Jump to content

User talk:Climie.ca/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6→Archive 10

11th Airborne Division

I think 11th Airborne Division is at a stage where I can put it through for GA Review. I've just got a few things to tweak - getting someone to do the references and adding in the Medal of Honor citations, but they're relatively minor. I'd be really greatful if you could pass an eye over it, pre-GA as it were, and see what needs fixing. Cheers! Skinny87 (talk) 21:26, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Cam, it's kind of you. Fixed the two citations without a page number, which I never even realized were missing. Thats the problem, with me, after I've written such a long article like this, it all starts to blur tiogether and I miss things. Same with Operation Varsity when I finished it pre-GA. Skinny87 (talk) 22:47, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Oh, hey, I didn't realize that. Pleae, concentrate on the FAC, thats far more important. I can do some more copy-editing in the next few days and get soeone else to peer review. Skinny87 (talk) 22:54, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Roman-Persian Wars

KIA?--Yannismarou (talk) 08:48, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Casualties in the The Moro River Campaign / Battle of Ortona

Hi. You may have noticed in the Battle of Ortona talk page that there has been some confusion regarding Canadian casualties in this campaign. As it stands, the figures in the infoboxes of the two articles are now incompatible. Have you any thoughts on how this might be resolved? Footnote #2 in the Battle of Ortona probably best explains the current position. Good work, by the way, on these articles - although it would seem your sources are a little Canadian-centric. I have been trying to include some of the other Allied actions that were part of this overall operation to give broader context to the Canadian attacks and hope to continue to do this (as and when you complete each section). Stephen Kirrage talk - contribs 10:14, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

BoVR

By the way, WP:MOS#Ampersand, prohibits & in any use except corporate names. Military history is only capitalised as part of a title. Don't overwork it :) --ROGER DAVIES talk 02:28, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

I think it's almost there. Keep your fingers crossed :) --ROGER DAVIES talk 02:44, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Incidentally, KL is wrong on some MOS stuff. I've added notes. I'll review your changes later for MOS compliance.
You don't have to change something if you disagree with it. Just say why you disagree.
KL asked what is the factory area not where. I guess it's an industrial area, no?
--ROGER DAVIES talk 04:03, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Incidentally the dash in "his own breakout—Operation Cobra" is grammatically correct. It's a disjunctive dash, used for emphasis.--ROGER DAVIES talk 04:07, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Don't let it become stressful. You've dealt with the bulk of the stuff. It's going okay. --ROGER DAVIES talk 04:43, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Same from me, I think you're coping with your baptism of fire really well. I'll sort that image out, and if you like I'll turn the 'surrounding area' scan into a map too. It's only a couple of hours work, if that. EyeSerenetalk 11:11, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Addendum: don't worry about the Op Tractable GA hold - we can get back to that when the FA assessment's finished. I'll just leave it in limbo for now (I won't be able to copyedit for a few days anyway) ;) EyeSerenetalk 11:14, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

(od) Just an observation but at this stage of the game it doesn't help to have lots of different copyeditors tweaking the copy. What it needs is one or two methodically working through a stable-ish article. Too many cooks ... :) Anyhow, I'm re-starting now and hope to get it done this evening (UTC). --ROGER DAVIES talk 17:27, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for all the help Cam. Don't worry about the article, it'll get there! Skinny87 (talk) 21:52, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Yup, I noticed Roger and I had the same thought at the same time... and Sandy's also been busy. Apologies for any confusion caused. Pics hopefully sorted now BTW ;) EyeSerenetalk 23:08, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

(od) I've found a good source for German casualty figures for the Normandy campaign overall. This includes the two divisions at Verrieres but doesn't show their specific losses there. This is probably as good as it'll get. I'll add it later. --ROGER DAVIES talk 05:17, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

What I've got is before-D-Day and after-Breakout figures for the 1st and 12th SS Panzer divisions. Basically, they were reduced from 20,000 men each to a few hundred. Not guestimates, either :) --ROGER DAVIES talk 05:49, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
Thank you very much Cam - that's really appreciated, although it's been very much a joint effort! BTW, I don't know if you saw my talk-page note re the naming of the battle? It might be worth a redirect. Like Roger says, I think we're nearly there now... EyeSerenetalk 17:19, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
Indeed, thanks very much for the barnstar, Cam. Hopefully, Sandy will promote tonight! (Oh, and PS: Please please please stop using & in articles :))) --ROGER DAVIES talk 17:26, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
Lol - I was just about to advise Cam to snap the '7' key off his keyboard ;) Re the objection over 'hundreds of guns' - according to Wilmott, as of July 17th the Bourguebus Ridge was manned with 78 eighty-eights, 12 other heavy flak guns, 272 nebelwerfers, and 194 field artillery pieces. I can add this to the article if you like. EyeSerenetalk 17:43, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
The other goody to add is that the 1st SS Panzer Division was "simply the best German panzer division in the Third Reich" (Source: Jarymowycz (1993), p. 77.) which would need to become a multi-cite. --ROGER DAVIES talk 17:56, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
Yes - Wilmott goes so far as to count the barrels: 1632 - I guess he counted the nebelwerfers six times each ;) EyeSerenetalk 18:00, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
Chuckle :) --ROGER DAVIES talk 18:01, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
There's a second source: Stacey. I read it earlier but can't find it know. Here are links to the volumes:
--ROGER DAVIES talk 18:11, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

