![]() | 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 5 | ← | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 |
Just curious, when do you start writing articles again? I have been waiting long time to see them coming. Or, you want to concentrate on sorting, assessment and this kind of stuff for some more time? - DSachan ( talk) 08:06, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
| |||
Don't forget that the next Military history coordinator elections take place in September. You might like to start thinking about whether you are interested in standing. More information to follow in the next edition of The Bugle. In the meantime, enjoy the remainder of the holiday season and come back refreshed and raring to go! Roger Davies talk 02:00, 8 August 2009 (UTC) |
New featured articles:
New featured lists:
New featured pictures:
New A-Class articles: | ||
| |||
| |||
| |||
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) 18:38, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi Bellhalla, I've been working on improving the article for this ships class, the Type C4 class ship. However, I've found that there are class articles for the ships that were used as hospital ships ( Haven class hospital ship) and as troop transports ( General G. O. Squier class transport ship). Should these be seperate articles or do you think that they should be merged? I also redirected the article for the SS Marine Star as it's under one of the previous names for the ship, the SS Aquarama. The article article for the Aquarama needs work but there is enough information available to expand it. I found a start class article for the SS Marine Marlin and corrected the article name as well. On a personal note, the Aquarama was berthed for many years a few miles from my house prior to its scrapping. Shinerunner ( talk) 13:18, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
Hey, maybe you find German cruisers to be a bummer, but some of us find them interesting! :D Parsecboy ( talk) 15:49, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
I created many -- not all -- of those categories. I am not married to the idea of what I called each one, and there is value in standardization. But too much insistence on exact terminonology can lead to its own problems, and this must be considered as the categories are renamed. Some examples are:
One of the ships transferred to the Japanese Navy was actually trhe destroyer USS Stewart, captured (okay, not really "transferred") at Java in 1942 and placed in service with the Imperial Japanese Navy. I picked "Japanese Navy" because it conveys the idea of the naval forces of Japan colloquially without requiring a distinction between the Imperial Japanese Navy and the JMSDF. To be accurate, you would have to create a category of "transferred to Japan" and then have two categories within it, one for the IJN and one for the JMSDF. Actually, that's okay, but it's more complicated and requires more clicking.
"Marina Militaire" is Italian for "Navy", so saying "transferred to the Marina Militaire" just means "transferred to the Navy", requiring greater understanding of Italian and of the Italian Navy than can be expected of worldwide English-speaking users of Wikipedia. I think that "Marina Militaire" best translates to "Italian Navy," and this is the English-language Wikipedia, after all.
Ditto the Colombian National Armada. "Armada" in Spanish means "Navy" in English in this case, and does not really translate to the English usage of "armada", as in "Spanish Armada." In the English Wikipedia, the nest translation is "Colombian National Navy," not "Colombian National Armada" -- which cherry-picks the English translation of "Colombian National" but not of "Navy" (Armada). Heck, that applies to the article on the Colombian Navy itself, I suppose.
The modern trend toward expressing everything in something as close to the home country's description or terminology is valuable and laudable, but much of it goes to far when it fails to properly translate foreign terms into the plain English in actually translates to.
Other entries you propose to change make sense. Any English speaker can understand Royal Thai Navy, Belgian Naval Component, and so forth.
So I think a review is necesary to ensure that full English translations are used ("Armada") and that the new terminology is obvious to an English speaker in terms of which country and which navy is being referred to (Marina Militaire).
My two cents' worth.
(By the way, I came up with the awkward "transferred to the Royal Navy (United Kingdom)" terminology because I 1) did not want to say British Navy, but 2) realized that non-experts would not know which navy was the "royal" one -- sort of the same problem as "Marina Militaire," but without the added problem of translation into English.) Mdnavman ( talk) 19:04, 23 August 2009 (UTC)mdnavman
In infobox there is information that this ship can have 221 patients - but in text Both ships were outfitted with state-of-the-art operating rooms and X-ray labs and could accommodate 500 patients each. So can you precise from when are information in infobox ?
