User talk:Peacemaker67/Archive 15

The Bugle: Issue CXVIII, January 2016
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) 11:23, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Favor
Can you do me a favor and just remove the "country" rather than reverting so that I can stop having to get all your notifications? Thanks. Italia2006 (talk) 04:59, 27 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Guess not. And still haven't answered the question posed on the Military History talk page. Italia2006 (talk) 05:04, 27 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Seriously? You changed them all with no consensus or attempt to gain it, and you don't want to be bothered with a few notifications? It was a lot quicker to revert, I don't see why I should take any longer than necessary to put things back where they were. I've done my watchlist now, there were more that were still at Nazi Germany than ones I changed. You've also forgotten the military biographies and other types of articles that use the link. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:14, 27 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Because there is no consensus. Why is it so difficult to answer a single question? Italia2006 (talk) 05:17, 27 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I thought it better to answer you there. I was trying to answer it, I'm afraid my answer isn't what you wanted to hear. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 11:35, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

RFA
Hi, I've started the RFA at Requests for adminship/Peacemaker67. According to the instructions at Requests for adminship/Nominate, it doesn't go live until you accept. Nick-D (talk) 23:34, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I've added my co-nom! I'm very happy that you're going ahead with this. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:52, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks guys, I will accept and get it up shortly. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:01, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mato Dukovac
The article Mato Dukovac you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Mato Dukovac for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ian Rose -- Ian Rose (talk) 08:01, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Revert of modifications in the article is biased
First, The inclusion of the word jihad in the same sentence with Skanderbeg has no meaning, because a group who claim jihad cannot name their division after a catholic prince who fought against ottoman forces and later rewarded by the pope with the title "Athleta Christi“. Second, I would say that the term jihad was not used in the same context as today and it was not a familiar concept. Third, even though I put my arguments as to why I removed those particular sentences from the article, you did not add any arguments about reverting them, so I assume that your actions are arbitrary and biased. Fan noli (talk) 12:08, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ikarus IK-2
The article Ikarus IK-2 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Ikarus IK-2 for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:21, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

I support your RFA
I decided to switch from neutral position to support position!! Winterysteppe (talk) 01:06, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I appreciate your contribution there. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:02, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Vladimir Lenin
Hello Peacemaker! I notice that when you conducted the (failed) GAN of Vladimir Lenin back in September 2015, you stated that "When properly cited, I'd be happy to have a look again". I have since finished my revamp of the page and re-nominated it as a GA. This being the case, if you do have the time and interest in carrying out such a nomination then I would welcome you to do so; there is, however, no pressure on you! All the best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:18, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

User:Mr.Z-man/closeAFD
You may want to try this script. It allows you to close AfD discussions faster. Let me know if you do not know how to use the script. sst ✈(conjugate) 05:11, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Cheers! I'll check it out. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:24, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

congratulations

 * Thanks Katie! All good advice... Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:45, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Also, try not to block yourself too often - it's embarrassing. Nick-D (talk) 01:32, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Now that would be funny... Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:45, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * It's good to know that you can still unblock yourself. Hawkeye7 (talk) 07:50, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Queen's Representative or Monarch's Representative?
Greetings, Peacemaker67. Just to clarify, would you prefer the status quo to be kept or would you like Monarch's Representative implemented in its place? Many thanks for participating.     11:33, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm not !voting, thanks. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 11:35, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Congratulations
I want to congratulate you on your RFA. Winterysteppe (talk) 05:23, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:33, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Me too! It was a pleasure to have met you online. I think WP will be a bit better now that you have the tools. Cheers, Caballero/ Historiador ⎌  06:23, 6 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Welcome to the club, pick up a mop! Let me know if you want me to show you any of the cabals. HighInBC 06:28, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Congratulations! Continue helping Wikipedia be better. Arius1998 (talk) 07:39, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Well done! Hawkeye7 (talk) 07:48, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Congrats on your successful RFA. Cheers, Kierzek (talk) 14:40, 6 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Congratulations! I'm delighted by your adminship. Wish you all the best. 23 editor (talk) 15:56, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

  Food for thought....

Congratulations and welcome to Adminship, an often thankless task. Please accept this delicious in-flight meal! Understand that it may be all the nourishment you'll get for days and weeks at a time here, but oh the beer, and the bragging rights, are AWESOME! (Oh wait, there's no beer on this flight. Sorry about that.) Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 17:58, 6 February 2016 (UTC) A cynic over my shoulder wants to say just wait till you put half-a-toe wrong!, but I told him to shut up and just wish you all the best. Pincrete (talk) 18:37, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks everyone. I'll be taking it easy... Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:59, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * A little bit late, but I also wanted to congratulate you. You deserved it and Wikipedia will benefit.--Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 23:51, 6 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Congratulations, PM67. Well done.  Mindful of the trust shown you, I hope you do a fabulous job as administrator.  Look forward to working with you in your new capacity.  Cheers.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:13, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Congratulations on a successful RfA
It is my pleasure to advise you that your request for adminship has been closed as successful. Please spend some time reviewing the information here to make sure you are well informed about what the job entails. If you have any questions, you're welcome to ask me any time, or ask any other administrator or bureaucrat. Once again, congratulations! ··· 日本穣 ·  投稿  · Talk to Nihonjoe ·  Join WP Japan ! 00:29, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Congrats PM -- as long as it doesn't reduce your great content contribs, I'll be happy knowing that you can continue in your gnomic duties with more tools at your disposal... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:35, 6 February 2016 (UTC)


