User talk:Buistr

Welcome!

Hello, Buistr, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  —Khoikhoi 18:18, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Uk27.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:05, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Buistr 08:25, 15 August 2006 (UTC)==Foreign Legion== Nice addition with the uniforms, but a moved it from History to a own section Carl Logan 10:42, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More nice additions to the uniform section. but I am a bit worried its taking over the article. One more thing: Should there not be a special sub-section of the uníform section for the white kepi or kepi blanc. Carl Logan 19:51, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes perhaps I was piling on the detail too much. Will stop, at least until the article has grown around the uniform section. Thanks for creating this as a separate item.

Re a separate sub section for the kepi blanc. The difficulty here is that this particular icon of the Legion has been around since at least the Mexican Intervention. A subsection devoted to it would need to repeat developments appearing in the main section. Will give this a bit more thought. Regards. Buistr 05:38, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am thinking of creating another sub-article like French Foreign Legion in popular culture about the culture of the legion, copying much from the site on the French Wikipedia. Maybe we can incorporate the importance of the kepi blanc there.

I am also trying to create articles about the regiments of the legion, you don't have any information about any difference in uniform between the regiments. Carl Logan 18:46, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A culture of the Foreign Legion sub-article sounds like a good idea. There was clearly something that elevated the Legion above what a pre-1914 observer unkindly described as "a second rate regiment of German infantry transplanted to Africa". Douglas Porch devotes a good deal of his book "The French Foreign Legion - A Complete History" to analysing what made the Legion different.

Re regimental differences within the Legion: there were suprisingly few of these at least as far as regulation wear and insignia went. The French Army has, at least since 1870, opted for standardisation within branches. Thus (for example) one cuirassier regiment in 1900 would appear like every other one except for the numbers on the collar patches. There was little of the British emphasis on regimental identity through varied facings and elaborate official badges. The Legion was the same - until 1914 the only distinction between the 1sr REI and the 2nd REI was the number 1 or 2 on the collars of tunics, vestes and greatcoats. Between the wars the newly raised 1st REC wore silver buttons and insignia (following French cavalry custom), instead of the bronze of the infanty units. The main regimental distinctions from 1916 to the present day are probably (i) the elaborate forragere lanyards worn in the colours of particular medals when a regiment as a whole has won a number of citations (for example green and red for the Croix de Guerre); and (ii) the originally unofficial regimental, battalion and company badges adopted from the 1930s on at the initiative and expense of the individual unit. In the Legion these badges share as common elements the traditional red and green colours and the grenade. Otherwise they differ greatly in design but usually have some stylised symbol of the unit's past e.g. a dragon for service in Indo-China or a horse-shoe for service as a mounted company in the Sahara. Buistr 08:25, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote very detailed on the "Polish cavalry charge against tanks". Can you refer with a footnote to your source? (this way nobody will start reediting because he knows better). Actually I also learned about the Polish charging tanks with lances back in school, the usual story about Polish military unfit for the 20th century. Greetings Wandalstouring 00:58, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. A footnote link has been added as advised. Buistr 01:13, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work on the Flight of the Wild Geese article. Keep it up. Jdorney 09:51, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks. The subject is an interesting one. Hopefully the article can be expanded still furtherBuistr 17:36, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The two links in the tag should provide you with detailed info, my two quick comments: this article needs internal links and inline citations.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  22:29, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Buistr. I've seen you editing a few military topics and i thought you'd be interested in joining our Military history project. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up ®} 16:42, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FayssalF - yes I would be interested in joining the Military History Project. regards Buistr 17:56, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. I am glad you are interested. If you have any questions please feel free to approach me or anyone of our project coordinators. Regards. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up ®} 18:05, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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 13:27, 8 July 2007 (UTC) [reply]

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 09:10, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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 09:06, 8 October 2007 (UTC) [reply]

