Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/British military history task force/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Peer review for Alexander Cavalié Mercer now open

The peer review for Alexander Cavalié Mercer is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill ^[pf] 12:52, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for HMS Endeavour now open

The peer review for HMS Endeavour is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 00:39, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

http://army.mod.uk redesign.. and removal of many regiments history

You are all probably aware that the http://army.mod.uk website has had a recent redesign. Many of the regiments individuals pages are now a lot smaller. A lot of the history pages have been moved. A search on the site reveals no ideas where they could be. This could affect some (I know it affects a lot of the Royal Artillery) pages. Jez t e C 19:30, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

The obvious place would be to look on eg http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www2.army.mod.uk/1rha/ - not ideal as in that case they only have versions up until 2006, but it's better than nothing. http://www2.armynet.mod.uk/ appears to be the new official "open" site, but more interesting in tweeting than hard history it would seem... As an aside, this is a good example of why it's a good idea to point archive.org at "useful" websites to get them onto the archive list occasionally.Le Deluge (talk) 00:41, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

You should be abel to find the old versions of the pages via the UK Government Web Archive run by The National Archives, see http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/webarchive/default.htm?WT.lp=sa-33628 David Underdown (talk) 12:19, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Current MoD web policy is that the websites are used as public engagement and marketing tools, with little value in the histories. fwiw a recent review of web traffic that I saw indicated in the order of 1-2% of site traffic was related to the history pages, and not much more for the grown-ups CVs.

Armynet is more of a community and engagement website, hence the newfeeds.

ALR (talk) 12:54, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

List of nicknames of British Army regiments

Hi folks can I ask for comments on this article List of nicknames of British Army regiments as the name suggests its a List of nicknames of British Army regiments but a lot of them were not official regimental nicknames and or derogatory names used by other regiments/units of the British Army. One editor keeps adding The Agile and Suffering Highlanders for the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders this is not claimed as an official nickname by the Argylls what does the project think should unofficial nicknames by added ? --Jim Sweeney (talk) 19:54, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

If it's only meant to list "official" nicknames, it should probably be clearly titled that way and make it obvious in the text. I don't see any reason in principle why less-official ones should be listed, as long as they're reasonably well cited. Shimgray | talk | 20:14, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

One way around would be to add (official) (unofficial) --Jim Sweeney (talk) 20:26, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

The reference cited for that hardly looks like it is a WP:RS. First off the people's war stuff is all self-contributed, and the nickname itself is only mentioned in a comment to the article anyway. David Underdown (talk) 08:54, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

The whole thing is pretty high risk, personally I'd only list the recognised nicknames, since they can generally be attributed to something wikireliable and authoritative. We don't really need to know what lads in one rifle section of the 15th Foot and Mouth refer to others as.

ALR (talk) 11:32, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Operation Perch now open

The featured article candidacy for Operation Perch is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill ^[talk] [pf] 12:27, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Battle of Ticonderoga (1759) now open

The featured article candidacy for Battle of Ticonderoga (1759) is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Magic♪piano 16:00, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for Horatio Nelson, 1st Viscount Nelson now open

The peer review for Horatio Nelson, 1st Viscount Nelson is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill ^[talk] [pf] 02:02, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Question regarding "C. M. G." award

I've been reading parts of William Sims' The Victory at Sea and came across this passage regarding an American destroyer commander in WWI who was thought to have sunk a U-boat:

The judgement of the British Government, which awarded him the C. M. G. for his achievement, may be accepted as final. The Admiralty citation for this decoration reads as follows: …

According to the CMG dab page, it might be a Companion of the Order of St Michael and St George. Any thoughts or other suggestions? — Bellhalla (talk) 03:27, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

If you had the name of the commander you could search the London Gazette http://www.gazettes-online.co.uk/ for the actual citation. MilborneOne (talk) 11:10, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion. His name is Alfred W. Johnson and he was in command of USS Conyngham (DD-58). Johnson was citied for "probably" destroying the submarine that sank the British auxiliary cruiser Orama. I tried a search of the Gazette but had no luck. :( — Bellhalla (talk) 12:23, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

