User talk:Bullzeye/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVII (May 2008)

The May 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:06, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVIII (June 2008)

The June 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:06, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIX (July 2008)

The July 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:41, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikimedia Commons

Thank you for uploading images/media to Wikipedia! As you may know, there is another Wikimedia Foundation project called Wikimedia Commons, a central media repository for all free media. In future, please upload media there instead (see m:Help:Unified login). That way, all of the other language Wikipedias can use them too, as well as our many sister projects. This will also allow our visitors to search for, view and use our media in one central location. If you wish to move previous uploads to Commons, see Wikipedia:Moving images to the Commons (you may view images you have previously uploaded by going to your user contributions on the left and choosing the 'image' namespace from the drop down box). Please note that non-free content, such as images claimed as fair use, cannot be uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons. Help us spread the word about Commons by informing other users, and please continue uploading!--OsamaK 14:47, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Did You Know problem

Hi. I've reviewed your DYK submission for the article Vasili Blokhin, and made a comment on it at the submissions page. Please feel free to reply or comment there. Cheers, Art LaPella (talk) 22:48, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Nikolai Yezhov

A rather late thank you for your edits to Nikolai Yezhov. Well done! user:Everyme 11:00, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Ivan Maslennikov

Could you please check your sources - if this NKVD fellow appears in western books. NVO (talk) 18:45, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 18 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Vasili Blokhin, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Gatoclass (talk) 16:27, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on September 14!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:39, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXX (August 2008)

The August 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:36, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The September 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fourteen candidates. Please vote here by September 30!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:24, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Ken Mondschein

Please see the reasons I re-established the page on the talk page. I don't appreciate Nationmaster calling me a "douchebag."

Er, which tag?

Ken Mondschein (talk) 06:16, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Ken Mondschein (talk) 05:47, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Um...

If Jarrett O'Hearn is blanking his page (which is up for speedy anyway), why not just re-tag it with {{db-blank}}? You can't really vandalise your own page, right?HalfShadow 02:15, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Eko ratrianto

Hi. Thank you for your concern about the language in which the article Eko ratrianto is written. However, please be advised that there is a procedure in place for such situations. The first step would be to tag the article with a {{notenglish}} template, then follow the instructions on that template. Although the template has a parameter which is the name of the language, that parameter may be left blank if you are unable to identify it. Someone else will fill in the blanks in no time.

If, after two weeks, no one has begun the translation of the article, then it may be prodded again. Also, all normal speedy deletion criteria still apply if you are able to understand the language. But, other than that, the only case where an article can be deleted for being in a foreign language is if it's an exact copy of an article in a foreign-language Wikipedia (WP:CSD#A2). -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 19:09, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXI (September 2008)

The September 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:03, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

User: Dude13579

This user has been vandalizing again (see Pual hudson).

Chem-MTFC (talk) 10:35, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Great wording!

But yeah, a stilted, factional, faux-meritocracy works well, too. I will have to remember that exact phrase, as it sums it up. Perhaps only the word "drama" could be added, as in wiki drama. When I first started here, someone told me "Wiki is drama". I didn't understand at the time. That person left for good a year and one half ago. Thanks, —Mattisse (Talk) 04:14, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

RE: Vandal on Mario Vargas Llosa

Looks like he's going Proxy to Proxy... Guess we just wait until he gets bored? xD ~Pip2andahalf 04:37, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

November 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Suzy Shuster has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Bullzeye ^{(Ring for Service)} 04:55, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

I would assume this was sent on accident? Eric-Wester (talk) 04:57, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good, could you just remove that from my talk page por favor & gracias? Eric-Wester (talk) 05:00, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

I just don't like the looks of people removing warnings from their talk page, I will let you do it. Eric-Wester (talk) 05:02, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Huggle

There is no way that I can keep up with the reverts that you are making. Do you enjoy Huggle? I am currently using TW. Is Huggle pretty easy to download and learn how to use? Eric-Wester (talk) 05:08, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Pakistan Telecommunications Company Ltd

Hi, I have reverted your HG change here as it seems the previous contributor was removing mis-placed nonsense. Take care Nelson50^T 11:36, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Roberta Baskin