That's rather odd. Granted the picture isn't 100% perfect but it gives a relatively good idea of how they looked. I used this this and this as my reference for the drawing. Feel free to add the image back if you still feel it is appropriate. However do not do so to a point that the anon draws you into a 3RR vio. A block log means more than a picture being displayed on that article. If it is once more removed, I suggest asking other editor's opinions whether to keep it or not on the talk page.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 18:43, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there Buistr. Do you have the full details of the your book please? year, author, publisher, Isbn? Thanks, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 00:03, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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) 22:20, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I thought you hade merely removed fact tags without changing anything else. You're right. My apologies. So much of that stuff goes on that I sometimes lose patience and don't review the history to figure out what really happened. Bob98133 (talk) 19:36, 16 June 2008 (UTC) PS - thanks for fixing! Bob98133 (talk) 19:36, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First off, do not think I think you are a newbie. I am here for four years and I don't know everything there is to know, so I'd thought you might appreciate if I pointed something out to you. I saw your changes to Karl Josef von Bachmann and noticed that you did not put <ref>-Tags correctly (which is kind of hard if one is not used to it). I tried to fix it, using the {{cite book}}-template but I do not have this book and cannot thus check the correct location of the claims. So I would like to ask you to edit the article and add the page number(s) where you read this to the template, changing the "pages=" value of the template (e.g. changing <ref>{{cite book |title=The French Revolution |author=[[M.J. Sydenham]] |pages=}}</ref> to <ref>{{cite book |title=The French Revolution |author=[[M.J. Sydenham]] |pages=50-51}}</ref>. Thanks in advance and keep up the work! Also, you might want to read the MoS about references at WP:REF or the shorter essay WP:REFB. Regards. So#Why ^{review me!} 07:53, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for providing the interesting information on the tirailleurs tonkinois after the Sino-French War. It's out of my own period, so I learned a lot from it.

Djwilms (talk) 01:37, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When I've got time I'll go through the two volumes of Thomazi's Histoire militaire de l'Indochine, which covers every skirmish ever fought in Indochina up to the 1930s. I'm sure there will be some interesting stuff on the post-Sino-French War exploits of the tirailleurs tonkinois. I'll start with the events you mention and move on from there.

Djwilms (talk) 02:24, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Djilms. Further to our earlier exchange, I notice that you and Carl Logan have discussed whether tirailleurs or rifles should be the default term for the varigated "native" infantry regiments of the defunct French Empire. I wonder if a final conclusion was reached on this - as you may have noticed I have more or less alternated between the two desigations in the additions I have made to your article. I have had a number of communications with Carl over the years regarding French military articles - and in particular those relating to the Armee d' Afrique.

The correct translation of tirailleurs is a difficult one - "Rifles" is undoubtedly the most popular one but I have also seen "Skirmishers", "Levies" and "Sharpshooters" used. Even "Light Infantry", although that clearly clashes with the misnamed "Joyeux" of the Infanterie Legere d' Afrique. My personal preference would be for "Tirailleurs" but I will be happy to go along with any decision that may already have been made. Regards Buistr (talk) 03:53, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think both of us have been busy on other things, and we haven't taken the debate any further. My preference remains for Tonkinese (Annamese, Senegalese, etc) Rifles, on the grounds of accessibility. I believe that 'Rifles' remains the instinctive 'default' formulation most English-speaking readers are going to type in if they're looking for information. I'm perfectly happy to gloss that, so that the article might be titled 'Tonkinese Rifles (tirailleurs tonkinois)'. But I think the use of the French word tirailleur is out of place in an article title in an English-language encyclopedia, many of whose readers do not know French. Although I can see very clearly where Carl is coming from in his arguments for tirailleur, it would not occur to me, even though I am familiar with the structure of the French colonial forces, to type in 'Senegalese tirailleurs' as my first search choice.