 * My congratulations too. You had pretty solid support: I am confident you won't let those who supported you down. For what it's worth, I was writing my own support in the RfA when I was edit-conflicted by the bureaucrat closing it, so you'll just have to get along without my support vote. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 00:40, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the suck, amigo. TomStar81 (Talk) 00:54, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Congrats, Peacemaker! I'm sure you'll make a fine admin, but you know where I am if you need anything—there's not much of Wikipedia I haven't seen over the years. HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  00:59, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks everyone. I plan to live up to the trust that has been placed in me. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:43, 6 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Congrats! =) - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:10, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Well done mate, keep up the great work and if you have any questions, don't hesistate to ask me! -- Eurovision Nim (talk to me)(see my edits) 02:51, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Now that's the kind of RfA I like to see. Sorry I couldn't vote, I'm staying away from RfA all this year. Gratz PM. - Dank (push to talk) 03:28, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Congratulations Peacemaker67! :), Now go & make peace by blocking everyone, – Davey 2010 Talk 04:11, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Congrats! Is this the bit where you now block Jimbo while learning to wield the mop? --allthefoxes (Talk) 04:36, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Congrats Peacemaker. Don't think anyone has pointed you to our WP:ADMINGUIDE yet, which may offer answers to a lot of your questions. In particular do give WP:ADMINTOOLS a read. If you find some admin duty is taking forever to do, there's probably an easier way to do it :) &mdash; MusikAnimal  talk  18:48, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks MusikAnimal! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 22:00, 6 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Congratulations and I appreciated your responses to me in the oppose section. Mkdw talk 23:30, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:36, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

List of Power Rangers Dino Charge characters
This isn't fair. I removed an unsourced piece of trivia about one of the actors and made a bunch of other unrelated edits, but the other guy who logged in on 6 different IP addresses to make it look like I was fighting different people gets his way and has the silly piece of trivia restored?--2601:140:8200:DE:9C92:58A1:E43E:3B98 (talk) 09:40, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I semi-protected the page due to the edit-warring. Please make attempts to discuss on the talk page of the article. That is the appropriate course of action when reverting. You might consider registering an account so that other editors can see your history and trust that you only have one account. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 11:16, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * But I'm not trying to falsely claim I am more than one person. The other IP editor did. And he has done this to me before on other pages. I removed something that was poorly written, unsourced, or wrong, and he would appear and put it back saying "there's no consensus for your change" when it was just one other person putting it in a few hours before me. This was all over a piece of unsourced trivia and now the guy who originally put the trivia on the page can edit however he wants.--2601:140:8200:DE:E081:167E:5FAE:7DCB (talk) 23:00, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm acting against edit-warring, not against any party. Semi-protection means that editors who are not auto-confirmed cannot edit the article. But any further edit-warring may be subject to escalating blocks. Edit-warring isn't ok, no matter how right you think you are, or how wrong you think the other editor(s) are. If you believe there is someone abusing multiple IPs, the appropriate forum is WP:SPI, but you will need behavioural evidence for all the IPs you claim are the same user (ie similar editing times, content, edit summaries, etc). Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:50, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Incredibly late congratulations!

 * Excellent news on you getting the mop Pm! I was on a wikibreak and was unaware of your RfA. I would have voted for you without hesitation, and feel bad that I missed it. You have all the qualities, attitude and life experience to make an outstanding admin. Congrats to a fine Wikipedian. Simon Irondome (talk) 03:48, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the kind words, Simon. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:38, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: January 2016
About This Month in GLAM · Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery · Romaine 08:59, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Congratulations!
Hurrah! I'm no longer the newest Admin! Congratulations, it was very well deserved. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 03:32, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks... Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:36, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Nice to see you getting started. Hardly anything bad can happen when you protect things. Blocking is where it gets tricky! EdJohnston (talk) 00:05, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Haven't got there yet, Ed. And thanks. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:07, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Many congratulations! Just got aware of it. You have been so dedicated and active for so long now, it was surely a logical step.  It is a deserved recognition of merit for all the time and dedication you continuously offer to this project.  Wikipedia has won a new excellent admin, and you won a tool that will help this project get optimized.  Hope you make the best of it, and I m sure you will.  Although not as near as active as I have been in other times, you know you are allways welcome and you can ping me anytime.  What a great wikinews, best regards! FkpCascais (talk) 03:40, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Good on you, Fkp. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:35, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Welcome, and congratulations! --Eleassar my talk 07:41, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Cheers! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:16, 9 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Congrats!! Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:55, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Norwich City F.C.
There have been reverts, including one self-revert. Extend PC? --George Ho (talk) 21:25, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

My stuff up
Hi PM, I made some sort of stuff up trying to nominate an article for A-Class and created this page: WikiProject Military history/Assessment/. Can you please delete? Cheers. Zawed (talk) 08:10, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Done. Sorry it took a couple of days. Got distracted... Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:43, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Cheers mate. Zawed (talk) 04:06, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Pećanac and Deva 20 October 1941.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Pećanac and Deva 20 October 1941.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 09:05, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

File:Pećanac and Deva 20 October 1941.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Pećanac and Deva 20 October 1941.jpg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:46, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Use of sources
You may be interested in this Talk:Otto Kittel discussion. Cheers MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:15, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

