User talk:Deathlibrarian/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | → | Archive 5 |
Welcome!
Hello, Deathlibrarian/Archive 1, 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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! RJFJR 14:31, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
War of 1812
How can the result of the War of 1812 be disputed, it was settled by the Treaty of Ghent --Kev62nesl 11:22, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
Gothic fashion
hi, i've made some big structural changes. come on over and let me know what you think of them, i'd like your opinion. -- Denstat 15:29, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
formatting & links
When you put a single new line into text it does not move things down a line when displaying as a wiki. I have changed your list of created pages to bullet points. And made them links.
--TenguTech 23:47, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
The article you wrote, AMCA Troupes Aeról Portées Mle. 56, is uncategorized. Please help improve it by adding it to one or more categories, so it may be associated with related articles. A stub marker or other template doesn't count - please put in an actual category in the article.Eli Falk 21:31, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Deleted Rowany link
The link you placed on the Society_for_creative_anachronism page is inappropriate. It links to a Rowany promotion. It would be more appropriate on the Lochac page if anywhere. GuyWeknow 15:28, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Please do not create hoaxes. Please do not attempt to put misinformation into Wikipedia to test our ability to detect and remove it. This has been done before, with varying results. Most hoaxes are marked for deletion within a few hours after they are created. Some Wikipedians suspect that the majority of hoaxes here are attempts to test the system. Kindly — do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point. If you are interested in how accurate Wikipedia is, a more constructive test method is to try to find inaccurate statements that are already in Wikipedia, and then to check to see how long they have been in place and, if possible, correct them. Adding material which potentially is in breach of the relevant nation's security classifications is specifically prohibited. This incident will be reported to the Administrators Noticeboard. Thewinchester (talk) 13:26, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
- Simply put, you added the content, you perpetuated the hoax, therefore you get the warning. And further to the 'hiding the information' point, that's complete bollocks. The fact is that including a letter like this regardless or not of it's factually accuracy violates the no original research policy as it's factual accuracy cannot be proven, plus it is likely if in fact true to violate laws of a sovereign state regarding the dissemination of state secrets. Would you want to be in the position of being an enjoined party to a prosecution under the Secrets Act for breaching national security, just because you placed a link to a document which could possibly be classified? Would you like to see WP go down because it was being heavily sued in another jurisdiction for disseminating classified information? I would surmise that you would like neither of these to occur, so it is in your own best interests to work within both WP policy and the legal system of the jurisdiction in which you and WP resides. On the issue of the accuracy of the letter itself, I have done some digging myself last night, and based on the research and factual information I have it is extremely unlikely that this letter or the contents therein is genuine in any way, shape or form. My arguments against the letters authenticity are as follows:
- The letter does not follow due protocol for a ministerial notification. it's quite normal to sign a letter, indicate full name, and date it. A notification without this may in fact have been invalid with just initials - not a legal position you want to leave your minister in if depending on such information.
- The "austeo secret" positioning on the document is incorrect and would have been rejected by the checker in its form as presented.
- Why do the 3rd and 4th point not recommend drafting a legislative amendment for immediate attention to manage such alleged shortcomings? Hundreds of uncontroversial procedural amendments go through parliament all the time.
- The State Government of Western Australia should have been involved. That is also a protocol issue, and they would have been copied in on such correspondence.
- The Territories Department/Minister for Territories would not handle a request of this type about taxation or foreign affairs, their jurisdiction is/was over territories - that being, NT, ACT, PNG (until full independence in 1974) at that time. The "our considered opinion" line and the points suggest legal advice which should be coming from either Attorney General's office or the Solicitor General, not a staffer of a department office who probably has no legal qualifications.
- In 1989, the GPO box and telephone number used on the letter belonged to the ACT government, which became in effect institutionally self-governing in 1981 with the capital commission and the bicentenary project, and became legislatively so in March 1989. this can be checked in any white pages from Canberra for that period.
- The fonts are all wrong - department logos of the time used a serif font, and most likely in 1989 you would expect to see an electric typewriter font as computers were not in common use for letters at that time - and certainly not Microsoft Word (Or a HTML Document in Internet Explorer as the item in question seems to be).