Djwilms (talk) 02:05, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AlasdairGreen27 is a notorious troll: read here but he is dangerous because in previous cases instigated some admins to ban various valid editors as suspected socks: it's is a battle against users who would like to stop his political agenda in meatpuppetry with his accomplice user:DIREKTOR; you can report both them in wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents—Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.95.195.151 (talk) 17:16, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am so sorry, I check everytime if it is a filename, but this time I did not see it. Possibly the long Filename has help me to be blind. --Diwas (talk) 02:00, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 8 March 2010! More information on coordinatorship may be found on the coordinator academy course and in the responsibilities section on the coordinator page.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:07, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, it's great to see somebody taking the trouble to correct image captions in articles... could you also correct the captions on the images pages themselves. I've added your change to the caption for File:King's Royal Rifle Corps by Harry Payne.JPG on Commons. Regards, Rod Rcbutcher (talk) 09:18, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Buistr. Thanks for appreciating my efforts. As you might have guessed, I am the Official Historian of the Baloch Regiment. I am grateful to you for creating the page. I understand your concern about 'Uniforms and Insignia.' The reason I broke up the section was that the present regiment is an amalgamation of three different regiments, whose uniforms underwent numerous changes over the years. Describing these changes at the appropriate place gives them the proper historical context, while putting them all in one section was confusing the subject. Regards, Beloochee (talk) 13:42, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contribution to The Women's March on Versailles! Your remarks about the palace guards add valuable information and were nicely integrated with the earlier text. Thank you also (very much!) for your kind words about the article as a whole. I see you are deeply interested in military history – would you consider having a look at the Battle of Valmy article? I rewrote it some time ago but remain unsatisfied with it; I keep meaning to get back to it but so far I haven't had the necessary inspiration. Perhaps you will–? SteveStrummer (talk) 00:30, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good job on the latest addition to Battle of Valmy! I hope I'll see you around Wikitown more often :) SteveStrummer (talk) 22:30, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I borrowed your TOC - illustration wiki syntax for the article U.S. Constitution. It has stood unchallenged for a week, although I am still holding my breath. As the Table of Contents got over two screens long, there was a gaping hole which I believe could turn prospective readers away. Following your example I believe leads the reader into the Table of Contents and towards the text when first opening the article page. Thanks. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 10:39, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The format looks good in this context and should readily achieve your purpose. Good luck with your improvements! Buistr (talk) 10:47, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, I did get lazy and revert your entire edit as opposed to manually re-correcting each mistake. I was simply in a hurry and hope you understand. Paul, in Saudi (talk) 06:52, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In Régiment de la Reine, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Marie-Thérèse (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:40, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Buistr. Thanks for your message, but I don't understand what's wrong with the picture of the Compagnies sahariennes... Could you be more specific ? DITWIN GRIM (talk) 23:12, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand. I see the image without problem... Here are the links I used from Wikicommons:  ; . DITWIN GRIM (talk) 11:17, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, you can contribute to Talk:Sétif and Guelma massacre if you want. Maybe we can agree in a common point. --Dr.tolga (talk) 02:07, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Régiment de la Reine, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Marie-Thérèse of Spain (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:12, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Buistr ! As you seem to be interested in all sorts of military units, I thought you'd might be interested by this article which I recently created : Battalion of Light Infantry of Africa

Hello Buistr. I don't know anything about the Companies d'Exclus. I thought Bat' d'Af'/Biribi/French army's colonial bagnes/bataillons disciplinaires/etc. were different names for a single unit : the BILA. Or am I confusing different units? Were the Compagnies d'Exclus a subsection of the Bat' d'Af'/Biribi or is it a completely different unit ? I may have added informations which doesn't belong to Bat' d'Af' but to a similar unit... Feel free to complete the article or to correct my mistakes. I also think about nominating this article for DYK when we'll be sure there's nothing erroneous in it.

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Battalions of Light Infantry of Africa (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Bougie

Turcopole (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Templers

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:44, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Fort Saint-Jean (Marseille), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Army of Africa (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:39, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Ref to shakos for Line Infantry in full dress is fine. Just wanted to avoid the impression that it was part of service dress. Regards, Hengistmate (talk) 10:31, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent. Perhaps I should make it clearer that the Belgian shako was service dress (as well as full dress). Regards, Hengistmate (talk) 12:09, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Swiss mercenaries, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Waterloo (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:15, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Byzantine army (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Immortals

Compagnie des Carabiniers du Prince (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Spats

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:34, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Buistr, I see at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/African_military_history_task_force that your interests might extend to the Free French Forces in North Africa during World War II. I've been trying to rescue Raphaël Onana, which is a translation from the French-language bio of the same NCO. One issue has been the assertion that he was awarded the Legion of Honour (I presume as a Chevalier) by de Gaulle, something that I would have thought would be easy to verify, but so far I've had no success finding an authoritative list. Sourcing of the article has been quite limited, relying mostly on his autobiography. I wonder if you might be willing to take a look at the article and see what you can do to help out. Thank you, LeadSongDog come howl! 15:49, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I mostly came at it from translation cleanup, but even the French-language wiki had sourcing issues. I was astonished that there's no real authoritative sourcing available online for a complete List of Légion d'honneur recipients by name, comparable to what is available for the List of Victoria Cross recipients. LeadSongDog come howl! 20:44, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for checking. Did you find anything about the units mentioned? LeadSongDog come howl! 13:45, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's helpful, anyhow. The article at fr:1er régiment de Tirailleurs du Cameroun would benefit from those sources you mention. That should be firmed up a bit before translation.LeadSongDog come howl! 13:45, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is best that such discussions are public so others can see the conversation and comment if they want to so please see Talk:Red coat (British army) -- PBS (talk) 08:19, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Irving and Casson Austrian knot Italian East African lira Dominic Guard Billund, Denmark Guards Cavalry Division (German Empire) Berner Laufhund Italian Somaliland lira Manual of arms Nokia 500 Hassi R'Mel integrated solar combined cycle power station Aeschynomene Light cavalry Italian Somaliland somalo Devil's Peak, Hong Kong Șcheii Brașovului Eritrean tallero Moneghetti Eldridge Park

