User talk:Dormskirk

User talk:Dormskirk/Archive 1 (2007–2011)
User talk:Dormskirk/Archive 2 (2011–2013)
User talk:Dormskirk/Archive 3 (2013–2015)
User talk:Dormskirk/Archive 4 (2015–2016)
User talk:Dormskirk/Archive 5 (2016–2018)
User talk:Dormskirk/Archive 6 (2018–2019)
User talk:Dormskirk/Archive 7 (2019–2020)
User talk:Dormskirk/Archive 8 (2020–2021)
User talk:Dormskirk/Archive 9 (2021–2022)
User talk:Dormskirk/Archive 10 (2022–2024)

The Bugle: Issue 216, April 2024

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:08, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Third" Lancashire County Asylum

Can you do me a favour (because I'm unravelling a unknown length of string here) and let me know your thoughts on whether or not we are documenting the actual name of the hospital or an artifact of the original source for the names Dr. Jeremy Taylor publication "Hospital And Asylum Architecture 1840-1914". When I reviewed the current source for the name it became unclear if this was formally named "Third Lancashire County Asylum", and instead it was just the "third Lancashire County Asylum" per the history page on the same site quote:The third Lancashire County Lunatic Asylum, Rainhill opened 1st January 1851 simultaneously with the second asylum, Prestwich and our own disambig page Lancashire County Lunatic Asylum. Just in glancing around I can see:

I found Simon Cornwells site (careful, the site is listed as unsecured but I can't find anything obvious wrong) lists Rainhill as alternatively "Third Lancaster County Asylum" as does this similar list which both base their work off the original "Hospital And Asylum Architecture 1840-1914" which has raised my circular sourcing hackles a bit i.e. Taylor writes a list differentiating the different hospitals, Cornwell adds to list in table, Table becomes the source of countyasylums.co.uk and so on, but the numbering convention may not have been in original source, or may have been included only as a differentiator rather than a formal name, meanwhile wikipedia seems to just be adding "First", "Second" etc to sites where it isn't included at all because of some perceived convention. Koncorde (talk) 08:52, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - This is extremely complicated and it took me several months of work to unravel it myself. All counties in England used this numbering convention and in some counties they commissioned some ten asylums all numbered in sequence. It is best summarised by this article which sets out the numbering sequence. The numbering sequence was a government initiative rather than anything wikipedia invented although some hospitals may have preferred not to use the rather de-humanising sequence. Dormskirk (talk) 09:17, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a non-Taylor source for the numbering convention? Anything contemporaneous, such as from the commission? I haven't found a copy of Taylors publication, and when I glanced earlier the only sources I could find referenced Taylors book at some level. If there's specific commission details then would expect them to be somewhere, but outside a random architecture website I have ran dry (though I have hardly been exhaustive yet). Koncorde (talk) 14:26, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And thank you by the way. Not to sound like an ungrateful sod. Koncorde (talk) 14:26, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. I seem to remember that Taylor was the main source I used, although I did consider The Asylums List as well. Dormskirk (talk) 14:33, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue 217, May 2024

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 20:19, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

County Sessions House, Liverpool

Hello
I notice you deleted some stuff I put on this page; I’ve opened a discussion there, if you wish to comment. Regards, Swanny18 (talk) 21:27, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have commented. Thanks. Dormskirk (talk) 22:12, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Help

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Task_Force_(Toronto_Police_Service)#Equipment

How do you cite two authors I can't figure out. Can you fix my link?

TShape12 (talk) 08:34, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have sorted it for you. Dormskirk (talk) 08:59, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Auchinleck. The Lonely Soldier

Here you've put 1989 inside the sfn, but 1982 in the citation template. They have to match for the sfn to work. DuncanHill (talk) 13:07, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Now corrected. Apologies and thanks for pointing this out. Dormskirk (talk) 13:49, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for fixing it so quickly. DuncanHill (talk) 19:21, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Style of Cullompton Town Hall

Thanks for your sterling work creating and improving articles on town halls! I noticed you listed Cullompton Town Hall as being in a vernacular style - is that based on a reference? I'd have described it as Edwardian Free Style, though surprisingly I don't think there's an article on that movement. Warofdreams talk 22:32, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I used vernacular style only because I could not think of anything better, but on reflection I think Edwardian Free Style is more appropriate. Many thanks. Dormskirk (talk) 22:37, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Talking of "Edwardian Free Style", a particularly monstrous example is Battersea Town Hall. I had the pleasure of doing the GAN review a few years back, and always thought it had FA potential. The architecture is notable, if unpleasing, but the history is amazing. KJP1 (talk) 15:57, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi - Yes, it's a great article! Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 16:02, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue 218, June 2024

