User talk:Woody/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

→

Archive 10

WP:ERRORS

Sorry, my mistake, I was clicking on the "edit" link that takes you to the DYK time template page, which is protected. Didn't realize it was transcluded onto the errors page, sorry :) Gatoclass (talk) 08:53, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

BCAD Alexandru Şerbănescu

Could you provide a second opinion on my assessment of this article and comment on my talk page please? Many thanks in advance, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 17:01, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Just so you know...

(this with reference to User talk:Electrobe#Converting navboxes)

• Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts#User:Electrobe

Sardanaphalus (talk) 08:41, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Douglas Graham

Thanks for you help and advice . I did see hos picture that you have uploaded but was not sure how to accomplise it ? js1 17:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXV (March 2008)

The March 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) 03:10, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Infobox Ship to TFD?

Hi Woody. Seems like {{Infobox Ship}} fell through the cracks and wasn't nominated at TFD. Would you mind popping it up over there? Thanks so much. Haus^Talk 15:41, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

ss yale

thanks for fixing the merege i ductaped together . ANOMALY-117 (talk) 17:08, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: How to hack flash games

Hi there. You speedied this article earlier today. I just wanted to let you know that someone opened an AfD on it just before you deleted it. I went ahead and did a nonadmin close. Take care, Xymmax (talk) 17:16, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Image help

Thank you for the graphics section. It had been a while since I looked in the Logistics page, so I was not aware. There is another image that needs fixing, but it has a different issue. Cheers--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 21:39, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

British support to Iraq -- help

Thanks much. There is a very good and very frustrating page at http://www.caat.org.uk/publications/countries/iraq-1991-briefing.php. They bring up what appear to be many specific instances, but they only will give cites like "Guardian/date" or "Hansard/date", which isn't enough to find them online for citing properly. Some, from the eighties, may not be online at all.

If you can look at the CAAT article and come up with any usable citations for what appear to be the more important transactions with Iraq, I would be very grateful.

As far as the graphics, I'm reasonable with flowchart style graphics --- actually, I can draw acceptably on paper and scan it, but don't have any good freehand drawing tools on my computer. The problem is more conceptualizing the process by which Iraq set up front companies, bought into legitimate firms, etc. Matrix Churchill probably should be my first attempt, as, relatively speaking, it's less complex than the others.

To look at User:Hcberkowitz/Sandbox-West German support for Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war#H+H Metalforming, you'll get a sense of why I feel like I need to draw in at least four or five dimensions. What is in the draft article is mostly copied text I want to paraphrase, and also use other sources. For example, I just found a long discussion on the eventual trial of the H+H principals, which shows even more complexity of the Iraqi games. I'm still reading it, and now discovering he also represented defendants at Neue Magdeburger, which were subcontractors to H+H. As with many clandestine situations, a number of the participants, I suspect, were not fully aware of the ramifications until they were so deep that there was no clean escape.

French support for Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war#maraging steel is another complex one, involving organizations in nine countries and the Jersey Islands. I'm literally trying to draw these out.

A while ago, I did some timelines for NSA in Vietnam in SIGINT in Modern History, and thought those were complex. These are orders of magnitude messier. I may put some early versions in Commons, or perhaps on a site of mine.

Howard C. Berkowitz (talk) 23:56, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

FAC copyedit request - Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Cyclone Elita

I have an article on FAC, and it's going well so far. Do you think you could give the article a quick look to make sure it is good? Thanks if you can. If not, it's cool. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:34, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

HMAS Sydney (1934)

Thanks for taking the time to review this for GA. Major rework today based on your feedback - please revisit when you get a chance. Cheers. Socrates2008 (Talk) 12:08, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

FYI, dates in this Australian article follow the International format, as per WP:DATE. Socrates2008 (Talk) 13:11, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Image:Bundjalungwelcome.jpg

You can't delete it because someone retouched it. Funny how I asked for it to be deleted *before* some guy took it upon himself to retouch it. In other words, any request I make to have something *I* own to be deleted is a lottery where I may or may not be granted my humble request. Delete the damned picture please - it's crap and I regret uploading it to begin with. Peter1968 (talk) 23:40, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

uncontactable image owners

Would you know what happens with image copyright if the owner of the image can not be contacted, but it is available online?--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 09:51, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Re:DYK

Sure. 'Tis a good point you make. I inclined to try to take from the lower parts, but so far have been choosing based on interestingness [to me] and trustability. You wanna migrate some yourself? :) Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 19:45, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 7 April, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Douglas Alexander Graham, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 21:40, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

JSTOR

Woody, would you mind helping me with a JSTOR request? I'm looking for R. W. Johnson, "Sekou Touré and the Guinean Revolution," African Affairs 69, no. 277 (October 1970). Very much appreciate your help. Best regards Buckshot06 (talk) 01:55, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Can you help m out with another - same topic? 'Elise Forbes Pachter, "Contra-Coup: Civilian Control of the Military in Guinea, Tanzania, and Mozambique," Journal o' Modern African Studies 20:4 (1982)'? Much appreciated. Buckshot06 (talk) 02:46, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Re Manchester International Airport

Do you really have to be so patronizing and rude? As a new member I find it very difficult to put any sort of point across and it's usually down to admin that this is the case. I appreciate you want to keep Wikipedia standard high but please atleast think about taking other peoples thoughts, ideas and values into consideration. 19:11, 8 April 2008

Thank you, Abfab27 (talk)

Deleted images

I notice you recently deleted Image:CluthaAlbertTown.jpg and Image:Balcluthabridge.jpg because they had been moved to Commons. I appreciate that you are trying to help, but the images on commons were given different names, and these were used in at least one article. The deletion resulted in ImageRemovalBot removing the images from the article, at which point I had to try to work out where the images had gone. When deleting images under I8 in future, please check if articles are using these images, and if the names are not the same on Commons then change the articles to load the commons versions. I see from your contributions that you do fix these links sometimes.-gadfium 23:53, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

thx

Oh gee, I wish I knew how to work out the copyright system. What would we do without you guys? Tony (talk) 14:23, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Cheers Ryan4314 (talk) 17:14, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Hows it going?

Hey! Just wanted to see how your doing! Life going well? My goal is to make friends with every single person on wikipedia! Will you be my wiki-friend?

216.229.227.142 (talk) 15:23, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi

Hey Woody, thanks for responding to my Help Desk inquiry. Could you look over the article and see if there is anything that either you or I could spruce up? I'm totally open to suggestion as I don't really fancy myself a writer. Any help at all would be greatly appreciated! :-) --Endless Dan 16:35, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Cool, thanks! --Endless Dan 16:51, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Sullivan etc

Hi, saw you'd cleaned it up, thanks for that. As to derbies, if we play like we did at Wigan you'll win about 12–0 :-( cheers, Struway2 (talk) 20:36, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

do you think the image recently added to Brady's article is genuine? I've never noticed her having a nose like Pinocchio, and the arrival of such an unsightly picture seems awfully fortuitous. Might be just my suspicious nature, cheers, Struway2 (talk) 22:33, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Ernst & Young

Many thanks for protecting the Ernst & Young article Dormskirk (talk) 22:04, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Wiki logo

I could not find that template for the life of me, thanks a lot. asenine ^t/_c 02:12, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Magennis

I'm all done. Would have been finished long before you started, only I had a few connection problems. David Underdown (talk) 14:46, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I've added basically the same text to XE class submarine too, and will also do so to Ian Edward Fraser. David Underdown (talk) 14:52, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Incidentally, there's an ODNB article on Magennis http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/62047 which has some good stuff in it. David Underdown (talk) 15:12, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Compliments to both of you ClemMcGann (talk) 19:46, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

John Gunby

Thanks for the rating and comments on how to get this article to GA status. I will work on it some more and hopefully one day it'll get there.

Thanks again for the assessment.

dashiellx (talk) 18:04, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

thank you!

am starting to get a hang of this slowly! The article was on Clark Gesner, the musical comedy playwright and author of "You're A Good Man, Charlie Brown" among others. He died four years ago and his archives are in the Princeton Library and I have no idea why his biography was deleted. He was extremely well respected in the theatre world. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Willow wren (talk • contribs) 13:02, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

slight odd question

but not from me - I see you replied to Dummies in Wikipedia over at the pump. yes yes AGF and all that, but I find it slightly odd that a brand new user would a) head straight to the pump and b) ask how we would detect sockpuppets. --Fredrick Dayton (talk) 13:32, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Luke Klein

Hey there. I see that you deleted one of my articles on Tumescent liposuction. I cited all of my work and I had full permission from the doctor and publisher to include their material. How can I sufficiently show that source so that it meets wikipedia standards? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lukeklein (talk • contribs) 19:42, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Lukeklein (talk) 19:45, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

		The Invisible Barnstar
		In recognition of the vast amount of background stuff you do – quietly, unobtrusively and efficiently – at Milhist. Thank you, --ROGER DAVIES talk 11:51, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Milhist template

It actually has to do with the save order. The template is designed to flag an error in cases where a review is selected, but the corresponding review subpage doesn't exist; so what happens is this:

1. User adds review parameter to template and saves page. Review subpage doesn't exist, so the template flags an error.
2. User follows the link and creates the review subpage.
3. If the template is now forced to re-parse itself (by an edit or purge of the page), it will detect the review subpage and turn off the error flag.