- AFAIK, this puts the issue of it's factual accuracy to bed. It is a hoax, and until someone can render a citation to it's actual location within the national archives or a statement is made on the public record from a person without a conflict of interest, then this letter will be regarded as a hoax by the community and attempts to include it within WP articles will be dealt with according to relevant process and procedure. Thewinchester (talk) 08:18, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Winchester, I'm sure your heart is in the right place, but I believe that the public have a right to see this document and will be fighting for them to do so. Your investigations in themselves are against Wikidpedia policy. At Wikipedia we editors we do not do original research, and in any case I have no idea what Investigative qualifications or skills you have to do so. As the letter stands, it is published on two websites, and is referred to by a paper on secessionist states. As far as I'm concerned, it is a valid document, until authority states otherwise. Wikipedia does not employ forensic experts, we just look refer to where information is published. If there is something that is published that says the letter is not valid, then so be it, and if you can find it, then good. But at the moment it appears valid so I assume it stands. You certainly may have a point about the legality of the secrets part, but as it has already been published, and even referred to in an academic context it hardly seems a live issue. There are in fact, plenty of other "Austeo secret" letters published on the web. As for all Wikipedia going down just because they link to this letter I think that to be load of hysterical "bullocks" (as you so charmingly put it). In any case, if its a fake as you think it is, why are you worried? Additionally, Wikipedia is not publishing the letter, the page is just linking to it. As far as I'm concerned, this document should be available for the reader to view on the website, and for them to make up their own minds. If you have some proof that it is a hoax, please provide it, but until that time I will be going ahead with a third opinion dispute resolution to have it put back up where people can read it. Deathlibrarian 10:08, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
- I think you have misunderstood the original research policy - it is entirely reasonable to check the veracity of content, and this one is found highly wanting. This document does not constitute a reliable source, cannot be verified, and makes assertions WELL beyond its brief - a legal opinion on a matter involving the Commonwealth must come from the Solicitor General. That would, if the Solicitor General's office confirmed it, be capable of being a reliable source. However, this one is not. The issue with the number belonging to Rosemary Follett's office at the time of this alleged missive (and not a federal government department), together with the absence of any fax or telex numbers (which were institutional on Government letterhead in the 1980s) further suggests a problem to me. One final point - re "the public have a right to see this document" - maybe they do, but they can already do that quite easily at a number of locations - this seems to stray into WP:NOT territory. Orderinchaos 12:19, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
- Added point: plenty of Austeo secret letters? they all seem to be the same one. Orderinchaos 14:16, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
A few points:
- Back on the 12th of April I did a big tidy-up after you'd added too much "stuff".
- You've just now added even more rambling historical stuff which - and (not surprisingly) got hit with an advt tag and a suggestion for deletion.
- Your heart's in the right place, but really that level of detail (the Tavern not being covered by warranty!) just isn't appropriate.
- Worse, it's a simple cut and past from the sca.au site. Bad bad bad.
I'm sorry, but I've reverted back to the trimmed-down version... Snori 13:18, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
note
Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2008_January_15#Corey_Delaney--Seriousspender (talk) 11:45, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of Second Battle of Villers-Bretonneux
A tag has been placed on Second Battle of Villers-Bretonneux requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 13:23, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
War of 1812 - 3RR
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. --Narson ~ Talk • 12:10, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
Welcome!
Hi, and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.
A few features that you might find helpful:
- Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
- The announcement and open task box is updated very frequently. You can watchlist it if you are interested, or you can add it directly to your user page by copying the following: {{WPMILHIST Announcements}}.
- Important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
- The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, detailed article and content review, writing contests, and article logistics.
- We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, periods, and conflicts.
- We've developed a style guide that covers article structure and content, template use, categorization, and many other issues of interest.
- If you're looking for something to work on, there are many articles that need attention, as well as a number of review alerts and copy-editing alerts.
- The project has a stress hotline available for your use.
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask any of the project coordinators or any other experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome, and we are looking forward to seeing you around! Kirill [pf] 01:56, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. We will be selecting coordinators from a pool of eighteen to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on Saturday, 28 March! Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:37, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
Thank you
|
Milhist Coordinator elections | |
| I wish to thank you for your gracious support during my bid for a position as Coordinator of the Military history Wikiproject in the recent March 2009 elections. I was initially apprehensive to stand for election as I was unsure on how well I would be received, but I am pleasantly surprised and delighted to have been deemed worthy to represent my peers within the project. I assure and promise you, I will strive to do my upmost to justify your trust in myself with this esteemed position. Thank you, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 01:20, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Soldiers of the 4th Australian Division crossing a duckboard track through Chateau Wood, Ypres on 29 October 1917. |
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVII (March 2009)
The March 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:20, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVIII (April 2009)
The April 2009 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) 22:49, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XXXIX (May 2009)
The May 2009 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) 22:32, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XL (June 2009)
The June 2009 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) 21:52, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLI (July 2009)
The July 2009 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) 19:16, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
Hoax
Please be very careful with edits like this. I'm sure it wasn't your intention to perpetuate this hoax. ➲ REDVERS It sucks to be me 12:28, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
Nominations open for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election
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)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLII (August 2009)
The August 2009 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) 19:35, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
Military history coordinator elections: voting has started!
