Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
As a member of the Military history WikiProject or World War I task force, you may be interested in competing in the Henry Allingham International Contest! The contest aims to improve article quality and member participation within the World War I task force. It will also be a step in preparing for Operation Great War Centennial, the project's commemorative effort for the World War I centenary.
If you would like to participate, please sign up by 11 November 2009, 00:00, when the first round is scheduled to begin! You can sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:38, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIV (October 2009)
The contest department has completed its thirty-first month of competition; its second month under the new and improved scoring system. A total of 53 articles were entered by nine editors. Sturmvogel 66 came in first with 96 points, followed by Auntieruth55 on 80 points. They are presented the Chevrons and Writer's Barnstar respectively. Honorable mentions go to Ian Rose (38), Abraham, B.S. (33) and Parsecboy (10). Our thanks go to Cuprum17, Ed!, The ed17 and Piotrus, who also fielded entries. All editors are encouraged to submit any articles that are working on for next month's contest.
User:Climie.ca has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
and therefore, I've officially declared today as Climie.ca's day!
For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian,
enjoy being the Star of the day, dear Climie.ca!
To ensure that everyone who signed up is still committed to participating in the 2010 WikiCup, it is required that you remove your name from this list! By removing your name, you are not removing yourself from the WikiCup. This is simply a way for the judges to take note of who has not yet reconfirmed their participation. If you have not removed your name from that list by December 30th, 2009 (by 23:59 (UTC)) then your name will be removed from the WikiCup.
It's worth noting the rules have changed, likely after you signed up. The changes made thus far are:
Mainspace and/or portal edits will not be awarded points at all.
Did you know? articles (which were worth 5 points last year) will now be worth 10 points.
Good articles (which were worth 30 points last year) will now be worth 40 points.
Valued pictures will be now awarded points, however the amount (5 or 10 points) is still being discussed.
Featured lists (which were worth 30 points last year) will now be worth 40 points.
Featured portals (which were worth 25 points last year) will now be worth 35 points.
Featured articles (which were worth 50 points last year) will now be worth 100 points.
Featured topics (which were worth 10 points per article last year) will now be worth 15 points per any article in the topic that you were a major contributor to.
Good topics (which were worth 5 points per article last year) will now be worth 10 points per any article in the topic that you were a major contributor to.
In the news will still be awarded points, however the amount (5 or 10 points) is still being discussed.
If you have any final concerns about the WikiCup's rules and regulations, please ask them now, before the Cup begins to avoid last minute problems. You may come to the WikiCup's talk page, or any of the judge's user talk pages. We're looking forwards to a great 2010 WikiCup! On behalf of the WikiCup judges, iMatthew at 03:41, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
2010 WikiCup Signups Reconfirmation! (reminder)
To ensure that everyone who signed up is still committed to participating in the 2010 WikiCup, it is required that you remove your name from this list! By removing your name, you are not removing yourself from the WikiCup. This is simply a way for the judges to take note of who has not yet reconfirmed their participation. If you have not removed your name from that list by December 30th, 2009 (by 23:59 (UTC)) then your name will be removed from the WikiCup. Note: this is the same message from last week, but you are receiving it because you have not removed your name from the list yet! Please do so if you still plan on participating. iMatthew at 22:20, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Re:Congrats!
Thanks. In another moment of irony, though, my masters may come in political science. The GPA for political science was better than my history gpa, so I am banking on getting back into collage on the strength of my minor instead of my major. TomStar81 (Talk) 07:56, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Haha "my". :P My step-dad watches Fox News and believes every word. It's fun to correct him, but when I have to do it every other day, it gets annoying. —Ed(talk • majestic titan)06:12, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Remember that I'm an independent firmly in the center, and don't forget that the bias is not exclusively limited to the right, the left is guilty of doing the exact same thing, MSNBC is a liberal love-fest. -MBK00401:28, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
Hello, Climie.ca. You have new messages at WT:OMT. Message added 22:37, 20 December 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
The Academy Content Drive concluded on 31 October. The first place Golden Wiki went to TomStar81 for 13 entries; the Silver Wiki was awarded to YellowMonkey for 11 entries, and Patar knight was presented with the Bronze Wiki for 3 entries. All other entrants were awarded the WikiChevrons or a barnstar for their contributions. Thank you to everyone who fielded an entry! All editors are encouraged to check out the newly expanded Academy.
A discussion about the notability of military people has resulted in an update to our in-house style guide. Prompted by some recent "articles for deletion" discussions, members felt that we should provide clearer guidance on the types of person that are most likely to meet Misplaced Pages's biographical notability criteria. The resulting advice, which you can see here, should be very helpful in both future deletion discussions and in deciding where best to focus article-writing efforts.