RS source discussion
Peacemaker67: Just a note that there is a Reliable sources/Noticeboard discussion on using Franz Kurowski as a RS source in which you may be interested. Kierzek (talk) 15:50, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Royal Yugoslav Army, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dornier. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:39, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXIX, February 2016
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) 14:14, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Walter Görlitz
Have you read what Walter Görlitz has written about me? You stepped in and accused me of harassment and ignored that I am reacting to public slurs and defamation. What a psycho environment wikipedia is. I have no choice but to escalate this outside the site. Clearly.72.245.246.219 (talk) 00:29, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Just follow Wikipedia's behavioural guidelines and treat other editors with respect, and you'll get along fine. Also, read WP:NOTHERE, as your behaviour is in that space at present. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:33, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Treat editors with respect. I see. Calling me a liar as Walter Görlitz has done is respectful. I am aware that there is a club where wiki editors gang together to abuse and belittle victims. Now I am experiencing it myself. You have not posted any such threats to those calling me a liar and posting public slurs. If you were interested in respect, you would have done so and been equally even handed. Since you have not, I am left with no alternatives.72.245.246.219 (talk) 00:37, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry Peacemaker67, I need to respond here. 72.245.246.219: I didn't call you a liar, I proved that you lied. You stated emphatically that anonymous editor cannot create articles and I showed that they can. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:45, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Proving liars? How respectful. You have revealed yourself in your full colors. Doutless Peacemaker67 will continue to defend you and bully me. As Jimmy Wales so succinctly put it: "The lunatics have taken over the asylum". His words. So true. 72.245.246.219 (talk) 00:47, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * WP:DENY. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:52, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Cheers indeed. Thank you for highlighting Walter Görlitz behavior in this link. It is very useful. I'm afraid the abuse continues without impediment. I guess he just enjoys being nasty and calling people names. It happens all the time on wikipedia by editors. Shame.72.245.246.219 (talk) 01:01, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * G'day, don't take this the wrong way, but you need to be making positive contributions in article space if you want to avoid being seen as WP:NOTHERE. This thread is closed, don't post here again. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:04, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:09, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Bob Ross
Thanx again but, now they just moved to The Joy of Painting the page for his TV show. I really don't understand why this subject is a magnet for these jokesters but, I'm here asking for semi protection for The Joy of Painting also. Thanx for what you do :)  Mlpearc  ( open channel ) 02:19, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Done. And no prob. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:22, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you, :) Mlpearc  ( open channel ) 02:24, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks... I think. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:07, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

I am being harassed
Hello there. First off, thank you for locking up Christopher Reeve so we can have good discussion. I hope we can have it resolved.

More importantly, has started to harass me. When I first reverted his edit, he called me "idiotic," then "a pain in the ass." Recently, he said on his talk page that I "knew nothing" and am "ignorant." I gave him a gentle reminder to be courteous, which he deleted, and said that unexperienced users like me shouldn't be giving reminders to experienced users like him (I'm not even new). I told him nicely that just because I am "new" doesn't mean I can be called idiotic and other insults, and that if I am harassed, I have the right to give him a reminder. I didn't want to bring this to an administrator, so I tried to make peace with him my saying that we could always debate on the subject's talk page, without him throwing insults.

He then left this threatening message in my talk page:

"I just wanted to drop you a note to let you formally know that you are banned from posting comments on my talk page, unless, of course, you are  required to  by Wikipedia  policy . If you are required to post a notice on my talk page, please clearly indicate in the edit summary what policy you are doing so under. Any other posted comments will be deleted without being read.Please note that this ban also applies to pinging me.  Thanks.

I have no choice but to bring this to you, an admin. I will continue to nicely debate on the Christopher Reeve subject, but I am extremely uncomfortable with BMK being so hostile. I will never attack him back. As an administrator, please help me.

Thank you.

--Andymii (talk) 02:00, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
 * G'day, if you want to make a complaint about BMK, the appropriate forum is WP:ANI. But just be aware that when you make a complaint about another editor your own behaviour will also be scrutinised. You were very fortunate that I didn't block you both for edit-warring. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:32, 27 February 2016 (UTC)


 * This all seems rather stale, so I will keep my comment as succinct as possible.
 * While the reaction to BMK's edits/comments might have been a touch unsuitable, it seems pretty clear (from block history/previous edits) that BMK knew exactly what he was doing and which buttons to push, to provoke a reaction. Not reacting is always the best solution, but what with editors being human, there will always be someone who will take the bait he provides on an almost daily basis. Spacecowboy420 (talk) 06:33, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Sure. I don't have much more to add. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:37, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Congratulations!
I had no idea you were running for admin, which is the only reason the vote is not 185-1 but only 184-1 - still not exactly a cliffhanger... :-)

I meant to title this "Late congratulations", but since it comes almost three weeks after incredibly late congratulations, I suppose this is OK too. :-) GregorB (talk) 14:42, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks Gregor! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 22:50, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

AIV
Hey there! I blocked before I saw that you had commented the report here. Just wanted to apologize in case you think I'm deliberately stepping on your toes. For what it's worth, I think this is a fairly obvious school/library-type IP, hence the block rationale and length. Is this okay with you? m.o.p 12:36, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * No harm, no foul. I'm slowly getting a sense of which ones to whack and which ones to be kinder with. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:12, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for understanding - didn't want you to feel you were being overruled intentionally or something. In cases similar to this one, where we've got an IP vandalizing in short bursts over a long period of time, we can figure out the chances of it being a shared IP by looking at:
 * Time of activity: usually, this will fit a certain pattern. In our example, almost every edit over three months is performed around 1300 UTC. The city the IP is out of (Montreaux, Switzerland) is UTC + 1, so this puts every single edit (even the ones occurring around 8 and 11GMT) during school hours. Also, we only see activity on weekdays, not weekends, and nothing over what's typically the holiday break.
 * Edit content: this is usually the easiest to pinpoint, but school-age children typically vandalize pages in a uniform, identifiable fashion (blanking, simple graffiti, number changes, etc.)
 * Pages being vandalized: you'll often see the same page get vandalized over the course of days (in this case, Geography of Russia).
 * And, of course, sometimes the school's ISP will make it easy and actually identify the school by name on its WHOIS lookup (didn't happen in this case).
 * Hopefully that helps. Obviously, there are outliers where it's harder to tell, but these are the first things I'll look for when I'm checking out a report. Block length escalates accordingly given the frequency, severity, and history of the account's vandal behaviours.
 * Let me know if there's anything else I can do to help out! And congratulations on the recent RFA win, also. :) Best, m.o.p  02:48, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Upcoming vacation
I will be going on a lengthy vacation soon, walking the Camino de Santiago. Subsequently, I will not have access to the internet and I will not be able to address any open issues on my current A-class article candidates. If you need to close the review without promoting them, don't hesitate to do so. Thanks MisterBee1966 (talk) 12:42, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I doubt that'll be necessary, MB. Have great time, I've seen a documentary on it, looks incredible. Tschüß, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:57, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Congratulations!