There's no real way to avoid this without saving the subpage before the talk page, unfortunately. Kirill 14:24, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Saldanha Bay

You were quick off the mark assessing Battle of Saldanha Bay (1796). I wasn't finished yet :-) I have added an infobox and a ship's table and may put in some more stuff to brush it up. Please give it a few more days.--Ereunetes (talk) 21:13, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

World Cup Move

Why are you making it so difficult? World Cup is a regsitered trademark by FIFA. The domain name worldcup.com redirects to the tournament's web site. Look, I am for common sense, but this is way out of line. Camilo Sanchez (talk) 01:32, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

NCFC FAC comments

Hi Woody, as you may have seen, Dweller is off-wiki for a while so I'll attempt to do my bit at the NCFC FAC. Any help you could provide (in addition to your comments!) would be greatly appreciated. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:41, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, well I doubt we'll hear from Dweller for a while, so yeah, your copyedit offer is generous and welcome. Feel free to tick your own comments off. I'll see about the image etc. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:46, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

So we're just left with the imbalance, your concern over recentism. Dweller has gone to pains to state that this is a fair concern but one he felt was unavoidable given NCFC's abject failure to achieve anything of note until the 1980s.... (Tractor boy speaks....!) What to do? The Rambling Man (talk) 15:06, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

The link worked but probably doesn't point in the right direction. Which reference uses it? The Rambling Man (talk) 15:17, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Replaced that ref. How are you feeling about the recentism issue, or is it a case of more time needed? The Rambling Man (talk) 15:42, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Top drawer. And, if Dweller were around too, I'm sure he'd thank you profusely. Good working with you. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:33, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Response

I actually went ahead and suggested it, (feel free to comment) and I don't think Sandy is too enthusiastic. One suggestion was how to determine if a list is comprehensive, perhaps we could do something along those lines. And your help would be more than welcome. I've been looking for an FL topic to do, but I haven't really found anything good that I have a lot of experience with. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 16:40, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

It looks like we're being given a chance to do it, do we'd best work something out. Are you on IRC at all? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 18:56, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

We can use one of my sandboxes, I'm currently doing nothing with this one. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 19:43, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

And they want it for either the 21st or 28th, the 28th is preferable for me, what do you think? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 19:48, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Or, if you pick a date, you can sandbox it there ... either WP:FCDW/April 21, 2008 or WP:FCDW/April 28, 2008, which later get moved to the Signpost. Of course I'm enthusiastic :-) Just wanted to define the scope. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:49, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

I think for now we should avoid mentioning the discussion and wait a week to see how it turns out. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 21:27, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Portal peer review

My apologies for screwing around with the redirects as you were (presumably) writing; I didn't mean to step on your toes there. :-) Kirill 18:35, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Peer Review request - 2006 FIFA World Cup

Hello! I have added the 2006 FIFA World Cup article to peer review, and I would greatly appreciate your feedback if you have enough time for it :) Thanks,  ARTYOM  20:09, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

World Cup Move

Hey "Woody". First off let me tell you something. I don't think I am making any flawed arguments about moving an article to the content it should have because it is a protected term. For some reason you and a bunch of other users with a lack of common sense don't seem to realize that when it comes to world cups there is one lawfully protected by the European Union and the United States laws as the only one with the right to be referred as World Cup. Let us thank god you are not in the committee of any other sport organization trying to create a World Cup that would probably be followed by lawsuits from FIFA and I say that because it is obvious how unclear it is to you that it is a fact that there is one protected term and so it should be used here. Camilo Sanchez (talk) 20:31, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I guess I have to accept the fact that YOU concluded it "Mr. Woody"

Camilo Sanchez (talk) 20:45, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Craving a boon ...

User:Climie.ca has several Milhist awards (BCAD and Content review) in batches I've done on behalf of the coordinators. This has resulted in ALL his awards ostensibly coming from me, which knocks some of the glitter off them. Could you please edit the signature on one or two of them for a bit of awarding variety? You were a coordinator at all material times and both the BCAD awards and the Content review medal were pre-approved by the coordinators so it's really just cosmetic. I've asked Kyriakos to do the same thing. Many thanks, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk

HMS Cardiff

I see you've edited HMS Cardiff to reposition images as per MoS. Can I suggest you have a look at those changes again, as visually I wouldn't say the article is improved. My initial inclination was to simply revert but you seem to have a better handle on MoS. Justin talk 12:20, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't do it intentionally, I was copying n pasting bits of a rewrite Saberwyn made in his userbox. A rewrite he started before the re-organisation of pics. Ryan4314 (talk) 20:04, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

1995 Japanese Grand Prix

Hi Woody. I notice you are down as a peer review volunteer under the everydaylife section, covering sports. I was wondering whether you could possibly peer review the 1995 Japanese Grand Prix article for me. The peer review is located here. Regards, D.M.N. (talk) 09:18, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Alf Jones

I've created an article on Alf Jones, who played a handful of games for England in the 1880s. My reference book says that he played for Aston Villa in 1885, although he does not show in the Aston Villa player database. There is however a Wally Jones,[1] whose details are very similar; e.g. similar playing career (both played for Walsall Swifts) and position (both defenders). Do you know if there was any connection - they could be brothers, I guess? If you can shed any light, I would appreciate it. Cheers. --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 09:33, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

JSTOR

Woody, can you help me out with another article? I'm looking for Rosenberg 'The Origins of Overkill,' as per http://www.jstor.org/pss/2626731. Thanks very much, Buckshot06 (talk) 01:59, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Peer Review

Hi there. I noticed several new Peer Review announcements on the Military History Wikiproject which were made by you, and I was wondering who I might go about starting that process for Operation Varsity. I've done a major revamping and rewriting of the article, but I only joined a few days ago and I wouldn't mind some peer advice/criticism. Thanks! Skinny87 (talk) 19:01, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the help! Skinny87 (talk) 19:53, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Thomas Hitzlsperger

How do, hope you're good. Just thought I'd mention, I've added a few bits and pieces to Thomas Hitzlsperger. I found a few articles about him in German so I'll try to add more info in due course, using my increasingly rusty knowledge of deutsch. I have never really forgiven der Hammer for the deflected goal he scored against us back in 2002, but he does seem more interesting to write about than most footballers, and he had that weird 'Germingham' accent. --Jameboy (talk) 23:13, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Re:{{HD}}

When subst:ed it gives about 30 lines of text, I tried it and it just gets confusing. ...... Dendodge.Talk^Help 20:04, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Transcluded templates are used all over WP:UAA and WP:AIV. Because of the parser functions, it'd be almost impossible to reduce the size when substituted. If I find a way, I'll use it!...... Dendodge.Talk^Help 20:08, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

When I attempted to make the same point, User:Dendodge started labeling my edits to his template as vandalism, starting accusing me of sockpuppetry, then began using his rollback to restore his version of the template. User is now soapboxing on the help desk to gain support for his accusations of sockpuppetry. Perhaps you could have a talk with him? --VectorPotential Talk 21:24, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Robert Gunby

Help! I need your assistance with this article. It is a completely fictious write-up, but every time I put a CSD tag on it, the article creator sees fit to undo it. Thanks. ArcAngel (talk) 21:20, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

RE:Alex Ferguson

Hello Woody, I have removed the "sir" portion because it is not proper for any honorific title to be within the title of any page; this includes, sir, dame, dr, and so forth. Furthermore, it is noted that he may be called sir because of the text cbe next to his name. Also, sorry for not posting my justification, for changing the page, without sending a message to you earlier; I had to figure out how to post a message first.

Thank you for your clarification, I had just assumed it to be improper as it is redundant to state the title of an individual twice. Cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Intovert2438 (talk • contribs) 21:46, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Category:Educational institutions established in 1725

Yes, I know I'm a pain.... ;) But, I noted that Category:Educational institutions established in 1724 and Category:Educational institutions established in 1726 and all the other years in the 1720s don't exist, so I don't see any reason why this one needs to be kept. --Russ (talk) 23:43, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

News! Tag & Assess 2008 is coming ...

