User talk:EH101

This user may have left Wikipedia. EH101 has not edited Wikipedia since 29 July 2020. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

6 November 2024
From the editors: Editing Wikipedia should not be a crime News and notes: Wikimedia Foundation shares ANI lawsuit updates; first admin elections appoint eleven sysops; first admin recalls opened; temporary accounts coming soon? In the media: An old scrimmage, politics and purported libel Special report: Wikipedia editors face litigation, censorship Gallery: Why you should take more photos and upload them In focus: Questions and answers about the court case Traffic report: Twisted tricks or tempting treats? Technology report: Wikimedia tech, the Asian News International case, and the ultra-rare BLACKLOCK Humour: Man quietly slinks away from talk page argument after realizing his argument dumb, wrong
Single page Front page About Subscribe Suggestions Archives

Archive 01

Since I can't email you- email me; it won't be hard to find my email address. Bzuk 22:00, 4 September 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Ah, the plot thickens. I don't really know enough about the development of missiles in themselves to take a look at those edits, but he seems to have wandered into maritime history, where so far he's made questionable edits. I fancy I am rather better informed about this field so I shall see what he has to say. But like it or not, he needs to provide sources, as at the moment, he is pushing POV disguised as 'recorded history', and calling my edits attempts to cover up the truth I suppose. Benea 19:50, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Per above, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Stefanomencarelli-Bzuk-BillCJ, whatever you views of the current dispute or preferred outcome. THnaks. - BillCJ 23:51, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Stefanomencarelli. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Stefanomencarelli/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Stefanomencarelli/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Picaroon (t) 23:56, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

EH101, another sock-puppet of WIkizilla, this time not-so-creatively named User:NotASockPuppetOfWikzilla, has posted some "Italian" here. I'm curious as to what bad advice is being given here. FOr all his other problems, if Stefanomencarelli deceends to using socks to edit pages or harrass other editors, he won't need to complete the arbitration to have his fate decided. - BillCJ 00:34, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		The Editor's Barnstar
		Awarded for your "above and beyond" editing efforts in getting F-4 Phantom operators editorially back on track during November 2007 Ahunt 15:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, a well-deserved recognition of your patient and reasoned approach to working in this WikyWacky world. FWIW Bzuk (talk) 15:25, 25 November 2007 (UTC).[reply]

You are very welcome - you deserve the recognition for your great work! - Ahunt 18:01, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, stop being so nice and principled! I hate it when people act responsibly and show consideration for others. If you keep this up, people will start to notice. [:¬∆ FWIW , I appreciate your latest sentiment about what turned out to be a gruelling and stressful time for all involved. Bzuk (talk) 15:25, 25 November 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Hi EH, the following is a copyedit from my talk page:"

• Cappone, Max C.A.; Ferdinando D’Amico (2000). Re 2000. An online World War II aviation history magazine. Retrieved on 2007-11-26.
• Henriksson, Lars (2005-06-29). Reggiane Re 2000 Falco 1 (1941-1945). avrosys.nu. Retrieved on 2007-11-26.
• Cattaneo, Gianni (1967). The Reggiane Re.2000 (Aircraft in Profile Number 123), 1972, Windsor Berkshire: Profile Publications Ltd.
• Mondey, David (1996). The Concise Guide to Axis Aircraft of World War II. New York: Bounty Books. ISBN 1-85152-966-7.
• Punka, George (2001). Reggiane Fighters in action. Carrolton, Texas: Squadron/Signal Publications. ISBN 0-89747-430-9.
• Taylor, John W. R. (1969). Reggiane Re.2000 Falco I (Falcon). New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons. ISBN 0-425-03633-2.

What is your opinion ? May I substitute them in the article? In order to improve our knowledge on this topic, which parts of these results you do not agree with?

First of all, there is a bit of a mix of styles, dating conventions and use of reference sources, let me start by first establishing one consistent bibliographical standard. I will be using the MLA (Modern Language Association) style guides. All of these examples will be treated as a group of sources and will be ordered alphabetically according to the first entry note (Author or title). The authors' names are identified as last name, first name(s) and separated by commas in name and periods from the rest of the record. MLA places the date of publication with the item not the author. Commonly, the style that is uitlized is: Author. Title(an exact title with capitalization left as written, and series titles and language of use is placed in brackets following the italicized or underlined title, BTW, underlining is now seen as passé and redundant, if an article within an anthology or encyclopedia is given, to separate the title from the main title, the title of the article is in quotation marks and the main source in italics). Place of Publication (major city and country if the location is a minor one): Publisher, Date of publication (with the latest edition date given, and allowance for variations to satisfy ordering and researching stipulations, usually ended by including an ISBN (international standard book number although these were only established after 1965 and not in widespread use until late in the 1960s and early 1970s) and at times, page references). Bearing all of these specifications in mind, this is what the examples (I have added one other to show how a source in another language would look) would look like in MLA style.