US Navy says he got the "Order of St. Michael and St. George" and Companion of the Order of the Bath. I think foreign citizens can only be Honorary Members of the "Call Me God", rather than having the formal standing of a Companion etc. Le Deluge (talk) 15:07, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

You're still given a distinct grade in the order and entitled to use the postnoms I think. Awards to foreigners are not necessarily gazetted, and because of the way it's been digitised, you're not 100% guaranteed to find things anyway, Honours will normally be under a person's full name if they are there, but sometimes line breaks and so on can mess it up, the full citation probably wouldn't have been gazetted anyway, only those for gallantry awards are usually. David Underdown (talk) 16:37, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Peer review of History of the United Kingdom during World War I open

The peer review for the History of the United Kingdom during World War I is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and, as ever, any input there would be much appreciated. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 10:07, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Hastings Ismay, 1st Baron Ismay now open

The featured article candidacy for Hastings Ismay, 1st Baron Ismay is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Abraham, B.S. (talk) 05:42, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for British Army during World War I

The peer review for the British Army during World War I is now open; all editors are invited to participate and any and all input would be appreciated. --Jim Sweeney (talk) 15:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

A class review for History of the United Kingdom during World War I

The A class review for the History of the United Kingdom during World War I is now open; all editors are invited to participate --Jim Sweeney (talk) 13:53, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Battle of Ticonderoga (1777) now open

The A-Class review for Battle of Ticonderoga (1777) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! – Magic♪piano 15:56, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

A Class review for British Army during World War I

The A Class review for the British Army during World War I is now open; all editors are invitd to participate and as ever any input would be appreciated --Jim Sweeney (talk) 11:59, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Maiden Castle, Dorset now open

The featured article candidacy for Maiden Castle, Dorset is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Nick-D (talk) 08:20, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Stop the War Coalition GA Sweeps: On Hold

I have reviewed Stop the War Coalition for GA Sweeps to determine if it still qualifies as a Good Article. In reviewing the article I have found several issues, which I have detailed here. Since the article falls under the scope of this project, I figured you would be interested in contributing to further improve the article. Please comment there to help the article maintain its GA status. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 01:17, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Changes to popular pages lists

There are a few important changes to the popular pages system. A quick summary:

• The "importance" ranking (for projects that use it) will be included in the lists along with assessment.
• The default list size has been lowered to 500 entries (from 1000)
• I've set up a project on the Toolserver for the popular pages - tools:~alexz/pop/.
  • This includes a page to view the results for projects, including the in-progress results from the current month. Currently this can only show the results from a single project in one month. Features to see multiple projects or multiple months may be added later.
  • This includes a new interface for making requests to add a new project to the list.
  • There is also a form to request a change to the configuration for a project. Currently the configurable options are the size of the on-wiki list and the project subpage used for the list.
• The on-wiki list should be generated and posted in a more timely and consistent manner than before.
• The data is now retained indefinitely.
• The script used to generate the pages has changed. The output should be the same. Please report any apparent inconsistencies (see below).
• Bugs and feature requests should be reported using the Toolserver's bug tracker for "alexz's tools" - [1]

-- Mr.Z-man 23:52, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Territorial Army units - are they inherently notable?

The title says it all really. I was doing completing some incomplete B class reviews when I cam across the article on 4YORKS and I wondered why it was a separate article. I've proposed merging it with Yorkshire Regiment and as a result I'm wondering what the general opinion is on TA units. To use 4YORKS as a specific example it looks to me like the article could be reduced to 3 paragraphs in the parent unit article: its formation, its locations and service of its members. If that is all there is, is it notable enough for a separate article? I think the same could be said about a number of others.