Milhist's new drive – Tag & Assess 2008 – goes live on April 25 and you are cordially invited to participate. This time, the task is housekeeping. As ever, there are awards galore, plus there's a bit of friendly competition built-in, with a race for bronze, silver and gold wikis! You can sign up, in advance, here. I look forward to seeing you on the drive page! All the best, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 13:25, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

One Stripe (200 articles) Two Stripes (400 articles) Three Stripes (600 articles) Tireless Contributor Barnstar (1000 articles) Chevrons (2000 articles) Working Man's Barnstar (3000 articles) Barnstar of Diligence (4000 articles) Third place overall Second place overall First place overall

Articles I created

Thanks,--Kumioko (talk) 14:27, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Recreation of deleted material

See this that you deleted yesterday. Regards EP 16:31, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Deleted Article: How to Build a Village

Dear Woody,

We checked this morning to see how the article posted last night fared, and found you deleted "How to Build a Village" as blatant advertising. This disappoints us as prior to writing it, we spent considerable time analysing other Wikipedia articles on books to assess what a neutral article reads like... purely descriptive. In terms of notability, the external links from unbiased reviewers provided evidence. In terms of being more than news, we deemed it appropriate to wait half a year to assure that the book in question was proving to be long-lasting, so any Wikipedia article would be more than news.

While we have "seasoned" Wikipedia identities for articles and changes posted over the years, we did not believe it was appropriate to use them, which perhaps would have run under the radar screen, but rather to establish a new Identify that clearly disclosed our relationship to the article. Surely this in itself does not constitute a basis for rapid deletion. Our understanding is that articles stand on their own, regardless of who writes them.

We feel the decision to make a rapid delete may have been done in haste, and we would like to first enquire what triggered such a decision, as we worked quite hard to avoid it. Obviously our desire is to have the article reinstated, and we are happy to adjust or rewrite offending parts.

Thanks

JHP

JHPublishing (talk) 20:36, 23 April 2008 (UTC).

List of Dance Dance Revolution characters

I noticed that you deleted this article just a couple of days ago, I had been planning to write it and had no idea that someone had put it up and I was completely unaware. I'm sure you had a valid reason for deleting it but do you think it would be possible to have the source text from the article as it was when you removed it to see what it was and what material it contained? It's been deleted twice now, and I have a copy of the first version that was removed two years ago already. I'm trying to get an understanding of why it failed as an article twice now so that when I complete my version it will compliment Wikipedia instead of weigh it down. If you could help me I'd appreciate it. --AeronPrometheus (talk) 09:48, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Haha, okay. I guess that wouldn't do much would it? Thanks anyways --AeronPrometheus (talk) 19:36, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Deleted Article: Thebigword

Dear Woody,

I am a little puzzled as to why you have deleted the article thebigword yesterday?

It is a little concerning seen as though many of thebigword's competitors have company deatils on the site and we submitted ours in the same manner as they have. Most have logo which we don't. We also put many links into everything possible.

Please can you advise what we have done wrong and how we can place a listing for thebigword. I've spent a lot of time looking at other articles like Tesco, British Airway, Honda and our competitors and can't see the difference.

I look forward to your comments.

Dannilindley (talk) 10:17, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Dear Woody,

Thanks for getting back to me. I do note your points but why is Lionbridge allowed to keep their details up?

I thought the Yorkshire Post was a verifiable link? This is unfair competition. Danni

Dannilindley (talk) 14:32, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank You

Thank you for welcoming me into the Military Wikiproject. I look forward to helping!! America69 (talk) 20:12, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Dispatch

Woody, I left a query at Wikipedia talk:FCDW/April 28, 2008; I need to know if you all want to hold off on this dispatch for two weeks and if I should get someone else to take this week. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:13, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Bengal Native Infantry

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Bengal Native Infantry, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.britishempire.co.uk/forces/armyunits/indianinfantry/indianinfantrypre1857.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 17:09, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Football and military history

Is there a place in WP:MILHIST for fact-checking? I've been working on Bert Trautmann, and I've more or less done the section on his time in the Luftwaffe. For obvious reasons I've been relying on football-based sources, so I'd like someone with the relevant knowledge to go through that section to ensure it doesn't drop any clangers. Oldelpaso (talk) 12:07, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the welcome. I had started to work on the Tag & Assess project, and realized that it might be easier to do that if I was actually a participant in the project; so, here I am. Again, thanks! UltraExactZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 18:34, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

SimpsonsFan08

Per a help me request by SimpsonsFan08, he would like me to contact you. His indef block is up for debate. Is that allowed, for me to contact you? §hep • ¡Talk to me! 13:00, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Gotcha, thanks for the pointer. §hep • ¡Talk to me! 13:09, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Removal of CSD tag on Christian Grahn

While he is a member of the hives, the article has no content; it simply says that he's the bass player for the hives and a previous band he was in, which can just as easily be put on the Hives' page without creating a new article. Ironholds (talk) 15:04, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Second opinion

I'm concerned about one of the editors in T&A. He's doing the lists at breakneck speed and has clocked up a 1000. I've been keeping an eye on his edits and have the following concerns:

1. He's assessing, in some instances, at the rate of six a minute.
2. He's not assigning task forces thoroughly (and in some ranges, at all).
3. He's not tidying up after cutting and pasting material from the templates (ie all the unneeded portals and task forces are saved into the article).

I have left him a couple of messages and his work has improved but I think the ranges probably need redoing to fix the gaps. Can you take a look and let me know if you think (a) his work is up to muster and (b) we need to intervene? Thanks, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 16:32, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Can you have a word with him please and suggest he revisit? A fresh approach may work ... --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 19:11, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank's

		The GO-PCHS-NJROTC Abuse Report and Antivandal Barnstar
		Thank's for reverting vandalism to my user page! GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 22:22, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Revert

Because you removed the picture I took of the Birmingham game. Do what you have to do but dont take away that pic, its an excellent photo showing a game in progress, the crowd and the stands.

Fine, remove it as it seems to make you happy. But can I just say that quoting "your" in every sentence in the most condescending way possible to a donating member who has been here a whole 2 years longer than you have is also a 'bad sign'. And dont let that array of internet 'awards' make you think otherwise. Of course it added something to the article, it was a picture of the subject matter, in game as well which no other picture does. Mozman (talk) 02:14, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

TUT

203.143.226.98 has vandalized Tutankhamun, and been reverted 4 times. Would a block be in order.(olive (talk) 02:48, 29 April 2008 (UTC))

"Tut" is now being vandalized regularly everyday it looks like. What about about semi - protecting again?(olive (talk) 19:40, 29 April 2008 (UTC))

Excellent. Thanks.(olive (talk) 17:15, 30 April 2008 (UTC))

Talking of Villa Park images

if you're aiming for FA you might be in trouble with the one captioned "Villa Park in the 1940s". It's described on the image page as "Villa park in the early 1900's" with a PD-US license, but there's no source information at all to indicate its real age or where it came from. By the way, thanks for removing various recent bits of gloating from certain articles; I did say beforehand that we'd probably lose 12-0, if your lot had tried a bit harder we might well have done :-(( cheers, Struway2 (talk) 10:28, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Only good thing to come out of that day was images for Martin Laursen, Zat Knight and Mauro Zarate (all standing about watching something on the screen between the Witton end and the Doug Ellis). I wish it was possible to change one's team and go and support one worth watching instead, but it isn't. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 11:02, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

HMS Cardiff Featured Article Candidate

Hello, this is a generic message, as a contributor to a previous review of HMS Cardiff, you may be interested to know that I plan to submit her for an FA review. Would you mind taking a quick look at the article and letting me know if you think it's ok, would be muchly appricated, cheers. Ryan4314 (talk) 13:06, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

{{HD}}

I remember you expressed concern over the template a while back, I've sorted it no it can be substituted, by typing {{subst:HD/rd}} etc. Just thought I'd tell you...... Dendodge.Talk^Help 11:47, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Asia united Bank page

Hi there! I was just wondering why you had the page I created for Asia United Bank was recently deleted. I was simply putting information regarding that bank, no intention of advertising at all. DAVID CRUZ ^talk —Preceding comment was added at 18:08, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Various things

Thanks for your help with T&A the other day. Your input was much appreciated.

Would you have time to sign as one of the coordinators and help monitor the drive? I usually keep an eye on new taggers to try to fix early problems. We're light on coordinators at the moment, mostly due to exams, and I seem to be on my own with this one.