Our Task Force housekeeping discussion is now coming to a close. In October a number of proposals were made for rationalising our extensive list of Task forces. Although a few areas remain to be decided, project members have approved the changes summarised here. These will be enacted shortly, so if you haven't yet had your say, now's the time!
The contest department has completed its thirty-second month of competition; its third month under the new scoring system. A total of 52 articles were entered by seven editors. Sturmvogel 66 came first with 168 points, followed by Ian Rose on 51 points. They are presented the Chevrons and Writer's Barnstar respectively. Honorable mentions go to Auntieruth55 (31), Ed! (26), Abraham, B.S. (26), The ed17 (17) and Piotrus (7). All editors are encouraged to submit any articles that are working on for next month's contest.
Welcome to the biggest WikiCup Misplaced Pages has yet seen! Round one will take place over two months, and finish on February 26. There is only one pool, and the top 64 will progress. The competition will be tough, as more than half of the current competitors will not make it to round 2. Details about scoring have been finalized and are explained at Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Scoring. Please make sure you're familiar with the scoring rules, because any submissions made that violate these rules will be removed. Like always, the judges can be reached through the WikiCup talk pages, on their talk page, or over IRC with any issues concerning anything tied to the Cup. We will keep in contact with you via weekly newsletters; if you do not want to receive them, please remove yourself from the list here. Conversely, if a non-WikiCup participant wishes to receive the newsletters, they may add themselves to that list. Well, enough talk- get writing! Your submission's page is located here. Details on how to submit your content is located here, so be sure to check that out! Once content has been recognized, it can be added to your submissions page, from which our bot will update the main score table. Remember that only articles worked on and nominated during the competition are eligible for points. Have fun, and good luck! Garden, iMatthew, J Milburn, and The ed1719:17, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVI (December 2009)
Happy New Year to all! I shall take this opportunity to reflect upon the past year. In 2009 our project grew impressively, adding nearly 100 new featured articles and doubling the total number of featured lists. Overall the total number of articles within our scope surpassed 95,000 in 2009, and if these numbers hold steady we will surpass 100,000 articles in 2010. Thank you all for your outstanding efforts.
We are currently working on several proposals to improve the project for 2010. These include bringing the Milhist Academy up to full operational status, as well as spicing up and streamlining the task force structure. Also, any help you can offer to clear the current backlog of Military History good article nominations would be appreciated.
Coordinator Emeritus Kirill Lokshin has been re-elected to the Arbitration Committee for a two-year term in the 2009 elections. Kirill is one of four present or former coordinators of the project to be appointed to the Arbitration Committee; he was originally elected to a three-year term in 2007. The others are YellowMonkey (2007–2008), FayssalF (2008–2010), and Roger Davies (2009–2011).
The Contest Department has completed its thirty-second month of competition; and its fourth month under the new scoring system. A total of 45 articles were entered by seven editors. Sturmvogel 66 came first with 82 points, followed by Auntieruth55 with 74 points. They receive the Chevrons and Writer's Barnstar respectively. Honorable mentions go to Ian Rose (51), Abraham, B.S. (21) and Parsecboy (16). Ed! and Binksternet also fielded entries. Please submit any articles you are working on for the January contest.
Hello, Climie.ca. You have new messages at Talk:Japanese_battleship_Yamato. Message added 08:16, 4 January 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
I have nominated Iowa class battleship for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. TomStar81 (Talk) 00:53, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Milhist task force reorganisation
I've now completed the merger of the Lebanese military history task force into the Middle Eastern military history task force. As you are listed as a coordinator of both task forces, there's little (or nothing!) you need do, other than be aware that the merger has taken place :) It's possible former Lebanese TF members may wish to create a working group under their new task force's umbrella, but this can be addressed if the situation arises. All the best, EyeSerene12:21, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
WikiCup 2010 January newsletter
We are half way through round one of the WikiCup. We've had some shakeups regarding late entries, flag changes and early dropouts, but the competition is now established- there will be no more flag changes or new competitors. Congratulations to Sasata (submissions), our current leader, who, at the time of writing, has more listed points than Hunter Kahn (submissions) and TonyTheTiger (submissions) (second and third place respectively) combined. A special well done also goes to Fetchcomms (submissions)- his artcle Jewel Box (St. Louis, Missouri) was the first content to score points in the competition.
