User talk:Aber~enwiki

Your account will be renamed

Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Aber. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Aber~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours,
Keegan Peterzell
Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation

21:33, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed

This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: Special:GlobalRenameRequest. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk)

10:09, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding the ongoing debate on how best to develop the Battle for Caen article. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is "Battle for Caen". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! --EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 22:55, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FYI: Per a discussion with a DRN moderator, you may want to put the page on your watchlist in order to keep notified when a response is posted.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 14:02, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Difficult to believe that 7th Armoured were not conceived for mobile warfare on open terrain"

So not to further distract on the talkpage, I thought I would post here. I can see why you reached this position, owing to poor wording on my behalf. My comment should have read as thus:

"In regards to the Dan van der Vat source, I cannot really comment as I do not own her work. However, I do believe that Buckley (British Armour in Normandy) essentially makes the same point. I would have to dig through his work, but I do recall him concluding that the British armor were deployed in a situation that they were not conceived for (being used as battering rams against prepared German positions compared to mobile warfare on open terrain)." (emphasis added to indicate the change)

One notes that Wdford followed up with the exact quote from Buckley: "[The armoured divisions] were not constructed to act as battering rams to lead a penetration...".

I apologize for the confusion. Kind regards, EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 15:40, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]