User talk:Salmanazar/Archive 1

License tagging for Image:X1 sub.jpeg
Thanks for uploading Image:X1 sub.jpeg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 19:09, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Obeissante.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Obeissante.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 12:06, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Methane reformer (car)
An editor has nominated Methane reformer (car), an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. Jayden54Bot 13:27, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Sentinel Lorries to Argentina
HI! you added the information to the Sentinel article about 100 steam lorries shipped to Argentina. Where did you get this information? it would be interesting to find out if there are any survivors... Dullfig 23:19, 23 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Here's a reference to the Argentinian Sentinels: http://www.railwaysofthefarsouth.co.uk/9dbuildingtherfi.html Salmanazar 07:35, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

It's Mike isn't it?

Lorisarvendu 12:57, 25 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Nice work, Dave! Salmanazar 13:42, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Thomas William Bowlby
Hello, I noticed that you recently created the article Thomas William Bowlby and have some excellent work on your hands. I have gone ahead and nominated it since it may qualify to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page under the Did you know... section. The Main Page gets about 4,000,000 hits per day and appearing on the Main Page may help bring publicity and assistance to the article. Feel free to self-nominate in the future. Cheers, Chris.B 18:31, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

HMS Cruiser (1879)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of HMS Cruiser (1879), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: :. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page&mdash; you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 23:03, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Copy-n-Paste Moves
Please do not make copy-n-paste moves as you did with HMS Cruiser to HMS Cruiser (1879). Copy-n-paste moves shouldn't be done as they disassociate the edit history which causes GFDL compliance issues. You should move pages instead. I have fixed this one. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks. -- JLaTondre 23:09, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the advice; I honestly had no idea. Having read move all is now clear. Salmanazar (talk) 23:14, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem. Thanks. -- JLaTondre 23:17, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

thanks for your cleanup of Caroline Herschel
Hi, thanks for your thorough cleanup of Caroline Herschel. Did you mean to tag it as a minor edit? --Jtir (talk) 16:33, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Oops! Well, I did at the start, then forgot I'd ticked the box! Salmanazar (talk) 16:54, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * NP. --Jtir (talk) 19:57, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Lord Napier of Magdala
Nice work. Acad Ronin (talk) 03:24, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Salmanazar (talk) 12:32, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Convert
Hello Salmanazar, I see you're using undefined undefined. I just thought I'd make you aware that  is soon to be depreciated as a code for knots. Please use  instead. This is being done to simplify the template, to avoid potential confusion with kilotonne and to keep the input codes more in line with the output abbreviations (per MoS "knot(s)" is abbreviated as "kn" not "kt"). Jɪmp 03:10, 3 March 2008 (UTC) Thanks for the heads-up Salmanazar (talk) 13:03, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry About that
I was trying to restore the original version of that article.

 Staffwaterboy  Talk ♂ 17:40, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * No bother! Salmanazar (talk) 17:41, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism warnings
I noticed that you're not issuing warnings to vandals. Getting these may get them to cease their unproductive behavior but if not, are needed as proof that they are being ignored before admins can issue blocks. You can find them here, but Twinkle also has a function to issue them, I believe. -- Broken Sphere Msg me 19:12, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, it seems my browser was suppressing the windows Twinkle pops up to issue warnings. Thanks for the heads-up. Salmanazar (talk) 19:14, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Otoman Zar-Adusht Ha'nish
Please add references or suggest alternative hooks; the DYK nomination is expiring due to lack of references for the hook I suggested. Thanks, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 05:23, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Baldwin Wake Walker
I notice that you have moved Baldwin Wake Walker to Baldwin Wake-Walker. Do you have any evidence that his correct name was Baldwin Wake-Walker?--Toddy1 (talk) 17:10, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Modern British practise is to hyphenate such names to prevent the penultimate surname being mistaken for a middle name; his son and grandson used the hyphenated version . Earlier C19th usage can vary wildly with names being listed with and without. See also here
 * I think Wake was originally a middle name, not a surname. Walker was his father's surname, and Wake his mother's maiden name.  The use of the surnames of relatives as middle names was not uncommon.  I fully accept that there is evidence that his children seem to have adopted the surname Wake-Walker.--Toddy1 (talk) 17:39, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree. I'll move it back to Baldwin Wake Walker. Salmanazar (talk) 13:06, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Analog jan 1975.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Analog jan 1975.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
 * That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --11:14, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