Cleanup Illegal immigration Musketeer History of the Royal Marines Merge Royal Regiment of Scotland Royal Norfolk Regiment French Cameroons Add Sources Corps of Drums Military beret Principality of Wy Wikify Middlesex Yeomanry Antoine Charles Louis de Lasalle 75th Ranger Regiment (United States) Expand 4th Hussar Regiment (France) Marquesas Islands Prince Peter of Saxe-Coburg-Kohary

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 Nettrom (talk), 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) 16:32, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Takapuwahia Shane Johnson (soccer) Invincible error 61st Pioneers Operation Midnight Climax 64th Pioneers Alias Records Bikaner Camel Corps Fred Bremner Bombay Army Push of pike Mentor of Rhodes Permanent employment Second Battle of Champagne 69th Punjabis 4th Bombay Grenadiers Vasily Orlov-Denisov José Félix Estigarribia The Ravi Lancers

Cleanup Death rates in the 20th century Buffs (Royal East Kent Regiment) Gas duster Merge Foreign policy of the Barack Obama administration List of Allied forces in the Normandy Campaign Noble Guard (Vatican) Add Sources Dragoon guards Regiment Indian Army Wikify Indian general election in Bihar, 1971 Canyon Sam Maru Pradesh Expand Law enforcement in the United Kingdom 1 Gorkha Rifles The Rifles

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 Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 20:30, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Siege of Cuartel de la Montaña (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Franco and Mola

Asturian miners' strike of 1934 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Diego Hidalgo

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:19, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Buistr, As you probably saw, much of my text was a translation of the French wiki article which, unfortunately, doesn't cite any sources. If you could find any refs to use for the text, that'd be great though if not, I think the anecdote you mentioned could safely be retained with the ^{[citation needed]} tag. Best regards Brigade Piron (talk) 09:14, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Eliedion. Thank you for adding the very interesting 1913 photograph of the Paris amusement park scene to the Spahi article. Unfortunately the figure shown is an Algerian tirailleur (infantryman), not a spahi (cavalryman) from Senegal. I have accordingly moved it to the article on tirailleurs. Thanks again. Buistr (talk) 19:14, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your message. The source indicated that it was a spahi soldier. Thanks. Eliedion (d) 20:44, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Are they spahi soldiers? Best regards. Eliedion (d) 15:17, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• 

Another very good photo! Thanks for posting it. These are tirailleurs senegalais - that is to say infantrymen from what was then French West Africa. They were a separate corps from the spahis senegalais (cavalry) and wore dark blue uniforms instead of red. Detachments from these colonial regiments were brought to France in 1913 to participate in the annual Bastille Day parade. It was the first time that these soldiers had been seen in Paris and they attracted much attention. See the tirailleurs senegalais article for more pictures and background. Regards Buistr (talk) 16:56, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! What's translate Wissmanntruppe? Senior Strateg (talk) 14:17, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings. The terms translates as "Wissmann's troops" or "Wissmann Force". Hermann Wissmann was a German officer who organised a force of askaris to suppress a rising against the German East Africa Company in 1888-89. See Abushiri Revolt for details. Buistr (talk) 00:52, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Senior Strateg (talk) 09:22, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That one editor keeps adding the false material about "spirits reuniting" to the Hachi article. That is all the person has ever done according to their edit history. I've politely asked the person to stop before and a little less politely done so again. If this person does not stop, would you consider backing me up if I start a complaint? JayHubie (talk) 06:18, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that this is deliberate vandalism but rather the actions of a dog-lover who is distressed at the thought of a notably faithful pooch dying alone in the snow. The original Japanese film does actually conclude with Hachi running through a luminescent wood to reunite with his owner. By contrast the Swedish/American remake settles for an ambiguous ending apparently intended neither to upset viewers who believe "dogs go to heaven" nor irritate those who consider that they die uncomprehendingly like any other animal. Emotive stuff. As far as the Wiki-article goes I think that a factual summary along the lines of "dog dreams of happy past; dog is shown asleep as train approaches; professor comes out of station; dog and professor embrace; dog is shown dead, camera swings into night sky" would be the best compromise. Sorry not to be more helpful. Buistr (talk) 08:49, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Georges Picquart may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• <ref>page 226, 'The Proud Tower", Barbara W. Tuchman, published 1966 by Hamish Hamilton Ltd London}}</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:58, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gendarmerie&oldid=564294043&diff=prev

