parts. I have added it to the article Military of the Czech Republic. General Staff is quite small and Support and Training Forces can be on separate image. It is up to you.
 * I think that you can upload it to commons.
 * I woul like to help you with revision of Czech spelling.


 * Hello, I have sent you an email and I have not received your answer.

--Snek01 20:34, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Czech Air Force consist from Pardubice Airfield Authority too.

http://209.85.129.104/search?q=cache:i-c34alAT2QJ:www.army.cz/scripts/detail.php%3Fid%3D6821+Air+maitenance+base+%C4%8Desk%C3%A9+bud%C4%9Bjovice&hl=cs&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=cz&client=firefox-a I hope the link works. --Snek01 21:12, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Graphic of the Army Structure
I'm currently working on a project to create graphics of the structure of the most important Armies. i.e. French Army; German Army; Italian Army I also want to make a graphic of the structure of the Saudi Arabian Army, but the information at this point is not sufficient, as there is no information what units compose the single brigades. Does anyone have this information- down to the Battalion names and/or numbers? Thanks noclador 07:44, 2 March 2007 (UTC)


 * User:Publicus has more information :) Ammar 08:08, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I've added some info--check my sandbox page. Publicus 20:29, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey man, where is the structure graphic ? :) we still waiting :D have a nice day :) Ammar 08:05, 14 March 2007 (UTC)


 * hmmmm thanx a serious work :) take your time Ammar 08:46, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Armenia
Are you working on Army? or Armed forces?( Army, Air Force...) Vartanm 03:39, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The official site of Ministry of Defense is http://www.mil.am/eng/index.php but i must warn you its painfully slow. It takes at least 3-4 min to open a single page. I think this is what your looking for. http://www.mil.am/eng/index.php?page=5 Vartanm 06:40, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * All 3 versions have the same information. I'll keep an eye out, if I find anything I'll let you know. Vartanm 02:56, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Trentino-South Tyrol and South Tyrol
We are running opinion polls there, if you could put in your input, opinions, references, etc. Taalo 00:32, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Are you completely mad? :}} (i'm saying this in a completely friendly way :). You can't compare "Province of ..." vs. just "South Tyrol" alone.  Please refer to my reply on the page -- and think a bit more on a solution that has some sort of compromise.  It is fine to use Google to find English usage, but I think we can use that and add on top of that to have a name that satisfies both sides.  Well, actually, I consider myself satisfied if both names are included... so I don't want to be on either "side". :} Taalo 03:09, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Why don't you cast your vote also in the requested move above the First Round Poll? Without a clear vote in the Survey, the First Round Poll won't have any importance. --Checco 16:37, 8 March 2007 (UTC)


 * You need to cast your vote both in Talk:Trentino-South Tyrol and in Talk:South Tyrol. --Checco 16:43, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Excellent work on the army structure charts
Hi Noclador.

Just wanted to say thank you and well done on the excellent work you have done on the army structures diagrams. Chwyatt 16:59, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Trentino-South Tyrol
You have your facts mixed up a bit with regard to German rights in Bolzano Noclador. I read your message this morning on that talk page. I'll discuss on there, ok? take care. Taalo 18:11, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your great picture
Thank you for creating and uploading Slovakia Army.png. The diagram is very illuminating and looks like involving a hell lot of work. Tankred 01:18, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Irish Army Reserve.
Hi Noclador,

Thanks for the Great structural Image of the Irish Army. Any Chance you can do the Same for the Reserve? All the Info should be on the page.

Thanks and Rgds

Stabilo boss
 * HI Noclador, thanks for that, Just one slight error, the Air Defence Batteries are under the 1st Air Defence Regiment Based in the Curragh, Not in Dublin. And there is a Seperate Brigade Training Centre in Each brigade (1 S Bde RDF BTC, 2 E Bde RDF BTC and 4 W Bde RDF BTC.) Stabilo boss
 * Seemingly its Not on the Official Website.. Strange, Although you are right it is not an Operational Unit. Has a Basic Staff and Recruits instructors from other units. Yes the Curragh is the the name used for the DFTC in Common Usage. Technically the Reserve AD Batteries are not in the Reserve at all. but are manned by reservists. Stabilo boss