I'm not decrying the TA (I was in 217 Transport Squadron) but looking at the articles 150 Transport Regt (my parent unit) is another case in point. It says nothing and would, IMO, be better as part of a larger article on TA units in RLC or even in the RLC article. NtheP (talk) 19:02, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I'd say that its best to consider notability per unit, but in general I would think that modern TA units with short histories are probably going to be not notable. Drawing my attention to the Yorkshire regiment revealed an interesting use of sectioning in the Battle Honours.GraemeLeggett (talk) 20:07, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

We have 1 PARA to 4 PARA, 4 being the TA unit. we also have the Parachute Regiment (United Kingdom) article. We also have the Yorkshire Regiment article which mentions 4 YORKS in the text. An article on the parent unit which can mention 1,2,3,4 Para or 1,2,3,4 YORKS should I believe be all that is required, with the battalions being a redirect. --Jim Sweeney (talk) 21:19, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Further to the above the 1 2 3 and 4 PARA articles may need looking at as they just appear to be a list of bullet points. --Jim Sweeney (talk) 21:22, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for HMS Endeavour now open

The A-Class review for HMS Endeavour is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill ^[talk] [pf] 11:05, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for Battle of Grand Port now open

The peer review for Battle of Grand Port is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill ^[talk] [pf] 02:31, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for Battle of Dunkirk now open

The peer review for Battle of Dunkirk is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill ^[talk] [pf] 00:34, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for HMS Endeavour now open

The featured article candidacy for HMS Endeavour is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 18:55, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for Operation Pedestal now open

The peer review for Operation Pedestal is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Woody (talk) 14:52, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Battle of Grand Port now open

The featured article candidacy for Battle of Grand Port is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 00:23, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Battle off Texel now open

The A-Class review for Battle off Texel is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill ^[talk] [pf] 04:12, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

29th Commando Regiment Royal Artillery article

I have added a couple of bits of history for the Regiment - but I am not a military historian, and know nothing about this regiment.

Could someone with more knowledge please expand the history?

Also, the article as a whole needs more citations (the only ones there are the ones I added when I added some bits of history). The only reason I looked at this article is because it was tagged as having no references, so I found some!

Regards, -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 14:49, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

What does h.p. stand for?

Hi,

Please see this page on Asiatic Journal.

Can any one please tell me what h.p. stands for?

As in

"6th Foot (at Bombay) Capt John Atherton. From h.p. to be capt."

or just above that

"v. John Carr who retires on h.p."

AshLin (talk) 06:15, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

From the context, I think it's likely to be half-pay. GraemeLeggett (talk) 06:34, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. AshLin (talk) 08:35, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Siege of Kimberley now open

The A-Class review for Siege of Kimberley is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 12:30, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Categorisation

Bombardier (rank) is in Category:Military ranks of the British Army, whilst Gunner (rank) is in Category:Military ranks of the United Kingdom. I feel that since the latter rank is subordinate to the former, they should be in the same category. However, I don't know which to choose. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:12, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Probably move Gunner down to British Army. The only wrinkle is that Gunner was also formerly a Warrant Officer rank in the Royal Navy, though this isn't presently mentioned in Gunner (rank) article (and probably should be). The "correct" categorisation also depends on what privates in the Royal Marine Artillery were formelry called. David Underdown (talk) 14:18, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

No objections posted, so done --Redrose64 (talk) 20:52, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Korean War help needed

Can anyone help expand the following articles, the Battle of Yongju and Battle of Chongju (1950) in relation to the British Army units participation and whether there was any participation in the Battle of Kujin or supporting action nearby. Can anyone assist? Also looking for creation of Commander of 27th British Commonwealth Brigade, Brigadier Basil Aubrey Coad, as I do not hold any information on him? Any help would be appreciated. Kind Regards --Newm30 (talk) 02:11, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

You'll find a brief overview of British involvement at http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/battles/korea/?WT.ac=hp-korean-war. For Coad, the best place to start, as for any British officer is probably the London Gazette:

• search on full name
• initial and surname
• service number (this should largely overlap with the other results, will contain some false positives, but sometimes picks things up which otherwise slip through)

These should allow you to reconstruct the outline of his career.