All the best, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 17:33, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I usually reckon the checklist is appropriate for a Start-class that's practically B-class, that is, fails on one or two criteria. But the real priority is getting task forces tagging accurately done so that TFs have a meaningful pool of articles to work with. --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 17:41, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Some taggers are requesting gongs-as-they-go. No problems with that for most editors but I'm reluctant to do that when the editor didn't really do the job properly in the first and hasn't made much effort since to put it right. In such cases, what do you think is most appropriate? Reduce the claimed tally to say a third (which is probably being generous) or just ignore that tally and award everyone else? Or something altogether different? --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 19:06, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I concur. I've left a reminder. As I'm going to be away from early tomorrow for the rest of the week, could you please keep an eye on my talk page for any response and deal? All the best, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 05:48, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm thinking of proposing to the membership that Kirill's emeritus status becomes a lifetime one. It seems inappropriate to make this decision at coordinator level. What do you think? --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 05:48, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey

Wotcha. Just wanted to pass by and say thanks for your support while I was off having a hissy fit. I'm not convinced the issues at WP:FOOTBALL which worked me up are going to be resolved soon, and there are some personalities there that I'm better off avoiding contact with, but two or three days off has done wonders for my love of the encyclopaedia. Keeping or losing an 's' now is relegated to the Conference and I'm onto better things! All the best, The Rambling Man (talk) 16:44, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Something for you

		The Writer's Barnstar
		As winner of the contest department March competition, you are hereby awarded the Writer's Barnstar. Congratulations, --ROGER DAVIES talk 18:42, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations Woody!!! Good job :O)--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 02:14, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

FAC disruption

Woody, as an uninvolved admin, may I trouble you to keep an eye on this disruption, which he admitted was a point,[2] at the Clinton FAC, related to his complaint about the way Raul has always done restarts? To maintain neutrality at FAC, I'd like to not get further involved, but I'm concerned that if he continues on this track, it will disrupt the FAC further. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:36, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVI (April 2008)

The April 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) 02:47, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Overhaul of FL criteria

I've re-started the process here and am notifying the four candidates for director as well as advertising at FLC talk and FAC talk. Your input would be valued. Tony (talk) 05:23, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Premier League

I notice your edit summary at Premier League of "revert back to referenced version". Last week I reverted the addition of nicknames at Premier League members for 2007–08, partly because they didn't seem necessary, but also because they're unreferenced. I've never heard of The People's Club, The School of Science, The Academy of Football, for a start off. What do you think of that addition to the table? Peanut4 (talk) 21:14, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

I have to agree. I don't think they are necessary at all. I reverted the first addition, by saying "please discuss on talk page". They were put straight back, and couldn't be bothered getting in my own personal edit war, since I expected others to have it on their watchlist and may decide to revert. Since no more appeared, I thought maybe, other people weren't upset by their addition. Peanut4 (talk) 21:34, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Great minds. I wouldn't be surprised to see them return though. Peanut4 (talk) 21:37, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Rant

Your disrespect shows through in each thoughtless comment you ever make to me. Each comment you make is an attempt to cast any statement that I make in the worst light possible. How long does it take you to come up with some of them or is it just a natural thought process for you. Anyone who makes the effort to cast every statement I make in the worst light possible is by definition a critic. Each is always full of POV denigrations that are unsubstantiated. Is there a reason why you use unsubstantiated POV terms such as ego-driven.

You are clearly missing the forest for the trees. The LOTD process that I propound would be very beneficial to the FL department of the project if it were to be approved for the main page. 1. It would motivate people to edit FLs at other's suggestions, 2. it would promote adoption of lists without active editors, 3. it would motivate production of FLCs for eligibility at LOTD on the main page. All of these things would benefit FL as a whole.

Can you please respond with your thoughts on the following statement. Please may want to make a comparison between a person who is trying to promote a democratic process versus one who is trying to promote a co-dictatorship and reconsider your choice of words when saying which one is ego-driven.

Also how is "I am sorry if developments here seem to clash with your schedule." a productive response to a query "How will having an FLD affect that prospect [of reproposing LOTM in December]?"--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:29, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I apologize for late revision that got garbled. The request was for a "comparison between a person who is trying to promote a democratic process versus one who is trying to promote a co-dictatorship and reconsider your choice of words when saying which one is ego-driven."--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 14:39, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Since you understand that there are benefits to the LOTD process, it befuddles me that the only thing you can think of when I try to understand what role people are running for is "your post seemed entirely caught up with how changes would affect you and seemed to give no thought to the benefit of the project."--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 14:39, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Re:Battle of the Kalka River

Thanks. I wasn't t sure of wherever to make it its current class or its class at the start of the month. Thanks for clarifing it. Kyriakos (talk) 06:28, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Peer review

Hey, you helped peer review the Justin Tuck article I've been working on. Can you eye ball it and see if there is anything else I could possibly improve? It's difficult to find a lot of info cause he's not even a starter on the Giants. Any help would be much appreciated. --Endless Dan 12:54, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Julin Szukalak

I've listed this for speedy deletion, Julin Szukalak but it might be best if you do the deed, since you won't be taken in by the claims about this supposed VC recipient. I'll copy this to Solando as well. I haven't yet warned the creator of the article, but that probably ought to be done as well. David Underdown (talk) 11:42, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the notification. I've deposited a welcome/warn on the user's talk. I'm sure that account's contribs won't be able to escape scrutiny with so many interested users ;-). SoLando (Talk) 15:26, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

May 12 Dispatch

And now on to Wikipedia:FCDW/May 12, 2008, May 12 Dispatch, to cover new directors, general FL issues, etc. They never publish on time; it should be ready by the 13th, and if you all throw some text in there, Tony1 and Jbmurray usually copyedit. Gotta get moving :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:13, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Battle of Villagarcia

Thanks for the assessment. I have made some adjustments as per advice. Urselius (talk) 13:15, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

re: Reviews

I don't mind in the least as that was not at all what I intended to say :) (Talk about a Freudian slip!) It's probably best if we pro forma the review text. I'll do so and add it to the instructions template.

What do you think of the MHCON stuff in /Coords by the way? --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 14:54, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Don't know if you saw, but I replied to you in the Cardiff FAC, cheers :) Ryan4314 (talk) 10:07, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Unblock

Ta for the unblock.

Tresiden (talk) 16:40, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

List of German World War II jet aces

I believe that I addressed all your comments. Please revisit and let me know what you think. Thanks MisterBee1966 (talk) 22:52, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Could you have a look at the Kurt Welter picture and check if it addresses the issue? Thanks MisterBee1966 (talk) 09:17, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for helping out! I made the changes, please check again. MisterBee1966 (talk) 10:11, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Images in list

This article has only a selected image of the aces. Images of people who shot down more planes is absent while those who shot down less planes are present. What is criteria for inclusion of image in this article? Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 10:40, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the clarification. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 10:57, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Special projects dept/Nelson's birthday

Just a thought but Nelson is a natch for the new Special Projects dept. I've left a message to this effect on Maralia's page too. --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 03:30, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Villa squad

Hi, this is the reference: "Martin O'Neill confirms Aston Villa quartet's exit" http://www.birminghammail.net/birmingham-sport/aston-villa-fc/aston-villa-news/2008/05/15/martin-o-neill-confirms-aston-villa-quartet-s-exit-97319-20914478/ 82.131.204.26 (talk) 14:16, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Re:Image

Perfect! Thank you. TomStar81 (Talk) 20:56, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

1895 FA Cup Final

Can you clear up a query I have with regard to the goalscorer in the 1895 FA Cup Final? The article credits the goal to Bob Chatt, as does the linked page at www.sportingchronicle.com. The match report in the other linked page says that the ball "was diverted by goalkeeper Reader or by a defender on the line, to Devey who scored. Most people in the ground had been prepared to credit Chatt with the goal, but Devey is now thought to have got the final, perhaps involuntary touch".

This is supported by Gibbons in his History of Victorian Football . He says "Bob Chatt shot towards the West Bromwich goal. Joe Reader managed to half-save the goal attempt, but John Devey scrambled the loose ball over the goal line to secure a one-goal lead for Villa".

Are you able to clarify this from any of your own sources? Cheers. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 05:15, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I have now created an article on Bob Chatt, in which I've tried to summarise the FA Cup goal. Unfortunately, I have read three different reports on the events between kick-off and the ball crossing the goal-line, and they vary significantly, one even suggesting that the ball went out for a thrown in. I have gone with the version at www.fa-cupfinals.co.uk, but if your Villa histories say different, perhaps you could correct the article. Thanks again. --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 06:03, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

RfA thank-spam

Woody/Archive 4, just a note of appreciation for your recent support of my request for adminship, which ended successfully with 112 supports, 2 opposes, and 1 neutral. If there's something I've realized during my RFA process this last week, it's that adminship is primarily about trust. I will strive to honour that trust in my future interactions with the community. Many thanks! Gatoclass (talk) 06:26, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks!