Image:Danish Army.png
Thanks for creating this image, it is very easy to comprehend. I know very little about the actual subject, but I noticed a few minor issues.
 * 1) 1 You seem to consistently use the abbreviation "Reg" for "regiment", but you didn't do this for "Gardehusarregimentet" (Slagelse, 2nd column on the list). #2: Two names are misspelled. The correct spellings are "OKSBØL" and "HØVELTE" . Could you possibly take a look at these issues? Otherwise a very fine chart. Happy editing. Valentinian T / C 13:06, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks a lot, it is much better now. The "Ø" you've used looks fine. I've also asked one of my friends to take a look at the chart, as he knows a lot more about the military and its structure than I do. Regards. Valentinian T / C 17:31, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Btw, I just noticed the similar Estonian chart. The correct Estonian spelling is "TALLINN" with two N's, and the tilde is missing from JÕHVI and VÕRU. Furthermore the Estonian Wikipedia doesn't mention a location named Jagala, however a river is named Jägala, so JÄGALA is probably the safest guess. Regarding the Danish-German-Polish material, this might be more relevant in terms of an article about NATO, but you should be aware of the existence of COMBALTAP. It is the successor to the old Danish-German "unity command" that was established during the Cold War and which originally covered Jutland and Schleswig-Holstein. The Danish name "Enhedskommandoen" would literally translate to "Einheitskommando" but I don't think this term was used in West Germany. After the German reunification, the unity command was renamed and expanded to include Mecklenburg-Vorpommern and - when Poland joined NATO - also Pommerania (Hinterpommern). It is mentioned on this page. Not sure it is relevant here, but I just wanted to let you know. When you come to the Norwegian / Swedish material, feel free to contact me, and I'll be glad to proofread the relevant names. :) Happy editing. Valentinian T / C 18:08, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar stuff


You really deserve this one. That is some fantastic contributions you did.Angelbo 00:34, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Graphics stuff


a few questions about your image Danish Army.png (linked to the right).
 * The colour codes you use is not in compliance with APP-6a, I would like to know what your reason is.
 * You use a star in stead of a X, I would like to know what your reason is.
 * The Jægerkorpset is a degsinated as an SOF and not and a SF in Denmark
 * You list the Army Operational Command as a corps, and call it Army Command, to my knowledge there is not such corps.
 * I get abit confused about your diagram is it supposed to reflect war-time operations or peace-time operations?That is two entirely different organizationel structures. Becaouse Danske Division exsist only on paper and is part of MNC NNE (mulitnational Coprs, North Norht East). MNC NNE is a NATO unit Headquarted in Szczecin.

otherwise a big thank you for your fine contributions. All your diagrams are really nice and explains a lot. Have you perhaps been in the armned service. Mads Angelbo 00:34, 11 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I Thank you for your answers to my questions, I agree with you it is not nesescary to follow NATO standards. The army is currently in a reorgnaizing fase, and has changed since I did service, in order to help myself understand all this, I made a list of regiments and what units they send where. Basically it is a matrix diagram. You can see it here [].
 * I agree with you that the articles on the danish defence is not up to date and I will try to do some thing about it in the near future, perhaps I could persuade you to make a proper looking diagram based on the info in the excel file.
 * Can you tell if you have any special software you use to make diagrams with, All I have is this NATO-ruler [], or if you have some digital templates I would like to get my greedy fingers on them.
 * I was hoping I could persuade you to make theese changes in the Danish Army.png diagram:
 * Staff coy., 1st brigade: change colour to that of signals.
 * CIMIC coy., DIV unit: change colour to that of logisitcs, chnage icon to that logisitcs instead of Engineer.
 * EW coy., DIV unit: is not named 3rd, simply Electronic Warfare coy.
 * perhaps move 5th signal BN to at group with title "International Support" with DANILOG


 * regards Mads Angelbo Talk / Contribs 15:43, 14 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I am very satisfied, and I would like it, if you would send me the app-6 symbols. Keep up the good work. Mads Angelbo Talk / Contribs 18:36, 17 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Please enable email in wiki or contact me through mine, so I dont have to publish it for all to see(best way to avoid spam is to not publish email adr.). Mads Angelbo Talk / Contribs 17:27, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Lithuanian chart
Hi Noclador

I've done a little reading about Lithuania. If your software supports it, may I suggest that you update a few names; the cities should be TAURAGĖ and PANEVĖŽYS, the Grand Duke's name was Kęstutis (with something that looks like a tail hanging from the "e") and there should only be one dot over the e in Birutė. Happy editing. Valentinian T / C 01:03, 14 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks. It is much better now. Valentinian T / C 08:30, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