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

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

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

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 18:44, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Messed up Reiser edits
Your edits to Hans Reiser totally messed up the Unicode (Russian and other foreign scripts) in the articles. Please to fix, thanks. --Gwern (contribs) 19:57 8 July 2008 (GMT)

Benjamin Bathurst
Sorry, I was lazy not filling in the edit summary. Ideally, there should only be one blue link per line on a disambiguation page, see disambiguation. Thanks. Boleyn (talk) 20:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the info; I had no idea. Salmanazar (talk) 20:43, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice
Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 22:07, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Air Raid on Bari
Very nicely done expansion and cleanup of this article. Thank you. Thewellman (talk) 17:23, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the kind words. Salmanazar (talk) 18:24, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

U-552
You made a number of changes to the "Reuben James" and "David Atwater" sections of this article.

I've restored them for now;

As the neutrality of this article is disputed, please discuss any changes on the talk page before making them. Xyl 54 (talk) 17:36, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

HNoMS Bjørgvin and HNoMS Nidaros
First off, my appologies for taking so long to get back to you - Real Life keep taking too much time... I wasn't familiar with the policy you refer to, but it does makes sence even if - as a Norwegian - I'm not terrible happy about it in this case :). My major concern is that the articles on the ships in British service don't really contain much about the "pre history" of the ships before entering service with the RN. However, I'm sure something can be added to this effect. WegianWarrior (talk) 09:38, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I will revert to the redirects, and if you can find any information about the ships' history from the Norwegian side that would a useful addition. Thanks! Salmanazar (talk) 11:50, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Harry Parkes
Hi. I see you've added a lot to Harry Smith Parkes. You've done this scrupulously, the material smells credible, and for all I know it's all taken carefully and legitimately from one or more of the books listed at the foot. But while the added material is fresh in your memory, could you please add footnotes to indicate just what is taken from just where? Thank you. -- Hoary (talk) 00:31, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
 * My main source was the article on him in the online edition of the Dictionary of National Biography, which I've added to the references. Salmanazar (talk) 13:31, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Of course the new DNB is a superb work, surely the best you could have chosen for the job. However, nobody is going to know that the material comes from there. Instead, it will look as if some material came from the DNB, the rest from elsewhere. Or even that the whole lot came from elsewhere (e.g. various editors' imaginations) and that somebody then stuck on the mention of DNB either as a diversion or as a suggestion.

I know that this business is tedious, but could you not add notes ( )? I do this myself much less consistently than I should, but I do try. (Memo to self: And now I really must try, otherwise I should expect the worst from Salmanazar.) -- Hoary (talk) 14:16, 4 November 2008 (UTC)


 * No no, you're quite right, and I've added some inline refs where there are substantial differences from the previous version (which looked pretty poor when I read the DNB bio). Salmanazar (talk) 14:39, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Good work there, thank you! -- Hoary (talk) 23:53, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Fairness impels me to acknowledge this repudiation of my position. Actually it's not a complete repudiation, though sorting all this out would probably require an essay that I'm not inclined to write any time soon. -- Hoary (talk) 09:23, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

U-552 again
I’d like to look at this again; I’ve put a post on the talk page there. can you comment? Xyl 54 (talk) 17:36, 4 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Your comment "I more or less agree with you"; are you wanting to make a sockpuppet allegation? Xyl 54 (talk) 12:06, 8 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh God no. That was addressed to the anonymous guy and referred to his edits, not his accusation of sockpuppetry. He probably thinks we're ALL the same person. Salmanazar (talk) 13:09, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Minor edits
This is definitely not a minor edit. I can't help noticing that all your edits going back as far as the eye can see are marked as minor with no edit summary. That is a little discourteous to your fellow editors.  Sp in ni ng  Spark  14:56, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