Around half of competitors are yet to score. Please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. 64 of the 149 current competitors will advance to round 2- if you currently have no points, do not worry, as over half of the current top 64 have under 50 points. Everyone needs to get their entries in now to guarantee their places in round 2! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Misplaced Pages talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, by email or on IRC. Good luck! J Milburn, Garden, iMatthew and The ed17 Delivered by JCbot (talk) at 00:11, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVII (January 2010)
It's only a month into the New Year, and we've already made changes to the project's infrastructure, merging and improving several task forces (see below). Much content within the project's scope has also been improved: eleven new featured articles, two featured lists, two featured pictures, a featured sound, and seventeen A-class articles. Thanks and congratulations to all editors who contributed and/or nominated these items.
In other news, the elections for new project coordinators are coming up in March. Think about whether you would like to run or not, and self-nominations will be coming up at the beginning of next month.
Lastly, our project's A-class review process is desperately in need of new reviewers. Please consider looking at least one and leaving comments, no matter how small or trivial. It will be greatly appreciated by the article's nominator(s).
Our thanks go to all editors who participated in our recent task force housekeeping discussion and to EyeSerene who implemented the technical side of the approved changes. The new line up is as follows:
The Contest Department has completed its thirty-third month of competition; and its fifth month under the new scoring system. A total of 91 articles were entered by ten editors. Sturmvogel 66 came first with 152 points, followed by Kumioko with 98 points. They receive the Chevrons and Writer's Barnstar respectively. Honorable mentions go to Auntieruth55 (87), Abraham, B.S. (48), Parsecboy (41), and Ian Rose (41). Binksternet, Radeksz, Ed! and D2306 also fielded entries. Please submit any articles you are working on for the February contest.
Ed just referred me to you because you were working on the Kirishima. I've got a book on the battle of Guadalcanal (a 400 page book on three days) that could be useful. If you need any information, just drop me a line :) The book is entitled Guadalcanal: Decision at sea and is written by Eric HammelNativeForeigner /Contribs07:07, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
That had occurred to me too. I was wondering if it might be worth subsectioning the Battle of the Philippine Sea, Leyte Gulf and Okinawa battles. I don't really think it would help to even out the sections much, but it might be worth a try - perhaps I'll have a go and we can see what it looks like (we can always change it back). EyeSerene08:28, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
You included some references in the Yamato Class article, but you forgot to add the book. The author is Willmott, so I guess you must refer to his book The Second World War in the Far East. Am I right? --210.139.98.74 (talk) 01:23, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
WikiCup 2010 February newsletter
Round one is over, and round two has begun! Congratulations to the 64 contestants who have made it through, but well done and thank you to all contestants who took part in our first round. A special well done goes to Sasata (submissions), our round one winner (1010 points), and to Hunter Kahn (submissions) and TonyTheTiger (submissions), who were second and third respectively (640 points/605 points). Sasata was awarded the most points for both good articles (300 points) and featured articles (600 points), and TonyTheTiger was awarded the most for featured topics (225 points), while Hunter Kahn claimed the most for good topics (70). Staxringold (submissions) claimed the most featured lists (240 points) and featured pictures (35 points), Geschichte (submissions) claimed the most for Did you know? entries (490 points), Jujutacular (submissions) claimed the most for featured sounds (70 points) and Candlewicke (submissions) claimed the most for In the news entries (40 points). No one claimed a featured portal or valued picture.
Credits awarded after the end of round one but before round two may be claimed in round two, but remember the rule that content must have been worked on in some significant way during 2010 by you for you to claim points. The groups for round two will be placed up shortly, and the submissions' pages will be blanked. This round will continue until 28 April, when the top two users from each group, as well as 16 wildcards, will progress to round three. Please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup; thank you to all doing this last round, and particularly to those helping at Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Reviews. As ever, questions are welcome on Misplaced Pages talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, by email or on IRC. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox, iMatthew and The ed17 Delivered by JCbot (talk) at 00:44, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
Nominations for the March 2010 Military history Project Coordinator elections now open!
Thank you very much, Cam, for your two-year stint as a coordinator of you know what. I've enjoyed and appreciated your bubbly sense of humour, keen intelligence, and considerable common sense, in equal measure. That we share similar tastes in foreign travel destinations has merely been the icing on the cake. You have a great future ahead of you and you are absolutely right to concentrate now on making it happen. Thanks once again for your many valuable contributions. With best wishes, Roger Davies17:28, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVIII (February 2010)
March, as you know, is an election month for our project, when we pick the coordinators for the next six months. We are seeking motivated individuals willing to devote some of their time and energy to the project so it continues to grow and prosper.
