User talk:Wbfergus/Archive 1

Hi
Hi, thanks for your contributions to articles relating to the Korean Demilitarized Zone, Operation Paul Bunyan, etc. Thanks for helping out! If you're interested, maybe you'd like to join WikiProject Korea, where you can coordinate with others who share similar interests. We have a couple of working groups starting up that *might* interest you (not sure): this one on North Korea and this one on Korean military history. Anyway, hope to continue seeing you around. Cheers, -- Visviva 15:16, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Korean Armistice Agreement
I've added the "prod" template to the article Korean Armistice Agreement, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at Talk:Korean Armistice Agreement. You may remove the deletion notice, and the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria. --Benn Newman 01:13, 2 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi Benn. I think I agree, as it looks like the article has been moved to wikisource now. If this is correct, then I have no problem with deleting it from wikipedia. I do have a couple questions though, since still pretty new to wiki. On the existing pages that link to this, do I need to change the link to reflect it's new location in wikisource, and so, how? Also, there's several 'things' that could be linked in the document back to wikipedia articles. Is that suggested to do as well, or are there other governing attributes for text documents vs. wiki articles that discourage/prohibit it? Thanks for taking the time and effort to review the article and get it moved over to wikisource. wbfergus 12:45, 2 December 2006 (UTC)


 * The "best" solution would be to rewrite the article to make it encyclopedic. You could also make it a redirect page (which I'm not sure if you're supposed to, its technically possible though) or change all the links to it (but if there would ever be an article there, they would bypass it and go straight to the source text). Use something like Korean Armistice Agreement to link to it. --Benn Newman 17:03, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Armistice001.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Armistice001.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. &#124;EPO&#124; 15:00, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to the Military history WikiProject!
 Hi, and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.

A few features that you might find helpful:


 * Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
 * The announcement and open task box is updated very frequently. You can [ watchlist it] if you're interested; or, you can add it directly to your user page by including WPMILHIST Announcements there.
 * Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you [ watchlist it].
 * The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, peer review, and project-wide collaboration.
 * We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, periods, and conflicts.
 * Our requests page has extensive lists of requested articles, images, maps, and translations.
 * We've developed a variety of guidelines for article structure and content, template use, categorization, and other issues that you may find useful.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask one of the project coordinators, or any experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Kirill Lokshin 17:45, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Axe Murder Incident
Hello! I asked you to please cite some references for the additions you made to this article. Thanks a lot. Rare thing to have parts of such an event described by a real-life witness. Please feel welcome to contribute as much as you can.

While not wanting to be a pedant, it would still be good if you could reference as much as possible using published third-party sources (sadly, other witnesses themselves do not count unless they have written books or articles about it), as it otherwise would be original research. Have a look at what this means, and why Wikipedia has this rule - though in this case, most of the editors here will likely err on the careful side in treating what you might add. If you are unsure how to cite, have a look at the way the other references on the page are included. Internet links are NOT needed for a reference, just provide as much info as you can.

And don't be in any way put off by the above. Welcome on Wikipedia. MadMaxDog 12:56, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks MadMaxDog. There's a whole lot of information I haven't added, as most of it is/was from a biased POV. But, I do need to flesh out the section a bit more with additional details and pictures (I have permission from Wayne Johnson who took most of the pictures).
 * As an aside, your name is a tad funny. Our platoon was named the "Mad Dogs" after a nightime patrol we conducted, by the KPA guards. We (about 5 of us) snuck out of our main checkpoint and made a round of the JSA. When we were near KPA#10, we heard some snoring, so we snuck up the building and pounded on it with our axe handles. We heard shouting from inside and high-tailed it back to our checkpoint, laughing all the way. We started walking about 50 yards away from our checkpoint and the KPA caught up with us, ticked off really bad. They had a camera with them and started taking pictures (with the flash), and then complained about us the next day at a Joint Duty Officer meeting, stating ".. Lt. Zilka's Mad Dogs who patrol the JSA at night with big sticks". (Lt. Zilka was our platoon leader). Anyway, the higher-ups in the chain-of-command thought it was both pretty funny and quite an honor, since the KPA had never complained so vehemently or specifically about our gaurds in the area, and told us we should keep the name and use it with pride.

Not a problem
Not a problem, I'm just updating Air Force photographs and saw "soldier" and was thinking...hmmmm, that doesn't look right. It's all good. Signaleer 15:40, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue X - December 2006
The December 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 23:34, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Linking categories
If you want to link to a category (as in the discussion on the MILHIST talk page), use the following:. Carom 18:16, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I finally figured it out, except for the code/nowiki part. Is that neccessary, as it appears to have worked without it? :^) wbfergus 18:19, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
 * No, those are not neccessary. Using "code" just produces a different font, which is often used when talking about actual code (so that the code doesn't get lost in the rest of the discussion). "nowiki" is used to override the wikimarkup, so that you can display the code, rather than getting the result that the markup would normally provide. I used them here so that you could see the markup to use without having to enter the edit screen. ;) Carom 18:26, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Adding reference to an article
Hi, just to let you know. If you're the first to add in a reference into an article, you have to add in the appropriate template near the end of the article to make it show up. -- KTC 09:33, 2 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I didn't know that. I've subsequently gone through the main set of pages I've been editing and have changed the  notation I was using to now use the   template instead. It looks like it has a few 'features' that will make it worthwhile and easier to use. wbfergus 17:50, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Axe Murder
Hi William. Thanks for providing more info and material on this. I have done some layout editing on what you added, though.

Could you please revisit the 'Background' section and try to clarify the initial sentences? First of, is it correct that some of the post were abbreviated CP and some OP?

Second, where you say "...OP#5 (now called CP#3) during the summer months. During the winter months, a UNC checkpoint could only see the top of CP#3", is:


 * a: the to-from relationship of the visual angle correct or reversed?
 * b: the second time you refer to CP#3, is this the original or the renamed?

This section has simply gotten a bit confusing over time. Would be great if you could have a go at clearing it up. Thanks. MadMaxDog 07:03, 8 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the comments. I went back and hopefully got it cleared up now. I decided using the new new name, even if only one in parentheses, confused the matter to much, so I stayed with the names used at that point in time. I was also wondering about adding another image showing the layout of the JSA, the one from the Joint Security Area article, August 1976. Any thoughts on that, or where it should go? wbfergus 11:49, 8 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Added it in - it certainly helps the article, even while already being included on two other articles. MadMaxDog 08:05, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

People's Volunteer Army
While legally that may be correct, the formations of the PVA were simply 're-hatted' PLA formations that existed before the Korean War within the PLA Ground Forces and, after the Korean War, still within the PLA Ground Forces. As far as I was aware, it was a legal dodge to avoid a wider war with the US, but they were inherently PLA formations. For one small example, see Tiananmen_Square_protests_of_1989, where the PLA's (ex PVA's) 27th Army was one of the forces suppressing the protests. When we get round to writing individual articles on PLA armies, their PVA period will be only one part - though an important part - in their history. Thoughts? Buckshot06 21:20, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

You had it right - they should be listed as units of the People's Liberation Army, with a notation in their history that while they fought in the Korean War, during that timeframe they were ostentiably part of the People's Volunteer Army. A subcategory tag within the 'Units and formations of the PLA' will handle that. Great work on starting the PLA by the way - we're tremendously systematically biased toward Uk, US, Germany etc... Cheers Buckshot06 20:15, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * My thought would be to create the 'Military units and formations of the People's Liberation Army' category, simply by initially writing it out as a redlink, and then clicking on it, then renaming the armies & divisions to eg 27th Army (People's Republic of China). Keeping the PVA category would probably be good to, to mark the units that were involved in the Korean War. Cheers Buckshot06 20:40, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XI - January 2007
The January 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 21:44, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

WP:MILHIST Coordinator Elections
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect seven coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 11!

Delivered by grafikbot 11:48, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Military History elections
The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting seven coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by February 25!

Delivered by grafikbot 15:05, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the vote of support! --Petercorless 15:05, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XII - February 2007
The February 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 17:10, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:JSAmap.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:JSAmap.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self-no-disclaimers tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 19:50, 24 March 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MECU ≈ talk 19:50, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi. How does "who created the content" differ from the current licensing section that says it's in the Public Domain and a work of the U.S. Government? Doesn't the "Work of the U.S. Government" already state "who created the content", or am I missing something? Most of what I've uploaded has either been my own work or the work of the U.S. Government. wbfergus 10:30, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XIII - March 2007
The March 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 20:34, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XIV (April 2007)
The April 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 15:06, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XV (May 2007)
The May 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 16:14, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Korean War
You don't have to make such accusation,I didn't revert.It's you who falsified the chinese number as estimation in support your view.--Ksyrie(Talkie talkie) 11:12, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Requests for mediation/Korean War, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.