Not very nice to automattically remove goodfaith edits to remove unsourced PR PUFF material from a BLP. You should edit as a human being, not a machine. --96.232.22.160 (talk) 06:52, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXII (October 2008)

The October 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:30, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

List of notable people murdered due to being transgendered

In regards to your title suggestion - The article was at a similar title to that when I first became involved with the article (it was mentioned on an/i) however when I mentioned that half of people on the list didn't have any sources that suggested that they were murdered for being transgendered (some even explicitly said that was NOT the case), it was then instantly moved by another editor to a broadly POV title to try and run around the sourcing issues - after discussing with others I moved it to it's currently title - which is still horrible but is less pov than the previous one. I've got backwards and forwards on it's inclusion (and been called a homophobe for my trouble) but I think there is an article there if the inclusion criteria can be made sufficient tight. --Cameron Scott (talk) 00:04, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Ah right - I've been rather surprised at the attacks I've received over my editing of that and one other transgendered article, which ironically came to my attention because BB said that it was under attack by homophobic editors. I don't really care what the articles are about - I'm an editor not an advocate, so I approach articles from the position of "is it sourced, do the sources match what is being claimed?" etc - suddenly *I'm* one of the homophobic editors attacking those articles. The original version of that article was pretty shocking when I got involved with it - as I previously mentioned, at least half of the sources said "no motive is known" or "police are not treating this as a hate crime". I plan to keep my eyes on it and make sure it stays sourced and is as best as possible neutral POV. I also agree that this unofficial policy of "think of their feelings" is a bit of a problems - we are an encyclopedia, we should always approach our topics from a NPOV - if you don't have a NPOV on a subject, you should stand aside and let those who have do the work. --Cameron Scott (talk) 02:11, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Battle of the Chinese Farm

Hi, Bullzeye. I see you've edited this article, and I agree that the aftermath section was pretty lame. The edit before yours is, IMO, bad, and should be undone. However, that cannot be done because of your later edits. In the edit summary, you said you intend to add more info. If you plan on doing that soon, I'll just wait. If not, I'll change it back. What do you say? Cheers, Nudve (talk) 07:54, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

TBH, it's not just verifiability that I'm concerned about. IMO, the info is not encyclopedic. -- Nudve (talk) 19:42, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Could be. Maybe a rephrase would do. So back to my question, do you plan on expanding the article? Cheers, Nudve (talk) 05:06, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

about your recent comments at AN

I entirely agree with your recent comments on AN about the Tobin fiasco - it's a complete sidestep of everything the project is suppose to stand for. The article itself is a joke, it even has "guards" who proudly proclaim that they will ensure that Scottish law is enforced - it's like stepping through the looking glass! --Cameron Scott (talk) 14:48, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIII (November 2008)

The November 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 16:01, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Abuse

Thanks for your help with the user who put abusive language on my page at commons.

Sardaka (talk) 09:24, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

He's back

Thanks for the help, but it doesn't seem to be sinking in. He's put more messages on my page at commons (without the swear words this time). Block 'im. (By the by, from your use of the word bloke, are you an Aussie?)

Sardaka (talk) 10:31, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks again. I'll keep an eye on him.

Sardaka (talk) 08:50, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Albert Keeler Principle

I've removed the A1 tag you placed on Albert Keeler Principle since this article has content. Since the article seems to be a hoax, I've taken the article to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Generally, hoax articles should either be tagged as {{db-vandalism}} if they are blatant hoaxes, or taken to AfD if the hoaxes are not so obvious. If you would like to participate in the deletion discussion, please comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Albert Keeler Principle. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 02:26, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

external source / new article

Hi and sorry for any stupidity (first time user/info provider). Here's a couple of additional / external sources for the recently proposed article:

"ACHA Division-I All-Star Roster" in The Daily Collegian. http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2008/03/27/acha_division_i_allstar_roster.aspx

[note: Horner attended the Naval Academy; the Daily Collegian article is from Penn State paper.]