British Army
Saw your note on the talk page. Up until 2008, British regiments, as part of the 'Arms Plot' (might be worth looking that up on Google) move every three or four years, so they will switch brigade subordination as well. You have to specify a single time and then do an awful lot of research. 2 RTR?- based in Germany(easier for lots of armour), but part of a brigade in the UK for wartime purposes! When you are interested, plse consider a diagram for the Russian Ground Forces as well - I have most of the information you will need. Buckshot06 09:33, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Search on the British Army site or google for the Future Army Structure and Future Infantry Structure documents; that's as good as you're going to get so far. Also might be worthwhile taking a look at Regiments.org - very good source. On the Russian Army, all regiments are multi-battalion; MRRs have three motor rifle battalions & a tank battalion, while tank regiments are the exact reverse. There is no consistant solid information for components of separate brigades; when I asked you about doing a table, I really meant only from MD level to sep bde/div level; there is not enough info yet for anything more. Eg 'MMD, 20 Army, 4 & 10 Tank Divs, sep bdes,' etc. I couldnt reliably give you subordinate units info on 34 Arty Div, 16 Spetsnaz Bde, the Division BXVT(Ru=storage base acronym; 500 maintenance men, ~250 tanks, ~300 IFV, remnant of 144 Guards MRD) at Yelnya etc. For the remainder of the Districts, please take a look at the district pages and the table at Russian Ground Forces itself, which I've spent much time on. Cheers Buckshot06 07:21, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply. If you're wanting to detail the entire chain to battalion level (I would find that ideal too!) you're obviously going to be waiting a very long time for some armies (one of the other useful ones to do would be the PLA). However there is a regiment level org for the Russian armed forces, though inaccurate in parts, available at www.geocities.com/Pentagon/9059/ under Russia. Meanwhile I'll check the British doco and get back to you.. Buckshot06 07:09, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Go ahead with the British doco you specified. The structure will change slightly - that's a certainty; but it will be 80ish% correct. Good luck with the rest of the European armies; checking the page at geocities I listed above might help.

Cheers Buckshot06 17:13, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Romanian Army
I've remarked your interest in the Romanian Army and related articles. I am also trying to expand the Romanian Land Forces, Romanian Navy, Romanian Air Force and Romanian Army pages. I will be happy to share with you usefull informations for this articles. Best regards, Eurocopter tigre 23:11, 20 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I've recently made some contribs to Ro. land forces page, especially names and battalions, maybe will be usefull for your graphic. Can you make the units in the graphic a bit larger? It's impossible to read it. I'm still looking for other names and units. Anything special you'd like to find out?? Eurocopter tigre 15:14, 23 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi, I have some doubts regarding the correct translation of the word "divizion"(romanian). In the RoLF article the 206th artillery and 33rd mechanized are called divisions(english), that means "divizie" (romanian, which was the ex communist unit designation for the current "brigade"). A "divizion" (rom.) is a unit smaller than a battalion (much smaller than a former "divizie")...but I really don't know what's the proper translation for it ...maybe "company"... Any thoughts? Eurocopter tigre 17:32, 27 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, I will check them both. I'll reply you as soon as I know the answers. Are you sure that a "divizion" has the strength of a regiment? Eurocopter tigre 21:10, 27 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Done, the 30th Honor Guard is a regiment indeed now, and it is subordinated directly to the Land forces central staff (or whatever it is called). Regarding the 6th mixed AA brigade it currently exists, because I couldn't find any infos about its disbandement; I even found an article saying "the brigade will continue to exist in this structure even after 2008" - It is obvious that the brigade it's currently operational and should be added to the structure of the Land Forces page. Cheers, Eurocopter tigre 21:10, 27 April 2007 (UTC)


 * By the way, a "divizion" equals a battalion. So I will rename all "divizions" battalions. A regiment is usually composed of 3-4 or many battalions. Can you please make the graphic bigger because it is imposible to read it, and I would really like to read it. Thanks Eurocopter tigre 21:23, 27 April 2007 (UTC)