by non-foreign, I meant not an occupying force, such as US forces in Iraq. Tango303 (talk) 22:44, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Noted, but I suggest that the original wording in the article lede be retained. Unless otherwise specified it is reasonable to assume that any named police or gendarmerie force is an indigenous one. Regards Buistr (talk) 23:31, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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! Kirill ^[talk] 18:30, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - Thanks for your recent edit to Bengal Army. Please can you add a source? Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 20:11, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reference added as requested. Regards Buistr (talk) 20:39, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Great. Many thanks. Dormskirk (talk) 20:59, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Buistr, I like your changes in the article on Rasputin. May be you like to "collaborate" with me? I have a lot of details on Rasputin, studying his life for almost half a year. I would like to add my details, coming from Dutch experts on Rasputin, but I need some help from someone who is a native speaker, and most important, not too mystical. If you agree, I will supply you with details to improve the article. In my view it is important because the article is read each day by several hundreds of people and it will affect articles on Rasputin in other languages. Tell me if you like the idea. Regards from Amsterdam.07:14, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello Taksen. Yes I would be glad to copy-edit any material that you wish to add to the Rasputin article. I suggest that you place these additions on either your talk page or in a specially created sand box and let me have the link. Regards Buistr (talk) 07:40, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Look here [1]. Your alias Buistr has a Dutch flavour. Where did you get it from? Taksen (talk) 11:10, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again Taksen. I have copy-edited the draft article concentrating on spelling, grammar and English language style. I do not have any special access to reference material for this period so have only made minor changes to the actual content. Since you have clearly done a great deal of research please feel free to revert my edits. There are a couple of points where I have raised queries in bolded text. You have done a very good rework of the article - especially in view of the sometimes lurid nature of the topic and the often contradictory sources available. Best wishes Buistr (talk) 04:56, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Dutch colleagues have told me that "Buist" is a not uncommon name in Holland but it is also used in Scotland where my family came from - rather unglamorously a form of paint used to mark sheep!

Hello Buistr, thank you for taking a look at the text and the compliments. I seldon came across such a difficult subject, but I learned a lot about pre-revolutionary Russia and my view on history and historians changed. I still need to adjust my text with the latest "improvements" from the real article on Rasputin. I am not sure every change in the past three months can be taken as a serious improvement. [2] Which ones do you think are interesting and can be added without doubt?Taksen (talk) 10:24, 15 October 2013 (UTC) In the mean time I uploaded my version, the one you corrected and added some of the improvements. Now we can go on there (it really became to difficult to keep track of the changes on both versions). I suppose you will keep on eye on what happens in the next few days.Taksen (talk) 13:45, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Buistr, I prefer not to use my sandbox2 anymore. I agree with your changes. Could add your them to the real article? Rasputin was against this war. I did not explain it very well.Taksen (talk) 17:01, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message Buistr. I looked at the material dealing with the creation of the new army in 1956 and compared it with the information I was translating from the French Wikipedia; they seemed to be virtually identical. Happy to have you restore the material, with citations, just don't remove material that is already there and valid. You may be interested to have a look at this week's Signpost, which drew my attention to Tunisia. Also, saw your complaint about the unreferenced list of equipment, which I think you said seemed like something that would not be released. Are you aware of the IISS Military Balance?- they yearly print all this stuff for all the armies of the world. Drop me an e-mail via the emailthisuser if you'd like to see an extract. Cheers and thanks Buckshot06 (talk) 01:47, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Will do. Cheers.Buistr (talk) 01:54, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looks like the same guy did Tunisian Land Army, because some of it is exactly the stuff I've translated into English at the other page. I've moved the TLA article to Tunisian Army, citing COMMONNAME and WP:UE. It will need to be throughly cleaned up and referenced. Buckshot06 (talk) 02:21, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your edit summary. Could you maybe rephrase the sentence though? To the uninformed reader (such as myself), it doesn't make sense. --Tóraí (talk) 11:03, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not necessary now - another editor has picked up duplicated references within the lead section to the last stand and has (correctly) removed the first passage. For the record though "formed" troops was a term meaning that they were in ranks or a square or (as in this case) a back to back group. Anything of at least a semi-organised nature, as opposed to a rabble of fleeing individuals. I presume this was the reason for including the word in the original text. Regards (Buistr (talk) 19:13, 14 January 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Colonel general may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• a rank]] which translates as "colonel general". It is equal to the rank of 4-star ("full") general). Colonel general is however junior to the rank of field marshal and is an honory distinction