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:42, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Raspberry Pi Holdings Plc

Good morning Dormskirk, curious if you will be turning your hand to a new company page for the above that IPO'd on Monday 10 June 2024? I believe they will be joining the FTSE 250 at the next index rebalance. Thank you for your service. Johnlexcameron (talk) 08:32, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - It is not included in the next rebalance, which is due on 24 June 2024 (see here). However, I will certainly be taking a look if it does move up to the FTSE 250 at some later date. Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 10:22, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi - Now done. Dormskirk (talk) 20:42, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of 204 (Tyneside Scottish) Battery Royal Artillery for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 204 (Tyneside Scottish) Battery Royal Artillery is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/204 (Tyneside Scottish) Battery Royal Artillery until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

PercyPigUK (talk) 12:02, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Now resolved. Dormskirk (talk) 22:24, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Recent BP update request

Hi Dormskirk, I recently made a request on the BP Talk page to add information about the acquisition of Bunge Bioenergia in June. I was wondering if you had any thoughts on adding the information or how to make the request better. Reaching out because you had reviewed some of my requests in the past. Cheers Vishal BP (talk) 09:42, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - It looks fine. There will be a delay because there are over 150 requests waiting to be processed. Dormskirk (talk) 09:56, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Duke of Lancaster's Regiment

Hi Dormskirk, Today I edited our regimental wiki page. I have noticed that there is very little information with regard to our deployments since 2006, sporting achievements and locations. I have seen that you have reverted the changes that I made due to references (or lack). Could you explain more please? So that we can amend it correctly and get the correct information updated onto our page. 185.13.50.184 (talk) 11:40, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - No problem. Essentially all information needs to be verifiable: see WP:V. This is done through in line citations from reliable independent published sources. Please read WP:CITE and WP:RS to find out how this is done. Try adding one fact at a time, with an in line citation, so that it can be checked by other editors, before moving on. Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 11:49, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thanks for getting back to me.
The biggest issue that we have is that non of our Operations are in the public domain or public records - hence why we are trying to correct this now. Outside of the London Gazette and ORK stored in the National Archive or MOD main building, I can't prove this stuff to you.
I don't know why this has happened, but this is why I have taken on the job to change this and update our public facing records. Have you got business contact details in which I could communicate with you on, as I would rather not go through an editorial back and fourth, but if we could work together to fix this, it would be beneficial to all... least not that your editorial skills will be far better than mine! 185.13.50.218 (talk) 12:07, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but we do not provide contact details on wikipedia. Just one word of caution: you should not use wikipedia to publish information that is not already in the public domain. Quite apart from wikipedia guidelines on verification, please bear in mind data protection and other implications. As previously recommended, try adding one fact at a time, with an in line citation, so that it can be checked by other editors, before moving on. Also any further discussions should take place on the article talk page so other editors can comment. Dormskirk (talk) 12:26, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue 219, July 2024

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:08, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Scone Palace

Hi Dormskirk, I want to suggest rearranging and re-categorize the paragraphs on Scone Palace article, since in it's current form it's kinda confusing for readers Wentwort12 (talk) 07:29, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - Please feel free to make suggestions on the article talk page. Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 08:33, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MI6

Thanks! It was going to drive me to drink, except it's too late for that anyway. I like your decisive scissor-work. Cheers DBaK (talk) 18:24, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DBak And many thanks for your excellent edits to the article! Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 19:01, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much. Cheers DBaK (talk) 19:16, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Revert of my edit to Paris Hotel de Ville

I have readded the information you removed, with a citation. I also find it rather queer that you removed the information in the first place, as if it were vandalism or I was an inexperience editor. Please read Wikipedia:You don't need to cite that the sky is blue if you haven't; the Paris Olympic marathon starting at the Hotel de Ville was fairly widely reported and easily cited. pbp 17:39, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for adding the citation. Dormskirk (talk) 17:41, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue 220, August 2024

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:17, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your expertise