Also, I am making a personal appeal to each of you, the members of this project, to come out and vote for the candidates that run. These users will be responsible for managing the assessment process, answering questions, and making sure that the project's other needs are met. We have approximately 1,000 users who identify as being a part of our project, yet on average only about one-tenth of that number participate in elections. Moreover, as we typically hold referendums on major issues affecting the project along with these election, those who do not vote miss the opportunity to give their opinion on matters affecting the project as a whole. Remember, one vote always makes a difference. For the coordinators, TomStar81 (Talk) 23:47, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
A discussion has begun concerning our military history manual of style's guideline recommending preemptive disambiguation on the naming of military units. As the outcome of the discussion will likely effect a number of pages within our scope we are seeking input from the community on whether the guideline should be changed.
Late last year, several largely inactive task forces were merged. However, the mergers of the Australia and New Zealand task forces did not take place as there was no consensus for a new name. To resolve this, a discussion has begun and all editors are encouraged to participate.
Contest department
The Contest Department has completed its thirty-fourth month of competition; and its sixth month under the new scoring system. A total of 82 articles were entered by eight editors. Kumioko came first with 110 points, followed by Sturmvogel 66 with 87 points. They receive the Chevrons and Writer's Barnstar respectively. Honorable mentions go to Auntieruth55 (59) and Ian Rose (36). Binksternet, Cirt, Radeksz and YellowMonkey also fielded entries. Please submit any articles you are working on for the March contest.
Awards and honours
Brad101 has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his excellent reviewing and work on a sizable number of nautical articles that fall within our scope, producing a number of high-quality articles for the Military history and Ships WikiProjects.
Across Misplaced Pages, guidelines have been set up so that editors can vet sources for themselves. Links to some of these and a guide for checking if a source is reliable can be found in an excellent Signpost dispatch written by Ealdgyth (talk·contribs). However, for the majority of military history-related topics, we strive for more than just a basic reliable source. Specifically, we aim for peer-reviewed articles and books over, for example, most websites. Contemporary news articles or accounts can and should be mixed in (if possible) to give a picture of the general view point of the time—were they calm, afraid, unsure of what was going on?
Another major tenet is neutrality. If an editor rewrote the article Dieppe Raid using only the official Canadian history, we would have a problem; while it does contain a thorough and in-depth overview, a point-of-view can still be read. For one, it gives an undue amount of focus to Canada's input in the planning of the landing, and it would probably give an undue focus to their troops if a majority of the landing forces hadn't been Canadian. Granted, this is a book written to document that country's role in the Second World War, so you would hope it focuses on them, but this same reason makes it unusable as the primary basis for an article.
In this case, you would like to utilize a few recent, peer-reviewed books and journals, the official British, Canadian and German histories, possibly a few books written by historians from the aforementioned countries, and newspapers from that time period. Obviously this is ideal, but you need to represent all three sides in this (the United States would be a fourth, but they played only a minor role in the planning and invading). This neutrality aspect applies especially for battles and to a lesser degree biographies, but it can be utilized in virtually every article in our scope. For example, it could be beneficial to obtain Japanese accounts of B-29 Superfortress bombing raids or non-Puerto Rican peer-reviewed sources for that insular area's role in the Second World War. —Ed(talk • majestic titan)
Notes
It should be noted that certain sites like Combined Fleet or Navweaps, which are authored by recognized or published experts in the field, are not "most websites."
For example, some of the Canadian newspaper articles written about the raid are listed on their War Museum's website here, while a London Gazette supplement written after the war can be seen on their website. Anyone with access to the archives of The New York Times can view the stories printed by that paper on the raid by searching their archives, and the Google News archive lists many newspapers, some of which were scanned by Google and are available at no charge; most of the non-free material requires a subscription to ProQuest.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.
Apologies Cam, I only just saw your note (my talkpage can be high-traffic sometimes and I do miss things). Almost finished, yes, I just want to go over the lead and proofread the rest. I find coming to it fresh after a week or so off helps. I should get some time today to dive back in :) EyeSerene08:32, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Question
Hey Cam,
I was considering running for Coordinator for the Military History WikiProject, but I am not sure. I was very busy in the "real world" during the last elections and did not think I was prepared to devote the time to the WikiProject that it truly deserves. I'm back now and I have started getting involved again. I've always respected your opinion, especially after we served together as coordinators in Tranch VII. I would really appreciate your advice on this. Thanks and Have a Great day! Lord Oliver22:51, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
goodwood
Need to cut back the detail on 18 July, add info for the rest of the battle and knock up an anyaltic section. Shouldnt take that long but i would say give it a few months lol--EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 08:44, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Shouldn't we add that in to the Normandy project? It deserves an article as much as Tonga and the American one. And are we doing the Battle of Paris?