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:15, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Zaptié, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ottoman (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:49, 19 June 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Auxiliaries may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• units, broadly grouped as [[Ala]] (cavalry), [[Cohors]] (infantry) and [[Cohors equitata]] (infantry with a cavalry element}. Specialist units of slingers, scouts, archers and camel mounted detachments continued in

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:09, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My edit to the 'Bicorne' page (in the 'cocked hat') section does make sense, as you're aware of the ban of the word 'cock' as, yes, it is slang for penis. This is why 'ball cock' is replaced with 'ball valve', and 'cock', as in a male hen, is 'rooster'. This is similar to the ban of the name 'Dick', as you're aware that 'dick' is slang for penis, and consequently, the shortened form of 'Richard' is now 'Rick'. 21:08, 20 September 2014 (UTC)Ofcdeadbeat

• 'Cock' has about 12 different meanings (check any dictionary). The reason for deleting your addition from this particular article was that there was no connection between the slang term noted above and a historic military hat. Sorry. Buistr (talk) 00:02, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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]} 22:06, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a page number for that reference?[3] Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 07:08, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Page 42 - as recorded in the reference given. Buistr (talk) 07:15, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh, ack. My bad. Apologies! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 19:28, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Military band may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• of the Argentine Ministry of Defense. The band wears uniforms worn by Argentine gunners during the [[Argentina-Brazil War] and later conflicts.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:21, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history Wikiproject has opened nominations for the Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year. Nominations will be accepted until 13 December at 23:59 GMT, with voting to begin at 0:00 GMT 14 December. The voting will conclude on 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:35, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history Wikiproject has opened nominations for the Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year. Nominations will be accepted until 13 December at 23:59 GMT, with voting to begin at 0:00 GMT 14 December. The voting will conclude on 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:41, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This message was accidentally sent using an incorrect mailing list, therefore this message is being resent using the correct list. As a result, some users may get this message twice; if so please discard. We apologize for the inconvenience.

Re: this edit, with the comment "Sourced reference for the ineffectiveness of lances in melees is given in the main text of the article", I am unable to locate the text or refs. Some main text seems to imply the opposite. Can you point the text out to me? --A D Monroe III (talk) 22:15, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• See quote from Barbara Tuchman's "Guns of August" under "World War I section.Buistr (talk) 22:23, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but that has nothing to do with the lance in melee; melee was virtually absent from WWI. Any other refs? --A D Monroe III (talk) 19:00, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

But the quote given by Tchman does refer to a close-quarters clash between a squadron of British cavalry armed with sabers and a squadron of German uhlans carrying lances, near Mons on 22nd August 1914. I would have thought this met the dictionary definition of melees as "a confused fight, skirmish, scuffle". The lance seems to have been an overrated weapon throughout the hundred years or so that it was in use by (comparatively) modern European armies, except against infantry caught in open order. If you are looking for instances of lancers breaking opposing cavalry in a great swirling encounter you may have to go back to Napoleonic battles. Buistr (talk) 19:35, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The lede text with the cn tag you removed was about the Medieval period; the quote you have isn't for that. Even if it was, it's about a single skirmish, so fails WP:UNDUE. Your "seems to have been" implies WP:SYNTH. If this is all you have, I'd restore the cn. --A D Monroe III (talk) 16:30, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am adding source references for the ineffectiveness of both medieval and early 20th century lances in a melee. If you wish to continue this discussion then please move to the talk page of the article so that other editors can provide input. Buistr (talk) 18:35, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Re: [4]. How do you know they're marines? The picture title at the LOC uses "sailors." I'm not adverse to changing the characterization, but I'd like to know why you did so! Best, Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 19:45, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi The ed17. I think the hand written caption on the LOC photo got it wrong. Excusably enough. The Brazilian Navy's enlisted men c1913 wore the universal white or blue sailor suits of the era (see the photograph of mutineers in the same article). However the figures in the second photograph are wearing the same khaki drill without visible buttons, plus belts, as that worn by the Brazilian Army during 1910-20 for summer service uniforms. In addition the flat topped forage caps with side badges are the same as those worn in white by the modern Brazilian Marine Corps for gala dress. They also carry bayonets as side arms - not a usual part of a sailor's equipment. I guess this constitutes a degree of original research (historic military uniforms are my hobby) and you are welcome to revert. However the photo does seem well positioned in the article - next to a reference in the text describing a mutiny by Brazilian marines which followed on the Revolt of the Lash. Regards Buistr (talk) 20:58, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Buistr, I apologize for not checking back to see if you replied. I don't mind a bit of OR in picture captions if there's evidence to back it up; I'm not wedded to reporting incorrect information. ;-) Thank you for the explanation! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 03:12, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at the landing at Anzac Cove Op-ed: TomStar81 on the debut of poison gas in World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:15, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Military uniform page, your edit caused an ISBN error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Cavalry page, your edit caused an ISBN error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:41, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Fez may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• |porter]]s and [[bellhop]]s sometimes still wear a fez to provide local colour for visitors,}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:28, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Swiss Guard may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Hundred Guard (''Cent&nbsp;Suisses''), which served at the French court from 1490 to 1817). This small force was complemented in 1567 by a Swiss Guards regiment. In the 18th and early 19th