Also - do you know why that ship was decommisioned ? Too old or US Navy was have too many hospital ships ?
PMG ( talk) 22:20, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
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)
Hi Bellhalla, I encountered this template tagged for speedy deletion, and since it was under your name and only being used within the userspace ( here), I've moved it to User:Bellhalla/N/A. It looks like it's transcluded several times on the Oiler page, so I won't delete the "Template:" redirect yet. Jamie S93 19:04, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
Please note that I added a line of code to Template:Cite Miramar. The purpose of that line is to find all usages of the accessmonthday and accessdaymonth parameters, which are deprecated. The goal is to eliminate their occurance, as has been done for {{ Cite web}} and other templates already. Then the code will be changed to stop supporting these parameters at all. Debresser ( talk) 12:56, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
| |||
|
New featured articles:
New featured lists:
New featured pictures: New A-Class articles: | ||
| |||
| |||
| |||
![]() Looking behind the figures, some other interesting facts emerge. First, 84% of our promoted articles had successfully passed a Milhist A-Class Review before going on to FAC. Second, of the 29 Milhist articles that failed, less than half (41%) had had an A-Class Review. Third, the 97 Milhist articles accounted for 16% of all FACs submitted between January and July of this year. The clear lesson is that if you want a string of featured articles to your credit, you may find Milhist's A-class Review process to be of benefit to you! Roger Davies talk
| |||
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) 18:55, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi Belhalla, could you help us out in the academy and write a section about photography. How do you take pictures (mostly in museums) and how you enhace them to be good presentations in wikipedia. I'll help you and write about documenting such a photosession. Thanks a lot. Greetings Wandalstouring ( talk) 10:35, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
I know you say on your user page that you don't want the drama of being an administrator, but wouldn't it be handy to edit protected pages? ;) It is clear to me from your edit history that you are as trustworthy an editor as we have, and that should be enough for adminship. You certainly do not have to spend all your time on ANI, or closing XfD discussions, or blocking vandals, etc. I have been an admin for a couple of years, and I certainly don't do any of that! But I do a lot of work with protected templates, fixing page moves, etc. and it is awfully handy to have all the tools at your disposal. Think about it and let me know, and I would be happy to nominate you. — Andrwsc ( talk · contribs) 02:36, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
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)
Hi! I realized that you've recently removed the ship prefixes in the article Turkish Navy. May I ask why the USN prefixes still remain in the article United States Navy ships? Thanks if you have time to reply. Cheers. CeeGee ( talk) 17:23, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Thank you so much for the detailed information. Cheers. CeeGee ( talk) 19:27, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
Hiya Bellhalla. Nice work with the categories; they might actually be organized and uniform when you are done! :-) I come here with a request, though; could you copyedit Brazilian cruiser Bahia as part of its A-class review and eventual FAC? Thanks a lot, — Ed (Talk • Contribs) 01:33, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your service as coordinator on WPr Military History for the last six months. Great job, the Wikiproject has matured some more. Lots more needs to be done though.
Would you consider giving a para here on what you planned to do, what you could achieve, what gave you happiness, what irritated you and your suggestions for the road ahead to the new team?