 * Thanks Rupert! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:31, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Congrats, well done. Kierzek (talk) 14:15, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

User:Jepet
Thanks for blocking that user. However, looking through their contributions, they have a long-term history of vandalism that starts almost two years ago. I think that their infrequent editing is how they've managed to avoid being blocked for so long, but it may be a good idea to indefinitely block them as someone who clearly falls under WP:NOTHERE. --A guy saved by Jesus (talk) 00:09, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I'll have another look. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:14, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

202.189.75.226
Hi Peacemaker,

I just noticed that you blocked for 31 hours when the previous block was for 2 years. Just wanting to run this by you whether this was on purpose or not. Cheers! FA9295 (talk) (contributions) 02:11, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Doh. Sorted. Thanks for the heads-up. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:28, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Stojko Vranković
Please...Stojko Vrankovć is not serbian...he is CROAT and his mother and FATHER are CROATS! do not block me because of Zoupan like last time because he is serbian and he have problems in his head! The story is false...of his father and churches! — Preceding unsigned comment added by F7777 (talk • contribs) 02:06, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Minor point of clarification
Hi there, I have the feeling you'd be able to answer a simple question about A-Class reviews. I recently had an article of mine Battle of Antioch (218) pass a good article review. The article is listed as a Warfare Good Article, however, on the MilHist project it remains B-Class, no surprise. Does the article need to be checked for GA status against MilHist or can the article be nominated for A-Class regardless. I also note that "A good or B-Class article that has undergone additional improvement may be considered for the A-Class assessment level." Which comes straight from the Assessment section on the Military History Project site. I ask because after I go through the article one more time that I'd like to nominate it for the A-class review, but am holding off until I get confirmation that this is acceptable. Thank you for your time regards Mr rnddude (talk) 12:06, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
 * GA is a Wiki-wide assessment so if the article has passed GAN then it should be GA for MilHist and any other projects -- there'd be no need to assess it for GA against MilHist criteria per se. Re. your main point, I don't recall any hard-and-fast requirement for an article to be assessed as B or GA before nominating for A-Class Review -- it happens to be a pattern that I (and Peacemaker, generally, as well as several other MilHist regulars) follow but you don't have to. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:44, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Cheers for the quick response, and thanks for clarifying on that topic. I have every intention of running through it one more time first (when I get the chance). Mr rnddude (talk) 09:50, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Supporting vandalism?
Why are you supporting that user on the article World War II in Yugoslavia? His edits are obvious vandalism, that is why I have reverted all his edits, if you think some of his edits should stay then go to the talk page, but such changes to the article need first to go on the talk page, ok? Please do not engage in a edit war, please. That ip user is adding material that is not sourced. He is also probably a sock-puppet. Tnx --Tuvixer (talk) 11:00, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * They don't look like vandalism to me, he appears to be sourcing the edits. However, it is your deletion and then trimming of material that about the German-Partisan negotiations that I am specifically talking about. Stop it. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 11:06, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I have removed the edits that he made that were not sourced. Go and see, please. Why are you starting an edit war? Please don't do that. I have leaved the sourced material. You are generalizing. Why are you doing that? Please don't engage in a edit war, and if you have issues, please go to the talk page. Please be civil. Tnx --Tuvixer (talk) 11:17, 9 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Mate, you have repeated removed sourced information about the negotiations. Leave it there and I'll be happy. If you remove it again, I'll be taking it to WP:AE. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 11:20, 9 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Please can you specify what should I not remove? So that I don't do the same "mistake" again? Tnx --Tuvixer (talk) 11:22, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: February 2016
About This Month in GLAM · Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery · Romaine 21:05, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:30, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Good onya Gerda! Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:58, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Reverts
Hello, I must confess that I am running out of options. In spite of the consensus found on the insertion of a mention about the repression of political opponents in the lead of the article Tito, Tuvixer continues to remove the reference. What can we do? --Silvio1973 (talk) 10:28, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Please read this: NAC: No consensus. There is one Support !vote and no Oppose !votes, but mostly Comments, including complaints about the way that the RFC is worded. I won't close an RFC as consensus based on only one !vote when there are so many comments. Recommendation is to reword the RFC in a clear neutral way, and publicize the RFC through various WikiProjects. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:28, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Josip_Broz_Tito&diff=707158254&oldid=707035756 Tnx --Tuvixer (talk) 10:30, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree with Tuvixer, the RfC failed to achieve a consensus on inclusion and was closed by an uninvolved editor. I believe you need to add relevant reliably sourced material to the body of the article, comparing and contrasting with other sources regarding the political repression. Then I would redraft an RfC. I'd be happy to help with the drafting when you've added the material. You shouldn't have any problems with adding the material, because we include all non-fringe views, and this definitely isn't a fringe view. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:46, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Body of the article Tito
I agree, what is in the lead need to be the summary of facts presented in the body of the article. I am editing the body in this sense. I am not sure this is however the problem. For some reasons I suspect that whatever modification to the body of the article will be removed. Silvio1973 (talk) 12:12, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
 * If it is reliably sourced, I will support you on its inclusion, and will take disruptive behaviour to ANI or AE as necessary. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:36, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Peacemaker, I tried to edit the body of the article but as soon I started, everything was wholesale removed by Tuvixer. Look, this is the proof: []. It is a crazy situation. I don't know what to do. I cannot edit the lead because allegedly the object of the modification is not sufficiently developed in the body of the article, but if I try to touch the body of the article Tuvixer removes the material. Please mind well that I supported my edit with many sources and I am ready to add more sources and material, if only I was given the possibility to touch the article. There is a clear issue of WP:OWN going on here. --Silvio1973 (talk) 19:46, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
 * @Silvio1973 I have suggested you, a thousand times, to present the changes you want to make to the article body on the talk page so they can be discussed properly. But you constantly ignore that suggestion, and in general you ignore everything I write on the talk page if you do not agree with my statement. It is really hard to work with an user like you Silvio, you do not follow the rules, and when you realize that you are wrong you start to edit war. that is not how Wikipedia should work. Tnx --Tuvixer (talk) 20:25, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Tuvixer, are you telling me that proposing first the changes on the talk page will make things smoother? I want to follow your suggestion, just to demonstrate I tried everything. Silvio1973 (talk) 20:28, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Then follow it. --Tuvixer (talk) 20:38, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
 * You see Tuvixer, the only problematic user is you. The fact that you follow me is the proof. Silvio1973 (talk) 20:41, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I am not even going to dignify that with a response.
 * Sorry Peacemaker67, I did not want to disturb your talk page. --Tuvixer (talk) 20:47, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
 * That's fine. I have made a proposal regarding incorporating one such source into the article on the talk page. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:21, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