• Cappone, Max C.A. and Ferdinando, D’Amico. "'Reggiane' Falco Re-2000." Planes and Pilots of World War Two: An online World War II aviation history magazine. New York: Jordan Publishing, 2000. "Reggiane" Falco Re-2000 Access date: 26 November 2007.
• Cattaneo, Gianni. The Reggiane Re.2000 (Aircraft in Profile Number 123). Windsor, Berkshire, UK: Profile Publications Ltd., 1972.
• DiTerlizzi, Maurizio. Reggiane Re 2005 Sagittario, Aviolibri 4 (in Italian). Rome: IBN Editore, 2001. ISBN 88-86815-38-7.
• Henriksson, Lars. Reggiane Re 2000 Falco 1 (1941-1945). Ljungskile, Sweden: Avrosys.nu,29 June 2005 J 20 - Reggiane Re 2000 Falco 1 (1941-1945)
• Mondey, David, ed. The Hamlyn Concise Guide to Axis Aircraft of World War II. New York: Bounty Books, 2006. ISBN 1-85152-966-7.
• Punka, George. Reggiane Fighters in action. Carrolton, Texas: Squadron/Signal Publications, 2001. ISBN 0-89747-430-9.
• Taylor, John W. R. "Reggiane Re.2000 Falco I (Falcon)". Combat Aircraft of the World from 1909 to the Present. New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1969. ISBN 0-425-03633-2.

As to the use of images, the standard would be to have a representative aircraft illustrated as the infobox image and your use of a photograph of an Italian aircraft in an article on an Italian aircraft would be perfectly fitting. FWIW, you may have to read this all in edit mode to see all my changes. Bzuk (talk) 20:14, 26 November 2007 (UTC).[reply]

EH101, could you look at the Cavour (550), and see if you can help me a sentence phrase? It looks like it was badly translated from Italian, but I can't make out what it is supposed to say. THe sentence is (bad phrase in bold): Cavour can operate as LPH, with 2 eliassault from 6 EH-101 each can land all marines. Thanks. - BillCJ 00:11, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi EH101 - let me think about this for a little while! Two problems that I see:

"Ambrosini SAI.xyz" seems to be the way that most English-language sources designate these aircraft, and that might influence our choice on en.wiki the way that it influences our choice on Japanese designations (ie, "Mitsubishi A6M", not the more usual Japanese designation "Mitsubishi Type 0 Carrier Fighter").

Also, in English usage, "Ambrosini SAI" is not used as a company name; the "company name" element of the designation is simply "Ambrosini". In English usage, "SAI" is a prefix to the model number, just like in "Messerschmitt Bf 109", or "Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21"; therefore "Ambrosini SAI.207 is a three-element name (manufacturer, prefix, number), not a two-element name (like Boeing 747 - manufacturer, number).

Tell me what you think... --Rlandmann (talk) 23:16, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To put it another way, then, to preserve the three-element name (manufacturer-prefix-number), if we follow your suggestion, we would have to make it "SAI Ambrosini SAI.xyz", which is cumbersome, as well as being unusual (I can't remember seeing this in print anywhere...)

As I think you know, in the Messerschmitt example, the Bf prefix does come from the (old) manufacturer name: Bayerische Flugzeugwerke. But if you prefer to use another example, think of the three-element name "Messerschmitt Me 262". --Rlandmann (talk) 01:21, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The other thing to consider is that we almost never use the manufacturer's full name. For example:

• "Curtiss P-40", not "Curtiss Aeroplane and Motor Company P-40"
• "Dorner Do 17", not "Dornier Werke Do 17"
• "Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-15", not "OKB Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-15"

Practically every manufacturer has a short form of its name that is commonly used in English sources. For "Douglas Aircraft Company", the common short form is "Douglas"; and for "SAI Ambrosini", the common short form is "Ambrosini".