"2008 ACHA Men's All-Star Game Readies for this Weekend." http://www.achahockey.org/news2.php?news_id=72972

"Players and Coaches List." http://acha.goalline.ca/files/08allstarflyer.pdf

Hope these are good sources; let me know if you need other data.

thanks! Hornerarmy (talk) 02:30, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

author

hello, my name is jonathan turner with cnbc.com. I believe that this author thomas reed thompson should be on wikepida. He has sold over 100,000 copies of his book how to build the perfect computer, and I think its a record for a self help book. you can search on google to find various articles on him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Direct44 (talk • contribs) 03:16, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Go Speed Racer, go!

Nice.[1] --KP Botany (talk) 03:25, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Ah, because lately something has been wrong with the Wikipedia server or something, and a couple of times in the past few weeks I've had slight blips where things have just come up when my watchlist has loaded (I tried reporting it but got lost), and it appeared that you had edited it the very second he posted. I see now. Looks like he's going for block. How come they're never creative or original? They do the same stuff I would have done in sixth grade. --KP Botany (talk) 03:32, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Egads, the egos around here! Still, it is fun to see how fast the vandals can be reverted, and I suspect it is the only thing that's frustrating to vandals, that they're reverted so fast no one sees their edits. I'm glad that a lot of editors use it and it works so well. --KP Botany (talk) 03:49, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

9 warnings

Yeh, I like the ones where you go to the page and it has 3 or 4, "This is your LAST warning" on it. However, the rules for IP's are different from regular users. Typically they'll zap a registered user after just 1 warning, or sometimes with no warnings at all if he's running rampant. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 13:55, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Thomas reed thompson-> afd

It asserts notability, so I sent it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas reed thompson. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 14:27, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Page blanking by author

Hi. Though page blanking is usually vandalism and needs to be reverted, it is worth looking first at the page history, because quite often the author has blanked his own page, as was the case with Taiwan Culture Portal just now. In those cases the best thing is to tag it {{db-author}}. It can be confusing for an author who realises his page is inappropriate and blanks it, if his page is at once restored and he is accused of vandalism for the blanking and told it was unconstructive. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 10:50, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

HelpMaticProHTML Being Considered for Deletion

Thanks for reviewing my first attempt at an addition to Wikipedia. Since your review, I have added more information, plus a link to the vendor's site. I'm unclear on what is not being addressed, so I followed the suggestion to seek help from the Wikipedia Article support group. However, I will also appreciate any brief comments that you might share. My intent is to add HelpMaticProHTML to the several other help generator software products in Wikipedia because it is not well-known, yet has a unique flavor of using CSS to enhance the generated output. I agree that the entry needs to have more information added, but I cannot do all of that in one sitting, as I'm still a novice editor in Wikipedia. Your thoughts or suggestions will be appreciated and will help me become a better contributor. Thank you for your interest. --Dskirk (talk) 19:38, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. I can find no independent 3rd-person article on this product, so I guess it will be deleted. I was trying to model it on the entry for Help&Manual, which seems to have no such reference. I was writing the article because it is such a nice product and appears to be relatively unknown. I do appreciate your advice and I'll know better the next time I attempt to post an entry. Regards. --Dskirk (talk) 12:23, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks much for your help. I've learned a lot in this brief experience. I've always liked Wikipedia and now have a better appreciation of the content. You've been very helpful and I thank you. --24.235.68.233 (talk) 14:00, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

AN/I drama

If your goal is to reduce drama on AN/I, this sort of provocative comment (while perhaps containing an element of truth) is not likely to help. If you want to see the drama (and the editor in question) go away, I'd remove it. -kotra (talk) 00:23, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh well, too late. -kotra (talk) 01:09, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm not trying deliberately to create more drama, and I hope that won't be the effect. I just happen to consider "I'm taking my ball and going home" retirement threats to be a form of disruptive editing when they are undertaken as a cheap emotional ploy instead of a legitimate reaction to extreme circumstances. Many editors have (and continue) to be forced to retire for legitimate, serious reasons, including credible RL threats to their lives based on their WP editing. I feel obligated to confront users who misuse retirement as a form of petty vindictive emotional capital. It's a common tactic of drama-mongers and 9 out of 10 times they're back (either openly or secretly) within a month. Bullzeye ^{(Ring for Service)} 01:19, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