Hiya. I do not understand what Emily Hunter Salveson's company does, and I am trying to rewrite the lede. As you have expertise in this area, can you help with the language? The details are covered in these articles: "Rust Shines Spotlight on Indie Film Financing Scheme" and "Rust Producer's Key Advior -- her Dad -- Pushed Tax Shelters and Hid Income According to IRS" . Feel free to ignore me -- the article may be deleted -- it was originally published with very weak references and no mention of Rust. Hope you are well. Julie JSFarman (talk) 19:31, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I am not familiar with Streamline Global Group. That said my understanding is something along the following lines: "The company enables private individuals and financial institutions to make highly tax efficient investments in the film industry". I am aware that the company also offers generous terms regarding the period over which the investors can pay for their investments but I think the financing terms are a secondary factor i.e. a distraction from the main purpose. Best wishes, Dormskirk (talk) 22:20, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah. I thought it was more diabolical. But of course I did. I appreciate your help! Thank you. JSFarman (talk) 14:14, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 14:23, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bare URL; tool to convert to citation format?

I used to use Toolforge,as you recommended, but that has stopped working. Do you know a tool I could use? Thanks and best wishes Asto77 (talk) 13:23, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is the one I use as well! Sorry. Dormskirk (talk) 13:24, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
now at https://refill.toolforge.org/ng/. best wishes Asto77 (talk) 00:46, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks. Dormskirk (talk) 08:15, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for coordinators is now open!

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election have opened. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:40, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue 221, September 2024

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 21:56, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for WikiProject Military history coordinators is now open!

Voting for WikiProject Military history coordinators is now open! A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. Register your vote here by 23:59 UTC on 29 September! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:34, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

R Mon RE (M) - Brig Ridge

Dormskirk, thankyou for keeping me on my toes :-)

The Gazette entries ref Brig Ridge, show that his SSLC / Gen List(University OTC???) / Reg C commission were outside the scope of life at R Mon RE(M).

He warrants a mention as a notable individual who started life as a soldier in the Regiment, and finished as a senior serving officer in the Corp.

Any advice on how this is best protrayed without incurring the wrath of experienced wikipediers welcome. Militiaman 1539 (talk) 10:39, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The best thing you can do is to start at debate on the subject at Talk:Royal Monmouthshire Royal Engineers. You need to get consensus before adding contentious material. Dormskirk (talk) 11:04, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dormskirk,
Thanks for the detail. Given his entry as a "former troop commander" has been removed I'm content that there is no further debate required. His gazette entries are conclusive that he did not commission as a Militiaman, otherwise he, like the rest of us in the unit would have his detail notified under the Regiment's entry at the head of the TA / Army Reserve section. The fact his gazette entry was a Gen List one is normal for those who commissioned whilst at a University OTC.
John Ridge began his career as a Sapper in 100 Fd Sqn in Bristol (where he went to school). He competed in the arduos Cambrian Patrol competition in 1990 as a team member and subsequently left the unit to go to University.
My question is thus - as notable former "member" of the regiment, who started life as a soldier and became an officer elsewhere, he is deserving of a mention on the page. What would you advice given your experience?
MM Militiaman 1539 (talk) 11:37, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My advice would be to drop the issue if you cannot provide conclusive evidence from the London Gazette etc that he served in the regiment. But the correct place to have this debate, as I have already said, is at Talk:Royal Monmouthshire Royal Engineers...so that there can be a transparent debate on the issue. Dormskirk (talk) 11:41, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dormskirk. No need:
https://rmonrem.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Dining-Club-Newsletter-Sep-15.pdf (page 4):
John Ridge who is to be the next Commander 8 Brigade (a
"Category A" Brigade on par with a Manoeuvre Brigade commanding
some 10,000 soldiers), John was at Bristol Troop before going Regular
in the early 1990's.
I will however trawl through the wiki documentation links you sent this weekend.
Regards and thanks,
MM Militiaman 1539 (talk) 11:58, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, please get a good understanding of the guidelines before posting anything else. Thanks. Dormskirk (talk) 12:53, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cotton

I had a suspicion that by adding Cotton to that list I would quickly see the link turn blue! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 16:04, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am delighted to prove that you were right! Best. Dormskirk (talk) 16:05, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well done

Well done for your improvements to French city hall articles. I had given them English-style titles as I mainly work on other countries' topics and they were already in English there (see pages I didn't create such as Seville City Hall) but it's good to have uniform to a topic. Unknown Temptation (talk) 17:07, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for the feedback. Dormskirk (talk) 17:08, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:26, 23 October 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Many thanks for the invitation. Dormskirk (talk) 08:25, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hôtel de Ville, Wissembourg