SS Automedon
I was going to nominate this article for DYK, but there are no inline citations. If you can fix this I will nominate the article. Mjroots (talk) 20:12, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Spring-heeled Jack in The Times, 1877
Please check your facts. The Times archive does have this story - go to archive, limit search to 1877, key word 'Aldershott' (with two ts).I have also consulted the report in hard copy in the bound Times archive in the London Library. Mikedash (talk) 14:58, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Mea culpa, I forgot all about the archaic spelling. Looks like Hamilton's memory was at fault, plus the 60th Rifles seem to have been sent to South Africa in early 1879. Salmanazar (talk) 22:09, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
 * No worries, and thanks for the correction. Hamilton was writing nearly 45 years on, so not surprising he got a date wrong by a couple of years. At least 3 informed sources hint or state openly that Allfrey was responsible for the 1877 incidents, but there is also a forgotten fourth account in the King's Royal Rifle Brigade Chronicle for 1924 which states the culprit was an unnamed officer in the Grenadier Guards. This account has attracted no notice as the publication is so obscure there are no copies available anywhere in the UK. I had to get a transcript from the University of Michigan in the end.Mikedash (talk) 23:37, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Agh, I didn't realize until now that you're the Mike Dash! Re the King's Royal Rifle Brigade Chronicle you mention, I ran across it as well, during a Google Books search, but tantalisingly enough it was only available in snippet view. Salmanazar (talk) 14:09, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Google Books...my favourite search tool...  Actually, mea culpa here too... checking, it was the Rifle Brigade Chronicle I meant.Mikedash (talk) 20:11, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

King’s Royal Rifle Corps Chronicle, 1922 (Winchester: 1923)

p.175

AN ECHO OF THE PAST Some of us doubtless remember the excitement caused many years ago by the doings of a certain high-spirited individual known at the time as “Spring-heeled Jack”. Lord Ernest Hamilton, in his book recently published, called Forty Years On, gives an account of these happenings and attributes them to Lieut. Alfrey, of the 60th Rifles. Lieut.-General Sir Edward Hutton, who was serving in the Battalion with Alfrey at the time when quartered at Colchester and Aldershot, vouches for the facts being much as stated, but no clue was ever forthcoming as to who was the perpetrator of these pranks, though circumstantial evidence up to a certain point led to suspicions that Alfrey might have been the individual.

The Rifle Brigade Chronicle for 1923 (London: The Regiment, 1924)

p.191

“SPRING—HEELED JACK.” The following appeared in the daily press during the month of October at the close of a burglary account:— “The civil and military police are making inquiries concerning the affair, which brings to the mind of old inhabitants of Aldershot the escapades of the illusive individual named ‘Spring–heeled Jack,’ who, in the early ‘80’s made nocturnal visits to sentries round the camp, leaving them in a state of alarm. “He eventually proved to be a a Captain in the Rifle Brigade.” The Editor, however, is informed by Viscount Dillon  that this is wrong, and that “Spring–heeled Jack” was an officer in the Grenadier Guards. He was an extremely active man, and by wearing springs on his heels accomplished the most amazing leaps. A favourite feat of his was to leap a hedge or wall and alight in front of the startled sentry and to then disappear by the same means.


 * Thanks, Mike. Very interesting! Salmanazar (talk) 14:03, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Igor Witkowski
In Die Glocke you state that 'The Truth About the Wunderwaffe' by Igor Witkowski was originally published as Prawda O Wunderwaffe in Polish. Please can you let me know the publication date as 1997 is incorrect. In an English translation of the book in English, done in 2003, it quotes that Witkowski refers to something in 1999. With that being in the original Polish edition the earliest it could have been was 1999. Any other info? Thanks. AWT (talk) 01:32, 5 January 2009 (UTC)


 * The earliest edition of "Prawda O Wunderwaffe" I can find is 2002, so it looks like 1997 is indeed erroneous. Salmanazar (talk) 14:37, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Drache or Drachen?
Hi, thanks for the question. Initially I'm sorry for my poor english, but I think to answer you. One of IMHO better sites on "nazi" Luftwaffe is Luftarchive.de (in german), linked moreover from de:Focke-Achgelis Fa 223 (with " - ", not without ;-) ) where cite, at http://www.luftarchiv.de/hubschrauber/fa223.htm the title "Focke-Achgelis Fa 223 'Drachen'". I think had been an error of transcription, because, I repeat, Bert Hartmann (the Luftarchive.de autor and webmaster) was 	very reliable. Sorry for my intervention, if you feel right can rolbacking without any problem :-). Good wikiwork :-)--Threecharlie (talk) 16:45, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

1965 Carmel mid-air collission
Nice article, just needs those references sorting out and it'll be B class material :-)) Mjroots (talk) 15:15, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