2nd Panzer Army
What happened after your last edit here? The whole article disappears. Before and after. --89.204.153.106 (talk) 17:10, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
 * You should be addressing your question to, not me. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 20:07, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Blaine.W.B
Thanks for blocking that user, but shouldn't they be indefinitely blocked as a clear vandalism-only account? --A guy saved by Jesus (talk) 02:55, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Yep, my bad. Thanks for the reminder. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:27, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Incredibly bad judgement
In my view your behavior and editing at Jasenovac concentration camp shows incredibly bad judgement, as I noted here. Jytdog (talk) 15:21, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Opinions are like arseholes. Everyone has one. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:00, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Jasenovac concentration camp
Did you actually read the discussion on Talk? The consensus is pretty clear. I removed the content rather than protecting the article because it seemed to me that everyone had realised the contended text is POV and poorly sourced. If I had thought for a moment that people would continue to edit-war this crap back in, I would have protected the article. I have absolutely no interest in the dispute itself, only in ensuring that content meets standards. I came to this form the admin boards, as an admin. Guy (Help!) 09:42, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, I read it, and I also know the editing history of the editors who were there commenting too. My interest is in NPOV, and there was an unseemly rush to delete the material wholesale which I consider to be ill-conceived given my knowledge of the subject. I am also a strong believer in BRD, and my view was and is that the material should stay while the matter was discussed. This is a very sensitive area within ARBMAC and there are a lot of ill-considered kneejerk reactions in this topic area, especially when editors with one POV pile-on quickly. That is why I reverted your deletion. It may be that some or all of the material is deleted or moved elsewhere in the article, but the views of the group behind this source (which includes a significant number of university professors and members of the Serbian Academy of the Sciences) need to be given due weight in the article. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:58, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Well the edit you originally reverted sucked rather badly, as noted by numerous people including me and other uninvolved admins. I have no view on the changed version you proposed, but I suggest that an RfC would be a good way to resolve the debate. Guy (Help!) 23:36, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Today's featured article/April 11, 2016
Hi PM. It's currently 1432 characters; we aim for 1150, 1175 at most. You're welcome to trim, or I can. - Dank (push to talk) 17:44, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I'd appreciate it if you did it . I'm a bit distracted at present. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:52, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Delete this for me
The Church in the Darkness, I'm making an article for it (which is not ready yet) and I just came across your talk page, so hope you don't mind. --QEDK ( T 📖  C ) 20:32, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, are you talking about the redirect page or the page on Rouse? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:05, 25 March 2016 (UTC)


 * The redirect. --QEDK ( T &#128214;  C ) 04:30, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure why you wouldn't leave it there and move the article when it's ready? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:11, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I can't move a page to a page which already has content. :( --QEDK ( T &#128214;  C ) 06:53, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
 * The only content is the redirect, so when you're ready, ping me. In the meantime it makes sense for a forthcoming game to redirect to its creator, doesn't it? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:07, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay, got it. --QEDK ( T &#128214;  C ) 07:08, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXX, March 2016
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) 12:15, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

Nashville International Airport
Hi! You had protected Nashville Airport on February 12 for a week. Looks like the same dynamic IP continues to insist "charters" and remove destinations just like before. Can I ask for your help to protect this again? HkCaGu (talk) 19:53, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Admittedly belated
Congratulations on becoming an admin. : ) --Potočnik (talk) 14:36, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Cheers! Are you staying retired? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:27, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Semi. Sticking mostly to Bosnian War articles. --Potočnik (talk) 08:54, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Bit of action there with the Karadzic verdict last week and Seselj coming up later this week. Sadly, I had to give up on the Bijeljina massacre article, too many POV warriors even for me. Go well. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 11:14, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, the article's definitely become a timesink though I think ultimately the matter has to be revisited when Plavsic croaks. Funny enough I've had to spend more time on the talkpage of one massacre regarding three or five words than I have on the entire Croat-Bosniak war article. --Potočnik (talk) 15:06, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Greater Albania
One user keeps inserting Albanian nationalist terminology and original research, and insists on removing reliably sourced information here. I have no intention of engaging in an edit war. What does the admin say? 23 editor (talk) 15:15, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Looks like it has been reverted by someone else, and I can only see the one edit. If it continues and is against consensus on the talk page, feel free to bring it back to me. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 22:43, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Today's featured article/April 23, 2016
PM, Chris just swapped this one in (otherwise we would have run a Hitler article at TFA on the 22nd while DYK was celebrating Passover ... not good!) I'll get to it today. - Dank (push to talk) 13:17, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: March 2016
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">About This Month in GLAM · Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery · Romaine 12:31, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Some bubble tea for you!