A google search also turns up a few useful looking things, http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&rlz=1T4ADBS_enGB310GB310&q=%22basil+aubrey+coad%22&meta=, the original recommendations for many of his decorations also survive, http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documentsonline/search-results.asp?searchtype=browserefine&query=last_name%3dcoad&catid=22&pagenumber=1&querytype=1&mediaarray=* (I have free access to these). The Times published an obituary which will help fill out further details of his career (again, I have free access to their archive). David Underdown (talk) 09:22, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I've created something very stubby to be going on with. David Underdown (talk) 11:54, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I cant get access to Times Archives at the moment, but will try again in the near future. Regards Newm30 (talk) 04:08, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I noticed we also had 27th Infantry Brigade (United Kingdom), which overlapped with the content of 27th British Commonwealth Brigade, so I've now merged that into the larger article. David Underdown (talk) 14:55, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Makes sense as they were technically the same unit. Regards Newm30 (talk) 04:08, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Admiral Sir George Edwin Patey (1859-1935)

I have created an article on Admiral Sir George Edwin Patey (1859-1935) and have provided information in the obituary in the Sydney Morning Herald, Thursday 7 February 1935, however I do not have access to The Times archives and know that an obituary exists in edition of 5 February 1935. Can someone send me the article in pdf format or edit the article to flesh out any further information provided in the obituary. If anyone has any other information to add, please help out. Kind Regards. Newm30 (talk) 04:15, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for History of the United Kingdom during World War I now open

The featured article candidacy for History of the United Kingdom during World War I is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 03:10, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Jackie Fisher, 1st Baron Fisher

FYI, the article Jackie Fisher, 1st Baron Fisher is under a rename discussion to pick the best article name for Admiral Jackie Fisher. 76.66.192.144 (talk) 05:22, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for 1982 British Army Gazelle friendly fire incident now open

The peer review for 1982 British Army Gazelle friendly fire incident is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 21:48, 30 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 04:07, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Just a reminder but, with about 18 hours to go until nominations close, you'll need to get your skates on if you're thinking of standing as a coordinator. The election is based on self-nominations, so please don't be shy in putting your name forward. The last elections will give you an idea of what to expect.

Otherwise, voting starts tonight at 00:01 (UTC). Any member of the project may support as many of the candidates as they wish. You should cast your votes here.

 Roger Davies ^talk 06:38, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Explosion! Museum of Naval Firepower

This article has been listed as a copyright violation, as it is taken nearly verbatim from its website. Kablammo (talk) 16:11, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Operation Mar Lewe notability

I'm seeking views on the notability of Operation Mar Lewe. Please see the discussion here. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:03, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Belatedly awarded battle honours

I'm currently working on the 26th (Cameronian) Regiment of Foot, who were awarded a set of battle honours for service in the War of the Spanish Succession. However, these weren't awarded at the time; they seem to have been awarded just after amalgamation, in 1882.

...or so a note I have says. The problem is, I can't find any firm source, beyond the now-vanished regiments.org, to support this - it's not mentioned in Baker's Battle Honours of the British and Commonwealth Armies, or in Vol. I of the regimental history, which deals with the period. Any idea where I might be able to find this sort of detail - the London Gazette? Shimgray | talk | 16:45, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Dont know if this will help or not but the first battle honour was awarded to the 15th Hussars in 1760, for the Battle of Emsdorf. After this award other regiments applied for battle honours for earlier battles they had been involved in. This must be what happend with the Cameronians and the War of Spanish Succession. --Jim Sweeney (talk) 23:10, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, it seems that most of the eighteenth-century ones (and even some nineteenth-century ones) were awarded quite a while afterwards; most of the post-1881 regiments seem to have been awarded battle honours as successors of the ones which had been amalgamated. I'm just a bit baffled as to how I) can cite this, meaningfully :-) Shimgray | talk | 23:22, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Have you checked the regimental museum's website? [2] Its one of the better ones (I think), more so since the regiment has been disbanded for more than forty years now. Might have something about when it was awarded. --HistorianBell 05:37, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Deepcut Enquiry

This project is possibly the best on Wikipedia for its sensible attitude to recentism. However, I am surprised by the lack of attention to Princess Royal Barracks, Deepcut and in particular the section on the trainee deaths. I added a little a few weeks back with some information from Private Eye but there is so much more to say, isn't there? UFUU (talk) 03:59, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

I culled a lot of crap out of that article some time ago and refocused it to talk about the barracks rather than the suicides. As it is the section on suicides is disproportionately large. Most of the material that I culled out was unreferenced or from poor quality references, much of it pretty tinfoil hat dominated.