NEC Spinwriter - references needed
I've been trying to find references for the Daisy wheel printer article (without much success), and the darkest corner is the Thimble printers section which you created many months ago. I know that Spinwriters existed, but according to Google they seem to have been almost wiped off the face of the Internet—even searches on nec.com, necdisplay.com and nec.jp come up blank. If you added the Thimble printers section because you have some connection with Spinwriters, do please pop some references into the article or the talk page. Thanks - Pointillist (talk) 22:24, 17 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't have any connection with them apart from being old enough to remember them. They were pretty much identical with daisywheel printers in every way apart of course from the famous "thimble" which I always thought was some kind of patent ruse. Someone put a manual for a Spinwriter online, so I've added it as a reference. Salmanazar (talk) 12:19, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much. I think I'll restore the www.necam.com reference too, I know it is the vendor's site but it might be useful. - Pointillist (talk) 12:24, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Battle of the Atlantic (1914–1918)
I’ve posted a comment here, which (at the risk of canvassing) you may like to comment on. What do you think? Xyl 54 (talk) 10:37, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm glad someone took up my suggestion! I considered beginning "U-boat Campaign (World War I)" myself but I became distracted by other articles... -Salmanazar (talk) 11:06, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Mimaki logo1.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Mimaki logo1.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:08, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Wolfsegg Iron
Thanks for your good work on this. Dougweller (talk) 17:53, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Doug. I appreciate that. Salmanazar (talk) 20:31, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Frederick William Archdall Ellison
The refs for this (including Henry C. King) are showing his name as "William Frederick Archdall Ellison" or "WFA Ellison" or "Wm. F.A. Ellison". Just wanted to check if there was some ref for the current name before changing it. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 11:59, 8 May 2009 (UTC)


 * You are entirely correct, and it should be "William Frederick Archdall Ellison", so please change when you get a chance. I have no idea how I managed to get his forenames reversed. Salmanazar (talk) 11:48, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Field Volumes
There is a great book on the whole Field story (2 Vols., but in german) available on googlebooks.--Radh (talk) 07:28, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * What is the German title? Salmanazar (talk) 12:49, 26 May 2009 (UTC)


 * "Der Fall Field", it is the very first entry on googlebooks for "Noel Field" (there is a second volume down the line), "Bend Riner Barth" is the first editor.--Radh (talk) 13:13, 26 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks very much! Salmanazar (talk) 16:57, 26 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Not at all.--Radh (talk) 17:39, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Fogbank
Thanks for expanding the article on this interesting topic. However another editored noticed that the text, mostly added in this edit,, is probably too sclosely taken fro the source. Could you do a re-write to make it more original? Just changing a few words is pretty much the same as copying it.  Will Beback   talk    03:59, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks.   Will Beback    talk    00:15, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

U-boat Campaign (World War I)
Hello

I know you were working on this article; are you still? I was wanting to add some stuff on technical and tactical aspects, but I didn't want to tread on any toes...

Also, in the discussion about winding up the "First battle of the Atlantic" page (ages ago!) you suggested a page focussing on the campaign in British home waters (an "Atlantic" campaign); were you planning to do that? I had some ideas for that, too.

Sorry, I've not been around much recently; I'm trying to get back in the game...Xyl 54 (talk) 01:30, 4 July 2009 (UTC)


 * No, no, you must add whatever you think fit! I've not been very active on Wikipedia myself lately due to various factors, but I've been keeping an eye on the article, and I did overhaul the Brazilian section after some good-intentioned editor made a start on it, and I might also put in a section about the U-cruisers shortly if I can decide exactly where to insert it.


 * Re the Atlantic Campaign - I hadn't even considered doing it, so by all means plough ahead!


 * Salmanazar (talk) 12:06, 4 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Further thoughts re the Atlantic Campaign - I feel that "First Battle of the Atlantic" is a good title, even if it is a retroactive name - and it can be sourced from the present U-boat Campaign (World War I): I've made a start here. But should we also have a page for the North Sea, which was the U-boats' main theatre of operations, rather than lumping it in with the Atlantic operations? Salmanazar (talk) 10:35, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

U-boat Campaign (World War I), again
Following the recent Move war here, there is a discussion about scope and naming at Talk:U-boat Campaign (World War I), just to let you know. Your input would be welcome. Xyl 54 (talk) 19:34, 13 July 2009 (UTC)


 * To add to this, and to reply to the above


 * Yes, the content you've pulled from "U-boat campaign" fits well for the "Atlantic" article; is it worth summarizing it at the U-boat article, to avoid a big overlap? I would say include the North Sea action, rather than separate it; it's the same general area, and the same U-boat force, that saw the commerce campaign later.


 * Are you dead set on the name? I've challenged it here and here; I feel it needs a citation if it's to be used.