 * Cheers! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:54, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Finally my first article I'm proud of
If you'd remember me I had asked you to delete The Church in the Darkness, well my article is ready, User:QEDK/The Church in the Darkness. --<span style="font-family:'Tahoma',Geneva,sans-serif">QEDK ( T ☕  C ) 14:56, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Fritz Knoechlein
Can you move the page Fritz Knoechlein to "Fritz Knöchlein"? Or does some Wiki-policy prohibit us to correctly spell his name? Cheers MisterBee1966 (talk) 06:01, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
 * G'day MB. Hope your walk was enjoyable and the weather was ok. The applicable policy would be WP:ENGLISH, and the question would be whether English language sources refer to him using the original German form or Anglicised form of his name. I recently moved the article Milovan Đilas to Milovan Djilas because English language books (including those he authored, use the former. What do the majority of English language sources use? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:48, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for asking and checking. Yes the walk, I started in Granada, to Cordoba, to Merida and finished my walk in Caceres (roughly 500km in total) was very beautiful, physically not too demanding and a great experience. Could you have a look at the volume of draft articles (not to say saturation) created by User:Mad7744? I believe that most of the articles fail our notability guidelines. Cheers MisterBee1966 (talk) 14:46, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

January to March 2016 Quarterly Article Reviews

 * Thanks Ac. Been a bit off my game this year so far... Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:33, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Austro-Slovene conflict in Carinthia
I thought you might be interested in working on Austro-Slovene conflict in Carinthia, since you focus on Yugoslavian topics so much.--Catlemur (talk) 17:24, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I've added it to my watchlist, but I tend to get a fair bit of "push-back" from Slovene editors when I edit in that subject area, so it isn't very enjoyable. You might find some useable info at Johann Mickl. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:34, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Vrbanja bridge
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Battle of Vrbanja bridge 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 AustralianRupert -- AustralianRupert (talk) 00:01, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

TFA
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:10, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks Gerda! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:21, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXI, April 2016
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) 01:38, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Bora
Where would we classify Gudovac massacre under Bora? Doesn't appear to be on there. 23 editor (talk) 16:45, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Under operations, battles etc. Feel free to add it in. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:18, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

SMS Körös
Hi Peacemaker67,

I recently wrote the article Briarcliff Library, and submitted it to FAC, where I'm afraid it might not receive enough attention in time. I would really like if you could make comments; in turn, I'd like to review your FAC, in a quid pro quo manner. Thanks so much. ɱ (talk · vbm  · coi) 16:57, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I would really appreciate your help. The FAC really needs more attention in order to pass. ɱ  (talk · vbm  · coi) 19:52, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Edit warrior
We have an editor warrior over at Branimir Štulić dueling it out with some Serbian IP. I tried to mitigate the situation by adding a few sources and got accused of peddling nationalist propaganda for my trouble. So as not to get sucked in further, I figured I'd bring this matter to the attention of an admin. Best, 23 editor (talk) 16:30, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
 * The matter and intention of that IP is not in good faith. It tries to make Štulić less a Croat, more a Serb, without reliable sources, Štulić own words, and editing style. There Croatian sources which contradict Serbian. One-two Serbian sources doesn't make someone a Serb. Simple as that--Crovata (talk) 21:58, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Are you implying Index.hr is not a Croatian source? I know they aren't exactly right of centre, but still. You have repeatedly removed sourced content, Serbian and Croatian alike, because the sources don't suit your views. Not to mention the sheer number of times you've reverted that IP. I think both of you deserve sanctions for refusing to use the talk page. 23 editor (talk) 22:06, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
 * If someone revertd someone's edit, then the issue and info to be included should be taken to the talk page. It's not my problem if the IP doesn't know basics of Wikipedia editing. Again, it's not about my views, both sources are not reliable, pointless and misleading of the topic reality. This is an encyclopedia(!), not a webiste, blog, whatever someone thinks about to manipulate with unreliable sources.--Crovata (talk) 22:48, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Question
Is this a WP:NPV edit? Cheers MisterBee1966 (talk) 13:12, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: April 2016
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">About This Month in GLAM · Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery · Romaine 12:53, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Backlog Drive
Greetings. I was wondering if you could start a new backlog reduction drive. My proposal can be found here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history.--Catlemur (talk) 19:51, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
 * G'day, you've asked at the right place (on the Milhist Coordination talk page), just see what transpires. BTW, what you're suggesting isn't really a backlog drive per se, it is more of a edit-a-thon-type thing with a very specific focus. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:33, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Congratulations!

 * Thanks Rupert! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:48, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/J. R. Kealoha
Could you do an image check of this article? Thanks.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 20:39, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Coffman
Is this and this acceptable behaviour? He/she is pushing the envelope in my opinion. Cheers MisterBee1966 (talk) 17:31, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Josip_Broz_Tito
Hi. You've protected this article with an expiration set to 2 July which had passed. When will the article be unprotected so IPs can edit it? 89.164.199.223 (talk) 19:25, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
 * G'day, protection will expire in about a month as it is currently still June, not July. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 23:29, 3 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Oh, my mistake. Thank you. 89.164.199.223 (talk) 13:25, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXII, May–June 2016
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) 12:05, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: May 2016
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">About This Month in GLAM · Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery · Romaine 12:33, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

TWL Questia check-in
Hello!

You are receiving this message because The Wikipedia Library has record of you receiving a one-year subscription to Questia. This is a brief update to remind you about that access:


 * Make sure that you can still log in to your Questia account; if you are having trouble feel free to get in touch.
 * When your account expires you can reapply for access at WP:Questia.
 * Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, make sure to include citations with links on Wikipedia: links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed.
 * Write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, email us and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.

Finally, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this short survey. The survey helps us not only better serve you with facilitating this particular partnership, but also helps us discover what other partnerships and services The Wikipedia Library can offer.

Thanks! 20:24, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

TWL HighBeam check-in
Hello Wikipedia Library Users,

You are receiving this message because the Wikipedia Library has record of you receiving a one-year subscription to HighBeam. This is a brief update to remind you about that access:


 * Make sure that you can still log in to your HighBeam account; if you are having trouble feel free to contact me for more information. When your access expires you can reapply at WP:HighBeam.
 * Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, make sure to include citations with links on Wikipedia: links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed. For more information about citing this source, see HighBeam/Citations
 * Write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, let us know and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.