TY,
Hi Cam. I finally got around to checking it for GA, the review is here. The only major thing wrong with the article is mixed British/American spellings. Once that's fixed I'll be happy to pass the article. Excellent job with the article! Parsecboy (talk) 02:16, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi Cam, did you see my reply on my talk page a day or two ago? There's just one thing I'd like to see clarified before I pass the article for GA.
WikiProject Good Articles will be running a GAN backlog elimination drive for the entire month of April. The goal of this drive is to bring the number of outstanding Good Article nominations down to below 200. This will help editors in restoring confidence to the GAN process as well as actively improving, polishing, and rewarding good content. If you are interested in participating in the drive, please place your name here. Awards will be given out to those who review certain numbers of GANs as well as to those who review the most. Hope we can see you in April.
In gratitude of your service as a coordinator for the Military history Project from September 2009 to March 2010, I hereby award you this WikiProject Barnstar. TomStar81 (Talk) 00:18, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello. I noticed that you are reviewing this article for a GNA. Yet I have'nt seen you create a review page for it yet. Can you explan this? I'm a bit confused. Thanks :)--White Shadows02:05, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Oh no problems here :) I'm just glad that someone is willing to review it! As for me, I don;t get off for spring break until next week (due to the 2010 snowstorm here in Virginia) That along with the fact that my PC is acting up means that it may take a while for me to get back to your review. Thanks for the clarification though :)--White Shadows02:09, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
DYK for Kongō class battlecruiser
On March 29, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Kongō class battlecruiser, 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, quick check ) 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.
Likewise. Just a quick note to thank you for your support at the election, very much appreciated. See you around the Milhist pages! Ranger Steve (talk) 20:38, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Problem
Hey Cam, I understand wanting to remove extraneous refs (), but for a lot of those double-cited combinedfleet/G&D sentences, I used information from both sources. :-/ —Ed(talk • majestic titan)05:00, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Sorry Cam; I didn't know you were going to remove them.
The only source I have which covers Yamato's more than just trivially is G&D (Breyer has something, I'm sure, but it would be on the order of three to five sentences; I'll check him Wednesday anyway). I can't get ahold of Skulski, as it's marked "lib use only" in Melcat . However, I will get Requiem for battleship Yamato; the downside is that it can take up to two weeks to receive these books. This might hold some nuggets if you can view it (I can't). Otherwise, there isn't much I can do. Like normal, my university library and electronic holdings fail at helping me in the least (even JSTOR). :-/ —Ed(talk • majestic titan)05:42, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
It sucks doesn't it? The two university libraries I have access to have lots of general stuff, but very little on specifics of ships. Now, granted, I could not have written the Normandy articles without the two academic libraries in Calgary, but they're not of much help when it comes to IJN ships. It means working off of what we can, which can be exasperating when at FAC. Cam05:48, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Yes, it does. At least you have *two* *large* libraries to choose from; I have one small one. :-) Hopefully Cla will have something on hand to help. —Ed(talk • majestic titan)06:00, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
We're half way through round two, and everything is running smoothly. Hunter Kahn (submissions) leads overall with 650 points this round, and heads pool B. TonyTheTiger (submissions) currently leads pool C, dubbed the "Group of Death", which has a only a single contestant yet to score this round (the fewest of any group), as well five contestants over 100 points (the most). With a month still to go, as well as 16 wildcard places, everything is still to play for. Anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.
Although unrelated to the WikiCup, April sees a Good Article Nominations backlog elimination drive, formulated as a friendly competition with small awards, as the Cup is. Several WikiCup contestants and judges have already signed up, but regular reviewers and those who hope to do more reviewing are more than welcome to join at the drive page. If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox, iMatthew and The ed17
Delivered by JCbot (talk) 22:11, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Adoption
Hey, I found your name on the adopters list page and wanna know if you are still looking for adoptees? I am a new user and interested in military history and especially the Operation Majestic Titan is something I would like to help out on, but I am afraid to get lost in the amount of policies that exist on wikipedia. Somebody with a similar interest to help get started would be really helpfull. So I want to ask if you would be willing to adopt me or, if you are no longer adopting (since I can't find any references on your personal page about it) would be able to point me to somebody who does. Yoenit (talk) 15:00, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your support 
_in_camouflage_coat,_1918_edit.jpg){kind=link}