This is an archive of past discussions with User:Abraham, B.S.. 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.
On November 2, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Roberts Dunstan, which you recently nominated. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
On November 2, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Charles Crombie, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Thanks Abraham for your help and useful notices. It would be great if the contest would start on 11 November as scheduled, though I believe I'll be forced to postpone it if the invitation is not sent to project members till sunday. --Eurocopter (talk) 11:55, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
Military history project
Hey! I'm interested in the military history project and I saw that you were one of the coordinators. How do I join? What specific areas do you need people to work in? Cheers! --Reubzz (talk) 20:25, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for directing me to the sign-in page. This looks like an interesting project and I will soon join some task groups to get started. I appreciate the nice welcome. :) --Reubzz (talk) 01:59, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
As a member of the Military history WikiProject or World War I task force, you may be interested in competing in the Henry Allingham International Contest! The contest aims to improve article quality and member participation within the World War I task force. It will also be a step in preparing for Operation Great War Centennial, the project's commemorative effort for the World War I centenary.
If you would like to participate, please sign up by 11 November 2009, 00:00, when the first round is scheduled to begin! You can sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:36, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIV (October 2009)
The contest department has completed its thirty-first month of competition; its second month under the new and improved scoring system. A total of 53 articles were entered by nine editors. Sturmvogel 66 came in first with 96 points, followed by Auntieruth55 on 80 points. They are presented the Chevrons and Writer's Barnstar respectively. Honorable mentions go to Ian Rose (38), Abraham, B.S. (33) and Parsecboy (10). Our thanks go to Cuprum17, Ed!, The ed17 and Piotrus, who also fielded entries. All editors are encouraged to submit any articles that are working on for next month's contest.
Thanks for your help and kind words! In an attempt to have some more competitors at the start of the contest I will postpone the start by 20 hours (till 20:00, 11 Nov.). Cheers --Eurocopter (talk) 13:51, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello, Abraham, B.S.. You have new messages at Rjanag's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Well, it's better than edit warring. ;-) I've reverted the level heading, as I think it can be a little confusing having it in the table of contents when a section heading per se does not appear, but it also detracts from the article and section as a whole, I think. Abraham, B.S. (talk) 14:08, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello there. I just thought I'd drop you a quick line to let you know that I've moved the above article from Henry Wells (general). I've been on a bit of a spree, trying to standardise disambiguators for military officers (I know, I know - very OCD). No real issue there - most are in the "<insert service> officer" form anyway - but when I noticed that I was mucking about with an FA I thought the least I could to was to let you know.
I noticed you moved Wells (but only Wells) back while I was still searching for the discussion item. Note that he has done this for every page qualified with (general) Hawkeye7 (talk) 04:28, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
I only moved Wells back as I did not notice any other such page was moved, let alone all of them. I must say, I did not notice or hear about a discussion on this and do not particularly agree with it. I'm going to look further into this, however. Thanks for the notice, Hawkeye. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 04:53, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
If it makes a useful difference: I think the wholesale change should be discussed, and am happy (itching?) to be involved in the discussion. Please "keep me in the loop". Thanks in advance. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 10:57, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
FYI: Regarding this edit - The title to the table says "The following Australians have held the rank of Lieutenant General". If you are going to add Squires, then you also need to add Hutton, and change the title of the table. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 14:22, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
I've tweaked it to Australian Army lieutenant generals, as this is what the list should really be. Under the previous heading, an Australian-born person who achieved the rank of lieutenant general in another nation's army, such as the British Army, could have been included in the list, but that is not what the article is based on. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 02:01, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
After a little investigation, I'm not sure Hutton was promoted to lieutenant general in the Australian Army. Going off his Australian Dictionary of Biography entry, it states that he returned to the United Kingdom, was given command of the 3rd British Division and then promoted to lieutenant general on the eve of his retirement in November 1907. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 02:07, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
I think there's a problem with the MILHIST contest page as most of the entries for November have disappeared. You made the last change, so I thought that I'd let you know about it rather than revert it myself.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:49, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Comment
(Move log); 12:23 . . Abraham, B.S. (Talk | contribs) moved Alfred John Shout to Alfred Shout over redirect (per naming convention, as middle name is not necessary for disambiguation)
Good! Pdfpdf (talk) 10:28, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Medals
Hey! I'd like to add a medals section to other articles, using a similar format/layout/whatever to the one that you did for Maxwell. Are you OK with that? Pdfpdf (talk) 12:44, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Not particularly. I think it devalues an article, especially a higher rated article that has had an immense amount of effort put into it, and there are still some underlining MOS:Image issues. However, I do not see how I can stop it ... Abraham, B.S. (talk) 13:27, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
P.S. I'll have a lower profile over the next month, so good luck with the Yr12 results and the University entrance ordeal, and have a Merry Xmas & Happy New Year. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:40, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
I'm up to my neck at the moment (IRL), but around Thursday this week it should start to ease off for a few days so, yep, by the 10th or very soon after you should see some action :) Don't hesitate to nag if it looks like I'm not on the case - you're neither pushy or a pain, and helping you out is a pleasure. All the best, EyeSerenetalk14:45, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks very much :) I noticed you'd changed a few things back - no problems with that, but you've reintroduced a couple of grammatical errors:
"The ground in front of their position was dominated by a series of German pillboxes, which was further exacerbated by pouring rain that had converted the battlefield into a quagmire." If you read this sentence without the descriptive stuff, we've got "The ground [...] was exacerbated by pouring rain" This doesn't really make sense.