Finally, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this short survey. The survey helps us not only better serve you with facilitating this particular partnership, but also helps us discover what other partnerships and services the Wikipedia Library can offer.

Thank you. 20:31, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks
For your recent support. Could you please have a look if the change made to the articles Walter Ohmsen, Erich Rudorffer are legitimate? Thanks MisterBee1966 (talk) 12:15, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
 * You may man't to look at Fritz Amling (among many others articles recently nominated for deletion). Does he not meet the WP:SOLDIER criteria? Cheers MisterBee1966 (talk) 14:54, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
 * In addition, check Hermann Hoth, Helmut Wendorff, Johannes Blaskowitz, Hans-Valentin Hube, Fridolin von Senger und Etterlin, Walter Hagen (aviator), Otto Weidinger, just to name a few. You will also find comments like Talk:Joachim Müncheberg on a few articles, setting the stage for next actions. MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:45, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
 * More carving out of content on Ernst Lindemann, a featured article, please advise MisterBee1966 (talk) 06:22, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * MB, feel free to bring to my attention any GA or higher articles that are getting this "treatment". I am happy to revert and ensure GAR/Milhist ACR/FAR processes are used. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:19, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

thanks again, some more on another featured article Heinrich Bär, some of the carve-out may be okay, some parts maybe not so good. The part about his roots of his nickname may be worth keeping. MisterBee1966 (talk) 10:07, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I have noticed that a number of articles are currently being tagged with the notability template although the individuals meet the WP:SOLDIER criteria to my interpretation of the guideline, examples include Wilhelm Philipps, Werner Kienitz, Harald Schultz, Georg Graf von Rittberg (and many more). Is this legitimate? Cheers MisterBee1966 (talk) 09:55, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, it would depend on them meeting WP:GNG. Diamonds recipients, commanders of regiments and above etc would be highly likely to meet GNG if someone put the requisite effort into looking for reliable sources. I'll have a look at the ones you've mentioned. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:12, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
 * You should have a look at previous AfD nominations and their outcome. The common denominator was always: WP:Notability for Biography WP:ANYBIO, "Any Bio no. 1," which states: "The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for one several times." Examples include Articles for deletion/Josef Preiß or Articles for deletion/Hugo Ruf (soldier). In essence, any Knight's Cross recipient is notable, just like any Medal of Honor, Victoria Cross or Hero of the Soviet Union recipient. These awards are all "well-known and significant". Cheers MisterBee1966 (talk) 11:29, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Some more removal of content and citations on Albrecht Brandi, legitimate? MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:26, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I didn't realize how wrong all my editing has been over the years see Condense intricate detail per wp:not everything. I had always thought that family context was important and mandated. MisterBee1966 (talk) 07:22, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't think your editing has been "so wrong", different editors have different ideas of appropriate levels of detail. I personally wouldn't include the names of every member of a subject's family, but that should be sorted out at GA or ACR so that an article has a level of detail that reflects consensus. It certainly isn't mandated. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:20, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

1st Fallschirm-Panzer Division Hermann Göring
Quick question: were you intending to move the Fallschirm-Panzer Division 1 Hermann Göring article to 1st Fallschirm-Panzer Division Hermann Göring? You moved the talk page, but not the article itself. Kirill Lokshin (talk) 16:41, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Whoops. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:47, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXIII, July 2016
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) 12:44, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: June 2016
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">About This Month in GLAM · Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery · Romaine 01:58, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Bárdossy
Hello! I see that you started to expand László Bárdossy article. I am very glad to see that. I recommend a full book to you: THE WAR CRIMES TRIAL OF HUNGARIAN PRIME MINISTER László Bárdossy. Maybe it can be useful for you. --Norden1990 (talk) 14:23, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll have a look. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:08, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Rogožarski IK-3
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Rogožarski IK-3 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 Biblioworm -- Biblioworm (talk) 21:40, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

DRN is broken
Hello! I noticed you had edited recently, and thought I'd let you know DRN is broken but has fixed the issue, they just need an administrator to copy paste the patch since the page is edit protected. Please see This Link We'd appreciate the help :D --Cameron11598 (Talk) 02:15, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Never mind someone else handled it thank you for your time :D --Cameron11598 (Talk) 02:50, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Lists of KC recipients
Can you check if the recent removal of entries to the lists of KC recipients is okay (See the first list of the S Series). The removal is in breach of the references and does not reflect the references I used. Thanks MisterBee1966 (talk) 21:53, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Please read the lead, it states based on acceptance by the AKCR. Why did I do this? Because Scherzer himself states that the records give insufficent evidence to positively delist him (or others like Erwin von Witzleben or Hermann Fegelein). Subesequently he concluded with the words I am unable to take away any KC or delist, I can only point out where I found conflicting evidence. If Wikipedia choses to delete him (or others) it goes beyond what Scherzer himself was willing to conclude in his book. Based in this, these type of entries are explicitly coded to highlight this doubt, going beyond is not supported by Scherzer. Cheers MisterBee1966 (talk) 06:26, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * You need to make these arguments yourself, MB. I'm happy to help, but you are the one who knows the intricacies. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:04, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Helmut Lent
Could you please check if all the removals to the FAC article are legitimate? Thanks MisterBee1966 (talk) 07:01, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
 * If you have time, please also look into Werner Hartenstein, GA and A-class, where content was removed. Thanks againMisterBee1966 (talk) 09:53, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Kaiman-class torpedo boat
The article Kaiman-class torpedo boat you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Kaiman-class torpedo boat for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Parsecboy -- Parsecboy (talk) 12:41, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Kaiman-class torpedo boat
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Kaiman-class torpedo boat 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 Parsecboy -- Parsecboy (talk) 13:41, 26 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Hey, Peacemaker - I know you've had trouble finding usable photos of the Austro-Hungarian/Yugoslav river monitors, so I thought you might be interested to see these. They're mostly grainy like the torpedo-boat photos, but a few of them are in pretty good shape. Parsecboy (talk) 12:35, 27 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks Pb, I've been trawling through to see if they have any of my fairly obscure subjects, quite a collection. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:02, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history. Regards, <font color="#FF9933">KC Velaga <font color="#128807">☚╣✉╠☛  13:19, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

What is going on with a lot of the German world war II articles, especially some by misterbee??? It seems someone is censoring information due to some personal agenda??? I don't see this on articles about the Soviets or the allies for that matter.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:CF64:1D50:C450:94C6:E4FA:34A0 (talk) 04:37, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Congratulations!