This suggests to me that "Ambrosini S.7" is correctly named; but if you're right about "SAI" never being an official prefix, we might need to think about changing "Ambrosini SAI.207" to "Ambrosini 207". I'd welcome any sources you can offer that show that the "SAI" prefix was never used. I'd be surprised if this was true, because this usage is extremely widespread. If the prefix was never used, we need to find out where this usage came from. --Rlandmann (talk) 22:06, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All that picture shows is that no prefix was painted on the fin of that particular aircraft (but was it printed, for example, on the instrument panel? Or in the pilot's manual? Or in the delivery paperwork? Or in the squadron paperwork? or in the Regia Aeronautica's accounting paperwork?)

The point is that the use of this prefix is extremely wide-spread: the majority of sources use it (including Jane's) and a quick Google shows that the prefix is common in Italian as well as in English. It must have come from somewhere, and for the purpose of our naming conventions, it really doesn't matter where it originally came from: just that it's consistently and widely used.

Do you know where using "SAI." as a prefix originated?

(PS: I note that the NASM uses "SAI" as the manufacturer and "S." as the prefix (ie, "SAI S.207", "SAI S.403"! Very strange!) --Rlandmann (talk) 20:52, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not disputing that the full name of the company is "SAI Ambrosini" - that's obviously true (but irrelevant to this discussion).

The question is over the use of "SAI." as a prefix: the practice is so widespread, that I'm certain that it must have some historical basis: non c'è fumo senza arrosto.

Another important thing for you to consider is that en.wiki has a very strict policy against "Original Research". This means that we do not attempt to make scholarly judgments: we simply follow the conventions that our sources use. I understand from the various problems with User:Stefanomencarelli some months ago that it.wiki does not have similar policies in place, and it's quite OK for editors to make their own assessments and analysis of the facts.

So I ask again: if it was never used historically (as you say), where did the use of "SAI." as a prefix originate? --Rlandmann (talk) 23:48, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To answer your direct question (and maybe some more!) and forgetting the prefix issue for the moment:

• I think that Ambrosini (aircraft manufacturer) should be renamed to SAI Ambrosini, but only because it's a more elegant disambiguation.
• Based on the evidence so far, I think that the (Company) element of the aircraft names should not be changed to "SAI Ambrosini", for the same reason that we don't have Curtiss Aeroplane and Motor Company P-40
• Based on the evidence so far, I think that Category:Ambrosini aircraft should not be renamed to Category:SAI Ambrosini aircraft, for the same reason that we don't have Category:Curtiss Aeroplane and Motor Company aircraft.

The way we name things (not just aircraft) on en:wiki is based first and foremost on how English-language reference works (ie - secondary sources, not primary sources!) name that thing. I maintain that in English-language reference works, this manufacturer is consistently (almost universally) called simply "Ambrosini", and its products are also named accordingly. En:wiki is bound to follow that convention. For en:Wiki the "reliability rank" is #1 English-language books and #2 reliable English-language websites. I am making another trip to the library today to investigate further.

As I pointed out once before, if we accepted the logic that you have suggested, we would have to rename the Mitsubishi A6M to Mitsubishi Type 0 Carrier Fighter, which as I think you know, is its proper and correct designation from the Japanese government and Japanese Navy. We should also probably rename Messerschmitt Me 262 to simply 8-262, since that's how the Reichsluftfahrtministerium actually designated this plane.

One extra thing you should consider: practically all of the aircraft names we use (Company)-(Prefix)-(Number) are artificial names created by the publishing industry and not by governments or manufacturers.

So, where now? Basically, to have these aircraft renamed, you need to prove either:

1. that English-language reference works (aviation encyclopedias, monographs, reliable websites) mostly use "SAI Ambrosini" as the (Company) element of the names of these aircraft or:
2. that there is no consistency whatsoever amongst English-language reference works (aviation encyclopedias, monographs, reliable websites) about the (Company) element of the names of these aircraft; in which case we would need to look at what reference works in other languages (principally, of course, Italian) do. Of course, that still might not mean that "SAI Ambrosini" would be chosen for the (Company) element...

Over to you! :) --Rlandmann (talk)

Yes - the situation is very much like the Florentine church that you describe: en.wiki's naming policies are intended to locate information where it will be most familiar for native English speakers and most consistent with English-language sources.

It's interesting that you say that Italians will use "SIAI SF-260" with SIAI as the short form of the (Company) element; English language sources do not tend to do this - in English, this manufacturer is practically always "SIAI-Marchetti" (with no short form). So different languages behave differently.

