Revision as of 15:17, 5 October 2009 view sourceMiszaBot III (talk | contribs)597,462 editsm Archiving 2 thread(s) (older than 30d) to User talk:Martintg/Archive 2.← Previous edit | Revision as of 09:20, 7 October 2009 view source Elias Ziade (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers25,699 edits →Deletionists have gont too far: new sectionNext edit → | ||
Line 78: | Line 78: | ||
The ''']''' 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.<br /><small>This has been an automated delivery by ] (]) 00:57, 3 October 2009 (UTC)</small> | The ''']''' 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.<br /><small>This has been an automated delivery by ] (]) 00:57, 3 October 2009 (UTC)</small> | ||
== Deletionists have gont too far == | |||
I see your stamp too is up for deletion, their justifications are ill based. ]] 09:20, 7 October 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 09:20, 7 October 2009
Archives |
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Peacock term
Your last edit of the Soviet war crimes article demonstrates that you are not satisfied with wording. I took these words directly form the source ( William Korey. The Origins and Development of Soviet Anti-Semitism: An Analysis. Slavic Review, Vol. 31, No. 1 (Mar., 1972), pp. 111-135), it is the article in the academic journal. If these words are acceptable there, I believe they are equally good for WP. However, if you disagree, feel free to reword. Otherwise, I'll remove the tag in close future.
Regards,
--Paul Siebert (talk) 15:16, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. The quotation marks are the improvement.--Paul Siebert (talk) 06:46, 8 September 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 04:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Invitation
I appreciated your comments at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/American Home. We have worked together before User_talk:Martintg/Archive_2#welcome thankfully all of those bilateral articles have now been redirected! So that battle is over....
You maybe interested in a group I am a member of:
Hello, Martintg. You have been invited to join the Article Rescue Squadron, a collaborative effort to rescue articles from deletion if they can be improved through regular editing. For more information, please visit the project page, where you can >> join << and help rescue articles tagged for deletion and rescue. Ikip (talk) 06:51, 13 September 2009 (UTC) |
---|
...hope to see you in the AFD trenches again. Ikip (talk) 06:51, 13 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) 20:35, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
Divisional symbols
Can you read Estonian? Then please read this repeated by this. What are your sources for the officiality of the 'EI' insignia? --Jaan Pärn (talk) 21:26, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
- Sure, but I don't know how reliable these websites are, the two seem to repeat the same thing, but don't provide any references to support their claims. I recall reading other sources that state that is was used informally. --Martintg (talk) 21:26, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well, seems that none of us has the sources to verify our claims. Until we get our hands on some sources, why don't we leave the more commonly used insignia which will be better recognised by anyone who knows anything about the symbolics of the division. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 21:42, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
- Given that we do have one source that is considered reasonably reliable, www.axishistory.com, indicating that this is the official unit symbol, we should retain the original, until we can verify otherwise. --Martintg (talk) 21:46, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
- ok, I'll deal with it tomorrow. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 21:53, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
- Given that we do have one source that is considered reasonably reliable, www.axishistory.com, indicating that this is the official unit symbol, we should retain the original, until we can verify otherwise. --Martintg (talk) 21:46, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well, seems that none of us has the sources to verify our claims. Until we get our hands on some sources, why don't we leave the more commonly used insignia which will be better recognised by anyone who knows anything about the symbolics of the division. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 21:42, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Nazi-Soviet military parade in Brześć
On September 17, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Nazi-Soviet military parade in Brześć, 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. |
≈ Chamal ¤ 13:15, 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 22:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
Arbitration case regarding the Eastern European mailing list
The Arbitration Committee recently passed a motion to open a case to investigate allegations surrounding a private Eastern European mailing list. The contents of the motion can be viewed here.
You have been named as one of the parties to this case at the request of the Arbitration Committee, here. Please take note of the explanations given in italics at the top of that section; if you have any further questions about the list of parties, please feel free to contact me on my talk page.
The Committee has explicitly requested that evidence be presented within one week of the case opening; ie. by September 25. Evidence can be presented on the evidence subpage of the case; please ensure that you follow the Committee instructions regarding the responsible and appropriate submission of evidence, as set out in the motion linked previously, should you choose to present evidence.
Please further note that, due to the exceptional nature of this case (insofar as it centers on the alleged contents of a private mailing list), the Committee has decided that the normal workshop format will not be used. The notice near the top of the cases' workshop page provides a detailed explanation of how it will be used in this case.
For the Arbitration Committee,
Daniel (talk) 06:12, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
Please comment here
User:Piotrus/ArbCom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:28, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
Email forwarding
You have, I believe, expressed the view that forwarding of emails to third parties without the consent of the originator is Bad. Are you confident that you have not engaged in similar behaviour yourself? William M. Connolley (talk) 09:50, 26 September 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) 00:57, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Deletionists have gont too far
I see your stamp too is up for deletion, their justifications are ill based. Eli+ 09:20, 7 October 2009 (UTC)