		RfA: Many thanks
		Many thanks for your participation in my recent request for adminship. I am impressed by the amount of thought that goes into people's contribution to the RfA process, and humbled that so many have chosen to trust me with this new responsibility. I step into this new role cautiously, but will do my very best to live up to your kind words and expectations, and to further the project of the encyclopedia. Again, thank you. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 05:53, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the warning

However, you know what they say about working in dangerous places....safety first, wear hard hat!

Please read what I have said before warning me. The edits made by DIREKTOR are not even based on acceptable references. When I said we do our own research, this referred to checking the reliability of the sources and not that we should use Original Research in the edits. If you look at my edits you will see lots of examples of this, and what is more, they are all relevant to the context of the text. On the other hand DIREKTOR has been creating and editing articles in blatant disregard of the attribution policy thinking that ANY reference will do, even one that has not relevance or is completely taken out of context, as long as there is a references. But hay, so far I have been in conflicts with Romanians, Poles and now a Croat, so I must be doing something right. The strange thing is, I have been proven right every time, even if I had to get a former university professor of Polish history to retract her comments.

Woody, you go and look at the edits, rather then warning me because I have had enough warnings. I reserve the right to undo edits of anyone who lowers the quality of Wikipedia by wilfully falsifying facts. Wikipedia is a reference work, and what is in it is concern #1--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 14:06, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Assessment scale

I would be interested in your opinion on the Combine A and GA into GA/A class, process delegated by commmunity in cases of mature WikiProjects proposal. Thanks.--Pharos (talk) 19:44, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Re:Assessment issues

As I've already said, I should have been more clear why that article was not meeting B-class criteria. However, I didn't know if he was aware or not of our B-class criteria. So, if I posted only the minimum explanation in that issue, that didn't mean I was not welcoming or bad-intended. --Eurocopter (talk) 19:47, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

RE:Tag and Assess

Hey. Thanks for telling me. to be completely honest, I left my screen for a few moments and I forgot about the task forces and just saved the page. Thanks for picking me up on it and I will be more mindful in the future. Jhfireboy Talk 20:17, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Your advice

I have asked for your advice how to resolve the editing conflict with DIREKTOR. Will that be forthcoming?--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 21:06, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I note that while as an administrator you choose not to get involved in content issues, as a project coordinator is seems to me it is within your responsibility to ensure that articles comply with the project, and indeed Wikipedia guidelines, that include WP:V. That you choose to wear your admin hat in respect to my behaviour, but not your coordinator hat in this respect is most puzzling. Please note that it is only after repeated failures to explain to the editor DIREKTOR the impropriety of his reference that I became frustrated in my reply to him, once. I had not started a "dispute", DIREKTOR's initiative, nor do I see one at all in terms of content, which had only been slightly changed from that which I left following my preliminary review of the article, and has only been changed to give the Yugoslav forces greater prominence in the operation without any substantiation to other sources outside of a self-acknowledged poorly referenced (if possibly true) online site. This at best represents breach of neutral point of view editing, and at worst, should Ivan not be able to provide sources, constitute original research. In any case, I have asked another editor to assess DIREKTOR's references in question. I am sorry that I let my temper show, but I have been increasingly frustrated recently by the attitudes towards use of sources, and that may have been what provided the final straw.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 01:47, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

8th King's Royal Irish Hussars

Woody, you're doing a marvellous job there. I love the way you're formatting it. If you find any in-line citations needed let me know and I'll do the donkey work. This article, along with a lot of the other "Cavalry of the Line" articles was well overdue the work.GDD1000 (talk) 23:16, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Woody, you're giving me an amazing amount of assistance and I want you to know how grateful I am for it. I've been shouted at a lot for getting things wrong, especially with these images. It's fantastic that someone else is actually willing to spend time with a newbie. I can promise you I'm learning from what you're doing for me. Thanks again.GDD1000 (talk) 15:38, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

If you don't mind...

Hi Woody, I noticed you're active on the block log at the moment. If you don't mind, could you check over the block I've just issued here? It's my first, and I'd like to make sure I've done it right! Cheers ;) EyeSerene^talk 13:54, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks very much, that's good to know (and much appreciated!) EyeSerene^talk 14:15, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Venezuela

That fix seems to have removed the Venezuela project.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 14:36, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I fixed Argentina in the same way to be consistent.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 14:40, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Woody, why is Wikipedia:WikiProject Venezuela being redirected to South America throughout templates? What is behind this and how can I track it down? This isn't right; do we redirect France, Spain and Germany to Europe? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:47, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

This is absurd; I hope there's a good explantion. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:52, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Discussion moved to User talk:SandyGeorgia#RE:Venezuela. Woody (talk) 15:24, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Belgrade Offensive

Hi Woody, without suggesting you should take sides in this dispute, I'd like to ask you to stick around and maybe get involved. This whole thing could get ugly when mrg finishes his research, as he states that he will rework the article completely. (example: "I will revert your 'Soviet' where it is used in conjunction with units and formations before 1946 as being factually wrong." [3]) Possibly his sources will be satisfactory for both sides, but I dare say I doubt he will apply them in a balanced way, i.e. that he will apply Russian sources in the international context of the English Wikipedia (though I do not know this, and may be wrong). In any event, we certainly need Admin supervision. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 15:23, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

It is really advisable not to speculate on things we do not know. I'd be happy with sources in any European language--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 01:49, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

There's that overbearing tone of voice, I shall speculate on anything I fell like. In any case my speculation is well founded. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 11:01, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Problem user

Woody could you take a look at Thom7 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log), particularly in relation to these two diffs [4] [5]. I reverted but otherwise ignored the first one, and I've reverted the second, but since it seems unlikely he's going to give up I think some action needs to be taken against him - I don'tthink any of his contributions have been particularly worthwhile,and he's had a number of vandalism warnings in this incarnation anyway. David Underdown (talk) 11:09, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Ta. David Underdown (talk) 11:33, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Hello Woody/Archive 4! I'd like to leave a note of appreciation for your recent support of my request for adminship, which ended successfully today (and to my surprise) with 83 supports, 4 opposes, and 2 neutral. What I have taken back from my RFA is that I've perhaps been too robust in debate and I will endevour to improve upon that aspect of my usership. I would like to thank you again and state here that I will not let any of my fellow Wikipedian's down. Thanks again! --Jza84 |  Talk  11:30, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Commons image

Thanks very much for taking care of moving Image:Sandra Nasić.jpg or Commons. I do have a question about it, however: most images that I've uploaded that have been swapped to Commons have retained their wikipage, I guess as some sort of disambiguation link kind of thing to the commons page. Take a look at image:Trent Reznor Lollapalooza 1991.jpg for example. I'm not sure how to do this, but I think it's useful to keep its presence at least as a mirror to its original location (if only for external linking purposes). Drewcifer (talk) 15:33, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I see, makes alot of sense. Do you think a redirect would be in order for the page with the accent? Just to avoid red link, I guess. Or am I over thinking this? Drewcifer (talk) 15:46, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Unblock request

Answered on my talk for continuity.— Ѕandahl 02:00, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: Kenneth Dewar

Hi. Apologies I never got back to your comments on the A-class review on Kenneth Dewar - I've just finished exam season and I didn't notice that there was a four day limit to address the issues raised. Is there a possibility of re-opening the review or do have to bring a new one? Cheers, --Harlsbottom (talk|library)

Battle of the Bulge

Hi. Concerning this edit: [6]

The categories you returned are already parent categories of Category:Battle of the Bulge. --Timeshifter (talk) 14:40, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Dynamo 5 times two

Thanks! You're quick! --GentlemanGhost (talk) 20:01, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Categories for WW2

Hi Woody. I would appreciate if you did not revert the categories I created before you have a look at the work done, and consider it on its own merits. It is in fact a continuation of the discussion begun with Kirill last year, and he had already implemented that in part. I am simply continuing in the section of Second World War--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 14:56, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Its here [7], done by Kirill I believe. I simply went from that taking into account the categorisation guidelines, definitions used by other projects in Wikipedia and categorisations adopted by other language wikipedias. I was also bold. If you call what I did vandalism, then I would consider that an injustice at best and an insult at worst. Seriously, I could not find my way to categorise my own articles, and I do data administration for a living. Please consider calmly what I have done, and review it before dumping it all. Each category I added is fully compliant with their main article, and each term used is sourced and referenced, something not usually required in categories. Indeed the absence of these created the nightmare that is World War II categories in the first place. I am also consulting with the Britannica Propedia, which is the volume on its categorisation system. Thrust me, all I want here is to produce a high quality reference source. I am now going to sleep since its rather late here (Australia). Please note that Bucksho06 watches everything I do, and is usually highly critical of almost everything, but had not raised one complaint against me creating appropriate categories. Regards--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 15:33, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