True, but "calling them out" on it is only likely to get them to keep responding, usually inducing more drama. If nobody responds to it, though, it shows them that nobody really cares. But if you're both willing to continue, it doesn't bother me. I'm not a regular at AN/I, anyway, so I could just be wrong. *shrug* -kotra (talk) 01:32, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm not going to comment anymore, and hopefully it'll go stale soon. I still think part of the problem with some editors is that they're so goddamn tiresome with their petty soap opera bullshit and their refusals to acknowledge outside consensus that eventually they outlast anyone who might hope to drill some sense into their brains. Then they get satisfaction from being able to declare de-facto "victory" and so they do it all again. Maybe if we started telling them "No one is responding to your juvenile emotional pandering. If you want to leave, that's your choice" the problem would go away. Bullzeye ^{(Ring for Service)} 01:43, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Ah, yes, but WP:CIVIL prevents us from doing that. In any case, thanks to the admins responding to him, hopefully he realizes now he's not getting any sympathy. -kotra (talk) 02:11, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

About your proposal to delete article titled Animoto

Hi, thanks for reviewing my first artcle. I see that this article is marked for speedy deletion. I would be happy to update or edit the article if you can tell me what criteria causes problem. I learned about animoto tool from a friend and when I tried to learn about it in wikipedia I was surprised that it doesn't exist. So I spent couple hours to do a quality article, especially given that this is my first, researching reference and giving proper verifiable news citations while keeping neutrality in mind. I am not a fan of this tool or anything, so I have no problem if someone wants to edit this in whatever way. I just want to make sure there exists an article about this info that wikipedia is missing. Pls bear with me if I am missing something important and pls point me out & I'll learn. Thank you. Sgnaren (talk) 12:11, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Bullzeye for speedy response. Before writing article I looked at WP:RS and saw that News Organizations are reliable sources. So the main source I used http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS132135+26-Aug-2008+PRN20080826 isn't is reliable? I thought reuters is a well known respected news organization. Also another site I used is http://www.crunchbase.com/company/animoto with reliable info as far as I know. If these two are not reliable sources, then what is your advice on this? I hope my first efforts to create a useful article is not wasted. The reason why this company is significant is, as per reuters link above, 250,000 users are registered with 4 million videos & 40 million views - sounds significant for me. Also the tone in article is similar to the news link. Thoughts & Suggestions?

Sgnaren (talk) 12:40, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Bullzeye, you pointed me that though the news article was in reuters it was like advertizing and I wasn't paying attention to it. I was mistaken that having reuters news is good enough, but I was wrong and I am learning something. So, what is your advice on next steps? I see it comparable with Slide.com and RockYou! both of which have wikipedia pages (I actually copied template from there). I hope you agree that this tools is important enough to be in wikipedia (like above pages) & will help readers. If so, what do we need to do to keep this article? How much time would I have to find reliable source and how should I go about it? I see a magazine article on this http://www.entrepreneur.com/magazine/entrepreneur/2009/january/199000.html, would that be reliable source as it is a magazine? How about news.cnet article at http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-10111118-2.html ? If these cannot be reliable resources I am lost on how else someone find sources. The sources for existing articles Slide.com and RockYou! also seems similar. Again, thanks for your valuable suggestions.

Sgnaren (talk) 13:01, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for removing the delete notification. I'll add new references within 24hrs and correct the article. I appreciate the guidence you provided. It may be frustrating for first time contributors like me, but I understand your efforts make wikipedia maintain its quality, thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.167.82.175 (talk) 14:28, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIV (December 2008)

The December 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:11, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Unhelpful

That sorta comment is really unhelpful, please don't do that again. MBisanz ^talk 22:18, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I came here, to make a similar request. I know, it's a very personal subject to a lot of people, but, we have to try to keep the discussion civil. Nothing is gained, by getting others worked up, accusing others of having complexes, et cetera. It's much easier to have a discussion, when we are not screaming at each other. Thanks, SQL^{Query me!} 22:29, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Tony's comment was both completely unhelpful to resolving the issue at hand, and wildly divorced from anything resembling consensus. Since his desysop and fall from power he's made a career out of inserting these blurbs into discussions solely for the drama, having been blocked several times for the same. You both know this as well as I do. If you think it's incivil then feel free to redact it. Versageek's comment assumes bad faith by arguing that Beta's merely the victim of a lynch mob who enjoys beating him up. I take offense to that, because I deeply regret Beta's situation and consider him my friend. I tried to talk him out of this self-destructive attitude over a year ago, and he wouldn't listen. It's sad, and I deeply resent politics being played over it. Bullzeye ^{(Ring for Service)} 22:34, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