 * In fact,the only difference between you and I is that I am a native chinese spearker,so I can use the search engine to check the chinese page.As a matter of fact,the majority of chinese records do conform to the english sources,except the casuality one.--Ksyrie(Talkie talkie) 19:44, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Request for Mediation
This message delivered: 08:18, 30 June 2007 (UTC).

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XVI (June 2007)
The June 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 15:08, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Request of Mediation
A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Requests for mediation/Korean War, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.--Ksyrie(Talkie talkie) 03:08, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Request for Mediation
This message delivered: 04:17, 19 July 2007 (UTC).

Major Henderson Incident
Hello webfergus - nice to see you are still around and active (you won't recognise me, but we had a couple of talks on Axe Murder Incident, when my username was still MadMaxDog).

I just came across the Major Henderson Incident article which you created. It does not have any references. Could you please add them? Thanks. Ingolfson 10:19, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

quick question
you quote on Koran war talk page - "especially with the release by the PRC (Hu Jintao's speech" is that in ref to the section below in german recently posted on the Korean war talk page. SO wait we have new sourced info directly from the chinese and Ksyrie is still wanting to go to Rfa for the old stats? I am lost. --Xiahou 22:16, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

PVA
How can you prove the site is not worth citing？--Ksyrie(Talkie talkie) 18:38, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Invent may represent reinvent by CPV,I also question your claim of personal opinion of this website.--Ksyrie(Talkie talkie) 18:47, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Bunker warfare surely not invented by CPV，but neither by American in the Civil War or european in WWI.Ancient people worldwide bulit many bunkers for thousands of years.And your claim of american invention is obviously false,because,the American did invent the bunker warfare,but just another type of reinvent of ancient military fortified defence point.--Ksyrie(Talkie talkie) 19:16, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

People's Liberation Army divisions
Just came across your great work on continuing to create entries for PLA divisions. Had a couple of thoughts; firstly, you can take a look at http://www.sinodefence.com/organisation/groundforces/default.asp to see if the division is still active, and add that, and also, for armies and maybe divisions, you can link them into the Military Regions - eg Beijing Military Region entries which I set up a while ago. Also do you really think its worth creating stubs for regiments if there is so little info? Wouldn't it be better to leave regimental info like for the 347th under the division article for the moment until more info turns up? Just a thought, not really a criticism, as you're doing great work. Regards Buckshot06 13:25, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your note. Once you've finished doing a division or army entry, you can check the page link I gave above to see which military region it's part of, and add it from there.... Cheers Buckshot06 15:34, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Looks fine; one extra thing you can do if you wish is to add a link to the division in the Beijing Military Region article, which would slowly build up a list of active PLA divisions with articles. Great work! Buckshot06 15:56, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks Wb for your note. Am well aware of both those sources; the globalsecurity.org site is a cut and paste of anything they can find on the Net, and the ChinaDefence site may well be better than the IISS (whose research people can't read Chinese, as far as I know). I am focusing on other things (like Military of the Democratic Republic of the Congo) and haven't looked at the Chinese MRs for a while. Please, if you wish, go ahead and add the Sino/China defence figures, but I would retain the IISS figures myself. Cheers and thanks, Buckshot06 17:33, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I may have been unclear. I would advise you NOT to use the globalsecurity.org information; it is an out of date cut and paste which is never updated. However I believe the Sinodefence etc sites are good. For example, I think if you search around enough for the 24th Group Army you'll find it was disbanded a while ago. Added- it's actually the last paragraph on the same page - disbanded 2003: Buckshot06 19:33, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator selection
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by August 14! Kyriakos 12:10, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators from a pool of fourteen candidates to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by August 28! Wandalstouring 09:36, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Korean War
It was not written so by some Communist POVs or anything, right? I'm guessing it's original research or some misconception. (Wikimachine 20:54, 27 August 2007 (UTC))

!
Are you someone that I know? After looking at your userboxes... Are you Mitchell Herman??? I mean...Living in Colorado...ADHD...Pervertiveness...German ancestry...are You?? Odst 22:25, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Talk page
If everyone is fairly cooperative, we can easily manage the NOR talk page discussion. Right now, it's chaos due to the editwarring. I think once that's ended and the disputing editors shown that warring is not the way to get a policy change in place, we can move forward a bit more easily. I would like the ability to refactor some of the more wordy replies, so the discussion can remain focused. Some of the comments go far afield and become soapboxes for some editor's opinions on various and sundry topics only loosely associated with the discussion...;) Dreadstar †  17:13, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Talk:NOR
Given that the page is protected and has been for many days with no resolution of conflicts in sight, I think t is counterproductive to raise additional issues. If it is a general concern/question, I request that you just wait until the major conflicts are cleared up and then people can raise new topics. If it is directly related to a problem you are having editing another article, my advice is: raise the question at that article talk-page and ask people how they would apply the NOR policy. The talk page for NOR is for imoproving the NOR text. Questions about how to apply any policy to a disput ein an article belongs on the article talk pages which are for talk aimed at improving the article. I hope this sounds reasonable to you Slrubenstein  |  Talk 12:02, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Explanation was in the article since 2004. Some editors wanted it out, we debated this a year or two ago - thus the inconsistency. The word is in the policy, so for now, assume the policy applies to explanations too. After we have resolved the two immediate points of dispute, you or others are free to start a new thread focusing on explanations. Lets just do one change at a time. For now, the policy is what it says, not what some editors want to change it to be. If it says explanation in one place and not another, it does not mean the policy is inconsistent, it just means sloppy editing. Clearly, the word explanation is there so it is part of policy. When the page is unprotected we can fix the editorian sloppiness. And if someone wants to remove it altogether, we have to dicsuss it. But first things first. Slrubenstein  |  Talk 12:26, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Your NOR summary
is well-intentioned but premature - I'd even suggest your removing it. I do not think the discussion can move forward until other key participants register their views, and give others time to respond: COGDEN, Jacob Haller, Dreadstar, ans Vassyana principally. Let them contribute, then give it 36 hours, and then you can summarize - respectflly, Slrubenstein  |  Talk 19:31, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

NOR - depends on what you want to do
About your recent change - the link I set up is specifically for people who think Wikipedia ought to allow original research, i.e. analyzing or interpreing or explaining or generalizing from primary sources. If you are committed to NOR and just want to redraft the policy without changing the basic policy (original research is not allowed, period), then I think the link you orignally set up to a sub-page of your user-page is more appropriate. It isn't clear to me which one you want to do, either one is permited, I just think you need to be clear about which one. If you are really committed to the disallowing any original research at Wikipedia, I think you should go back to your previous idea. Slrubenstein  |  Talk 16:25, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

MOH
Are you aware of this?

Congressional Medal of Honor Memorial Indianapolis, Indiana

http://www.audiemurphy.com/exh_ind.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by Minasbeede (talk • contribs) 21:11, 1 September 2007 (UTC)


 * No I wasn't. Thanks for the link. wbfergus 10:41, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

NOR and talk
Personally, I think the policy just needs to be cleaned up. I believe firmly in the policy as it is stated and at this point my principle reasons are on the talk page, in the two sections, "Should we distinguish between primary and secondary" and "Should we privilege secondary" etc. I think no policy perfectly fits every situation and people neded to learn to apply and interpret policies as the situation demands. I suspect however that as people have done this they have gone back and edited the policy - adding sentences they came up with in a very specific situation, trying to interpret the policy to the situation, and then taking these sentences out of their situation-specific context and adding it to the policy. I've no doubt they did this in good faith, thinking it would make the policy cleare. But I think any attempt to account for all situations in a policy will just make it overwrought and confusing. So I favor the basic policy but stripped of a lot of attempts to explain the policy within the policy itself; just cleaning up the language and if anything making it more direct.

As for your attempt to revise it - no, I personally do not see a need. But you have a right to do exactly what you are doing. Any Wikipedia editor does. If you feel it is a good idea, go for at and see where it leads.