Hello Domskirk, could you please stop editing this article? You've done enormous harm by your carelessness and your ignorance. First, you've renamed the town "Wassenberg", and now, you've claimed that the edifice is not classified as a Monument historique, although it indisputably is (https://pop.culture.gouv.fr/notice/merimee/PA00085251). Please take your sloppiness elsewhere. Regards, Edelseider (talk) 07:02, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for getting the name wrong: I edit many articles and I do make a few mistakes. Also thanks for adding the citation to demonstrate that the building is a "Monument historique" which was not cited correctly before. In the meantime, please can you read WP:NPA and stop making your criticisms so personal. Thank you. Dormskirk (talk) 08:24, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Raglan

Hello Dormskirk. As my source is another Wikipedia article, i was thinking that was enough as a reference. There are many sources.

Wikipedia cannot be used as source (see WP:CIRCULAR). But the source that I have already added for you is fine. Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 17:42, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue 222, October 2024

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:02, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ACCHAN coat of arms and ACCHAN badge

On top there is a drawing representing the coat of arms of ACCHAN, while I have added the picture of the badge of ACCHAN, which is a different item and has a great value, because it link the page to a real life object that was on the chest of many and many servicemen and women who have served un that specific Command. Since the drawing is made by an author it is not validated by anyone and even thug it is correct it leaks of any official confirmation, while the badge is a real object and is able to validate the drawing of the coat of arms, giving to the same an higher level of validity and significance. It is also extremely relevant to have this picture on the page, because it is an historic item and it gives a sense of real life and a connection to the past, which is absolutely necessary if the page is referred to something that now is no longer in existence. Not only, the picture is a really nice picture of a beautiful object with great colors and a perfect and stylish aspect. To remove it, is a pure act of violence and senseless vandalism. Refrain from such attitude. FrancescoC.italy (talk) 00:46, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The two pictures look almost identical to me. In the meantime please read WP:NPA. Accusing me of violence is completely unacceptable. Dormskirk (talk) 01:17, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to participate in Wikipedia research

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:40, 13 November 2024 (UTC) [reply]

OK. Thanks for that. Dormskirk (talk) 00:41, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations now open for the WikiProject Military history newcomer of the year and military historian of the year

Nominations now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2024! The the top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki. Nominations are open here and here respectively. The nomination period closes at 23:59 on 30 November 2024 when voting begins. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. MediaWiki message delivery via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:20, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:12, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mixed full and short inline citations

I added {{citation style}} to RAF Bomber Command a day or so ago because the article uses both full inline citations and short inline citations. Should it not be consistently one way or the other rather than mixed? It seems inline short citations is the predominant style.

I had also added {{full citations needed}} because some citations are rather scant, e.g., "President Franklin D. Roosevelt Appeal against aerial bombardment of civilian populations, 1 September 1939". Should access-date and website not be added at minimum? Elrondil (talk) 10:06, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed most of the book related references to short-line citations. The remaining long-form citations relate to journals or newspaper articles: in my view it would be unusual to use short-form citations for newspaper articles. I have also now expanded the citation regarding President Roosevelt's Appeal. If you want to make any further improvements yourself, please go ahead. Dormskirk (talk) 10:18, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So the only way to get consistency is long-form citations? That would need consensus. Is such consensus possible? Using list-defined references as per WP:LDR and {{rp}} might be an acceptable middle ground. Elrondil (talk) 10:33, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have done quite a lot of work achieving consistency by changing the books to short form citation style: you could change the newspaper articles to short form style as well but I am not sure that achieves anything. See Joe Biden which uses short form style for books and long-form style for newspaper articles. That's pretty standard. Dormskirk (talk) 10:42, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll let it be. Any objection to me adding {{convert}} to quantities in "ton", which I take are all long ton as per Weights and Measures Act 1985? So that all quantities are in imperial units first and metric second, as seems to be the current preference in the article? Elrondil (talk) 10:55, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine. Please go ahead. Dormskirk (talk) 10:58, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Hello, I’m HtialilwW. I would like to extend my sincere gratitude for your dedication and hard work in creating the Dhekelia Cantonment article and many others. I love editing and fixing errors on the article with my brother. Your 15 years of editing experience has greatly enriched the platform, and it's evident that many users appreciate and enjoy the quality of your contributions. The insightful information and thoroughness in your articles not only enhance the community but also inspire others to engage in editing. Thank you once again for your invaluable efforts and commitment to knowledge sharing. Thanks! HtialilwW (talk) 02:55, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - That's extremely kind - many thanks. I wish all Wikipedia editors were as gracious as yourself. Very best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 10:56, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