"Lobbed" might get objected to for being slang
"Following his discharge, Peeler..." I always think this sounds unpleasantly personal :)
Sorry, had a class to teach... I hadn't quite finished; some more:
"...understating his age by fourteen years <to avoid the upper age limit imposed on volunteers>." This is important so the reader isn't left wondering why Peeler did this - I think we either don't mention it at all, or mention and explain (per WP:LEAD "don't tease the reader").
"Peeler and his fellow soldiers comprising the ranks of Blackforce thus became prisoners of war." Repetition: we're told in the previous sentence that Blackforce surrendered, and we already know Peeler was in Blackforce.
"2/2nd Pioneer Battalion served throughout the entirety of the campaign" This seems unnecessarily wordy to me; if the battalion served throughout the campaign, that implies it was there for the entirety of it.
Hope this helps, and of course it's your call :) FWIW I agree with "lobbed" for grenades - in that context it's a kind of specialist term - but I've been involved in some unusually tough FA reviews recently with, for example, one reviewer objecting to "knocked out" for tanks. To be honest I'm a little hacked off with the whole FAC process, but don't let me put you off! All the best, EyeSerenetalk11:28, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Very true. The FAC I'm thinking of (this article's second) involved one editor saying the lead was too long and another criticising the lack of explanation, one saying the images were too small while another reverted the images when they were resized to be bigger, one criticising the lack of detailed casualty info while another objected when we wrote up a section to expand on the infobox, some liking the prose and others insisting on further copyediting... we couldn't win :P EyeSerenetalk11:54, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
...and no, the class was fine (motors and generators with second-year electrical apprentices). It was timetabled, I just forgot about it! EyeSerenetalk11:58, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Heh, me too :) Still, the comments were all intended as constructive criticism, and the article failed the first time for lack of reviewer response, so at least we know where to look before nominating it again... Incidentally, if you get the time to look over Battle of Villers-Bocage, your thoughts would be very welcome :) EyeSerenetalk12:16, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Thomas Baker (aviator)
On December 14, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Thomas Baker (aviator), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
The Academy Content Drive concluded on 31 October. The first place Golden Wiki went to TomStar81 for 13 entries; the Silver Wiki was awarded to YellowMonkey for 11 entries, and Patar knight was presented with the Bronze Wiki for 3 entries. All other entrants were awarded the WikiChevrons or a barnstar for their contributions. Thank you to everyone who fielded an entry! All editors are encouraged to check out the newly expanded Academy.
A discussion about the notability of military people has resulted in an update to our in-house style guide. Prompted by some recent "articles for deletion" discussions, members felt that we should provide clearer guidance on the types of person that are most likely to meet Wikipedia's biographical notability criteria. The resulting advice, which you can see here, should be very helpful in both future deletion discussions and in deciding where best to focus article-writing efforts.
Our Task Force housekeeping discussion is now coming to a close. In October a number of proposals were made for rationalising our extensive list of Task forces. Although a few areas remain to be decided, project members have approved the changes summarised here. These will be enacted shortly, so if you haven't yet had your say, now's the time!
The contest department has completed its thirty-second month of competition; its third month under the new scoring system. A total of 52 articles were entered by seven editors. Sturmvogel 66 came first with 168 points, followed by Ian Rose on 51 points. They are presented the Chevrons and Writer's Barnstar respectively. Honorable mentions go to Auntieruth55 (31), Ed! (26), Abraham, B.S. (26), The ed17 (17) and Piotrus (7). All editors are encouraged to submit any articles that are working on for next month's contest.
You are one of the twelve editors advancing into the second round of the Henry Allingham World War I Contest. The second round started at 00:00, 29 December and ends 23:59, 31 January. The top six ranked players at the end of this stage will advance into the final round of the contest so keep up the good work! --Eurocopter (talk) 00:41, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
Our spirited discussion about Roderic Dallas led me to look more deeply into this hero; I want to thank you for that, as I find him a fascinating subject and a much under-rated/unnoticed aerial combat leader. If I were a World War I ace in a previous incarnation in anyone's air force, I believe I would rather be flying Dallas's wing than the Red Baron's. My chances of survival would have been better, and I probably would have enjoyed my ground duties more in a Dallas squadron.
I hope you will take a look at the present day article; I believe you will like what you see. I continue to seek more material via interlibrary loan to round it out a bit more.
This is an archive of past discussions with User:Abraham, B.S.. 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.