Question: do any of your Italian sources directly mention this anomaly? I mean, do any of your books contain a phrase like "The SAI Ambrosini 207 (commonly but incorrectly called the Ambrosini SAI.207)"? There are certainly ways we could acknowledge this. --Rlandmann (talk) 21:01, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; didn't the S.S.4 also use a prefix?

There's no problem using the full name of the company in the infobox (or indeed for the article about the company).

Another question: what do you know about the Ambrosini company before it purchased SAI in 1934? --Rlandmann (talk) 23:39, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I promptly rerouted these questions to it.wiki aviation project. In the same time I will look up or buy some sources. Stay tuned. --EH101 (talk) 22:10, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi EH (a little late but Happy New Year), I've just been looking at the BR.20 article and wondered if you might be able to clear something up for me: in the article it states that the prefix BR comes from "Bombardiere Rosatelli" after the name of its designer, but I have a ref that says "Bombardamento Rosatelli". Do you know which is correct? Cheers. --Red Suns and 20:13, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply EH101. I take your point about citing wrongly-translated or interpreted references; it does present a bit of a dilemma and I agree with all of your suggestions and comments. In the case of the BR.20 article it seems that the source used gives the correct (as you have kindly confirmed) "Bombardiere" explanation of the prefix; i.e. the original Italian version as applied to an Italian subject. However, if a widely-accepted but wrong or poor interpretation had been used ("Bombardamento"), I would place an additional footnote next to the first reference point to provide the correct interpretion of the originator's intended meaning. I admit that I should have consulted it.wiki on this occasion; even though I have no understanding of the Italian language I might have been able to pick out what I wanted to know.

In response to your comment about fostering an international approach to topics; the collaboration of even more minds should in theory lead to better-informed and more-complete articles, but it seems that other language wikis don't all adhere to precisely the same guidelines, which IMHO would unfortunately lead to problems in creating internationally-accepted articles, although each wiki could adapt each one to its own standards. I also sympathise with you regarding being able to understand accepted en.wiki practises and philosophies, it's not always easy for us native English speakers to do so and I still have a lot to learn myself! Thanks again. --Red Sunset 21:34, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me for butting in here: but this is actually quite a separate issue from the one we're discussing above. Naming is a tricky thing, and has its own conventions, but for straight statements of fact such as the meaning of the letters "B.R.",there's no problem, and en.wiki will happily follow the most reliable sources available, in whatever language it's published in. It's not a question of verifiability or even "correctness", only a question of convention.

The connection that you need to break in your mind is that "en.wiki article name"="official name" or ="original name". It isn't necessarily anything like that: only "en.wiki article name"="most familiar name for English-speakers".

This is not just about aircraft, it's also how we name countries (Germany, Japan, Italy - not Deutschland, Nippon, Italia) cities (Rome, Milan, Naples - not Roma, Milano, Napoli) and people (Bill Gates, Pliny the Younger, Confucius - not William Gates III, Gaius Plinius Caecilius, and K'ung-fu-tzu). You can read the relevant policy and its rationale here. I notice that it.wiki does the same thing, at least for people and places (Confucio, Londra, Germania). There have been some really horrible fights about this over the years - the one I best remember is whether we name the article Danzig or Gdansk?

I hope this helps to clarify the issue a little! --Rlandmann (talk) 01:57, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problems Rlandmann, butt in as much as you want; I'm always happy to be pointed in the right direction. I hadn't previously read your discussion with EH, but having now done so and taken in your latest comments, I think I have a better idea of the intricacies of wiki naming conventions. Cheers. --Red Sunset 21:10, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Very good! Before doing bad moves, I thought it was better to double check correct rules interpretation. The field is quite mined, but with a good guideline we can come out. In fact, everything started when I asked for the better way to agree a naming standard. As Rlandmann suspected, in it.wiki too there are some standards agreed in naming and sources quoting. We there used the aviation project talk page for making consensus driven decisions on these topics. Here I see standards are more stable due to older age, but I think an improvement margin is still possible in some very specific matters. Thank you all for the support. --EH101 (talk) 21:55, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