As for the talk page, I just want to move discussion along to a point where the page can be unprotected and the policy be stable. Frankly, I am too tired to involve myself in the debates any more than I have - I have made my own views as clear as I can. I just want the discussion to focus on resolving issues preventing the unprotection of the page. And the current page is already 80kb long, which is more than twice the length a talk page should be! And this is after I moved much talk to your proposal page, to the completely change NOR proposal page ... But I can't see that there is anything more I can do ... PS I think you need to fix he settings on your talk page, unless you want any new comment to be center-justified and under the heading of the military project. Slrubenstein  |  Talk 11:15, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Have you talked to User:Vassyana? I think you two may wish to collaborate or coordinate your efforts. Slrubenstein   |  Talk 12:20, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Agree
I agree to a remarkable extent with what you've just added.

It appears that there are two places you tried to put the head, and it looks like it has ended up at the wrong place and should be where the defective one (lacking the trailing ==) is. I was going to suggest you fix that but I think I'll just do it. If I erred please make things right. Minasbeede 11:31, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XVIII (August 2007)
The August 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 10:25, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

NOR
Hey. I have to tell you - I do not like the version you are developing. To be fair, I figured i needed to try myself (I know you are acting in good faith and putting real effort into it). This is what I came up with. It is more conservative than yours, but I have tried to clarify what seems to me to be the primary points of confusion and contention. Slrubenstein  |  Talk 11:58, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Protecting NOR
There is a way to protect pages so that only admins can edit them. But this has never been the standard practice - it is typically a way to deal with vandals, not with conflict among legit. editors. I think you might find a lot of resistence to the proposal on principle. But if you want to raise it, you would in effect be proposing a new policy, a policy concerning policies. You have a right to do so but I would urge you first to raise the discussion on the listserve, and if there is positive feedback bring it up with Jimbo and the Foundation. My guess is that you would need Foundation approval to forward such a proposal. Given how large Wikipedia has grown, maybe it is a reasonable one. I think it is reasonable to say that as Wikipedia grows certain standards need to be revised. But I leave it for you to propose this to the Foundation or on the listserve and see what feedback you get. Slrubenstein  |  Talk 20:04, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

It's been cleared up
Yeah, it was a bit of a mess. Another editor and I were erroneously blocked on a bogus 3RR violation; the blocking admin apparently wouldn't admit he had overreacted and was in the wrong; another admin eventually decided the blocks were serving no purpose, and unblocked us. Alls well that ends well, I suppose. Parsecboy 16:09, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

WPMILHIST Elections
Thank you for your support. It was much appreciated. -- R OGER D AVIES  TALK 16:37, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Request for mediation
A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Wikipedia:No original research, and indicate whether you agree or disagree to mediation. If you are unfamiliar with mediation on Wikipedia, please refer to Mediation. Please note there is a seven-day time limit on all parties responding to the request with their agreement or disagreement to mediation.
 * For the Mediation Committee,  Daniel  07:19, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Hey
You're into blondes, brunettes and redheads and see nothing wrong with beautiful, naked women? I commend you...--h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 15:25, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Cumings
Hey, I happen to agree with you. That does sound realy watered down now, but I'm just a new person here, so my opinion probably wouldn't have any weight. Good luck trying to get your stuff back in. 136.177.33.77 12:38, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Hey Bill
I created my account on here, but when I did an edit, somehow one of yours from yesterday (Sunday), showed up on my Watchlist. How'd that happen? OracleDude 19:29, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Request for Mediation
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

origins of NOR
Do you think the section I wrote up is worth adding to the policy? Slrubenstein  |  Talk 12:49, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, unless there is strong objection, I would like to see it added to the article in place of the surrent section "what is excluded." But given people's concerns that i was the person who extended protection, I would rather someone else do it.  Not today, maybe not even for several days to give people time to comment on it or suggest edits, as people did with my proposed revised introduction.  Could you keep an eye on it for me?  Thanks, Slrubenstein   |  Talk 13:01, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * It has been up for over a week and we seem no closer now to agreement on changing the sources section - do you think now is a good time to try to move the "origins of NOR" into the policy itself? Slrubenstein  |  Talk 16:41, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, if you don't mind I will leave it to you? I think I am often a polarizing figure and you are not. Slrubenstein   |  Talk 18:08, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Order of comments
I didn't quite feel free to move your comment myself on WT:NOR. But it appeared your comment at 19:49 was in response to mine at 19:29. Just wanted to call it to your attention. ... Kenosis 19:55, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

stability
All I have ever meant to argue is that the main point of the policy, and the distinction between primary and secondary sources, has been relatively stable (certainly, stable compared to any controversial article). By the way, there are far more than 500 edits to the policy, if I read you correctly. Slrubenstein  |  Talk 14:54, 23 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I understand your point. I may have mis-typed (it wouldn't be the first time), but what I wanted to say, was that there have over 500 edits to the policy page itself in less than a year. That is hardly stable, with an average of one and ahlf edits per day. I would really need to look at each and every single edit, diff by diff, to see what each edit entailed. But, from the 50 or so I looked at this morning, almost all of them dealt with "sources". That also doesn't seem to say much about the stability of that section, but again, more research would be needed. Thanks for the reply. wbfergus undefinedTalk 15:16, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

include
WAS 4.250 16:03, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

NOR Behaviour
Hi, I know exactly where you are coming from and I can't approve of the attempts to justify poor behaviour in the one response so far, but I think it is unhelpful to escalate the behaviour debate (though I know you want to nip it in the bud). You would not believe the number of posts I have written and not pressed the Save page key on.

The best response is to be irritatingly civil in return. In one of my evil moments I chased one of the worst abusers of quoting civility rules (along with AGF didn't count for me as I was obviously disruptive, and obviously a troll - they never see it, do they?) around for a day in our area of dispute pointing out his every infraction of the rules in the politest terms, and sticking to policy. In the end he exploded in outrage, and he has left me alone since.

Anyhow, I've tried to positively focus some of the debate on motive, and it would be a shame to distract too much from that as it is a "good faith" way to undermine the "I suspect your motives" by clearly stating my motives, and we either see that they are wise and useful or we see that I am a disruptive troll who should be banned from Wikipedia. I know where I stand!

So, thanks for your support on NOR. Stay calm(ish) and keep to the moral high ground. Spenny 13:58, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Ho Hum, not good at my own advice, but at least I have kept it calm and civil. Spenny 18:46, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

its a wiki
Can this be copied over to the Sandbox example or another sub-page? These are good examples and will stimulate hopefully some decent discussion. I have a couple comments, but they'd be better suited probably there instead of here. wbfergus undefinedTalk 17:38, 27 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Its a wiki under GFDL. Can't stop you. But I'm trying a one on one on my user talk page right now to see if that can do anything useful. WAS 4.250 18:14, 27 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Okay. I don't mean to interfere, just from my previous post on your talk page, it shows up on my Watchlist now. My comment on the examples would be along the lines of "but that can still be easily explained without resorting to primary or secondary", original research is still original research no matter what the source is, isn't it? wbfergus undefinedTalk 18:26, 27 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree with that comment. It's been amazingly hard to communicate that simple point, but I think we are making progress. WAS 4.250 18:50, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Please stay off my page
Thank you. Orange Marlin Talk• Contributions 18:33, 28 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, I guess some people simply can't stand to be proven their statements are not not only wrong, but intentionally misleading, and therefore attempt to hide it. So be it, I shall 'interpret' further comments from you in the same vein. I have tried to be civil and strightforward, unlike 'some'. wbfergus undefinedTalk 18:59, 28 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Great reply. Thanks.  See this and User:Tom harrison/concerns.  Enjoy yourself. Orange Marlin  Talk• Contributions 21:34, 28 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Ditto. I fail to see though how you pointing out two different pages such as those helps you make your point. It merely looks as if you are bragging that you have been able to make others take the time to write things such as those? Was that your intention? wbfergus undefinedTalk 22:14, 28 September 2007 (UTC)