There is little more to say, if you can find something credible that criticises the conduct of Blake then feel free to add it, but as it's the most recent, authoritative, assessment of the events then the article says about as much as there is to say at the moment.

ALR (talk) 15:40, 10 November 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! Abraham, B.S. (talk) 13:30, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Mary Rose update assistance

I've been working on a major update of the Mary Rose-article for a few months now and I have been tinkering with it at a sub-page of mine that can be found at user:Peter Isotalo/novelties. The reason for my not doing the editing in article space is because I've wanted to submit it as a DYK. There's also the matter of waiting for a possible image donation from the Mary Rose Trust that is in the works. Anticipating that the update will be realized within a few weeks, I'm inviting anyone who's interested in improving the quality of the update (and to share DYK credits) to freely edit the above mentioned draft.

Peter ^Isotalo 10:50, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Identifying a sword

A thread has been made here by myself, linking several photographs of an unknown sword found in the Eastbourne Redoubt regimental museum. Any help identifying it would be appreciated. Skinny87 (talk) 18:54, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Leonard George Chapman

Just came across Leonard George Chapman, which I would describe as well-researched and a fascinating addition to the story of radar development. It is however lacking in sources I can validate and I am reluctant to remove the "unreviewed article" tag. Ben MacDui 11:51, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Cantonments in ex colonies

I wish to know whether still functional cantonments originally established by d British in ex colonies like India can be a part of this task force or even a part of wikiproject milhist...for example the article Pune Cantonment thnx...Nirvanareborn(Teen Spirit) 14:35, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Huge offshore mound Terrington St Clement

Anyone got any idea what this is ?? [3] (no, I know that bits a ship lol)

I have searched some old maps and aerial photos, but so much land has been reclaimedover the past 150 years...in the aerial photos from 1946 the fields adjacent to the sea are now two fields inland and so many maps and photos stop a couple of hundred yards short of the feature

It is a 600 foot diameter volcano mound

52°50'31.20"N LAT 0°14'36.04"E LONG

I dont know if it is military in origin...

Chaosdruid (talk) 13:32, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

It was a trial earth bank structure to test the feasibility of building a barrage/etc across the Wash[4]GraemeLeggett (talk) 17:17, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

THanks for that ! so its just a bund, or reservoir. Been wondering what it was for a year . . . bloody massive great thing as well

Chaosdruid (talk) 19:49, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot announcement

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:03, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Timeline of bases in UK

We have a mix of approaches across establishments in the UK. Many bases have changed hands several times over their history and in WP some are listed under their RAF name, some under their RN name and some as an army barracks. I can see arguments for a single article discussing timeline, although there is then a point about naming, and I can also see an article about having a single article for each point in the sites history, although some of them are likely to be very stubby.

Part of what prompted this was trying to find Gamecock Barracks, 30 Sigs Regt, and ending redirect to RAF Bramcote, a name the site hasn't had for 50 years. Over time it's been in Army hands for much more than the life of the RAF camp.

My own preferences is to have a portfolio of articles, although there is a practical issue about implementing a direction one way or the other. An example would be RAF Chicksands now Defence Intelligence and Security Centre, although those are articles that I've done a fair amount to. Another example would be RAF Rudloe Manor, the site encompassing Basil Hill Barracks, HQ DES ISS, HMS Royal Arthur, RAF Rudloe Manor, HQ ROC region and RAF Box.

Do we have any other views?