EH, could you look at http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeritalia, and see if there is anything translatable that we could use? I've restored the old Aeritalia stub in preparation for expanding the article. As a company that existed for 20 years, I think it ought to have its own page. Thanks for whatever you can do here. - BillCJ (talk) 19:33, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Also, I've created Fiat Aviazione from material on the Fiat page. Anything you can do here would be appreciated too. - BillCJ (talk) 04:18, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Here's another one, if you're able: it:Aeritalia G-91Y, to go in User:BillCJ/Sandbox/Aeritalia G.91Y for now. If you aren't able to do these now, do you know of another English/Italian-speaking editor that could help me? Thanks. - BillCJ (talk) 21:03, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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) 22:02, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again EH101 - I'm glad to see you back :)

My question is about the early history of Ambrosini: SAI was formed in 1934, and then very soon was purchased by the "Ambrosini industrial group" (as it is called in English). So far, I have been able to find nothing about this "Ambrosini industrial group". Does your new book tell you anything about Angelo Ambrosini's company before he bought SAI?

I look forward to the new pictures too! Cheers --Rlandmann (talk) 22:11, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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) 21:50, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi EH101! I don't think there's any particular reason why Jane's isn't cited much, other than the fact that most people don't have copies at home. Please feel free to cite it wherever you feel it's useful. Cheers! --Rlandmann (talk) 21:02, 10 December 2008 (UTC) PS – Sull'En.Wikipedia, voce significa "article". Non é possibile utilizzare "voice" comme questo in inglese; sono "falsi amici" ;)[reply]

As a member of the WikiProject who is running for coordinator it is so go great to see people getting involved. It seems that some people truly care about the future of the WikiProject Keep Up the Good work. Have A Great Day! Lord Oliver ^{The Olive Branch} 19:13, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As a member of the Aviation WikiProject or one of its subprojects, you may be interested in testing your skills in the Aviation Contest! I created this contest, not to pit editor against editor, but to promote article improvement and project participation and camraderie. Hopefully you will agree with its usefulness. Sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here. The first round of the contest may not start until September 1st-unless a large number of editors signup and are ready to compete immediately! Since this contest is just beginning, please give feedback here, or let me know what you think on my talkpage. - Trevor MacInnis ^contribs 00:17, 22 August 2009 (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 12 September!
Many thanks,  Roger Davies ^talk 04:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Voting in the Military history WikiProject coordinator election has now started. The aim is to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on 26 September!
For the coordinators,  Roger Davies ^talk 22:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As a member of the Military history WikiProject or World War I task force, you may be interested in competing in the Henry Allingham International Contest! The contest aims to improve article quality and member participation within the World War I task force. It will also be a step in preparing for Operation Great War Centennial, the project's commemorative effort for the World War I centenary.

If you would like to participate, please sign up by 11 November 2009, 00:00, when the first round is scheduled to begin! You can sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:40, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back! - Ahunt (talk) 23:06, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I echo the comment above, and as for the User:EH101/Sandbox3, it appears to be a good start. I would look over some of the grammar and sentence construction for improvements but otherwise, post it and ask for the usual suspects to help develop the article further. There is always a question of how notable a concept aircraft could be, but this one seems to have had some reference sources and will probably not be challenged. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 01:31, 13 November 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks you for your note. Your contributions have been missed across the Aircraft Project. In working with you in the past I have always found your English to be just about perfect and better than some native English speakers, unlike some other contributers from your land. If I can be of any assistance please just ask! - Ahunt (talk) 02:20, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your lively notes there! I think that WWII "concept aircraft" that were not built are fine as articles, provided that there are good refs to support that the projects actually existed. If there are thre-views available then that is even better! We do now have a page at Wikipedia:Notability (aircraft) that gives some good guidance, basically allowing these as long as they are from an established aircraft manufacturer and were at least given a model number. I actually started one article on a WWII concept series of aircraft myself at Schweizer cargo glider designs.

As far as the new aircraft specs template goes, I have mostly been asking questions, lacking the expertise to help much! I agree that its automatic conversion of metric-imp or vice versa is a great time saver over manually calculating these! Using it is easy, just copy one version from the pull-downs at Template:Aircraft specs and fill in the blanks! It works pretty well, at least as long as you remember to specify the prime units at |prime units?=<!- imp or kts first for US aircraft, and UK aircraft pre-metrification, met(ric) first for all others. You MUST choose a format, or no specifications will show -> . If you find anything that isn't working right please do report it at Template talk:Aircraft specs and Trevor will probably fix it quite quickly. - Ahunt (talk) 13:27, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No sweat on the minor copy edit, your work is well-written and easy to just "tune-up" a little! - Ahunt (talk) 14:39, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On November 21, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Reggiane Re.2007, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 07:00, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey congratulations! - Ahunt (talk) 13:10, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds fine and adds a good answer to an obvious question. - Ahunt (talk) 16:39, 21 November 2009 (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) 21:25, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for the Military history WikiProject coordinator elections has opened; all users are encouraged to participate in the elections. Voting will conclude 23:59 (UTC) on 28 March 2010.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:44, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Red tick has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:12, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. You are cordially invited to help pick fourteen new coordinators from a pool of twenty candidates. This time round, the term has increased from six to twelve months so it is doubly important that you have your say! Please cast your vote here no later than 23:59 (UTC) on Tuesday, 28 September 2010.