 * wbfergus. Walk away. No more needs to be said. Spenny 22:28, 28 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the advice. It's useless to try and conduct meaningful discussions with some people. wbfergus undefinedTalk 22:51, 28 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I recently read a quote from one of America's founding fathers (Thomas Jefferson?) that said that it is common for people to believe that a long held belief is true simply because it is a long held belief; mistaking past acceptance for evidence against current concerns; referring to forms of government in his case; but reminding me of people here who can not see the point of using new terminology to describe a new definition and insist that "primary source" must be the phrase wikipedia uses to describe something simply because that's the phase we have used up to now. People! If only they weren't so ... so .. human. WAS 4.250 06:57, 29 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Spenny, nice subtle attack. Enjoyed it actually.  WAS, ditto.  Frankly, I don't waste time with this conversation, because I know the vast majority of much more civil individuals on this project won't let anything change, so I don't have to waste any incivil (never sure if that's a word) (uncivil?  non-civil?) words on any of you.  On to fighting more pressing battles against POV-warriors, who would wet their pants if you guys get your way.  Again, not really worried that you have any chance in hell.  BTW, wbfergus, I noted your comment on SlimVirgin's page.  Apparently, you need to read her contributions a lot more carefully.  Because, first, she's gone from the project (essentially).  Second, there isn't a snowballs chance in hell that she would support your POV on NOR.  But it was amusing for many of us to read it.   Orange Marlin  Talk• Contributions 18:39, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Orange, please heed your own advice (Please stay off my page). Judging by many different comments I've read on Wikipedia specifically about you, and your comments that instigated the comment, you appear little better than a troll. It's probably a good thing our 'subjects of interest' don't cross very often, though I probably have more access to information you could use than you would know what to do with (an entire library devoted to the subject, approx. 300 ft x 200 ft, encompassing over 100,000 different books and other journals). I also happen to work with many different scientists who are working on the various 'geologic' subjects that you edit on here, though I could care less about the subject. A rock hurts when it hits me in the head. That's all I care to know about the subject.

I invited SlimVirgin because whether I agree with her opinions or not, being as involved as she was in the formulation of various aspects of the policy, she would have valuable input, and on top of all of that, she at least is articulate and doesn't appear to have a need to resort to baseless insults and completely inaccurate accusations when (or if) she can't make a point. I really don't care if she agrees with my position or not, her input would be valuable, though reading through the archives, she expressed the same thoughts that many of us are stating once again. If she has changed her mind, it would be interesting to know why, maybe we've missed something. At least I'm open-minded, unlike some people. wbfergus undefinedTalk 19:01, 30 September 2007 (UTC)


 * (ri)Hey, here's an idea: since primary source presents such a poser for many, let's get rid of those pesky Latinate words and go back to our Anglo-Saxon roots. Yes, roots, that's it!  Primary sources hell, no! root knowledge.   Secondary sources hell, no! trunk knowledge.  Tertiary sources hell, no! leaf knowledge. Yes, the tree of knowledge, here on Wikipedia.  Oh, I'm in a Rapture! &#0149;Jim 62 sch&#0149;  18:49, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Strange how you and Orange seem to always go along together at the same time. 'Nuff said. wbfergus undefinedTalk 19:10, 30 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Wow, that would mean that your talk page is on both of our watchlists. 'Nuff said.  &#0149;Jim 62 sch&#0149;  19:13, 30 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Ho hum.... Boring day today? You and Orange obviously have nothing better to do today than troll around. Please take my comments to Orange above personally. And, since you posted messages to my talk page, well I guess my talk page is on your WatchList, Duh! wbfergus undefinedTalk 19:19, 30 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Jim and are socks. No meats.  No brothers in arms.  But really, we both are opposed to POV warriors, that's all.  It's the good fight.  BTW, to be fair, if you want to troll on my page, please do so, since I'm here.  Guess I have to give  you a forum to complain.  Orange Marlin  Talk• Contributions 22:17, 30 September 2007 (UTC)


 * No need. Unlike some, I'm not a troll and actually have better things to do, a life to live, and a family to care for. wbfergus undefinedTalk 22:27, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

NOR
Thanks, I will try to fix it - and, thanks for the kind words. I do think kenosis has valuable things to say. Alas, time pressures really limit my ability to contribute. It is a shame that the people who were most involved in developing the explanation of sources are not around to contribute. Slrubenstein  |  Talk 15:31, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XIX (September 2007)
The September 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 10:43, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Dead Chinese Body in Korea War Article
Hi Wbfergus, the picture is really offensive and I am honest about it. It is not only myself, all most all Chinese feel same way. If a certain group of people all feel the same way, isn't it indicate at least something to you? I wish you can understand. Peace. Dongwenliang 15:12, 11 October 2007 (UTC)


 * "But, if it was somebody from a different culture you apparently would not object. ". No I object this happens to any cultures. That is why I also removed the US dead body. Anyway this is a case that Chinese are shown without dignity. I personally will never vote this kind of bloody picture with clear identity as featured picture, regardless the race of the dead man. My rules not only apply to others, also apply to myself, you can find on my main page. Actually it is part of our culture, Thanks. Dongwenliang 15:44, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XX (October 2007)
The October 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 15:11, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

re:Congrats
Thanks. You're right, it wasn't always fun or pleasant, but I'm definitely glad I did it, and feel that I'm a better person because of it. It's still sort of strange, knowing that I'll be home for longer than just a week or two like it has been, but I don't think that's a hard change to get used to :) Thanks again. Parsecboy 13:00, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

1.5 month old GA review
On the Korean War. Shall I remove it? Kfc 1864   talk  my edits 12:49, 11 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Hmmm....A different subpage? Kfc 1864   talk  my edits 13:13, 11 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Ok with me. Kfc 1864   talk  my edits 09:50, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Innuitian region
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Innuitian region, and it appears to include a substantial copy of. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

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) 17:29, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXI (November 2007)
The November 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot 03:04, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Copyright problem: Innuitian region
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Innuitian region, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a copy from http://atlas.nrcan.gc.ca/site/english/maps/environment/land/arm_physio_arctic/1, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:


 * If you have permission from the author leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Innuitian region and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Innuitian region with a link to where we can find that note.
 * If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Innuitian region.

It is also important that the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and that it follows Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at Talk:Innuitian region/Temp. Leave a note at Talk:Innuitian region saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! &mdash; madman bum and angel 04:22, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Physiography
I think you're treating the name "physical geography" as the sum of its semantic parts. It's been explained to me that "physical geography" (in its most common academic usage) is an interdisciplinary study (much like its "parent", geography) that includes the geological sciences, biosphere studies, oceanography, et cetera. It is a main branch of geography. This is consistent with the information I've found online. It was also explained to me that the disagreement only exists as a split between geology and geography, and it part of a broader disconnect/competitiveness between geologists and geographers, this particular division closely related to similar splits over the topics of ecology and environmental studies between the two disciplines. While it is a major branch of geography, it's treatment in geology is analogous to the field of environmental geology (consistent with how you describe "physiography"). What I was told, I was told by a geographer, so bear in mind any possible bias there, but her assertions seem to match the most easily accessed information. Vassyana (talk) 08:28, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll ask her to take a look over it, and see if she can recommend any sources. The subject is a bit outside of my interest and knowledge, so I'll just solicit her advice. Thanks for the heads up and the previous response on my talk page. It's much easier to understand what we're both saying when we can both understand where the other is coming from. :) Cheers! Vassyana 22:51, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Your cordillera merger
---- Zer0~Gravity (Roger - Out) 12:20, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Mediation
Requests for mediation/Cordillera Oriental-- Zer0~Gravity (Roger - Out) 16:34, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Request for mediation not accepted
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Excellent Question
To adam. I oppose him but your question is excellent. --Blue Tie (talk) 15:32, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

NOR Request for arbitration
Because of your participation in discussions relating to the "PSTS" model in the No original research article, I am notifying you that a request for arbitration has been opened here. I invite you to provide a statement encouraging the Arbcom to review this matter, so that we can settle it once and for all. CO GDEN  00:09, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Geography templates
Please, do not add those two broad geography templates to specific geographic articles. They are good but should be used only for articles which are mentioned in these templates. We have thousands of geography articles on Wikipedia and it is just redundant to have these general templates in all of them. - Darwinek (talk) 13:20, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't know if it automatically sorts out in the Portal:Geography, I suppose not. As for the reader's comfort, I think it is really obsolete. You know, when some user would visit short article about a lake, he can click on the "lake" internal link and through that article he can click to many more related ones. Your idea is nice and I understand it but it just seems to me it is obsolete. It resembles me similar situation we've had here several months ago when one user was adding e.g. "French cinema" general template to almost every French actor and director. It ended at WP:TFD with a heated discussion and voting. - Darwinek (talk) 13:53, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * It would be good to include show/hide option. Many templates have this option. Try to look at it and possibly implement it. -- Darwinek (talk) 14:35, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

It looks good now. I am now going out and will be half-day without internet, so I will try to revert it maybe next day. Still you are free to add templates back. Cheers. - Darwinek (talk) 22:05, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Klamath Mountains
I too feel that these templates are overbroad and should not be added to specific geographical features. Generally templates should only be added to articles that are linked from them. While I appreciate your effort to promote and improve geographical coverage in Wikipedia, overtemplating articles is not the way to do it. Katr67 (talk) 19:13, 14 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I share this concern. I don't know the precise policy on navboxes, but I think these boxes, which may be excellent additions to the right articles, are out of place on specific mountain range pages like Klamath Mountains and Oregon Coast Range. -Pete (talk) 19:23, 14 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Wbfergus, I replied on my talk page--re: let's move this discussion to the project page. Thanks! Katr67 (talk) 19:30, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Far left/far right
Why not just call them pro-source-typing and anti-source-typing and avoid the connotations, which are at best terribly misleading?