ALR (talk) 13:26, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Probably a good case for mving to the current name, unless particularly well-known under a former name. David Underdown (talk) 18:10, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Possible WWII structure

Hello. I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask - but I'm currently trying to identify a UK structure. It may be railway infrastructure, though there is a possibility that it is a WWII gun emplacement (or something). If someone can confirm or deny any military connection that would be very helpful with my researching what exactly it is. See [[5]] - there is a geographic coordinate link attached to one of the images - If anyone knows about 'home front' defensive structures (in the Hull area) I'd appreciate it if they could look at it. Thanks.87.102.67.84 (talk) 20:32, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

New Wikiproject Anglo Saxon Kingdoms

Hey all, we would like to invite all of you to join WikiProject Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms. This newly formed WikiProject is seeking to improve the articles associated with the period between the departure of the Roman Empire in 410 to the Norman Conquest in 1066. Any help would be sincerely appreciated! Sadads (talk) 21:56, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Article title

Grateful for some thoughts here. The article British Military Intelligence Systems in Northern Ireland is a placeholder name for a single sourced article about a number of information systems in NI. The title is clumsy, inaccurate and unrepresentative of the topic. I've been trying to come up with an alternative name, but would value some other input.

Thanks

ALR (talk) 09:20, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

British Military Intelligence Systems used during the Troubles perhaps? Nick-D (talk) 10:49, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm wary of describing them as Int systems, they're not in the main. They're straightforward policing information sources that could, potentially, be used to contribute to the intelligence collection activity. The snag is that the source is a one page extract from a classified handbook that Geraghty copies in his book.

ALR (talk) 12:11, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Burma Star Association

Question: is the Burma Star Association sufficiently notable for a Wiki article. It was deleted some time ago by an editor who picked up a copyright violation. I propose to reinstate it but a query has been raised on the BSA's notability. I think it meets the guidelines (purely on what's on the net) but I'd like a consensus before I act. Folks at 137 (talk) 20:57, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Bletchley park

Hi, just seen this on the BBC [6] Bletchley Park WWII archive to go online, will be worth keeping an eye on. May provide that missing link to some articles. --Jim Sweeney (talk) 07:57, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

While interesting, this looks like it will be a large collection of primary sources, including wartime intelligence reports which were inevitably speculative. Can I suggest the excellent (and very detailed) British official history of intelligence in World War II? - its authors have already chewed through this material and it provides a depth of information on most aspects of the War in Europe. For the war in the south-west Pacific Macarthur's Ultra: Codebreaking and the War Against Japan, 1942-1945 is indispensable. Nick-D (talk) 08:13, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Peer review for Operation Aquatint now open

The peer review for Operation Aquatint is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 05:03, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Category talk:Military_history_of_the_United_Kingdom

Is table at Category talk:Military_history_of_the_United_Kingdom in active use anymore? An admin notification has also been done. --Kslotte (talk) 00:15, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

If you need the data I propose that you should take care of this information as part of your WikiProject (as a sub-page). --Kslotte (talk) 11:41, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

I have been WP:BOLD and deleted the content ([7], [8]). Currently there exist tools that provide the information at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment. The content is found in history if someone needs it. --Kslotte (talk) 17:13, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Great Siege of Scarborough Castle

In case anyone's interested, it's been freshly imported and could use a look from someone knowledgable. --Cybercobra (talk) 06:49, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Peer review for Operation Postmaster now open

The peer review for Operation Postmaster is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 07:52, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

A-Class review for Courageous class battlecruiser now open

The A-Class review for Courageous class battlecruiser is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 19:18, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

A-Class review for Ernest Augustus I of Hanover now open

The A-Class review for Ernest Augustus I of Hanover is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 19:49, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Peer review for Battle of Plassey now open

The peer review for Battle of Plassey is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 02:07, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Peer review for List of Commando raids on the Atlantic wall now open

The peer review for List of Commando raids on the Atlantic wall is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 19:58, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Ernest Augustus I of Hanover now open

The featured article candidacy for Ernest Augustus I of Hanover is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 01:07, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Grenadier Guards

I've done a bit of expansion/clean up work on the Grenadier Guards article. My sources/knowledge are/is limited so unfortunately it is still needing a few citations. There are also a couple of very small sections that I'm not sure whether they should be there or not (legacy from before I got to the article, for instance the cadets and football sections). It is still currently a Start class article but it seems like it should be able to be promoted to B class with only a little bit more work. If there is anyone on this task force with the sources and inclination to read over what I've written, tweak/fix and then finish the job I would be most grateful. It seems like a topic that deserves at least a B class article. Cheers. AustralianRupert (talk) 05:31, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

John Jervis, 1st Earl of St Vincent

Done a bit of work on this and Sadads suggested I get someone with an eye to look it over for reclassification. Thanks Corneredmouse (talk) 12:52, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Also, if you have time I've expanded on Richard Goodwin Keats and Sir Joshua Rowley, 1st Baronet if anyone wants to take a quick look at them.