HMS Raleigh (Shore Establishment)

Good afternoon, earlier today you archived some edits I made to HMS Raleigh’s page, including the names of the Phase One training divisions, the divisions were named after British Naval hero’s, and are are all listed on the Royal Navy’s own forums that allow friends and family to check on recruits progress here: https://forum.royalnavy.mod.uk/groups/units/training/hms-raleigh/initial-naval-training/ Crawshaw7135 (talk) 16:26, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - Thanks for that. Unfortunately WP:SPS states that "Internet forum postings, and social media postings are largely not acceptable as sources". Please could you review WP:RS and try and find some "reliable, independent, published sources". Many thanks. Dormskirk (talk) 16:44, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you look at the link I provided, that is not an actual forum post, but is part of the Royal Navy’s actual website with board names corresponding to the divisions that the posts can be made to. Apart from this there is no official link that states the names of the 8 different training divisions at HMS Raleigh, but I have found these links that do mention some of them.
Hanson Division mention: https://hmsardent.org/gallery/hms-raleigh-ardent
Mention of Fisher and Cornwell Divisions with history of each division mentioned: https://www.rnrmc.org.uk/news/hms-raleigh-passing-out-parade-celebration-dedication-and-achievement
Mention of Cornwell Division, including history of Boy Seaman Jack Cornwell VC, whom the division is named after: https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news/2016/march/17/160317-raleigh-company-divisions
Mention of Gould division:
https://bootcampmilitaryfitnessinstitute.com/2021/01/26/new-co-for-hms-raleigh/
Mention of Nelson division:
https://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/news/local-news/royal-navy-veteran-takes-lead-2887630.amp
Mention of Cunningham Division
https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news/2017/december/06/171206-fleet-commander-reviews-ships-company-divisions-at-hms-raleigh Crawshaw7135 (talk) 18:25, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Thanks for that. I have restored the names of the divisions and who they are named after. Dormskirk (talk) 18:49, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks- from a serving instructor of Cornwell Division. Crawshaw7135 (talk) 21:32, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 22:18, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shell plc

Please stop this. Your following edit didn’t make sense. I found this information online Awilt17 (talk) 05:39, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:RUMOUR "Wikipedia is not a collection of unverifiable speculation, rumors, or presumptions"...."and rumors are not appropriate". The online article actually states this is a "rumour" so it is "not appropriate". If you have a problem with this, please take it to the article talk page. Dormskirk (talk) 07:28, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue 223, November 2024

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:12, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards

Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2024! The top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki. Cast your votes here and here respectively. Voting closes at 23:59 on 30 December 2024. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. MediaWiki message delivery via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:59, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Sulafa Tower

Notice

The article Sulafa Tower has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

Noted. Thanks. Dormskirk (talk) 19:42, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seasons Greetings!

Hello there, 'tis the season again, believe it or not, the years pass so quickly now! A big thank you for all of your contributions to Wikipedia in 2024! Wishing you a Very Merry Christmas and here's to a happy and productive 2025! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:59, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And the same to you, Dr. Blofeld! Many thanks. Dormskirk (talk) 09:57, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Joshua Crompton

Hi, I notice you just reverted my additions to the article on Joshua Crompton. I'm guessing that was an error, but wanted to check before reinstating them. Thanks, Warofdreams talk 00:39, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, you've already fixed it, thanks! Have a great Christmas and New Year! Warofdreams talk 00:39, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Warofdreams. My sincere apologies for pressing the wrong button! Very best wishes Christmas and New Year to you as well! Dormskirk (talk) 00:41, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays

Wishing you a most happy holidays! --A.S. Brown (talk) 00:53, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A.S. Brown - Many thanks. Very best wishes to you too! Dormskirk (talk) 00:57, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking the trouble to explain about how to make one's links better. I come and go from Wikipedia I had no idea of any of this, but it was well explained and helpful, so it inspired me to try. I'm not promising to always have the willpower to do this, but I have done it a few times and if I continue to Edit Wikipedia, perhaps it will become easier over time ! IceDragon64 (talk) 00:47, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IceDragon64 - Many thanks for leaving such a thoughtful message. Have a great time editing! Best wishes, Dormskirk (talk) 00:53, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue 224, December 2024

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:42, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]