With many thanks in advance for your participation from the coordinator team,  Roger Davies ^talk 21:35, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'd like to know if my intuition is good. You can read and comment in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aircraft#A problem of transliteration from soviet aircrafts? Thanks :-)--Threecharlie (talk) 23:16, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi EH101, I too have used the shortened form and tend to have Harvard citation style for entries, i.e. James 2001, p. 23. as the written out form. I know that a number of editors also use the cite template to achieve the same result, but I often have to go back into the bibliographic template and alter the coding to match the style. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 18:16, 22 March 2011 (UTC).[reply]

• it:Wikipedia:Bar/Discussioni/Comma_29_e_Wikipedia
• it:Wikipedia:Bar/Discussioni/Sciopero:_il_punto_della_situazione

Hi, I fully agree with this idea/proposal: meta:Wikimedia_Forum#Call_for_resignations, * [[1]].

The key point is that admins are no way allowed to apply censorship/denial of service to a part or to the whole Wikipedia without having previously:

• fulfilled a poll to the users of the Wikipedia project
• asked WMF for legal support and agreed about the proper thing to do

All the italian sysops that decided the motu proprio strike have betrayed the faith of the users who chose them as admins. We now have to get them resign their sysops status and, altogether, decide a proper guideline that every admin will be compelled to follow when dealing with hot topics such as the freedom of Wikipedia itself.

Jimbo, I understand that - dealing with italian law and politics - you support the italian style action of dramatic blanking. I don't understand why you agree with the fact that this blanking has been done without consensus: (1) Italian editors have not been proposed any poll, (2) WMF has not been asked any suggestion nor legal support. Please be sure that admins of local projects, in the future, will no more be able to perform such a denail of service without consensus with editors and WMF. ZipoBibrok5x10^8 (talk) 14:54, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

I am told that this was not a small group of admins, that it was discussed for a long time, and that there was strong support. However, having said that, I agree with you that in the future process should be much clearer, and actions like this should be taken in coordination with the Foundation and the wider community. One reason for that is so that we can time it to have maximum impact, give solid PR support from the Foundation, etc. This has never happened before, and we had no warning, so, you know, it's a little complicated.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 15:13, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

and moreover

I had a question about issue actually. I've been having a very hard time understanding how a process of discussion that even remotely resembles consensus building around this issue could have occurred while no one outside of the Italian Wikipedia was aware of it. It's just not possible unless the Italian Wikipedia is no bigger than a dozen editors. So in what manner exactly was this "under discussion in the Italian community for months," as Jimbo says? Like I said, I'm having a hard time understanding that, and maybe Jimbo or someone from the Italian Wiki can shed light on this.Griswaldo (talk) 15:07, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

These are good questions and I'm sure clear light will be shed on them in due course. I would love it if you would go and ask them and then report back here what you learn.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 15:16, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Talking ad Jimbonem is only a strong suggestion, but please get in touch and let's start a proper democratic - horizontal process where we will decide proper guidelines and proper reaction to this shameful event. ZipoBibrok5x10^8 (talk) 23:54, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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]} 23:01, 15 January 2012 (UTC) You were sent this message because you are a listed as a member of the Military history WikiProject.[reply]

Credo Reference, who generously donated 400 free Credo 250 research accounts to Wikipedia editors over the past two years, has offered to expand the program to include 100 additional reference resources. Credo wants Wikipedia editors to select which resources they want most. So, we put together a quick survey to do that:

• Link to Survey (should take between 5-10 minutes): http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/N8FQ6MM

It also asks some basic questions about what you like about the Credo program and what you might want to improve.

At this time only the initial 400 editors have accounts, but even if you do not have an account, you still might want to weigh in on which resources would be most valuable for the community (for example, through WikiProject Resource Exchange).