Featured article candidacy for Tower of London now open

The featured article candidacy for Tower of London is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 03:01, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

A-Class review for British Commandos now open

The A-Class review for British Commandos is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 03:05, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

A-Class review for HMS Speedy (1782) now open

The A-Class review for HMS Speedy (1782) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 10:48, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Peer review for Third Battle of Seoul now open

The peer review for Third Battle of Seoul is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 05:56, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Courageous class battlecruiser now open

The featured article candidacy for Courageous class battlecruiser is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 03:37, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

A-Class review for Arnold's expedition to Quebec now open

The A-Class review for Arnold's expedition to Quebec is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 20:31, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Battle of Quebec (1775) now open

The featured article candidacy for Battle of Quebec (1775) is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 07:32, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Peer review for St Nazaire Raid now open

The peer review for St Nazaire Raid is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 18:40, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for HMS Indefatigable (1909) now open

The featured article candidacy for HMS Indefatigable (1909) is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Ian Rose (talk) 06:09, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

A-Class review for HMS Courageous (50) now open

The A-Class review for HMS Courageous (50) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 15:03, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Peer review for Battle of Cartagena de Indias now open

The peer review for Battle of Cartagena de Indias is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 00:35, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Peer review for HMS Liverpool (C11) now open

The peer review for HMS Liverpool (C11) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 06:12, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Peer review for No. 4 Commando now open

The peer review for No. 4 Commando is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 04:25, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for HMS Speedy (1782) now open

The featured article candidacy for HMS Speedy (1782) is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 03:47, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

A-Class review for Operation Postmaster now open

The A-Class review for Operation Postmaster is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 03:58, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Peer review for Third Anglo-Maratha War now open

The peer review for Third Anglo-Maratha War is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! AustralianRupert (talk) 08:23, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Peer review for Battle of Alton now open

The peer review for Battle of Alton is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 06:19, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

A-Class review for Courageous class aircraft carrier now open

The A-Class review for Courageous class aircraft carrier is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 06:22, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Project Emily

Hi, I've just joined this wikiproject and task force, and started a new article, Project Emily about the deployment to Britain of Thor nuclear missiles, 1959 - 1963. The intention is that the article will be more UK-centric than the existing PGM-17 Thor article, which covers a wider aspect. This joint US-UK project involved 20 RAF bases, 20 RAF Squadrons and a number of other units, as well as several US-based assets. Some of the stations and squadrons do not yet have wikipedia articles, which I can create as I go through, but of the rest, several have little or no mention of the project. I am considering creating a category - perhaps "Project Emily" or "Thor in Britain" - to add to all relevent article. Does that sound like an appropriate way forward? Any other suggestions, or comments on this idea, or on the article so far?

Regards, Lynbarn (talk) 12:56, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for HMS Princess Royal (1911) now open

The featured article candidacy for HMS Princess Royal (1911) is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 07:32, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

A-Class review for List of battlecruisers of the Royal Navy now open

The A-Class review for List of battlecruisers of the Royal Navy is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 07:24, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

A-Class review for Battle of Alton now open

The A-Class review for Battle of Alton is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 05:01, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

A-Class review for HMS Liverpool (C11) now open

The A-Class review for HMS Liverpool (C11) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 22:28, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

A-Class review for List of breastwork monitors of the Royal Navy now open

The A-Class review for List of breastwork monitors of the Royal Navy is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 06:27, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Siege of Drogheda

Anybody able to help cite and reference the Start Class Siege of Drogheda article? It has been sat in this approximate state since mid 2009 with very little done to improve the content and references for much of even the most rudimentary content. I have attempted to raise this article with cite fags, but these have since been reverted. Please see the talk page for further details. Koncorde (talk) 21:28, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Arnold's expedition to Quebec now open