That said, you'll get no more lip from me on the whole subject. Nothing anybody says is going to make it any better, that's for sure. But I was kind of hoping against hope that nobody would deliberately try and make it worse... Bullzeye ^{(Ring for Service)} 22:40, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

While I didn't see the comment by TS that you were referring to, I did read versa's a couple times now. I don't see that as failing to assume good faith, but, as that user's honest opinion. I'm not sure how long you've been following this whole thing, but, for the years that I have, it's always seemed that way to me too. But, anyhow, I'm not really here about other users comments. Thank you very much for considering my request, and it's good to see you again, by the way. I've been on break for quite a while (going on 3 months, I think?), got bored tonight, figured I'd see what the wiki was up to :). SQL^{Query me!} 22:56, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

It's good to see you again too, friend. And thanks for stopping by. I'm sorry for being surly. It's too damn bad about Beta. He kind of took me under his wing in terms of the technical aspects of editing when I first got here. The javascript skin I use is one he basically hand-configured for me. This was before he got obsessed with the fair use botting and it all went downhill. I talked to him in person earlier this year and told him he was a good editor, but he was going about it all the wrong way, and if he didn't relax and let it go he was going to get hung for it eventually, and I didn't want to be here to see it happen. And now it's too late... Bullzeye ^contribs 01:52, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I know what you mean, I've seen this coming for a while now, it's sad, but really after last time (which I still kinda feel bad about) he honestly should have known better. Sorry if I was a little snappy with ya, I didn't recognize the name, until the second reply you made :) It's really been a while! SQL^{Query me!} 04:24, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:UBX/onemanonewoman compliments

I don't want to extend an already unhelpfully long MfD by making a comment that is more personal than substantive, but I must offer that your reply to my reply is quite well put (and ancillarily serves to remind me that forcefulness and persuasiveness vary inversely with verbosity) and expresses a sentiment with which I am, I think, even as I am on the whole an EM sort, largely in sympathy. I am constitutionally a PIIer, and so I tend to focus at MfD on process issues, but if we are to take the issue up on its merits, your case, made more pithily than are many that we have seen at MfD of late on position-taking userboxen, should probably carry the day. Good on ya, then. Joe 23:36, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXV (January 2009)

The January 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:15, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

America Jr. listed at RfD

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect America Jr.. Since you had some involvement with the America Jr. redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Aeon17x (talk) 11:32, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, the rule on offensive redirects does seem to conflict with WP:CENSOR. I put up a comment on the RfD about it. --Aeon17x (talk) 15:30, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVI (February 2009)

The February 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:38, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Nominations 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 13 March!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:18, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Apology

Sorry I didn't sign my posts. I've not been here for a long time, a very long time in fact. I only ever made occasional anon edits anyway --84.45.219.185 (talk) 09:22, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

That was me above: I'd had an account for so long, forgot to even use it until now - I'd edited anonymously before 2007, but knew a fair bit about Wikipedia from notices on IPs I edited from, e.g. Starbucks cafes.. --Moorstone (talk) 12:51, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. We will be selecting coordinators from a pool of eighteen to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on Saturday, 28 March! Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:21, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVII (March 2009)

The March 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:06, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of User:Dskirk/HelpMaticProHTML

A tag has been placed on User:Dskirk/HelpMaticProHTML, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Alexius08 (talk) 03:58, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

File:Field 01945.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Field 01945.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:37, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVIII (April 2009)

The April 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:35, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

SM-70

I'll work on this more later today. I've got a ton of stuff to do today. Errands out the ass and tons of shit to prep for this weekend. Just letting you know I haven't forgotten. لennavecia 17:00, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

??????????