I agree that moving PSTS out of the policy wold be a solution. I think it is time you and everybody else actually looked at how PSTS is used. At least some of the adamant pro-source-typing editors use the policy (beyond it's actual wording) to justify summary deletion of edits they wish to delete. No dialog, no explanation - just delete. At least that's what I saw in the example slrubenstein presented as evidence of why the policy was needed. The adamant group want source typing, want it in a policy, and want to use it to justify their arbitrary actions. IT has to be in a policy so that they can justify what I consider extreme action: abrupt removal, no discussion, no explanation. (That, I believe, is wrong behavior even if the removed material does violate a policy.) It's as though they see a hidden conspiracy to use primary sources and are stamping out all signs of it. As it's a conspiracy there's no need for Wiki-politeness, for an assumption of good faith, for any recognition whatsoever of the possibility that the affected editor deserves decent treatment.

There are two possible outcomes: Wikipedia remains Wikipedia, which is in essence a flat, democratic loose affiliation of interested parties OR Wikipedia becomes a two-tiered system, with a small group of editors (the pro-source-typing ones) in charge and all others inferior to them. They have made it quite clear that they have their own vision of what Wikipedia ought to be and in that vision secondary sources play a leading role.

I'm out of the discussion and wouldn't be communicating about it at all were it not for Cogden's arbitration request. That at least makes some sense (as compared with the RFC against Cogden.) Arbitration won't work and almost surely won't happen. I made a suggestion to one of the arbitrators. You can find that by looking at my contribution history.

Thanks for your time. --Minasbeede (talk) 18:30, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

NOR
NOR revert I think you probably meant this section as to the discussion and consensus WT:NOR#Revisiting a proposal instead of the one you cited in the revert. At least, this is the one that clearly gave Vassyana consensus to make the changes, which have been reverted over and over by those not participating in the discussion. wbfergus Talk 18:36, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Argh. The discussion gets so spread out, and the wording disputes seem to cover many different areas, it's hard to tell what's exactly what.  Thanks for pointing that out so we can clarify who stands where.  I do like Vassyana's version 002, but I think it may have been a bit early to implement it...and Slim's response seems to agree...but I think we may be close.  Sorry meet you under such circumstances...but it's nice to meet you! Dreadstar  †  18:44, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, can you show me where anyone has acted to "freely abuse their Administrator 'powers' to block consensus". That's a very serious charge, one I'd like to investigate, if true. Dreadstar  †  18:55, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, you're right! I've worked on MilHist articles, I think mostly to protect them from edit wars...;) Yeah, your name looks familiar too...I look forward to working with you outside this NOR dispute..if it ever ends...gods, it's been going on and on forever...and I hope I haven't looked like a "pig-headed" admin..I'm just trying to help keep things on the right path.  I backed out of it for a while, but when I saw the tag dispute and the railroading by some editors...I just had to stick my nose in again.  Dreadstar  †  19:00, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I have no doubt Vassyana's edits were in very good faith that he had consensus, heck I liked his version..there may be a few small tweaks that are needed, but I just wanted to make sure that everyone was on the same page...and apparently one or two aren't, so that needs to be clarified. I think the entire discussion has been so edgy and frustrating, that some editors back away until the changes are actually implemented..and I didn't really see that conensus had been confirmed, so...anyway, I feel the frustration too.  Dreadstar  †  19:10, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your note, you've been fine, no worries. I try not to take anything personally or react to the more inflammatory or disingenuous remarks that have been made some of the other editors. RfCs and RfARBs are hotbeds for emotion and are one of the few places that comments about the contributors are allowed. Some of the participating editors have gone well over the line on the policy and user talk pages with their comments - and normally may have received NPA warnings (you're not one of those), but in conditions like this, more leeway is given that would be the norm. Anyway, I can easily see that you're editing in good faith, even though I disagree with some of your points. I know it appears that the opinions of admins carry more weight, but being an admin does not confer extra power in disputes they are involved with...they are expected to be knowledgeable of policy, and the admin 'powers' are only to be used in situations where they are neutral and not involved in the dispute. I would never use my admin buttons to affect a dispute I was involved in, and I don't see that any other admins have done so in this particular dispute either. Thanks for your note and I appreciate the open channel of communications with you!

Oh, BTW, here are your stats for the NOR article:

Dreadstar †  17:58, 15 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Hmmm. I guess the other two must have been typos or placement on the policy. Now I'm interested to see what else I did. :^)
 * At times, I've debated (very, very briefly) about applying for Adminship. But I do that stuff at work all the time also, and it's really a major pain at times, actually most of the time. Other than having a few extra 'cool tools' and the ability to actually have a say-so during these periods of prolonged page-protection though, there really isn't that much incentive to be a Wiki Admin. Thanks for the reply and the additional stats. Now to go check the history to see what those other two were. wbfergus undefinedTalk 18:40, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay, one was fixing some typos and the other was an idea I had at the time, due to comments on the talk page, that perhaps having it blantantly clear in each section with hidden comments, future editors could be be reminded of the 'special editing' rules about policies, but that change only lasted 22 minutes before being reverted by CBM. Oh well, I thought it was a good idea to possibly alleviate some of edit-warring. Then editors couldn't claim ignorance of such policies, etc. wbfergus undefinedTalk 18:50, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Physical Geography Template
Hello Wbfegus, thank you for commenting on my wall. Personally I see physiography as more synonymous with geomorphology and topography rather than physical geography, as it tends towards looking at just landforms. Also the template was created to link-up the areas of physical geography as the article, which at the time was appalling. I am not quite sure why the template would be used on subject specific articles mentioning physiography etc as it is quite a general template and perhaps a template listing the various physiographic regions may be more apt. Hopefully that hwlps in some way. AlexD (talk) 18:44, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Physiography - Great Barrier Reef in particular
Thanks for that - I can understand that you've closed up the office for the year and so will have trouble finding references immediately for both Physiographic regions of the world and Great Barrier Reef. If the map in your office is created by the US government, I gather it could be scanned and put up as public domain on the wiki... Maybe you should investigate that further. I've not come across mention of physiography (in terms of the GBR) in my reading thus far, and my you-beaut library book, published in 2007 still uses geomorphology as a term. I was not aware that it was an out-dated concept, and the geomorphology article on Wikipedia doesn't suggest that either. -Malkinann 21:07, 4 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks so much. Perhaps if either you or your mate had access to this article it might resolve any further difficulties about Australia's physiography? -Malkinann (talk) 22:04, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:OutsideMAC Bldg-3a.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:OutsideMAC Bldg-3a.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 13:06, 18 December 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Mangostar (talk) 13:06, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * There was no problem with the license, I was just looking for an explicit statement that you took the photo. I figured you had but I didn't want there to be any questions later. (A lot of users tag everything PD-self, even things they get from the internet.)  The difference between PD-self and GFDL-self is that GFDL imposes extra restrictions on other users - basically that they must cite you and also share the work under a free license.  Since you initially released the photo into the public domain, you can't add more restrictions now (so I changed the photo back to PD-self) but in the future it is a fine license to use.  Mangostar (talk) 13:32, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Australia map
That map for Australia is: Physiographic Diagram of Australia, A.K. Lobeck, by The Geological Press, Columbia University, New York, 1951. A further note in the real fine print says "to accompany text description and geological sections which were prepared by Joseph Gentilli and R.W. Fairbridge of the University of Western Australia".