AshLin ( talk) 04:06, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
I know you're likely to be extremely busy; but if you have time, would you willing to copyedit Japanese battleship Yamato? It's in need of a few prose tweaks before an eventual FAC. Cam ( Chat) 05:05, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The WikiProject Barnstar | |
In gratitude for your coordination services to the Military history WikiProject, from March 2009 to September 2009, please accept this barnstar. -- TomStar81 ( Talk) 02:24, 27 September 2009 (UTC) |
Hello! A month and a half ago you created the redirects:
but those sections have still not been created. Are they still expected to be, or are these redirects permanently dead and broken? -- ToE T 08:40, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
Could you contribute to the discussion at Say no to Linkspam: OCLC Online Computer Library, as I believe the OCLC parameter was introduced to the Template:infobox Book. I believe the rationale was to provide an additional catalogue reference, but it is unclear why this particular catalogue system was chosem, or who made the choice. -- Gavin Collins ( talk| contribs) 11:59, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
...For fixing the tense in Tanager Expedition. I was experimenting and forgot to self-revert. Viriditas ( talk) 19:52, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
I'd drop the Stalingrad-class ships from the Soviet BCs of WWII category. Preliminary design work may have started during the war, but no metal was cut until well after the end of the war. And do we really need separate categories when each only has, or should have, one article in each? Personally, I'd drop them as I think the general category is quite enough. Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 14:25, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
| |||
Greetings to all members of the Military history WikiProject, and to those outside the project who receive this news letter as well! My name is TomStar81, and it with a great sense of pride that I assume the position of lead coordinator for the project. On behalf of all the coordinators, both new and returning, we wish to thank those of you who participated in the September elections, and we look forward to working to advance the goals of the project for the next six months. With the elections concluded, there are two changes. First, Roger Davies has been appointed a coordinator emeritus, joining our first coordinator emeritus Kirill Lokshin. Secondly, for the first time ever, the lead coordinator for the Military history WikiProject will be taking a lengthy wikibreak. For those who were unaware of this, I am an undergraduate student, and will be taking a leave of absence, effective end September, to focus on graduating in December. However, with fourteen coordinators, and two coordinators emeritus, I am confident the needs of the project will be well taken care of. For the VIII coordinator tranche, TomStar81 ( Talk) |
New featured articles:
New featured lists: New featured topics: New featured pictures: New A-Class articles: | ||
| |||
| |||
| |||
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) 23:45, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi. According to WP:DASH and WP:HYPHEN, Category:Russo–Japanese cathead templates and Category:Sino–Japanese War cathead templates should use hyphens, not dashes, because "Russo-" and "Sino-" are prefixes rather than self-standing words. They can only be used when attached to another word, so hyphens are used. I was going to nominate them for speedy renaming but thought you could just change if you'd rather them since you were the creator. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:52, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Regarding the fix you had to make to Category:Bayan class cruisers, sorry ... that was my mistake [1]. — Kralizec! ( talk) 17:16, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
The article Grassy Bay has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
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.
LessHeard vanU (
talk)
19:48, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Categorisation Barnstar | |
For all of your past and present work to sort out the nightmarish condition of the ships category tree. Much appreciated! Brad ( talk) 04:09, 24 October 2009 (UTC) |
{{ Empire ships/sandbox}} which you created. Now superseded by the various templates for the Empire ships by first letter of suffix. Can we delete this now or do you see a use for it? Mjroots ( talk) 07:39, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
I've created a redirect for this from its use on the {{ Design 1015 ships}} template. A Yahoo search fails to find any sources for this one. Was SS Waban in service with the US Navy at any point? Mjroots ( talk) 10:35, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Just out of curiosity, would you happen to have/know anything on which convoys Bahia and Rio Grande do Sul escorted during the Second World War? I'm hoping to include a mention of at least one for each article (..when I write the latter, that is), integrating it like I did in the Nevada article:
One of the convoys that Nevada protected was troop convoy UT-2. UT-2 consisted of 20 transports and troopships and was escorted by nine destroyers, four fast minesweepers, a destroyer escort and Nevada all under the command of Rear Admiral Carleton F. Bryant, who also picked Nevada to be his flagship. After departing New York on 5 September, they set course for the North Channel; no contacts were made with any enemy, and the ships made it to their destination in ten days. The same ships then journeyed back to the United States in late September as Convoy TU-2 (Morison, Samuel Eliot (1956). Volume X, The Atlantic Battle Won. Boston: Little, Brown and Company. p. 134.).
— Ed (talk • contribs) 14:51, 27 October 2009 (UTC)