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)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIII (September 2009)
The September 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:35, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Test your World War I knowledge with the Henry Allingham International Contest!
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) 18:33, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIV (October 2009)
The October 2009 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) 18:33, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
{{unblock|I have a legitimate sock puppet - Trijah. While I have used this account (Deathlibrarian) to produce about 30 articles, I was uncomfortable about producing the two articles "Church of Scientology in Australia" and "Gangs in Australia" for obvious reasons relating to personal security. Trijah's only purpose was to create a fake account for me to write these 2 articles - I would not have written them otherwise. I have sent two emails to the admin who blocked the accounts for sock puppetry, but have had no response. The page on sock puppetry allows for the legitimate use of sock puppets where Privacy is concerned - the deathlibrarian account has reference on the internet to my real life details, Trijah does not.I would prefer any connections between the two to be deleted. Additionally, I am currently in a mediation cabal, so would like access to the deathlibrarian account ASAP as there are people waiting for my response. Thanks for being understanding.}}
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XIV (November 2009)
The November 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 08:43, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVI (December 2009)
The December 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:58, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Deathlibrarian! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 944 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:
- Pascall Fox - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
The article Pascall Fox has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- Unsourced BLP of an australian actress.
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Unitasock (talk) 03:32, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVII (January 2010)
The January 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:20, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
Nominations for the March 2010 Military history Project Coordinator elections now open!
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) 21:19, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
Please review upcoming Signpost story
The upcoming 1 March 2010 issue of the Wikipedia Signpost contains an article that touches on the controversy over victors/vanquished in the War of 1812. Could you quickly review the Signpost article for accuracy? Thanks - Draeco (talk) 05:24, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVIII (February 2010)
The February 2010 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) 22:13, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
Coordinator elections have opened!
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) 21:39, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIX (March 2010)
The March 2010 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) 21:35, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : L (April 2010)
The April 2010 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) 19:15, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LI (May 2010)
The May 2010 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) 21:00, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LII (June 2010)
|
|
|
June's contest results plus the latest awards to our members |
|
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. | |
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:54, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
Your contributed article, Dueling scars
Hello, I notice that you recently created a new page, Dueling scars. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as yourself. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page - Academic fencing. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will to continue helping improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Academic fencing - you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.
If you think that the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. andy (talk) 09:27, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of HMAS BERMAGUI, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://home.st.net.au/~dunn/ran/hmasbermagui.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.)
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 12:51, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LIII (July 2010)
|
|
|
July's contest results, the latest awards to our members, plus an interview with Parsecboy |
|
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. | |
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:19, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LIV (August 2010)
|
|
A recap of the month's new Featured and A-Class articles, including a new featured sound |
Our newest A-class medal recipients and this August's top contestants |
|
|
To change your delivery options for this newsletter please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:07, 7 September 2010 (UTC) | |
The Milhist election has started!
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 21:31, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LV (September 2010)
|
The results of September's coordinator elections, plus ongoing project discussions and proposals |
|
|
|
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 21:14, 21 October 2010 (UTC) | |
The Bugle: Issue LVI, October 2010
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:18, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LVII, November 2010
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:14, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LVIII, December 2010
| |||
The Bugle: Volume LVIX, January 2011
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 15:30, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LX, February 2011
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 21:31, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXI, March 2011
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 01:32, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXII, April 2011
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:11, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXIII, May 2011
|
To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:22, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXIV, June 2011
|
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 22:44, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXV, July 2011
|
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 21:49, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXVI, August 2011
|
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 17:47, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
Titan's cross nomination
Hello, Deathlibrarian. I see that you are a member of WP:OMT. I am reminding you that there is a discussion [here] about whther or not to award Bahamut0013, a member of OMt who passsed awsay a short while ago, the Titan's Cross in silver. your opinion will be welcome. Thanks, Buggie111 (talk) 14:03, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXVII, September 2011
|
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 02:03, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXVIII, October 2011
|
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 08:02, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi, If you are adding a reference, then it should be formatted accordingly, <ref>http</ref>.
Can you tell me why lots of well-known films, e.g. One of Our Aircraft Is Missing, which have pages of their own, require sourcing on the list page?
Sourcing belongs on the main page if such a page exists.
That list page is already colossal without the addition of superfluous referencing.
If The King's Speech concerns George VI, a mere list page doesn't need to explain or source that; the list links to a fully referenced independent page where the facts are established and cited.
Varlaam (talk) 10:01, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
I have tabled it for discussion on the discussion page, so the other editors can give their opinions on it. Cheers. Deathlibrarian (talk) 12:23, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXIX, November 2011
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:23, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification
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.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:40, 12 January 2012 (UTC)