Enjoying your vcation? OracleDude 19:28, 18 December 2007 (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) 07:24, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

No worries
You're doing a fantastic job. &mdash;Viriditas | Talk 10:05, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Protection log for WP:NOR
It might be better to regenerate this to get the better presentation of it. If there's a reason the log only goes back to April, 2006 I don't know what it is.

Make of this whatever you wish.

* 22:24, 7 December 2007 GlassCobra (Talk | contribs) changed protection level for "Wikipedia:No original research" ‎ (unprotected; hopefully we can have some constructive discussion [move=sysop]) * 20:02, 4 December 2007 GlassCobra (Talk | contribs) changed protection level for "Wikipedia:No original research" ‎ (protecting due to edit warring over addition of disputed tag [edit=sysop:move=sysop]) * 13:16, 25 October 2007 Jossi (Talk | contribs) protected Wikipedia:No original research ‎ (policy page - protecting from move [move=sysop]) * 13:15, 25 October 2007 Jossi (Talk | contribs) unprotected Wikipedia:No original research ‎ (Page protected for one month already.) * 14:32, 25 September 2007 Mr.Z-man (Talk | contribs) protected Wikipedia:No original research ‎ (edit warring [edit=sysop:move=sysop]) * 06:14, 17 September 2007 Slrubenstein (Talk | contribs) protected Wikipedia:No original research ‎ (still working towards consensus [edit=sysop:move=sysop] (expires 00:00, September 24, 2007 (UTC))) * 14:09, 7 September 2007 Slrubenstein (Talk | contribs) protected Wikipedia:No original research ‎ (continued confict [edit=sysop:move=sysop] (expires 00:00, September 17, 2007 (UTC))) * 13:26, 7 September 2007 Slrubenstein (Talk | contribs) unprotected Wikipedia:No original research ‎ (continued edit warring) * 09:52, 7 September 2007 Slrubenstein (Talk | contribs) unprotected Wikipedia:No original research ‎ (continued edit-warring and no consensus) * 11:33, 31 August 2007 Slrubenstein (Talk | contribs) protected Wikipedia:No original research ‎ (conflicts as yet unresolved [edit=sysop:move=sysop] (expires 00:00, September 7, 2007 (UTC))) * 17:29, 23 August 2007 TenOfAllTrades (Talk | contribs) protected Wikipedia:No original research ‎ (Continued edit warring. Stop it, you guys. [edit=sysop:move=sysop] (expires 23:29, 30 August 2007 (UTC))) * 12:55, 21 August 2007 Husond (Talk | contribs) unprotected Wikipedia:No original research ‎ (let's see if the war has cooled off) * 19:04, 15 August 2007 Husond (Talk | contribs) protected Wikipedia:No original research ‎ (edit war [edit=sysop:move=sysop]) * 06:34, 4 July 2007 Hiding (Talk | contribs) unprotected Wikipedia:No original research ‎ (It's been near enough week, I hope everyone has settled down, it seems calmer on talk, The American's are celebrating their independence, we're all adults here, let's give it a go) * 16:36, 28 June 2007 Jayjg (Talk | contribs) protected Wikipedia:No original research ‎ (On-going edit war [edit=sysop:move=sysop]) * 15:14, 4 April 2007 Centrx (Talk | contribs) unprotected Wikipedia:No original research ‎ (Not an appropriate use of protection, see also WP:PROT and m:Foundation issues; this page has been protected quite long enough) * 18:23, 21 March 2007 Crum375 (Talk | contribs) protected Wikipedia:No original research ‎ (Protect until clarification re status [edit=sysop:move=sysop]) * 18:24, 13 January 2007 WillyofToxteth (Talk | contribs) moved Wikipedia:No original research to Wikipediа:No original reseаrch ‎ (moved) (revert) * 10:15, 13 September 2006 Jossi (Talk | contribs) unprotected Wikipedia:No original research ‎ (Unprotect) * 14:47, 5 September 2006 Slrubenstein (Talk | contribs) protected Wikipedia:No original research ‎ (minor revert war [edit=sysop:move=sysop]) * 13:08, 3 September 2006 GTBacchus (Talk | contribs) unprotected Wikipedia:No original research ‎ (per talk - we seem to be ready to proceed w/out edit warring) * 14:31, 23 August 2006 Morven (Talk | contribs) protected Wikipedia:No original research ‎ (Edit war - take it to talk. [edit=sysop:move=sysop]) * 10:54, 24 April 2006 Slrubenstein (Talk | contribs) unprotected Wikipedia:No original research ‎ (I think we have cooled off) * 12:58, 12 April 2006 William M. Connolley (Talk | contribs) protected Wikipedia:No original research ‎ (Restoring block (not just notice :-) [edit=sysop:move=sysop]) * 12:58, 12 April 2006 SlimVirgin (Talk | contribs) protected Wikipedia:No original research ‎ ([edit=autoconfirmed:move=autoconfirmed]) * 11:48, 12 April 2006 William M. Connolley (Talk | contribs) unprotected Wikipedia:No original research ‎ (disruptor blocked) * 10:41, 12 April 2006 Slrubenstein (Talk | contribs) protected Wikipedia:No original research ‎ (edit war - on a policy page, yet! [edit=sysop:move=sysop]) * 23:39, 11 April 2006 Curps (Talk | contribs) unprotected Wikipedia:No original research ‎ * 01:40, 11 April 2006 Curps (Talk | contribs) protected Wikipedia:No original research ‎ (vandalism [edit=autoconfirmed:move=autoconfirmed]) * 06:53, 14 March 2006 Dewliner (Talk | contribs) moved Wikipedia:No original research to WOWOWOWOWOWOWOWOWOWOW ‎ (revert)

--Minasbeede (talk) 02:06, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Jim62sch
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Jim62sch/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Jim62sch/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Anthøny 17:58, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXII (December 2007)
The December 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:57, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Your recent comments at Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Jim62sch/Evidence
Regarding this comment, he was advised by me in my role as Arbitration clerk on his talk page and by this message which I left on the talk page. I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you did not see it, but I ask you now to remove it and in the future to be mindful of the need for civility and basic respect for one another, otherwise I will ban you from editing pages related to this arbitration case. Thank you. Thatcher 21:59, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, that would explain his comment then. It sounded as if some lawyer had contacted him and given him advice. I will now go strikeout my comment. wbfergus undefinedTalk 01:06, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thatcher, is that strikeout (per Theresa's comment on the page) sufficient, or would you prefer that I strike the entire paragraph? I probably won't be back on here until tomorrow morning, (it's 7:00pm here now), so around 10 hours or so from now). Thanks. wbfergus undefinedTalk 02:05, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Jim62sch case
That's intentional. When we add parties to a case, it's to inform them that we may involve them in the decision; it doesn't necessarily mean that we will. Kirill 22:49, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIII (January 2008)
The January 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:31, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Military history coordinator selection
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 14! Woody (talk) 11:07, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIV (February 2008)
The February 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 08:25, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

"Peace House", Peace out :)
Hi there - apologies for my swapout of what I believed to be two images in the Joint Security Area article. I spent several hours reading a number of interesting articles about the area and was kind of by what I felt was a sub-par image to accompany the article.

My change was made in the best of intentions.

The description on the image I'd used had me believe that it was in the north and therefore the same building as in the image you reverted to. Its a pretty picture, certainly and this affair has made me read up a bit more. I believe that there's two errors and I'm hoping I can convince you to take a look and maybe sort out those areas as well.

Firstly, I believe the photo I was using (and this is all described on the article's talk page right now) is of the Freedom House which is in the area controlled by the south. Sadly yes, this is my level of confusion.

In any case, I think that if the Peace House is as-indicated within the JSA it might then deserve note in the "Major landmarks" section of the article.

A very interesting part of the world -- sorry to have caused you some extra work and I hope that there will be more within that article and the subject area as a whole.