I do not like my integrity questioned. I have been a member of the Australian branch of RUSI for over a decade, and in military history discipline this means something. Seeing how you are from the UK, it should mean something to you also. Regards--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 16:20, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Woody, the only reason I do not accept opinion of others is because I do not deal in opinions. Usually the reason for disagreement is because others have failed to support their thoughts with sources, something which is more then encouraged in Wikipedia. As for RUSI, yes, as a member there I do have a reputation to protect, not only my own, but that of the organisation, and its 150+ history. Maybe if others had same regard for their reputations, we would see more quality then quantity in article authoring and editing.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 03:57, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Military Articles

Hi Woody, I've been beavering away like a wee beaver and gradually improving a lot of cavalry websites as well as creating three interesting articles (I hope) one of which was down as a project on the Milhist page. I'll post the ones I've worked on here (some still need a fierce amount of work though) in case you or anyone else from the project wants to look in on them? Maybe this fire that seems to be lit under me might inspire others? South Irish Horse, The Irish Legion, Regiment of Hibernia, 1st King's Dragoon Guards‎, 2nd Dragoon Guards (Queen's Bays)‎, 3rd Dragoon Guards, 4th Royal Irish Dragoon Guards, 4th/7th Royal Dragoon Guards‎, 5th Dragoon Guards, 5th Royal Inniskilling Dragoon Guards‎, 6th (Inniskilling) Dragoons, Carabiniers (6th Dragoon Guards)‎, 7th Dragoon Guards‎, 3rd The King's Own Hussars, 4th Queen's Own Hussars, 7th Queen's Own Hussars, 8th King's Royal Irish Hussars, (this one you've done me proud on and I'd like to know how I can get it upgraded now?), Queen's Royal Irish Hussars, 21st Lancers, 17th/21st Lancers, North Irish Horse.GDD1000 (talk) 22:36, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Asking you before I go to a dispute process

I would firstly like to ask you to undo the redirect for Battle of Voronezh (1942) and restore it to the Battle for Voronezh (1942).

I would also formally ask you to request Buckshot06 from engaging in stalking me. Should you be unable to do so, I will go through formal arbitration process of halting this behaviour. Buckshot06 has taken it upon himself to correct and undo everything I do as my personal shadow. Despite doing so, he actually has little if any knowledge in the areas I edit outside of unit histories, and his assertions of my incorrect use of English can certainly wait until some other editor, user or even IP corrects it. On numerous occasions he has engaged me in an argument where he had failed to provide any sources to support his proposals outside of the OED and Google search counts. Maybe you can explain to him that good arguments are based on more then our opinions--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 07:56, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Yet another example of stalking is the renaming of Narodnoe Opolcheniye into Peoples' Militia. Below is my note to Buckshot06

Why can't you just stick to editing something you know about?! You do not know Russian, you do not know Russian military history and yet you challenge me at every article! Народ (narod), the root of Narod-noe, means a single nation (the root is -rod, kind), and refers only to Russians. Therefore it is incorrect to translate it into either Peoples' or People's militia, because in the first case, in English, it means a militia of a "people" left undefined, and in the second case is equally incomprehensible.

--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 09:46, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

I do not wish to get involved here, but to my knowledge, "narod" simply means "people", or "nation". (With the root, "rod", meaning "kin", or "kind".) "Narodnoe" would mean "of the People (singular)" or "People's", which is to say, not "of (several) Peoples". A direct translation of "Narodnoe Opolcheniye" would without a doubt be "(the) People's Militia" or "National Militia", while the former is usually used to translate communist/socialist use. However, I do not see why "People's" would refer only to the Russian people, especially in the context of the multi-national Soviet Union, and taking into consideration that even Russia was (and remains) very much multi-national. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 11:07, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Maybe I should have let it stay at People's Militia then. Direktor, thanks for your second opinion. Buckshot06(prof) 12:08, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem, in my language "Narodnoe" (the adjective) is spelled virtually the same, "Narodno". --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 12:13, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

It does not simply mean people, and it is not applied only in communist use in this case--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 11:45, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't? How so? --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 11:56, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Ask on the article talk--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 23:01, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Euro squads

Per your request, I shall accede and create no further squad templates. I believe they do have a place, I can understand lesser tournaments, but the Euro's seem to be close to the WC in terms of public interest. No further navboxes from myself.Londo06 11:46, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Incivility

Hi Woody, noticed your use of 'that goes for both of you of course,' in regard to incivility over these disputes. I've tried to remain civil and have been biting my tongue at times when reading the responses Mrg has directed at me, but if you've spotted any times when my use of words has been borderline, please point them out and I'll take a look - and take any remedial actions the coordinators may direct. Kind regards Buckshot06(prof) 12:06, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Woody. Having looked at yours and Rodger Davies' words on your discussion over disruptive editing, I'm a little confused. If I follow Roger's suggestion, I've indicated my disapproval and that's all I would need to do. Yet you say that useful ideas are emerging in the WW 2 category discussion - are you seeming my contributions there as helpful? If they are useful I'll go on making them, but if all that's needed is to express disapproval of the radical remake of WW 2 categories, I'll stop, as rebutting things point by point over and over and over again is not very fun - I could work on something else. Kind regards from DownUnder, Buckshot06(prof) 21:30, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Woody. How long do you recommend I wait before I made a mass CfD for all these ridiculous categories? Do you have any ideas on how long the discussion should be allowed to last? Buckshot06(prof) 07:25, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

This is the "discussion" I'm waiting for? A threat of "mass CfD for all these ridiculous categories"? So far you Buckshot06 have contributed one negative statement after another without actually proposing any alternatives. Quite frankly since Roger pointed out that no one has to do anything given its a convention to even have categories, why are you so worried about it. Just don't use the "ridiculous categories", but only the sensible categories of your choosing. Just create your own. Seems to be the outcome of the "discussion" that anyone can create and delete categories at will with no planning, forewarning or discussion. I can see that this entire exercise seems to be an exercise in delaying tactics, probably until I am threatened with a block again, told I'm being disruptive, a "clever troll" (your favourite), or some other "wikiism". Preventing the creation of a viable categorisation just to spite me for your perceived hurts is not going to go away.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 07:51, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

DalekChicken

Hi,

You blocked this user for sock abuse. [8]. In fact he's very recently (last few days) asked if he could re-edit on condition he doesnt misuse socks any more, and was told that would be fine.

Is the block because of new activity I'm unaware of, in the last 1-3 days, or old activity? Can you let me know, and consider if the block should be reversed in light of that information?

Thanks :)

FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 13:48, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Category:World War II

It actually says "Please do not add articles to this category without consulting Military History coordinating team". Doesn't say DON'T ADD. Just says please ask before you dump an article with little regard to categorisation standards of Wikipedia HERE. What exactly is wrong with that?--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 14:00, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Fine, have it your way. However, I always think there is urgency when something is broken to fix it.

However, keep saying "consensus" does not actually get things done. By Kitrill's own admission no consensus was reached before, and categorisation had been simply abandoned.

I therefore would like to suggest starting a Military History Project categorisation sub-project, with the Second World War as its test implementation.

I will start the project of in the location you suggested - Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/World War II task force/Category restructuring and assume the role of project leader. This is simply a role that provides steering and milestone tracking capacity, and monitoring that the project is not a talkfest, but seeks to reach its stated objectives and a goal of creating viable project-wide categorisation, and so is a steering/administrative function. It does not exclude my participation in discussion.

I will then put down some project criteria and parameters, and would appreciate that if you are able, you participate in your coordinating capacity, since to me it seems a clear case of a need for a coordinator present.

The project criteria and parameters will be based on existing Wikipedia categorisation policy, guidelines and conventions as they apply.

• The goal of the project would be to produce a coherent approach to Military History Categorisation that will serve the project authors and editors in the future regardless of currently available volume of articles.
• Aside from the application of Wikipedia categorisation policy, guidelines and conventions, the offered proposals need to be substantiated using English published sources that are commonly available.
• The understanding would be that comments would be invited from other Wikipedia projects as required where the MilHist participants are lacking in expertise or sources.
• All suggestions of titles need to be accompanied by category descriptions and not a single line title. Descriptions need to be sourced.
• The project will proceed in an orderly fashion from top order (root) category World War II down to the most practicable extent of notability. Examples of these extreme extreme extent would be Chemicals used in military science during World War II, or awarded Service qualification insignia of the RAF during World War II (as opposed to gallantry awards).

What do you think about this? Anything you would like to add?

Regards--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 00:07, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Categorisation

Woody - thanks for the comments on Categorisation - simply over-enthusiasm on my part. I guess I'll stop now! Thanks Shem (talk) 22:12, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Request for Peer Review help

Thank you for you work as a peer review volunteer. Since March, there has been a concerted effort to make sure all peer review requests get some response. Requests that have gone three days or longer without a substantial response are listed at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog. I have three requests to help this continue.