!!!!!!!!! Bullzeye ^contribs 07:56, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

HELLO GOOD SIR

You're a fucking faggot and have no clue what you're talking about with awesome.jpg. I know and don't care that this will be reverted, but read it first, because you should seriously shut the fuck up. Love you buddy

Love you too, man. Beers at my place tonight, try not to suck any dicks on the way over here. Bullzeye ^contribs 06:12, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, Bullzeye's hired a legion of male prostitutes and he doesn't want all that money to go to waste. AJDotNet (talk) 19:11, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

A legion of male prostitutes??? Who the fuck do I look like, Jimbo Wales? I could only afford the one. Good news is he agreed to be paid in Appletinis and protease inhibitors. Bring your felching straw. Bullzeye ^contribs 20:37, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Classy. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:40, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

You take that back. Bullzeye ^contribs 02:44, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Bully, for teaching me what protease inhibitors are. hmwithτ 05:15, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

*boggle* Dude, what the hell do they teach you kids in school these days? XD Bullzeye ^contribs 08:20, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

You really should have linked felching as well, stud. I'm not sure anyone other than AJ knows what that is. >_> لennavecia 15:43, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XXXIX (May 2009)

The May 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:18, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK for SM-70

On July 3, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SM-70, 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.

Wikiproject DYK 23:42, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XL (June 2009)

The June 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:30, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Article collab for cash

See here. Something interesting that I bet you already know a lot about. Could be good times. Let me know. Lara 19:46, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Nevermind. Bounty board donates the money to the Foundation. Fuck that noise. Lara 20:16, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

How unfortunate. I already squandered that money on drug-fueled sex junkets and skimpy underwear for my girlfriend. Tell Jimbo I need a loan. Bullzeye ^contribs 11:48, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Hmm... that sounds like a good time. Lucky girl!
O, and ya. I'll shoot that email out right now. Haha. Lara 21:48, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Re:Comments

I'm sorry that I've violated your trust, but per Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/CheckUser and Oversight elections, "Editors are encouraged to put brief questions to the candidates and to make brief comments", I misunderstood this I believe. Would you be satisfied if I removed my rationales? I apologize. ceranthor 20:51, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLI (July 2009)

The July 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:58, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Nominations open for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 12 September!
Many thanks,  Roger Davies ^talk 04:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLII (August 2009)

The August 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:15, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Nashville

Sorry I didn't get down there to meet all you great folks. Hopefully in the future, I'll be able to rectify that situation. Cheers. ;) — Ched :  ?  18:07, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Military history coordinator elections: voting has started!

Voting in the Military history WikiProject coordinator election has now started. The aim is to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on 26 September!
For the coordinators,  Roger Davies ^talk 22:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Standardizing

Would you mind pointing me to the MILHIST guideline on standardizing NATO codenames? Btw, they may confilct with WP:AIR guidelines, so we have have some problems to work out. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 14:52, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Sure. This has been a perennial issue on WP:MILHIST. Historically, there has been a fairly vocal Russian contingent who wished to see no connection at all made between NATO reporting names and the Russian hardware they connote. After many discussions, the most recent being just a few months ago, the conclusion was reached that the articles for Russian ships, planes, missiles etc. should continue to be titled in Anglicized Russian (per WP:AVIMOS) but with the NATO reporting name bolded secondarily in the lede to aid recognition. This is now almost universal in said articles; for example, the Russian missile known in the West as the AS-15 Kent is correctly located at Raduga Kh-55, with the original Russian title listed first and the NATO designation secondarily bolded in the lede. Likewise for all of the other missile and ship articles. Again, the widespread consensus seemed to be that this encouraged easier recognition by US/UK readers who are usually completely unfamiliar with the internal Russian designations and might be confused otherwise. I don't believe this harms the article or violates WP:AVIMOS, but did I miss a discussion on WP:Aviation? It is entirely possible as I have not been over there in some time. Bullzeye ^contribs 15:18, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