 * Thanks Rupert! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:17, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

An intractable problem
I don't know if you saw my e-mail, but I'm addressing you as the closer of this thread. The fact is, nothing much has changed in the approach of the user in question. You saw it yourself on the Bárdossy talk page. If anything, it's getting worse. Just look, please, at this diatribe, a response to this edit of mine:


 * "Would you once try to forget here you are a Wikipedian and not Romanian, and would you a little bit ignore your Hungarophobia and interested in professional articles?" &mdash; very serious, totally baseless accusations, textbook violation of WP:NPA
 * A meandering screed that, if anything, shows the user still has no clue about WP:V, 1881 days after his first edit (i.e., we're not dealing here with a novice)

Also this edit summary - again, pretty much every source uses "forced to cede" or some variant thereof, but because it grates against his sensibilities, we're supposed to censor it.

I suppose my question is: at what point do we stop pretending this is a "content dispute" and face the reality that this user has much more serious issues? - Biruitorul Talk 14:37, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXIV, August 2016
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) 07:58, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

mass removal
Can you please check if the mass removal to List of Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross recipients (W) is inline with A-class procedures? Due note that the article was reviewed by the community in its prior form. Doesn't a change like that require some kind of community consus? Cheers MisterBee1966 (talk) 18:48, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I just noticed the same mass removal was made on List X to Z
 * I think it depends on the scope of the list, which is about recipients, and gives Scherzer as the current "best" source. If the scope was varied to include those that the AKCR decided had received the award (despite the records), there would be a case for retention of those names. I can't access Scherzer, so it's hard to say. I must say, I wasn't as aware of the difference when I reviewed some of those lists. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:30, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Galeb-class minelayer
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Galeb-class minelayer 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 Biblioworm -- Biblioworm (talk) 02:01, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

RTL review
Hey Peacemaker! If you're not busy with other Wiki-activities, can you read Ride the Lightning and share your opinion at the FAC page? I've reviewed a couple of your nominees while ago and since the FAC desperately needs reviewers, your input is welcomed. All the best.--Retrohead (talk) 13:16, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Galeb-class minelayer
The article Galeb-class minelayer you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Galeb-class minelayer for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Biblioworm -- Biblioworm (talk) 18:41, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: July 2016
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">About This Month in GLAM · Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery · Romaine 02:40, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

my thanks
thanks for that edit on Karl Allmendinger I recommend adding that type of info to more Nazi generals, because hey. The more you know. Liamkasbar (talk) 22:09, 10 August 2016 (UTC)liamkasbar

Brendan Finucane and London Gazette
Please help me understand. How does the verbatim quoting from the London Gazette in the article Brendan Finucane or Douglas Bader differ from Wehrmachtbericht quoting (now removed with the justification "Wehrmachtbericht references: Undue -- pls see Talk:Erich_von_dem_Bach-Zelewski") in article Heinz-Wolfgang Schnaufer or Gordon Gollob? Examples:
 * Brendan Finucane: "Recently during two sorties on consecutive days, Flight Lieutenant Finucane destroyed five Messerschmitt 109's bringing his total victories to at least 20. He has flown with this squadron since June 1941, during which time the squadron has destroyed 42 enemy aircraft of which Flight Lieutenant Finucane had personally destroyed 15. The successes achieved are undoubtedly due to this officer's brilliant leadership and example— London Gazette"
 * Brendan Finucane: "This officer has led his flight with great dash, determination and courage in the face of the enemy. Since July 1941, he has destroyed three enemy aircraft and assisted in the destruction of a further two. Flight Lieutenant Finucane has been largely responsible for the fine fighting spirit of the unit.— London Gazette"
 * Douglas Bader: "This officer had displayed, gallantry and leadership of the highest order. During three recent engagements he has led his squadron with such skill and ability that thirty-three enemy aircraft have been destroyed. In the course of these engagements Squadron Leader Bader had added to his previous successes by destroying six enemy aircraft—London Gazette"
 * Heinz-Wolfgang Schnaufer: "During the night of the 9th to the 10th October Haupmann Schnaufer, Gruppenkommandeur (group commander) in a Nachtjagdgeschwader (night fighter wing), whom the Führer has decorated with the Oak Leaves with Swords to the Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross, scored his 100th night aerial victory.—Wehrmachtbericht"
 * Gordon Gollob: "Hauptmann Gollob, commander of a fighter wing, achieved his 101st aerial victory.—Wehrmachtbericht"

Thanks for helping me understand the fundamental differences. If they are not fundamentally different, should they be removed from the Brendan Finucane as well? Cheers MisterBee1966 (talk) 10:19, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I suggest a central Milhist discussion of the Wehrmachtbericht entries, in the same way as we are currently having one regarding the "questionable" KCs, but I'll leave you to initiate it. It seems to me that there is no significant difference between the two other than that one was British and the other German. All awards have a propaganda aspect as well as a legitimate meritorious aspect. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:33, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, good idea (see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history) Cheers MisterBee1966 (talk) 12:58, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

TFA
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:52, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks again, Gerda! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:22, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Malinska-class mining tender
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Malinska-class mining tender 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 Parsecboy -- Parsecboy (talk) 19:01, 15 August 2016 (UTC)