Regards, Ogre lawless (talk) 09:10, 7 March 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) 01:50, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXV (March 2008)
The March 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:07, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Korea!
Hey, sorry for taking so long to get back to you on this, I was on spring break. I understand your impulse to just revert a suspicious looking edit and in the future I'll try to break them up into smaller bits. As per sourcing, I don't mean to rush anything but a lot of those sentences seemed politically motivated and many had been taged since November of 07, one as early July of 07, how long does one have to wait? - Schrandit (talk) 20:23, 7 April 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) 17:27, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVI (April 2008)
The April 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:44, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Simple request
I just created the page on Operation Killer and was wondering if you could help out expanding it. I looked through your contribs and after seeing a history of editing articles related to the Korean War, I thought that you might be willing to help with this page. If you could take a look at it, I would be most appreciative. Thanks! -- Sharkface T/C 02:27, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Operation Killer
Hi Wbfergus

When you're online again, can you help Sharkface217 please and name him some sources on Operation Killer. Thanks a lot. Wandalstouring (talk) 08:13, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVII (May 2008)
The May 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:31, 3 June 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) 18:48, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVIII (June 2008)
The June 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 20:47, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIX (July 2008)
The July 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:23, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on September 14! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:17, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXX (August 2008)
The August 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:45, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

PSTS Policy & Guidelines Proposal
Since you have been actively involved in past discussions regarding PSTS, please review, contribute, or comment on this proposed PSTS Policy & Guidelines.--SaraNoon (talk) 19:27, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The September 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fourteen candidates. Please vote here by September 30! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:53, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXI (September 2008)
The September 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:16, 7 October 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) 05:07, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Section rewrite needed Talk:Laurentian Upland
Please see comments on Talk:Laurentian Upland. The section about the Laurentian Highlands seems to be a copyvio of the article Home > The Canadian Encyclopedia  > Geography  > Land Features  > Laurentian Highlands  IMHO the wikipedia article needs a re-write. This query is being sent to you as you have done revisions/corrections to the article Laurentian Upland. SriMesh | talk  01:10, 11 November 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) 22:16, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

request for suggestions
here when you have some time (concerns a proposal to Verifiability policy) Thanks, Slrubenstein  |  Talk 16:42, 16 January 2009 (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) 13:44, 14 February 2009 (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) 13:48, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

hey
I think there is a very dangerous section in the NPOV policy, which I deleted and discussed on the talk page here. Now there is an RfC, I hope you will comment. Slrubenstein  |  Talk 06:37, 5 August 2009 (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) 00:32, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Military units and formations of the North Korean Army
Category:Military units and formations of the North Korean Army,, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. –B LACK F ALCON  (T ALK ) 18:23, 29 August 2009 (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) 03:13, 16 January 2010 (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) 21:57, 15 March 2010 (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, 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) 10:14, 6 June 2010 (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, 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) 06:45, 9 July 2010 (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, 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) 18:32, 10 September 2010 (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, 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) 00:08, 7 October 2010 (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, 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) 20:03, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LVI, October 2010
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:12, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LVII, November 2010
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:34, 8 December 2010 (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, 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) 23:56, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Henderson04.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Henderson04.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 19:21, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Henderson03.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Henderson03.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 19:23, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Henderson02.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Henderson02.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 19:23, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Henderson01.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Henderson01.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 19:24, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Colorado
The year 2011 has brought many changes to the State of Colorado. We have a new Governor and other state officers, two new U.S. Representatives, many new state legislators, and a new Mayor of Denver. WikiProject Colorado is updating many Colorado articles. Many Colorado places, people, and organizations need new articles. Portal:Colorado needs new featured articles.

Can you help us? Please see our list of some requested articles. If you wish, you may join WikiProject Colorado at WikiProject Colorado/Members. If you have any questions, please leave me a message at User talk:Buaidh or e-mail me at Special:EmailUser/Buaidh. Thanks for any help you can provide.

Don't forget the Wikipedia 10th Anniversary event in Boulder tomorrow. Yours aye, Buaidh  23:19, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:ForDiscussion
Template:ForDiscussion has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. WOSlinker (talk) 07:47, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Volume LVIX, January 2011
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 17:01, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LX, February 2011
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:01, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXI, March 2011
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 05:02, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXII, April 2011
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:59, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIII, May 2011
To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:46, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIV, June 2011
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 00:22, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXV, July 2011
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 23:25, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Military Historian of the Year
Nominations for the "Military Historian of the Year" for 2011 are now open. If you would like to nominate an editor for this award, please do so here. Voting will open on 22 January and run for seven days. Thanks! On behalf of the coordinators, Nick-D (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:49, 16 January 2012 (UTC) You were sent this message because you are a listed as a member of the Military history WikiProject.

Military history coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject has started its 2012 project coordinator election process, where we will select a team of coordinators to organize the project over the coming year. If you would like to be considered as a candidate, please submit your nomination by 14 September. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact one of the current coordinators on their talk page. This message was delivered here because you are a member of the Military history WikiProject. – Military history coordinators (about the project • what coordinators do) 10:07, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

File:USArmy flag.jpg missing description details
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as: is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.
 * File:USArmy flag.jpg

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 16:03, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Axe murder incident Lt. Pak Chul.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Axe murder incident Lt. Pak Chul.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a [ list of your uploads]. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.  TLSuda  (talk) 20:46, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator election
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:16, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

You are invited to the Great Colorado Wiknic 2015
Who: All Wikipedia and Wikimedia users in Colorado and their families are invited. New users are specifically encouraged to attend.

What: The Great Colorado Wiknic 2015.

When: Sunday afternoon, July 5, 2015, from 12:00 to 4:00 pm MDT.

Where: The Wiknic will be held at our home in Arvada. Please contact Buaidh for further information or assistance.

Please add your username to our Attendees list so we know how many folks to expect. You can subscribe to our Wikimedia Colorado e-mail list to receive notice of future Wikimedia Colorado activities.

Your hosts:  Buaidh  and  BikeSally  15:23, 18 June 2015 (UTC) (You can unsubscribe from future invitations to Wikimedia Colorado events by removing your name from the Wikimedia Colorado event invitation list.)

Wiknic
Don't forget the Colorado Wiknic this Sunday afternoon. We hope to see you there. Buaidh 16:40, 2 July 2015 (UTC) (You can unsubscribe from future invitations to Wikimedia Colorado events by removing your name from the Wikimedia Colorado event invitation list.)

WikiProject Military history coordinator election
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 29 September. Yours, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:22, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:04, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Rescheduled Colorado Wiknic
The Great Colorado Wiknic 2016 has been rescheduled from June 26 to August 7 due to a conflict with Wikimania 2016. My apologies for the inconvenience. I hope you can join us on Sunday afternoon, August 7. Yours aye, Buaidh  21:55, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Colorado Wiknic rescheduled to August 7
See details at Meetup/Colorado/Wiknic/2016, the June date has been postponed.--Pharos (talk) 08:25, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Colorado Wiknic
Who: All Wikipedia and Wikimedia users and their families and friends are invited.

What: The Great Colorado Wiknic 2016.

When: Sunday afternoon, August 7, 2015, from 12:00 to 4:00 pm MDT.

Where: The Wiknic will be held at our home in Arvada. Please contact Buaidh for further information or assistance.

Please add your username to our attendees list so we know how many folks to expect. You can subscribe to our Wikimedia Colorado e-mail list to receive e-mail notice of future Wikimedia Colorado activities.

Sponsor: WikiProject Colorado

Your hosts: Buaidh & BikeSally (You can unsubscribe from future invitations to Wikimedia Colorado events by removing your name from the Wikimedia Colorado event invitation list.)

Delivered:01:40, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Possible removal of AWB access due to inactivity
Hello! There is currently a request for approval of a bot to manage the AutoWikiBrowser CheckPage by removing inactive users, among other tasks. You are being contacted because you may qualify as an inactive user of AWB. First, if you have any input on the proposed bot task, please feel free to comment at the BRFA. Should the bot task be approved, your access to AWB may be uncontroversially removed if you do not resume editing within a week's time. This is purely for routine maintenance of the CheckPage, and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You will be able regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB. Thank you! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:36, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Invitation to the Seventh Annual Colorado Wiknic
Who: All Wikipedia and other Wikimedia users and their families and friends are invited.

What: The Seventh Annual Colorado Wiknic.

When: Sunday afternoon, June 25, 2017, from 12:00 to 4:00 pm MDT.

Where: The Wiknic will be held at our home in Arvada. Please contact Buaidh for further information or assistance.

Please add your username to our attendees list so we know how many folks to expect. You can subscribe to our Wikimedia Colorado e-mail list to receive e-mail notice of future Wikimedia Colorado activities.