In addition, note also that all (100%) of the articles for Soviet/Russian submarines are actually located at their NATO designation names, for example Akula class submarine and Typhoon class submarine, despite the fact that the latter is actually the one properly named "Akula" by the Russians. Presumably Wikipedia:WikiProject Ships decided to standardize them thusly. See also Template:ColdwarSovietSubmarines for an example of what I'm talking about. Bullzeye ^contribs 15:32, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Actually, the discussions ar usually on WP:Aircraft, which is a sup-project of WPAVIATION, and is actually quite older. The guidelines are at WP:AIR/PC, but I can't look at the page now becasue of connection problems, so I'm not certain what's there. We've had similar discussion in the past on the issue, with similar protests from the "vocal Russian contingent". The compromise invovled using only single quotes ('Bison', 'Fulcrum'). I also prefer the bolding for the reasons you gave. I'll try to let WPAIR know later today of MILHIST's guidelines, at WT:AIR talkpage, and see what they want to do. I don't foresee a a problem approving the bolding right now, as the most-vocal editor on this issue is currently banned, and it's unclear if he will be able to return. We'll see how it goes. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 15:56, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for responding so quickly, BilCat. I did some checking and noticed that this was the actual edit by User:MilborneOne to WP:Aviation/Style guide/Layout (Aircraft) which seems to be the current status quo, as you mentioned. Unfortunately, it seems to be the ONLY discussion of the subject. A search reveals there's zero mention of NATO reporting names on the style guide talk page (or archives) except for one guy vaguely suggesting that they should talk about it at some point! XD I think it's that time, eh? hahaha Get back to me when your connection improves. Bullzeye ^contribs 16:05, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Addendum: I've found the discussion in the archives of WP:Aircraft, as you mentioned, here: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Aircraft/Archive_22#Guidelines on usage of nicknames and code names. It seems nobody had a particularly strong opinion on the matter except User:Askari_Mark. Based sheerly on that discussion, I think it deserves mentioning again that WP:MILHIST uses a bolded NATO designation in their ledes for missiles and subs, the other two Russian systems which feature NATO names. Furthermore, NATO designation names are not merely "nicknames", bolding of which would be discouraged in the lede. That would be a gross oversimplification of their value to Westerners in identifying the hardware. They are as official as titles get, and what every NATO government (including the US and UK) refers to them as in their official documents, briefings, etc. It's not that they don't know the names, it's that they've given them "official" new ones designed for Western ears and eyes. Perhaps more importantly, unless you're an airplane or sub or missile buff, you are far more likely to recognize the NATO name, which is why they exist! Considering English Wikipedia's target audience and WP:LEAD, which states that additional names should be bolded. So why not bold them? Bullzeye ^contribs 16:23, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Again, not trying to hype NATO or the West or piss on the Russians, but I bet you a buffalo nickel that 99% of the English Wikipedia browsing demographic isn't going to be able to tell a Raduga KSR-5 from a hole in the wall. In this case, bold benefits the audience. AS-6 Kingfish succinctly and accurately points out to us Westerners that it's the 6th anti-shipping (AS) missile entered into Russian service, while the article itself stays at the Russian name for official purposes. I'm failing to see the benefit in not bolding. Bullzeye ^contribs 16:33, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

You're preaching to the choir! :) I just enforce guidelines I don't agree with until they are changed. - BilCat (talk) 17:10, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

hahaha! As I mentioned, it seems there is no consensus on the issue. If the user you mentioned is banned, why not change it then? Bullzeye ^contribs 17:14, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

I should say "consensus", since this wasn't a written guideline. I'm pretty sure there were older discussions with a more clear consensus. Anyway, I'm waiting on Milborne1's response before doing anything at WTAIR. I only reverted two of your changes before I realized why you were changing them, and I won't make anymore changes until the issue is settled. - BilCat (talk) 17:20, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

The issue we had at the time was not really presentation in the lead but the use of nato names in the body of russian aircraft articles and in other articles that used the reporting names as if they were official. So I dont have any objections if it has consensus at WP:AIRCRAFT related to presentation in the lead. MilborneOne (talk) 18:56, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Please leave other users' user pages alone

This edit to Ottava's userpage was inappropriate. Please don't do that again. It's disruptive and abusive to other editors, and disrespectful of the Wikipedia community. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 05:51, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I, on the other hand, am very tempted to give you a barnstar for it. I almost fell over with laughter. Brilliant. Ever considered a career as a literary critic? Moreschi (talk) 13:32, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIII (September 2009)

The September 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:11, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Archiving

I think the bot broke. Haha. Lara 01:00, 25 October 2009 (UTC)