 * No, I can guarantee you that a "divizion" equals a battalion, I just checked in a dictionary and I'm 100% sure of it. I will check if 288th and 229th are under the command of 206th, but I really don't believe this. I will reply you soon, Eurocopter tigre 13:33, 28 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Got it! 228th and 229th are battalions subordinated dirrectly to the brigade. I still didn't find any informations about the mountain scouting and armored companies. Eurocopter tigre 13:56, 28 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I added the 32nd Infantry btn. (timisoara) but I'm not very sure if it's subordinated to the 81st Mec. Brigade (bistrita) and I couldn't any infos about this. Maybe is an independent btn like the 528th reconnaisance (braila). Any thoughts? Eurocopter tigre 14:32, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't know what to say about that source...but I wouldn't trust it. In the "Forter" magazine, november 2006 issue (official magazine of the land forces) there is an article about the 206th Mixed Artillery btn. You can also make a google search on "batalionul 206 artilerie" and see the first two results. I think that article on geocities is a bit outdated. Eurocopter tigre 14:42, 28 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I just added 3 new pictures to Land Forces article, but there are some tagging problems. Do you know which is the best licence-tag for this kind of pics? I also created articles about 282nd Mechanized Brigade, 2nd Infantry Brigade and 2nd Mountain Troops Brigade. You may have a look on them and tell me if you have any improvement ideas. Cheers, Eurocopter tigre 17:17, 29 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I also hate tagging pictures, I speak romanian. Regarding the email, even if Romania entered the EU on 1st January the army officials are still bureaucrat lazy jurks, maybe I will try it (but there are 95% chances that nobody will reply). I added a summary to each picture indicating the source (I removed orphan's tags) and I also write a message to the owner of that annoying OrphanBot. It should be ok, if not I will try to send an email. Eurocopter tigre 20:07, 29 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Another problem...Should we make an article about Ranks and insignia of the Romanian Army? I know that creating an article only with the Rom. Land Forces ranks will be a stub, but I think If we put all the Romanian Army ranks (including air force and navy) it will be a nice article. Any thoughts?? Eurocopter tigre 17:10, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Noclador, I think we should remove the subordinated units from the brigades who currently have their own article. Do you agree with this? I've looked in Us army and russian ground forces articles, and only the major units are listed. Best, Eurocopter tigre 16:54, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Albanian Military
I would like to ask you to not delete and miss edit the articles of the Albanian army Albanian navy and Albanian military because you are deleting other users contributions which they have added with full proof and sources whilst you have not presented any source to your modifications you have just deleted things, I would like this not to happen again if it does I will take further actions... good day Gon4z 23:16, 1 May 2007 (UTC)


 * On Wikipedia we speak nicely to one another, even if we disagree with the other person. Everybody is entitled to be treated with respect, and threats about "action", blocks or similar is simply not allowed under WP:CIVIL. I suggest you to read that policy and avoid making any further comments like that in the future, Gon4z. Valentinian T / C 00:09, 2 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I've not "just deleted". I've updated the articles with the numbers I found in the "The World Defence Almanac 2006", Mönch Publishing Group, Bonn 2006. Most of the numbers you insist on keeping in the articles are outdated and must be changed to the correct numbers. A good example is the Albanian Land Forces Command were your numbers include also all the equipment that is/will be scrapped and the equipment in storage. I admit that I know little about the Albanian Navy, but I'm sure about the numbers and information regarding the Albanian Land Forces and the Albanian Logistic Support Command.
 * Regarding the Navy: What I know fore sure is, that Italy has given the Albanian Naval Defense Forces at least 12 High Speed Patrol Boats within the last 4 years, but they do not show up in your list. Were these Boats given to the Coast Guard or is this your list older than 4 years? Also the strength in men you give is pretty high- from which year is this number?
 * Regarding the Air Force: According to my information the number you give in active personnel are to high- my information states that there are 1400 active troops in the Albanian Air Force. Were does your number come from? Does it include the reservists (there are 2 reserve units in the Air Force I know of)?
 * About the main Article: Military of Albania I removed the paragraphs about the Albanian Land Forces and the Tank inventory from there, because that belongs to the article Albanian Land Forces Command! What belongs to the main article about the Albanian Military is: history, current leadership, alliances and so on, but no information that belongs to the sub-articles: Albanian Air Force, Albanian Naval Defense Forces, Albanian Land Forces Command and Albanian Logistic Support Command.
 * noclador 09:42, 2 May 2007 (UTC)


 * One thing more: I cited my sources: Military of Albania noclador 09:48, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Graphics
Hi Noclador

Thanks for your message. You are right, WP:OWN is a general problem on this project can be a problem. Still, this project has more good sides than bad. The German example you mentioned was interesting. As I see it, the other graphic would be great if the topic had been "List of coats of arms used by the Bundeswehr" but I don't see its relevance otherwise. If I wish to find information about Schleswig-Holstein, simply displaying the Land's coat of arms won't give the reader any serious information, it is a nice addition sure, but not essential.