Also, if you have an account but no longer want to use it, please leave me a note so another editor can take your spot.

If you have any other questions or comments, drop by my talk page or email me at [email protected]. Cheers! Ocaasi ^{t | c} 17:15, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

CAMEN had nuclear reactor just for research,so qualitative developement.The quantitative developement of the italian nuke was naturally in Trino Vercellese and Latina that was the largest nuclear plant is 60's in Europe.EH101 (s o is named the helicopter) i don't know how much you know about Parliamentary Acts but CAMEN had officially that aim.Till 1975 Italy never denied to have produced its own nukes.It could even own then (as many people today believe)after their production before than 1975.My father was in SIOS so i think to know vey well the matter.The functions of CAMEN were those that were descrepted.The rest of the contest is another thing.From 1963 to 1975 italy could have produced all nukes it liked.Parla con me per ben interpretare le FUNZIONI ed il contesto..are 2 different things about the Parliamentary Acts that I have just received from the Chamber of Deputies. You have interpreted the context of 69 very much but not the functions that had been there for years before. In 5- 6 or more years Italy can have built all the atomics it wanted. Only on 75 did it cease. But that and eventually built before 75? There is state secret. 151.40.49.133 ( talk ) 15:26, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As a subscriber to one of  The Wikipedia Library  's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi t | c 15:52, 9 December 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! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 22:15, 23 September 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]

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)[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) 16:34, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Xmas Ornament.jpg

To You and Yours!
FWiW Bzuk (talk) 20:31, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 03:16, 26 December 2016 (UTC) [reply]

Welcome back! Welcome back! Alexmar983 ( talk ) 10:54, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

:If itwikipedia changed little or too much or not enough from what you expected, call me to teach you wikidata. Hello. --  Alexmar983  ( [[[User talk: Alexmar983 | talk ]] ) 12:23, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply] 

Obviously I am required to disclaimer that users defined as wikidata experts have never appreciated or criticized my teaching about wikidata to noobs. The following is an informational announcement;)-- Alexmar983 ( talk ) 07:33, 12 July 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) 11:30, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

...to you and yours, from the Great White North! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 04:17, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:IronEagle4.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:03, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In the month of September, Wikiproject Military history is running a project-wide edit-a-thon, Backlog Banzai. There are heaps of different areas you can work on, for which you claim points, and at the end of the month all sorts of whiz-bang awards will be handed out. Every player wins a prize! There is even a bit of friendly competition built in for those that like that sort of thing. Sign up now at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/September 2019 Backlog Banzai to take part. For the coordinators, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:18, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:37, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

G'day everyone, voting for the 2019 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 2018. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:37, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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) 07:36, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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[reply]

Hello EH101! This message is to inform you that due to editing inactivity, your access to AutoWikiBrowser may be temporarily removed. If you do not resume editing within the next week, your username will be removed from the CheckPage. This is purely for routine maintenance and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You may regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB. Thank you! — MusikBot II ^talk 17:04, 21 May 2020 (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 review: Nick-D on Hadrian's Wall and Hawkeye7 on the British military Op-ed: Nick-D on diversity and military history

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 review: Recent external reviews Op-ed: Nick-D on 1945

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) 02:04, 1 September 2020 (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 review: Recent external reviews Review Essay: Nick-D on the Historical Aircraft Restoration Society

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) 05:17, 15 September 2020 (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 review: Nick-D on Franklin Roosevelt in World War II and Hog Farm on the Battle of Chancellorsville

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 review: Nick-D & Hawkeye7 look at two aspects of 20th Century warfare Op-ed: TomStar81 on the Unknown Soldiers

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:33, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

G'day all, the nominations for the 2020 Military history WikiProject newcomer and Historian of the Year are open, all editors are encouraged to nominate candidates for the awards before until 23:59 (GMT) on 15 December 2020, after which voting will occur for 14 days. There is not much time left to nominate worthy recipients, so get to it! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:45, 10 December 2020 (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 review: Nick-D looks at the war in Ukraine

G'day all, voting for the WikiProject Military history "Military Historian of the Year" and "Military history newcomer of the year" is about to close, so if you haven't already, click on the links and have your say before 23:59 (GMT) on 30 December! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:34, 28 December 2020 (UTC) for the coord team[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 review: Hawkeye7 looks Australian artillery in World War I Op-ed: Hawkeye7 on no-win scenarios