1) If you are asked to do a peer review, please ask the person who made the request to also do a review, preferably of a request that has not yet had feedback. This is fairly simple, but helps. For example when I review requests on the backlog list, I close with Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, ...

2) While there are several people who help with the backlog, lately I have been doing up to 3 or 4 peer reviews a day and can not keep this up much longer. We need help. Since there are now well over 100 names on the PR volunteers page, if each volunteer reviewed just one PR request without a response from the list each month, it would easily take care of the "no response" backlog. To help spread out the load, I suggest those willing pick a day of the month and do a review that day (for example, my first edit was on the 8th, so I could pick the 8th). Please pick a peer review request with no responses yet, if possible off the backlog list. If you want, leave a note on my talk page as to which day you picked and I will remind you each month.

3) I have made some proposals to add some limits to peer review requests at Wikipedia_talk:Peer_review#Proposed_limits. The idea is to prevent any one user from overly burdening the process. These seem fairly reasonable (one PR request per editor per day, only four total PR requests per editor at a time, PR requests with cleanup banners can be delisted (like GAN quick fail), and wait two weeks to relist a PR request after it is archived), but have gotten no feedback in one week. If you have any thoughts on these, please weigh in.

Thanks again for your help and in advance for any assistance with the backlog. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 21:17, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

WhoMadeWho article deletion

I was somewhat confused as to why the article didn't exist in the first place, due to the band being rather popular on sites such as last.fm and MySpace(Moreso than thousands of other artists with wikipedia pages). So I made a start on the article, which took a little bit of time and was something I planned on adding upon over the coming days. But by a mere judgement call (Which is frankly wrong), all my work was deleted in seconds. So thank you. Red157 18:36, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Simple English username

Your request to usurp the user name Woody on Simple English wiki has been completed. Creol (talk) 04:27, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Spanish Wikipedia

The username change you requested was made sucessfully. es:Usuario:Woody is now available for SUL. Antur (talk) 12:36, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Bob Roberts

I've just created Bob Roberts (footballer) and put it up for WP:DYK as he was Albion's first international player. Was wondering if you could add anything regarding his (admittedly very short) Villa career? Even if you could just fill in his stats that would be absolutely fantastic. My source says he made 4 apps for Villa, but doesn't say how this broke down between league and cup. Cheers & see you in the Prem...! --Jameboy (talk) 22:37, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks for the updates - finding the Sunderland Albion stats could be tricky but I'll see what I can find out. An interesting story about Roberts, which I wasn't sure if I should add to the article, is that during a pitch invasion by a mob of Small Heathens, he apparently laid one of them out. That feat alone makes him an Albion great! Maybe Peter Enckelman should have done the same... --Jameboy (talk) 11:46, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

T&A

Might I ask you please to give the 1- and 2-stripe service awards to Cam? He prefers his awards from a variety of editors :) I've just updated the templates here a bit by the way to put them in Milhist house colours. --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 06:58, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Mrg3105

Hi Woody, recent edits by User:Mrg3105 have in my view finally crossed the line. He has resorted to plain POV edit-warring with all opposed editors without any real backing from sources [9], and I've accordingly reported him on WP:AN/I ([10]). As you're an involved Admin I thought it proper to inform you as well. To be perfectly frank, I don't know anymore what breed of logic (if any) reaches this guy... --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 13:09, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Albert Seaton, before he passed away, was a leading British military historian specialist on Russian and Soviet military history. A quote from his book is directly opposing your one-word support of the proposition that the operation was a joint one. He's stature is reflected by the review printed on the front of his other book The Russo-German War 1941-1945 by Military History Magazine, and he is quoted still in many contemporary works on military history. I call this a quality source. We have no idea who wrote the country data entry for the Library of Congress.

I have initiated an RfChist, and will wait for that, because I'm not interested in fruitless discussions. I have asked you to provide a better source again and again, and you have not. I'll let an impartial other editor decide.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 13:25, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Just to be clear, I will try to ignore any further posts by User:Mrg3105, due to past experiences convincing me of the futility of argumented discussion. My position on his edits can be seen in the "Latest edits" section of the article's talkpage, here: [11]. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 13:34, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Reliable sources

Well, if you knew about it, you may have pointed me to it as a seeming solution to all my problems Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 21:36, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Bibliographic?

Is this article MilHist material?--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 01:18, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

No, I have tagged it for Bio though. Woody (talk) 22:43, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Help requested from Inver471ness; re:Reusing material

Hello Woodym555,

Back in November, when I asked you about republishing my Ranulf I de Soulis article in the magazine of Clan Hay you wrote:

Yep, just point them to the article. Just put a link into the Wikipedia:Copyrights section for the rules on re-using the text. Everything looks good to me. Regards Woodym555 18:46, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, Hay Happenings want to publish the article. It is almost verbatim, but not quite. For instance, I altered the title to: “Ranulf de Soulis, uncle to the William de la Haya, founder of Clan Hay”, made one clarification to distinguish between the two Williams de la Haye, and the editor has omitted the notes. To me, I now have a derivative article.

Having studied Wikipedia Copywrights and Wikipedia Reusers’ Rights and Obligations, I intend to add the phrase, “This article was prepared by ........(my name ). It is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License and uses material from the Wikipedia article, Ranulf I de Soules”

(The first sentence is the editor’s).

Please let me know if you agree with how I am handling this, or make suggestions.

One point has occurred to me is that by publishing in Hay Happenings, I have identified myself as the author of the Wikipedia article. This does not concern me. Do you see any objections or complications’?

Thanks for all your previous help! Inver471ness (talk) 18:34, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Newsletter

I've added my bits. Perhaps you could give it the once over and release for distribution? As ever, many thanks, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 23:01, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

appeal of speedy deletion

Hi

I am currently filling in gaps in the football history sections, such as the Tornoi de France 1988 and others using information from the RSSF. I have been basic information for the World Cup of Masters, however speedy deletion on one page Copa do Craque de Masters. I do intend to add more details, but I was just filling in a basic overview first. Could you please remove the speedy deletion.

Thanks - Mr Bagnall (so called becuase thats my name and I am a teacher) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr Bagnall (talk • contribs) 15:35, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks re copy right question, plus two other queries

Woody, I appreciate your prompt reply. Apparently, I was on the right track.

My Wikipedia article,Ranulf de Soulis, is rated as Start Class.I realize that the reader might not find it sufficiently comprehensive. However, I have looked into this matter thoroughly and I seriously doubt that there is more information available or will be forthcoming after nine centuries. I thought that I would like to have its rating considered for revision and tried to follow instructions. However, I could find no project banner on the aricle's talk page on which to add peer-review=yes. I would appreciate your advice as to how to proceed.

If you go to my sandbox you will see that I have written some more text for Clan Hay, Origin of the Clan. I would have finished months ago, except that I ran into difficulty with the two references, got frustrated, and went on to other things. Please look at it and see where I went wrong. It may be the "circa" in the second reference. The Clan Hay article certainly needs improving and I am working on the early parts.

You have been a great help.

Cordially,Inver471ness (talk) 20:19, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Shiny Stuff

		The Original Barnstar
		For your diligence in getting another list of VC-Winners to FL-Status, I am pleased to award you this barnstar. Cheers! Cam (Chat) 23:50, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

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) 02:33, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Asia United Bank

Hi, an anonymous user has recently raised a concern over your deletion of Asia United Bank. I agree that it qualified for deletion per WP:CSD#G11, but wanted to get your opinion on the notability of this company. If it meets our inclusion standards, a couple of neutral/verifiable paragraphs can be salvaged from the body of promotional text. Let me know what you think. Cheers, ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 05:39, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Newsletter

I'm not sure if I am allowed to make a change to the letter but I do want to point out that List of German World War II jet aces also made FLC in May. MisterBee1966 (talk) 07:17, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Woody@nowiki

Hi there! The account Woody on the Norwegian Wikipedia has now been usurped. You can now log in as Woody using the same password as before. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 15:06, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Awards

I dont have the British award regulations handy, but the American are here [12]. You may want to have a read of them. Its funy that in a Military History Project of all Projects in Wikipedia the recognition of achievement is so loosely understood--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 23:29, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Followup from Inver471ness

Woody,

Thanks again. I now understand the difference between the two styles of referencing and prefer the"house" style. I have pasted the new material into the Clan Hay article. It looks OK, but the references did not come out quite as I had expected. I'd appreciate your having a look.

As for the peer review,I had read all the info concerning requesting a review before I contacted you. I must be missing something;I cannot see any WPBiography banner on The Ranulf de Soulis talk page. What happened? What's it look like?.