 * Is it worth dropping a line to the discussion here, if you are going to post the Atlantic article? Just to keep things in the clear. Xyl 54 (talk) 02:49, 20 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I've changed my mind half a dozen times over this, and have finally decided that we would be better off not creating an article on the Atlantic/North Sea operations, and instead leave the material where it is in the "U-boat Campaign" article, since the operations in question were the central focus of U-boat operations in WWI, with everything else a sideshow. Besides, I can't even begin to imagine a suitable name for it; while U-boat Operations in the German Unrestricted Submarine Warfare Zone (World War I) would be the most accurate description, it is way too long... Salmanazar (talk) 10:48, 20 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I've gone ahead and done an Atlantic U-boat Campaign (World War I) article (it seemed to me to be the better option). I took the liberty of lifting some stuff from the "U-boat campaign.." article) and added some other stuff to both; I thought I'd better let you know  Xyl 54 (talk) 14:56, 18 August 2009 (UTC)


 * That looks pretty good, all in all. Salmanazar (talk) 15:33, 18 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks! :) Xyl 54 (talk) 15:43, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Gripple-logo.jpg)
 Thanks for uploading File:Gripple-logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 01:46, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Non Free Images in your User Space
Hey there Salmanazar, thank you for your contributions! I am a bot alerting you that Non-free files are not allowed in the user or talk-space. I removed some images that I found on User:Salmanazar/Misc2. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use images to your user-space drafts or your talk page. See a log of images removed today here, shutoff the bot here and report errors here. Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 04:59, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Re: Arthur Griffith
Hi, Salmanazar. I had a question about the quote footnoted at Arthur Griffith: it contains a couple of spelling mistakes ("userer", "hertily"), a solecism ("injust," though this could be an Irishism or an archaism) and inconsistency in the capitalization of Jew. I thought to change these, but then wondered if they might not be faithful transcriptions of the original. Do you have ready access to the source? --RrburkeekrubrR 15:05, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads-up. They are, I am ashamed to say, typos which are entirely my fault, and I've corrected them. Salmanazar (talk) 21:25, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

SS Thielbek
I found this article which you expanded and have a query. The article says Thielbek was 2,815 GRT and that she was raised after the war, repaired and returned to service.

According to Lloyds Registers. Thielbek was only 1,883 GRT. Her history is different to that given in the article.

Of course, it is entirely possible that we have two different ships here. Builder and year of construction of the Thielbek in the article would go a long way towards resolving this apparent discrepancy. Can you supply any further details? Mjroots (talk) 05:10, 1 June 2010 (UTC)


 * There seem to have been a few ships with the same name. Wikipedia, for example, mentions Empire Condover, which was formerly named Thielbek. The ship which the article SS Thielbek is about was built in Lubeck in 1940, and I have added an infobox and a reference to the article. Salmanazar (talk) 21:51, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Large Format Printers Page
Hi, I added a couple of links to the LFP page and you have taken off one of them. I am new to Wikipedia and will happily abide by any convention, but I somewhat resent your description of the entry you removed i.e. advertising spam. I will admit that I am one of the owners of www.sampleprint.co.uk, but thought that becuase we run a service that enables people to request a print sample that we were a valid extra and helpful resource to help people know more about LFP and ultimately if they wish to purchase one. We are not a sales organisation and do not sell LFPs. Your call, but I don't know why a LFP print sample service is not a valid resource. Thanks, Rob Robertjohnandrews (talk) 08:38, 6 June 2010 (UTC)


 * My apologies for causing offence; I didn't realize you were new to Wikipedia. The word "spam" in this connexion is just Wikispeak. If you look at this Wikipedia page which gives official Wikipedia policy regarding such links, you will see: "Adding external links to an article or user page for the purpose of promoting a website or a product is not allowed, and is considered to be spam." Salmanazar (talk) 12:52, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 18:37, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Please don't make me wash your dishes for you.

 * Please don't make me wash your dishes for you. If you're going to add info, use the same format as the rest of the article. The info you added uses the footnote style. That is not the style the rest of the article uses. The article is currently at WP:FAR; you are making it much, much harder to keep the FA. &bull; Ling.Nut 23:48, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * You could have put it a little more calmly, and perhaps mentioned which article you meant. I did, in any event, make the required amendments when I logged in and saw your message. Salmanazar (talk) 15:45, 21 September 2010 (UTC)