Sponsors: The Wikimedians of Colorado & WikiProject Colorado

Your hosts: Buaidh & BikeSally (You can unsubscribe from future invitations to Wikimedia Colorado events by removing your name from the Wikimedia Colorado event invitation list.) Message sent: 00:43, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

User group for Military Historians
Greetings,

"Military history" is one of the most important subjects when speak of sum of all human knowledge. To support contributors interested in the area over various language Wikipedias, we intend to form a user group. It also provides a platform to share the best practices between military historians, and various military related projects on Wikipedias. An initial discussion was has been done between the coordinators and members of WikiProject Military History on English Wikipedia. Now this discussion has been taken to Meta-Wiki. Contributors intrested in the area of military history are requested to share their feedback and give suggestions at Talk:Discussion to incubate a user group for Wikipedia Military Historians.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:29, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Eighth Annual Colorado Wiknic
Who: All Wikipedia and Wikimedia users and their families and friends are cordially invited.

What: The Eighth Annual Colorado Wiknic.

When: Sunday afternoon, July 15, 2018, from 12:00 noon to 4:00 pm MDT.

Where: The Wiknic will be held at our home in Arvada. Please contact Buaidh for further information or assistance.

Please add your username to our attendees list so we know how many folks to expect. You can subscribe to our Wikimedia Colorado e-mail list to receive e-mail notice of future Wikimedia Colorado activities.

Sponsors: The Wikimedians of Colorado & WikiProject Colorado

Your hosts: Buaidh & BikeSally (Delivered: 12:32, 4 July 2018 (UTC)  You can unsubscribe from future invitations to Wikimedia Colorado events by removing your name from the Wikimedia Colorado event invitation list.)

An invitation to the Ninth Annual Colorado Wiknic
Who: All Wikipedia users and their families and friends are cordially invited.

What:

When: Sunday afternoon, July 14, 2019, from 12:00 noon to 4:00 pm MDT.

Where: The Wiknic will be held at our home in Arvada. Please contact Buaidh for further information or assistance.

Please add your username to our so we know how many folks to expect. You can subscribe to our to receive e-mail notice of future Wikimedia Colorado activities.

Sponsors:  and

Your hosts: Buaidh & BikeSally  We hope to see you. (You can unsubscribe from future invitations to Wikimedia Colorado events by removing your name from the ) PS: The  has been nominated for deletion. You may wish to comment at


 * Sent by ZLEA via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:56, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

The future of Portal:Colorado
On June 25, 2019, Portal:Colorado was nominated for deletion. (Please see discussion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Colorado.) We have upgraded the portal and added several new features including selected Colorado articles, biographies, and images. If you believe the Colorado portal is valuable to Wikipedia, please help us upgrade and maintain the portal. Add your suggestions for improvement to Portal talk:Colorado. You may nominate additions at: Yours aye, Buaidh  talk contribs 17:01, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Portal:Colorado/Selected article
 * Portal:Colorado/Selected biography
 * Portal:Colorado/Selected image
 * Portal:Colorado/Selected mountain
 * Portal:Colorado/Did You Know

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject Colorado at 17:36, 7 July 2019 (UTC). If you do not wish to recieve future notifications, please remove your username from the mailing list.

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election half-way mark
G'day everyone, the voting for the XIX Coordinator Tranche is at the halfway mark. The candidates have answered various questions, and you can check them out to see why they are running and decide whether you support them. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:37, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

March Madness 2020
G'day all, March Madness 2020 is about to get underway, and there is bling aplenty for those who want to get stuck into the backlog by way of tagging, assessing, updating, adding or improving resources and creating articles. If you haven't already signed up to participate, why not? The more the merrier! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:19, 29 February 2020 (UTC) for the coord team

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:07, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Milhist coordinator election voting has commenced
G'day everyone, voting for the 2020 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2020. Thanks from the outgoing coord team, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:18, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

April 2021 WikiProject Military History Reviewing Drive
Hey y'all, the April 2021 WikiProject Military History Reviewing Drive begins at 00:01 UTC on April 1, 2021 and runs through 23:59 UTC on April 31, 2021. Points can be earned through reviewing articles on the AutoCheck report, reviewing articles listed at WP:MILHIST/ASSESS, reviewing MILHIST-tagged articles at WP:GAN or WP:FAC, and reviewing articles submitted at WP:MILHIST/ACR. Service awards and barnstars are given for set points thresholds, and the top three finishers will receive further awards. To participate, sign up at WikiProject_Military_History/April 2021 Reviewing Drive and create a worklist at WikiProject Military history/April 2021 Reviewing Drive/Worklists (examples are given). Further details can be found at the drive page. Questions can be asked at the drive talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:26, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Colorado Zoom meeting 05/12/2021
WikiProject Colorado will hold a Zoom meeting at 7:30 PM MDT on Wednesday, May 12, 2021, for those interested in working on Colorado Wikipedia articles. Your suggestions and comments are appreciated. Information about some of the things we need to do is located at and

Topic: WikiProject Colorado May 2021 Time: May 12, 2021 07:30 PM MDT

Join Zoom Meeting https://us04web.zoom.us/j/78055623422?pwd=VUtPQVZrZzU1ZWVhZ0F1MExIeUQ2UT09

Meeting ID: 780 5562 3422 Passcode: WP:CO MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:07, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Infantry regiments of South Korea


A tag has been placed on Category:Infantry regiments of South Korea indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 16:36, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Regiments of South Korea


A tag has been placed on Category:Regiments of South Korea indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 16:00, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Colorado Summer Zoom Meeting
WikiProject Colorado will hold a brief online meeting at 7:30 PM MDT on Tuesday, August 10, 2021. See what your fellow users have been up to and share your interests and suggestions. Some requests are listed at and

Topic: WikiProject Colorado Summer Zoom Meeting Time: August 10, 2021 07:30 PM MDT

Join Zoom Meeting https://us04web.zoom.us/j/74506020308?pwd=eTFPSlkzOUg0bTE2SVdXUnl2SVY4Zz09

Meeting ID: 745 0602 0308 Passcode: Colorado

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:13, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

2020 United States Census for Colorado
I've posted the results of the 2020 United States Census for Colorado at WikiProject Colorado/2020 Census. You may wish to update your existing Colorado articles with this data.

Yours aye, Buaidh  talk e-mail 04:53, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject Colorado at 11:40, 31 August 2021 (UTC). If you do not wish to receive future notification, please remove your name from the mailing list.

Brief online meeting of WikiProject Colorado
What's up with Wikipedia and WikiProjectColorado? Join us for a brief online meeting at 7:30 PM MDT Tuesday evening, November 9, 2021 at https://meet.google.com/wyz-dfek-fdp

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:20, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Colorado online meeting 02/08/2022
What's up with Wikipedia and WikiProject Colorado? Join us for an online meeting from 7:30 to 8:30 PM MST, Tuesday evening, February 8, 2022, at meet.google.com/ksx-wksh-eba

If you don't want to receive these invitations any more, please remove your username from the Meetup/Colorado/Invitation list. Thanks. Sent via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:29, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

WikiProject Colorado online meeting 05/17/2022
WikiProject Colorado will hold a short online meeting from 7:30 to 8:30 PM MDT, Tuesday evening, May 17, 2022, at meet.google.com/zwd-ojag-enp

If you don't wish to receive these invitations any more, please remove your username from the Meetup/Colorado/Invitation list. Thanks.

Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:28, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:JSA-badge.gif


The file File:JSA-badge.gif has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Unused. Superseded by File:JSA-badge.svg."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --<span style="font-family: monospace, monospace; color:#69C;">Minorax &laquo;&brvbar;talk&brvbar;&raquo; 11:00, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

WikiProject Colorado online meeting 08/16/2022
WikiProject Colorado will hold an online meeting from 8:00 to 9:00 PM MDT, Tuesday evening, August 16, 2022, at meet.google.com/bqn-jhaw-ewc. Anyone interested in Colorado is encouraged to attend.

If you don't wish to receive these invitations any more, please remove your username from the Meetup/Colorado/Invitation list. Thanks.

Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:20, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

WikiProject Colorado online meeting 11/15/2022
WikiProject Colorado will hold an online meeting from 8:00 to 9:00 PM MST, Tuesday evening, November 15, 2022, at meet.google.com/yoe-aphc-wey. Anyone interested in Colorado articles, history, or photographs is encouraged to attend.

If you don't wish to receive these invitations any more, please remove your username from the Meetup/Colorado/Invitation list. Thanks. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:10, 1 November 2022 (UTC)