I noticed that you were missing some information about the Albanian military. Have you tried this link ? The graphics aren't very good, but it looks to me like the individual commands have their own charts as well. You might be able to make more sense of this than me. Valentinian T / C 11:36, 2 May 2007 (UTC)


 * If I find any information, I'll let you know. I have no knowledge about the Albanian topic, but WP:CIVIL is there for a good reason. I had a recent example on my mind when I wrote my last post, so that made it a bit too harsh. We do see WP:OWN from time to time, but it is not as big a problem as one might expect. On the whole, editors accept changes to "their articles" provided that the material added makes sense. If it is properly sourced then all the better. My experience is mostly confided to the historical material, and most people are acting in good faith here, despite of nationality and different approaches to history, although we also have examples to the contrary. My knowledge about the German Wikipedia is extremely limited, as the language barrier for one thing normally keeps Danes away from that project. Many Danes read some German, but the average person's German grammar is not up to scratch to do major editing there. Anyway, I'll let you know if I find some relevant material. Happy editing. Valentinian T / C 12:47, 2 May 2007 (UTC)


 * you did not citise anything its all crap you stright out deleted everything just because you are an anti Albanian dont mean you ahve to go around spreading propaganda you so called contribution of deeting articles are not wealcomed —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gon4z (talk • contribs) 19:54, 2 May 2007 (UTC).


 * And for that attack, you just earned yourself an official No Personal Attacks warning, Gon4z. Stop smearing other editors. Valentinian T / C 20:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Personal attacks do not make wrong information true. If you had read the new articles you would have seen that I did not delete your paragraphs, but that I moved them to the more appropriate article. Also my source is not some Greek "anti Albanian website", but a NATO military publication. My other source is the official homepage of the Albanian Army. The source you cite: is 12 (!) years old, as your source still lists 2 Whiskey Class submarines that were retired in 1995! Also I must inform you that I'm in no way Anti Albanian: I served voluntarily in Kosovo as a soldier with the Italian Army during 2000 and 2001. Furthermore my family has donated a school and a kindergarten in the village of Fushe Arrez. Therefore I’m very upset by your insults. I hope you will not resort to personal attacks in the future. noclador 22:11, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

PERSONAL ATTACKS
Okay firstly that is not my source and secondly that is 1 source more than yours I have not see a single link posted by you abut you edit. You are clearly deleting everything you deleted the tables and the war machinery that Albania uses what you call that VANDALISM because you did not add anything, ok I suggest that unless you have a real contribution you should not edit the article.... tahnk you


 * First: I cited my sources: Talk:Military of Albania when I made my first edit. Second: To end this annoying discussion I've emailed the Albanian Mnistry of Defence and asked for a review of all articles about the Albanian Military. Third: Your information is outdated and you for the last time: It is wrong to post the tank inventory of the Albanian Land Forces in the Military of Albania article. Also I suggest you start reading what I changed and the various discussion post I wrote up to now, before answering yet another time without good manners. noclador 23:45, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok first you claiming you emaild them its not good enough of a source, becuase i can just say (& this is true by the way) that I have a cousaind in the Albanian army who is a colonel in the Albanian army and I know more than you when it comes to what Albania has so please put some links if you are going to edit
 * He emailed them so they could check if the articles were correct, not to use it as a source. - Mgm|(talk) 04:34, 3 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Maybe you want to have a look at List of countries by number of active troops, were it says: Albania 20.000 Troops and NOT 50.000 as you keep on claiming. Also, I say it now for the fourth time, that I have a source: http://www.army.mil.al the official homepage of the Albanian Military. noclador 07:02, 3 May 2007 (UTC)


 * .Another source for you to look at (from 2004): http://www.csees.net/?page=country_section&country_id=1&sec=8


 * Noclador: you may be providing references, but I don't see a references section in the article. Could you please have a look at WP:CITE and create one. - Mgm|(talk) 08:15, 3 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I'd second that suggestion, and please provide deep links to the relevant sub page(s) of this website. Valentinian T / C 20:54, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

It looks like you are correct in this matter
Well it does look like you are using the correct sources and have the most recent information available. Sorry for the revert I will watch the page in the meantime to stop further inclusion of bad/outdated source material. Thanks for the message or else I never would have seen it. MrMacMan Talk  07:33, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I used some data from the CIA factbook... it might not be as up to date as your source but it makes the template work for the time being. MrMacMan  Talk  07:56, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Military of Albania
Naclardo it is clear that you have no knowledge when it come to the military of Albania or Albania in general i see you have something against the Albanian people so you like to vandalize the articles, first you are using a old source which I disagree with but since you want to use it then you are going to quote it correctly your source says that Albania operates 375 tanks then that is what you will put not 79 as you states which is a made up figure by you that does not match your source non of your figures match their sources, also you are not allowed to move the disputed banner I have every right to put it there and you or no one is allowed to remove it until the depute is resolved Gon4z 17:10, 10 May 2007 (UTC)