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:54, 29 September 2015 (UTC) |}[reply]

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]} 05:20, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:54, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On behalf of the Military history WikiProject's Coordinators, we would like to extend an invitation to nominate deserving editors for the 2015 Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards. The nomination period will run from 7 December to 23:59 13 December, with the election phase running from 14 December to 23:59 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:05, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Yep, all those edits came from a long-term abuser who mixes up copyvios and false informations pursuing a strictly non neutral agenda. Ciao! --Vituzzu (talk) 22:23, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's all that puzzling for police to be in civilian clothing, and it's slightly distracting to draw attention a relatively minor detail like that in the aftermath of the Glenrowan shootout. The point of interest is them posing in front of the tree where Kelly was captured, not what they're wearing. Their clothing isn't discernible at thumbnail size. I suppose it's a detail worth mentioning in the image description over at Wiki Commons? - HappyWaldo (talk) 01:22, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Buistr. I reverted both your edits at Toga for the following reasons. Both the passages you edited were tagged for citation, which invites citation by reliable sources, or else removal, rather than further uncited editing. The image of Vel Saties is of a cloaked Etruscan, according to Mary Beard; not of a togate Etruscan; she's very specific about that. I happen to agree with you about the North African claims; but unless a cite can be found for either the claim or counterclaim, the sentence should probably be removed. Sorry 'bout that. Best, Haploidavey (talk) 20:49, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Failing a reliable modern opinion on the matter, it might be useful to cite Roman belief on toga origins (Pliny, IIRC), via William Smith - old but reasonably sound source. I'll remove the North African business entirely - it has remained uncited for quite some time. Haploidavey (talk) 21:02, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response, Buistr. Yes, the North African claims are highly suspect. But it seems the Romans themselves thought the toga - specifically the praetexta version - derived from the Etruscans. If that's what they thought, that's what we can say. I mean, who's to argue? Btw, William Smith has heaps on the topic, which I'm distilling, very slowly. Horrible topic, to be honest. Haploidavey (talk) 21:53, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The paragraph you asked to clarify was recently added by User:OJOM. He probably wanted to say that the corps trained in France but were also deployed elsewhere.

I suspect English isn't his strongest skill and also that he doesn't bother to integrate his edits with the rest of the text, not to mention sourcing. Pavel Vozenilek (talk) 00:49, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Buistr,

First of all, a Merry Christmas to you! :-)

Regarding your edit on the Persian Cossack Brigade page. You're partially right in your assesment (absorption in Reza Shah's later rule) however, the name "Iranian Cossack Brigade" is definetely used in many of the WP:RS sources. After all, even though Iran was known as Persia to the outside world for millenia, the native name has always been "Iran". Here are a few of these sources in question;

• Although according to Domantovich, the first commandant of the Iranian Cossack Brigade, this initiative came from the shah himself, Field-Marshal Ahmad (...) -- Cronin, Stephanie. (1997). "The Army and Creation of the Pahlavi State in Iran, 1921-1926". I.B.Tauris. ISBN 978-1860641053 p. 54

• One of the principal components of Riza Khan's new army in the nineteen-twenties was the Iranian Cossack Brigade. -- (1998) "Iran: Journal of the British Institute of Persian Studies". The Institute. (original from the University of Michigan). pp 178, 183.