(I used to follow Newcastle United when I was a kid )Inver471ness (talk) 21:07, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Hughes

Thanks to our Registers of the Victoria Cross minisite at the National archives, I discovered that his first name is gien as Mathew (with one t). Page moved, and full citation given. David Underdown (talk) 14:09, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Template:WikiProject Portugal‎

Hi, you recently edited this template to add support for nesting, which it ALREADY had, so I suspect there may be some conflicting within the code. Could you possibly revert or modify your edit accordingly?--Ivo ^{talk / contribs} (join Project Portugal) 23:38, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh, well. Glad to hear that, then.--Ivo ^{talk / contribs} (join Project Portugal) 23:53, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks from Inver471ness

Woody,

The references look good now. I see they are at the end of the article, rather than where I had them. The next step is for me to really get it into my head as to how to use references-certainly before I write anything else! Concerning the biography template, your explanation could not be clearer. I have submitted my request. Cordially, and with thanks.Inver471ness (talk) 22:12, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Aldershot Town

Apologies about the comma in the title, and thanks for correcting my error, though why on earth someone would want to randomnly make such changes is quite beyond me.♦Tangerines♦·Talk 00:22, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

A Featured List contest

Grettings. FL directors Scorpion0422 and The Rambling Man have decided to run a contest for FL contributors. We are trying to get some interest in the process and get some FLs for the under-represented topics. If you would like to learn more about this contest, you can find such information here. If you are uninterested in it, then you could still help out by reviewing FLCs submitted by the entrants. Thanks for the time, Scorpion⁰⁴²² 18:30, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Bob Roberts (footballer) again

Hello again. Some discrepancies have come to light regarding Bob Roberts's date of birth and death, and I have therefore started a list on the article's talk page to log the various sources. Just wondered if you have any Villa-based sources (or any sources really) that could be added to the list? Cheers. --Jameboy (talk) 11:42, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

JSTOR request

Would you mind getting me this article, on the pacification of the Liberian hinterland: http://www.jstor.org/pss/2717507. Really appreciate it. Kind regards Buckshot06(prof) 11:06, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Russian Air-to-Air Missiles

Thanks for taking care of the Template:Infobox Weapon. I'll try to use it for the Russian AAMs and SAMs!

Germ (talk) 23:01, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Northern Group of Forces

Thanks for reviewing this article; please note I've now improved the aftermath section and did some other copyedits. Does it qualify for a B-class now? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 23:08, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

At Talk:Polish-Austrian War and Talk:Zamość Uprising, could you explain why the "coverage and accuracy" criterium was not met? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 14:32, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Test cricketers

Please take note of my final comment that I will make on this subject and can you please answer my question on [13] ? Thank you. Jolenine (talk) 16:11, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

I have replied over there. I saw it on my watchlist. Regards. Woody (talk) 16:12, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm really sorry, I think that you misunderstood my question. I will reformulate it: How am I supposed to know that those test cricket players are notable if there are not any references/sources that demonstrate that they are really a test cricket player? I mean, they can be people that are simply invented. Therefore, those invented people are not notable. Does it mean that when there is the words "test cricket player", it automatically means that they are notable, regardless of if they really exist or not? Therefore, does it mean that if I create an article about a person that I invented and I say that that person is a test cricket player for ABC country, this article is be considered good and that invented person is notable, regardless of if there is references or not? Thank you and have a nice day. Jolenine (talk) 16:48, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

I've added sources for all the articles on women test players I created. Thank you for pouring oil on troubled waters there. I apologise for becoming irritated at the time, I know we're all here to improve the encyclopedia in our various ways. Thanks again for your patience. Nick mallory (talk) 13:51, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Type 45 - bybye nos 7&8

So I suppose this means the class will never leave port unless attending an aircraft carrier. Oh well, at least the fleet will have good protection. Stupid politicians though - a little less increase in the NHS' budget would have provided for two more destroyers and a lot more besides. John Smith's (talk) 21:59, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I know what you mean. But in some respects we should be grateful we live in a secure part of the world. People talk about securing trade routes, but we'd need something like the Grand Fleet to do that. Two more destroyers wouldn't help us that much. In many ways I guess we should be worried when the government wants to expand the fleet. John Smith's (talk) 22:15, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

WP:LOTD/WP:LOTM

Congratulations List of Australian Victoria Cross recipients has been selected as a July WP:LOTD. As one of the leading vote-getters, it will appear in the WP:LOTD template for two days as a LOTD. If you have any preference on a days during July let me know before June 24th. If you have any other lists that you feel should be nominated next month please ad them at User:TonyTheTiger/List of the Day/Nominees/200808.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:59, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Crimea War VC FLC

Hi Woody. Sorry, I realised when I read your recent note that I'd miss your last request. I'll get a chance tomorrow (just off out now) - you ought to consider that I won't be supporting or opposing, just trying to ensure the standard is as high as possible. I guess, from that perspective, if I don't make any more comments at the FLC you'll know (as will the other FLC director, Scorpion0422) I have no more concerns. I'll do it first thing and when I'm done I'll drop you a line. All the best, The Rambling Man (talk) 18:16, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

It's all good except for William Peel's dates - what's going on there? The Rambling Man (talk) 07:04, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Mil Hist

It was really a matter of habit to put that in there. I sort of wondered why the main page was like that. That makes sense though. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 20:02, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Infobox country

Hi thanks for adding in the legislature field but could you move it below the leaders section I made a mistake on the talk page request thanks. Barryob (Contribs) (Talk) 20:58, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Apologies for the mistake thank again. Barryob (Contribs) (Talk) 21:04, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

AN: barnstar issue

Thank you Woody, for defending my comments. No they were not personal attacks on him but as you have corrected stated on the PC culture in general. I think it's been resolved now. I want to make it clear that I am not a racist. I have a deep admiration for Mexican people and their culture as well as Native Americans. In fact, I have edited an article on an American Indian activist Suzan Shown Harjo whom I admire, and a few articles on Mexican-Americans and their culture Ritchie Valens and lowrider. I'm from California and I grew up with Mexicans and had many Mexican friends, they knew I loved European history ( in fact, they are descended from European Spaniards as well as Indians) and never had problems with it. Anyway, thank you for your unbiased judgement. Cheers.09:18, 25 June 2008 (UTC)jeanne (talk)

SUL

Hi there. I renamed the greek user:Woody at el.wikipedia. You should be able to login with your global username. Cheers, el:User:Dada —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dada (talk • contribs) 18:22, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks ...

for keeping an eye on my talk page and actioning things as necessary. It really is appreciated. Things are (temporarily) a bit frantic in RL. We've got major building works at home and nothing going either smoothly or to schedule. Thanks again, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 19:53, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

SUL (es.wikibooks)

Please look at b:es:Usuario Discusión:Woody. LadyInGrey.

Deleting images

It appears you have removed images from articles because they had no fair use rationales, but you never gave anyone, including the editors who uploaded the images, an opportunity to add a rationale to the image page. Why are you removing images from articles and then deleting them completely without asking for rationales to be added first? 209.247.22.166 (talk) 13:16, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Which images are you referring to specifically? I have only deleted images that have been listed in maintenance categories. These images have been tagged for speedy deletion for at least three days, usually seven depending on the circumstances. If I had specific links then I could respond more adequately. Woody (talk) 16:02, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Assessment of Battle of Mardia article

Hi. Thank you for the assessment on my Battle of Mardia article. I just have made quite a few improvements on the structure and some moderate ones on the background and battle sections. If I assume that coverage (or, even worse, accuracy) is what this article lacks of, I'm afraid that the information we have from the sources and the modern scholarship does not permit further improvements. Bu I would like to know what *you* think is needed for this article to become B-class. Dipa1965 (talk) 20:09, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Transclusion limit

Woody, I can't remember ... was it you who discovered that transcluded limit thingie a while back at FAC? [14] SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:01, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Royal Army Medical Corps-Victoria Cross

Hi Woody could you look at this article it seems to be missing details of some members awarded the VC. I believe the VC is an interest of yours and you may be able to assist. Jim Sweeney (talk) 08:00, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes thats the one thought you would be able to help thanks Jim Sweeney (talk) 12:35, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Ranulf de Soulis article

Woody, Thanks for re-assessingthis article. That's all I need. Cordially,Inver471ness (talk) 16:44, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

Woody, thanks for assessing Clarence Ransom Edwards. I promise I will mind my parameters and leads from here on out! Ejosse1 (talk) 17:49, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

UTC

Hi Woody, I undid your undoing of my edit (!) because if you check, the time was not in UTC, it was in BST. In fact, if you check the edit history, it was actually added from an IP rather than the user account, so the signature was obviously added manually and botched... Dan1980 (talk ♦ stalk) 22:10, 30 June 2008 (UTC)