Revision as of 13:51, 9 January 2008 editDaniel (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators75,400 edits Saw you were active - does User:Daniel/Sandbox/1 look OK?← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:47, 9 January 2008 edit undoAatomic1 (talk | contribs)9,565 edits →The Military history WikiProject Newsletter — Issue XXII (December 2007)Next edit → | ||
Line 153: | Line 153: | ||
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section ]. | To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section ]. | ||
|} <br/><small>'''Note:''' This newsletter was automatically delivered. Regards from the automated, ] (]) 23:41, 7 January 2008 (UTC)</small> | |} <br/><small>'''Note:''' This newsletter was automatically delivered. Regards from the automated, ] (]) 23:41, 7 January 2008 (UTC)</small> | ||
==RFA== | |||
] I would like to complain about Alison placing herslf be for me at the above. ] (]) 23:47, 9 January 2008 (UTC) |
Revision as of 23:47, 9 January 2008
|
|
I am an administrator open to recall. To request this, please start a request for comment; if the consensus there is that my conduct has been unbecoming of an administrator, I will resign. |
Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_reform#Let.27s_start_with_Category:WikiProject_United_Kingdom
Multiple tagging is out of control. The banner containers are a kludge, not a solution.
Please see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_reform#Let.27s_start_with_Category:WikiProject_United_Kingdom. --kingboyk (talk) 19:52, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Renamed admins
Kirill: Since I've been back editing with a little more frequency, it seems that pretty much every day I run into an admin who has clearly been around for a while but who has a username which is new to me (several have been one letter usernames). I check their RfA, nothing there. I do a little digging and eventually I will find an old user account of theirs, but invariably no redirects have been left behind. Try and edit those pages and the admin pounces - "I have a right to vanish!"
I just wondered what you think, because this bothers me somewhat. People have a right to vanish and to change their username, but I don't think they should be allowed to take their sysop bit with them unless there is total transparency. Adminship is about trust, and why should the community trust admins who don't even have an RfA on public display? --kingboyk (talk) 23:41, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Adding categories
So I need to create a page first? Its there already Theater (warfare), but miscategorised as Military conflicts. Do I just replace Category:Military conflicts with Category:Theater (warfare)?
In actual fact the Theatre, Campaign, Operation and Battle, need to be under Category:Military Events, since the commencement of each is an event. Please look at the expansion I just made to the Military operation. I could not decide if the three concepts belong in one article or three separate articles with a disambig.-- mrg3105mrg3105 03:08, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- Hi Kirill. What happened last night is I was trawling for any inappropriately categorised articles relevant to Eastern Front, and noticed some articles that were in root categories and just started recategorising. I hope you don't mind, and I see that I may have got a couple not quite right, but still better then having hair styles dumped in the root Military I think :O) It may be a good idea for active memebers to do occasional 'pruning' of articles unless there is already a procedure in place and what I found are from old times (didn't look at the history). Cheers and thank you for your patience and help (again)-- mrg3105mrg3105 23:04, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Armenia-Azerbaijan
There is much duplication in the Armenia-Azerbaijan remedies. Can you look at Misplaced Pages:Editing restrictions and confirm if we can collapse those to just the three point list? Jehochman 14:13, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
disambig help
I was trying to add this
to this List of military occupations, but for some reason its not working. Can you please tell me what I did wrong?-- mrg3105mrg3105 03:30, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
- See above; if you're linking to a category (as opposed to placing an article in that category), you need to put a colon in front of it. Are you planning to create the disambiguation page? There doesn't seem to be one yet, as far as I can tell. Kirill 03:34, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
- Or maybe you meant to have For other uses, see Category:Military occupations. See Category:Territories under military occupation for a comprehensive list of military occupations. instead? Kirill 03:36, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
- Hmm, no I meant the forst one, but I thought that the disambig page is created when the tag is used. I hadn't created disambig pages before so will have to see how that's done. Thank you for pointing out the colon. Cheers-- mrg3105mrg3105 03:56, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
- Or maybe you meant to have For other uses, see Category:Military occupations. See Category:Territories under military occupation for a comprehensive list of military occupations. instead? Kirill 03:36, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Infobox Military Structure
I saw you undid the modification to the "Template:Infobox Military Structure" for a second image. This provided an option for a second image. This option actually works quite well in the infobox in certain situations & its use is optional. I realize you can also add images other ways, but in certain situations it works well inside the infobox. Just trying to determine the logic for removing this improvement. Thanks! FieldMarine (talk) 17:59, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
- I now see what you did - thanks for the clarification. My preference would be to have the second image next to the first as I think it looks cleaner, but I am happy to defer to your judgement on that. Anyway, please have a look at Naval Support Activity New Orleans when you get a chance & let me know what you think. Thanks! FieldMarine (talk) 18:13, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Category:Nuclear weapons programs, etc.
Hello Kirill, Thanks for your note -- just wanted to let you know that I am reflecting on the new arrangement you've created. Cgingold (talk) 13:36, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Jim62sch case
Hi,
I just just was looking over the Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Jim62sch/Proposed decision case decision and saw something that you may want to address if it's relevant. Orangemarlin was added to the case, but I don't see his name anywhere on the proposed decsions, whether he is is impacted by these decisions or not. I think maybe a clarification on that point might be in order. wbfergus 19:48, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
+FA -A
I really need to remember to look for those!! Thanks for clearing up after me as always. Regards. Woody (talk) 22:45, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
My Russian Brother
I am glad my Russian brother is such a great person and really helps this community in such a mognanimous and selfless way. Thank you, Igor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Igorberger (talk • contribs) 23:23, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter — Issue XXII (December 2007)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter Issue XXII (December 2007) | ||
|
New featured articles:
New A-Class articles: | |
| ||
| ||
Tag & Assess 2007 is now officially over, with slightly under 68,000 articles processed. The top twenty scores are as follows:
Although the drive is officially closed, existing participants can continue tagging until January 31 if they wish, with the extra tags counting towards their tally for barnstar purposes. We'd like to see what lessons can be learned from this drive, so we've set up a feedback workshop. Comments and feedback from participants and non-participants alike are very welcome and appreciated. | ||
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. |
Note: This newsletter was automatically delivered. Regards from the automated, Anibot (talk) 23:41, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
RFA
] I would like to complain about Alison placing herslf be for me at the above. Aatomic1 (talk) 23:47, 9 January 2008 (UTC)