• (...)(later Riza Shah Pahlavi), and indeed within four years he rose from the rank of colonel in the Iranian Cossack Brigade to the Iranian throne. -- Shahvar, Soli. (2009). "Forgotten Schools: The Baha'Is and Modern Education in Iran, 1899-1934". I.B.Tauris. ISBN 978-0857712714 p. 5

• Reza Khan, who had been a brigadier general in the Iranian Cossack Brigade before ousting Iran's last Qajar king in 1925. -- Wawro, Geoffrey. (2010). Penguin (chapter 10 - Reza Khan). ISBN 978-1101197684

• military officers in European uniforms, clergymen, cadets of the military school, and one or two European women, Reza Khan Savadkuhi of the Iranian Cossack Brigade placed on (...) -- Buchan, James (2013). "Days of God: The Revolution in Iran and Its Consequences". Simon and Schuster. ISBN 978-1416597773 p 1

Hence, per the sources, I believe it should be included as an alternate name in the lede. All the best - LouisAragon (talk) 00:09, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Greetings LouisAragon. You make a convincing case for including "Iranian Cossack Brigade" as an alternative name for the unit. I suggest that you go ahead with the addition. I would do so but I think that adding source references (one or two should be sufficient) would probably infringe some esoteric Wiki code of conduct if I had not sighted the books/publications myself. Best wishes for the New Year! Buistr (talk) 05:13, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Strange why I missed your response.. Though its kind of belated, I wish you all the best for this New Year we're in as well obviously! :-) - LouisAragon (talk) 15:56, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I decided to add 4 of the 5 sources linked above within one "major" ref tag for the time being, as the article lacks alot of inline refs. They'll suffice for now, but they should get removed whenever the article has received more inline references, as they won't be needed anymore at that point. All the best - LouisAragon (talk) 16:14, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

G'day all, please be advised that throughout March 2017 the Military history Wikiproject is running its March Madness drive. This is a backlog drive that is focused on several key areas:

• tagging and assessing articles that fall within the project's scope
• updating the project's currently listed A-class articles to ensure their ongoing compliance with the listed criteria
• creating articles that are listed as "requested" on the project's various task force pages or other lists of missing articles.

As with past Milhist drives, there are points awarded for working on articles in the targeted areas, with barnstars being awarded at the end for different levels of achievement.

The drive is open to all Wikipedians, not just members of the Military history project, although only work on articles that fall (broadly) within the military history scope will be considered eligible. More information can be found here for those that are interested, and members can sign up as participants at that page also.

The drive starts at 00:01 UTC on 1 March and runs until 23:59 UTC on 31 March 2017, so please sign up now.

For the Milhist co-ordinators. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) & MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:24, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		Awarded for your contributions to the article Auxiliaries. Awarded by Cdjp1 on 16 August 2017.

Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway. As a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 29 September. Thank you for your time. For the current tranche of Coordinators, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:39, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mexican Army, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Battle of Zacatecas (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 20:08, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As we approach the end of the year, the Military History project is looking to recognise editors who have made a real difference. Each year we do this by bestowing two awards: the Military Historian of the Year and the Military History Newcomer of the Year. The co-ordinators invite all project members to get involved by nominating any editor they feel merits recognition for their contributions to the project. Nominations for both awards are open between 00:01 on 2 December 2017 and 23:59 on 15 December 2017. After this, a 14-day voting period will follow commencing at 00:01 on 16 December 2017. Nominations and voting will take place on the main project talkpage: here and here. Thank you for your time. For the co-ordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:35, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Swiss mercenaries, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Capitulation (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:18, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've added to the discussion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kepi#Belgium. Hengistmate (talk) 00:31, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for your input on the Yeomanry->Yeomanry Cavalry page move request. It's clear that this was an inappropriate move and I've withdrawn the request. I do, however, believe that separate articles are justified and, following a discussion with one of the other contributors to the page move discussion, have begun a discussion about reverting the Yeomanry article to its original state, and splitting off the work I have done into a separate Yeomanry Cavalry article. I would welcome your opinion on this. Factotem (talk) 23:10, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

G'day all, please be advised that throughout April 2018 the Military history Wikiproject is running its annual backlog elimination drive. This will focus on several key areas:

• tagging and assessing articles that fall within the project's scope
• adding or improving listed resources on Milhist's task force pages
• updating the open tasks template on Milhist's task force pages
• creating articles that are listed as "requested" on the project's various lists of missing articles.

As with past Milhist drives, there are points awarded for working on articles in the targeted areas, with barnstars being awarded at the end for different levels of achievement.

The drive is open to all Wikipedians, not just members of the Military history project, although only work on articles that fall (broadly) within the scope of military history will be considered eligible. This year, the Military history project would like to extend a specific welcome to members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red, and we would like to encourage all participants to consider working on helping to improve our coverage of women in the military. This is not the sole focus of the edit-a-thon, though, and there are aspects that hopefully will appeal to pretty much everyone.

The drive starts at 00:01 UTC on 1 April and runs until 23:59 UTC on 30 April 2018. Those interested in participating can sign up here.

For the Milhist co-ordinators, AustralianRupert and MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:53, 27 March 2018 (UTC)