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 review: Works on the Gallipoli Campaign, Battle of Perryville and US 1st Infantry Division

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 review: Works on the Gallipoli Campaign, Battle of Perryville and US 1st Infantry Division

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 review: Hawkeye7 on female computers, Nick-D on the Israeli Defence Forces

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 Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_History/April 2021 Reviewing Drive#Participants and create a worklist at Wikipedia: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) 17:23, 31 March 2021 (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 review: Hawkeye7 on Montgomery's doctrine and Nick-D on Mussolini's wars

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 review: Nick- D and Hawkeye7 look at intelligence gathering, doctrine and strategy

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 review: Nick-D on RAAF aircraft, Hawkeye7 on mission command and nuclear secrecy

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 review: Peacemaker67 and Nick-D on World War I

Hello EH101! This message is to inform you that due to editing inactivity, your access to AutoWikiBrowser may be temporarily removed. If you do not resume editing within the next week, your username will be removed from the CheckPage. This is purely for routine maintenance and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You may regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB. Thank you! — MusikBot II ^talk 17:16, 3 August 2021 (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 review: Hawkeye7 on Commonwealth armies and an Australian spy, Nick-D on the American Revolutionary War and RAAF mine laying Op-ed: RobDuch on United States coastal defenses

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 review: Hawkeye7 on Australia and the UK in Iraq and Afghanistan Op-ed: Nick-D on writing about military procurement

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 review: Hawkeye7 on Australia and the UK in Iraq and Afghanistan Op-ed: Nick-D on writing about military procurement

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 review: Nick-D on British conscription and German warship raiders

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 review: Hawkeye7 on Canadian junior officers in World War II

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 review: Nick-D on the Franklin–Nashville campaign Review essay: Military History Wikiproject Coordinators' reading list

The WikiEagle

The WikiProject Aviation Newsletter

Volume I — Issue 1
Aviation Project • Project discussion • Members • Assessment • Outreach • The WikiEagle
Announcements After over a decade of silence, the WikiProject Aviation newsletter is making a comeback under the name The WikiEagle. This first issue was sent to all active members of the project and its sub-projects. If you wish to continue receiving The WikiEagle, you can add your username to the mailing list. For now the newsletter only covers general project news and is run by only one editor. If you wish to help or to become a columnist, please let us know. If you have an idea which you believe would improve the newsletter, please share it; suggestions are welcome and encouraged. On 16 December, an RfC was closed which determined theaerodrome.com to be an unreliable source. The website, which is cited over 1,500 articles, mainly on WWI aviation, as of the publishing of this issue. Luft46.com has been added to the list of problematic sources after this discussion. The Jim Lovell article was promoted to Featured Article status on 26 December after being nominated by Hawkeye7. The Raymond Hesselyn article was promoted to Good Article status on 4 December after being nominated by Zawed. The Supermarine Sea King article was promoted to Good Article status on 22 December after being nominated by Amitchell125. The William Hodgson (RAF officer) article was promoted to Good Article status on 26 December after being nominated by Zawed.
Members New Members KingAviationKid (Joined on 17 December) PatrickChiao (Joined on 22 December) Wp9097 (Joined on 16 December) Number of active members: 386. Total number of members: 921. Closed Discussions Featured Article assessment Jim Lovell (discussion) – Closed as promoted on 26 December 2021 Good Article assessment HAL Tejas (discussion) – Closed as not promoted on 30 December 2021 William Hodgson (RAF officer) (discussion) – Closed as promoted on 26 December 2021 Supermarine Sea King (discussion) – Closed as promoted on 22 December 2021 Raymond Hesselyn (discussion) – Closed as promoted on 4 December 2021 Deletion Timeline of Berlin Brandenburg Airport's construction (discussion) – Closed as delete and redirect on 30 December 2021 Evergreen International Airlines Flight 17 (discussion) – Closed as keep on 25 December 2021 Requested moves Akbarpur (Ambedkar Nagar) Airstrip → Akbarpur Airstrip (discussion) – Closed as moved on 30 December 2021 1983 Avensa Douglas DC-9 crash → Avensa Flight 007 (discussion) – Closed as moved on 30 December 2021 Garuda Indonesia Flight 035 → Garuda Indonesian Airways Flight 035 (discussion) – Withdrawn on 28 December 2021	Article Statistics This data reflects values from DMY. Aviation pages by quality Quality Total FA 142 FL 15 A 56 GA 505 B 4,573 C 11,878 Start 15,082