The featured article candidacy for Arnold's expedition to Quebec is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 22:19, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Featured list candidacy for List of battlecruisers of the Royal Navy now open

The featured article candidacy for List of battlecruisers of the Royal Navy is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 13:43, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Featured list candidacy for List of breastwork monitors of the Royal Navy now open

The featured list candidacy for List of breastwork monitors of the Royal Navy is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 03:12, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Peer review for HMS Avenger (D14) now open

The peer review for HMS Avenger (D14) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 06:26, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

A-Class review for Chilean battleship Almirante Latorre now open

The A-Class review for Chilean battleship Almirante Latorre is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 05:31, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Peer review for USS Chesapeake (1799) now open

The peer review for USS Chesapeake (1799) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 05:52, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

A-Class review for Order of battle of the Battle of Long Island now open

The A-Class review for Order of battle of the Battle of Long Island is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 01:29, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Request For Assistance

Hello. I am new to Wikipedia and I have been trying to edit the article called Ulster Defence Regiment. I'm very concerned about the response I have had from other editors. From my perspective my attempts to improve the readability have sparked a reaction which has resulted in a lot of perfectly good information being removed without good cause but with skill, going by the logic being posted on the noticeboard. At the moment I feel that I have done more harm than good. I'd be very grateful if someone who has the patience to become involved in such a complex subject would be kind enough to look in and see if I'm being paranoid or if my worries have any validity. SonofSetanta (talk) 15:14, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

What exactly are you looking for? Mo ainm~Talk 15:15, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Help. I feel I'm being swamped because I don't have the experience to understand what's going on.SonofSetanta (talk) 12:11, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

So a way to feel less swamped is to forum shop at 4 different locations here,here, here and this page, are you looking for a favorable comment? Mo ainm~Talk 12:53, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm quite happy at last to have been directed to this page where other more experienced users like yourself but specialising in military matters might be able to assist me in forming a more appropriate method of improving the article and interacting with other users.SonofSetanta (talk) 14:15, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Chilean battleship Almirante Latorre now open

The featured article candidacy for Chilean battleship Almirante Latorre is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 06:32, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

A Wikipage for Maund

Dear Community, Please can someone help me? I'd like to make a page concerning Admiral LEH Maund, CBE, (1892-1957), who was an important character in amphibious warfare just prior to and during WW2. He was also the last Captain of Ark Royal. A photo of him would be useful to the article. The only ones I know of are on this page: http://www.unithistories.com/officers/RN_officersM2.html (you'll need to scroll down). Is there anyone who can provide me with a public domain photo of the Admiral? Thanks in advance for any help you might offer.AmesJussellR (talk) 16:45, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

I can't help with a photo I'm afraid, but anyone with a book on the Ark Royal might be able to oblige with an official RN portrait that satisfies outdated Crown Copyright. I reckon that based on his role with the Ark Royal alone, Maund deserves an article, so please feel free to go ahead and create one. As I advised the above editor, I'd recommend raising this discussion at the main Milhist talk page to get some wider responses. This talk page is little watched and will probably be redirected to the main talk page soon anyway. Cheers, Ranger Steve ^Talk 17:35, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

A-Class review for Black Friday (1945) now open

The A-Class review for Black Friday (1945) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Nick-D (talk) 02:05, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

British Expeditionary Force (World War II) quick review/look at

Hi

Anychance someone could give the article British Expeditionary Force (World War II) a quick review with regards to what it will need to bring it up to a higher standard (ie what is missing and what can be improved?)

I realise it is far from B and need the practice on getting it up there :¬)

thanks in anticipation Chaosdruid (talk) 00:51, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

A-Class review for Operation Doomsday now open

The A-Class review for Operation Doomsday is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 08:09, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Two new Belfast paramilitary articles

Greetings, I ran across the term "Freds" in a GoogleBook, so created a page Freds (paramilitary) for that sub-unit, and Military Reaction Force for the larger unit which ran informants, and allegedly committed false flag drive-by shootings in Belfast blamed on Loyalists. Would appreciate any help from folks interested in The Troubles. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:47, 11 December 2010 (UTC)