One thing I meant to ask - was it Simonds who redefined Spring as a holding attack, or was this more of Montgomery's obfustication about the outcome of Goodwood? EyeSerenetalk 18:32, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Excellent news, and congratulations! EyeSerenetalk 08:29, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Congrats on your FA promotion, Climie. Great work! Parsecboy (talk) 21:33, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

I'll get back to Tractable as soon as I can; basically once I've finished the copyedit of Brian Horrocks. Apologies for making you wait - these urgent copyedits just seem to descend on me ;) Re Goodwood etc, it sounds like Simmonds took a leaf out of Monty's book! Montgomery touted Goodwood to Churchill and Eisenhower as the big breakout, and even told the press it was going like a dream on the first day... then when it was called off, he said it was only a holding attack all along and he'd never meant for it to be anything more. No wonder they all fell out ;) EyeSerenetalk 07:04, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

You Deserve This

The Working Man's Barnstar
For Cam, on working so hard and for so long to get Battle of Verrières Ridge to FA Status! Skinny87 (talk) 08:08, 15 June 2008 (UTC)


Thanks. Keep up the good work. KnightLago (talk) 20:57, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Well done. Great work. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:15, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Morning Glory

Hi, I've picked up your query on this and shifted it plus a repkl to the Moro Talk page in order to expose it to other editors in the hope they may have a contribution to the discussion. Stephen Kirrage talk - contribs 23:30, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

FA-Team Mission 4

Mission 4, a series of articles on the Everglades, could do with help from the FA-Team! Thanks! Awadewit (talk) 12:57, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Tractable

Copyedit underway, will finish over the next day or so ;) EyeSerenetalk 19:01, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

PS added a ref or two from Wilmot, hope you don't mind! (I just happened to be re-reading it and have got to that section in the book)

Great, no problems. Shouldn't you be revising? EyeSerenetalk 19:09, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

GA passed

Thank you for your hard work on Operation Tractable. Following an excellent copyedit on the suggestions provided, I have now passed this article as a Good article, and updated the various talk page templates to reflect this.

That also means you get another one of these:

This user helped promote Operation Tractable to good article status.


which you may like to place on your user page (or somewhere suitable) by copy/pasting {{User Good Article|Operation Tractable}} into the page code.

Great job - well done! EyeSerenetalk 08:45, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar!

Thank you for the barnstar! I will keep an eye out for the Operation Tractable article, and hopefully you will put it through the featured article candidate process! JonCatalan (talk) 09:45, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

GA Backlog

Hey Cam. I don't suppose I could interest you in doing a GA Review at the backlog here, could I? *Charming Smile* I'm trying to get the backlog down to a more managable level, and I figure if I can get a few people to do one each, then it could get done quite quickly. Thanks! Skinny87 (talk) 22:23, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Huzzah! Congratulations, my man! Skinny87 (talk) 22:39, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Vilna offensive

Since I am not a native English speaker, if you offer help with c/e, I'd gladly accept it :) Regarding Polish copyrights, see the relevant article. If you have any questions about facts or sources in Polish, I'll my best to answer them.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 17:39, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. It's always appreciated when the reviewer not only reviews, but helps with addressing the issues! :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:39, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Nebelwerfer-attacking.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Nebelwerfer-attacking.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 06:56, 19 June 2008 (UTC) --Ricky81682 (talk) 06:56, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Userboxes

This user helped promote Operation Tractable to good article status.

Do you know what the code is for having an A Class box, ive been playing around but can't figure it out lol--EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 12:27, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

GA Open Review proposal

Thank you for your contributions to the discussion on GA process reform at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Good articles/Reform. Based on the suggestions made, a proposal has been set out (at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Good articles/Reform#Open review proposal). Your further input would be very welcome, as there are a number of areas that may need more discussion before this proposal is put to the wider community. All the best, EyeSerenetalk 10:30, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Goodwood planning

Am sprucing up on my background knowledge of the planning behind Goodwood before i edit this section, i believe you added this citation: Van-Der-Vat, p. 158. Do you know what it is for?

Its following the information on guns employed and rounds fired.

Cheers--EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 17:02, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Operation Varsity FAC

Hey! Just to let you know, I've nominated Operation Varsity for an FAC, and any comments would be welcome at the nomination page.Skinny87 (talk) 17:15, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Battle of Lissa (1811)

Many thanks for you comments and suggestions on the above article that is now a Featured Article. Your assistance during the review process was much appreciated and helped make the article what it is today.--Jackyd101 (talk) 20:13, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Indeed I do. If I remember rightly, I created a page entitled User:jackyd101/Top and filled it with the writing that you'll see when you look at the page (press edit to see it), that creates the images and links. Then I simply made a link to the page in {{ }} brackets at the top of my user page. If you need any more help please ask, although there isn't really anymore to it. Regards--Jackyd101 (talk) 09:14, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

FA-Team Mission 4 success!

Draining and development of the Everglades, which in the end we decided not to rename "Complete land rape of South Florida", has achieved FA status! Congratulations and thanks all around! Two down and three to go - head for those copyediting and peer-reviewing parties at Restoration of the Everglades, Geography and ecology of the Everglades and Everglades! Awadewit (talk) 13:53, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

re: A-Class

Hi! Thanks for the message. The scenario you describe has happened plenty of times before, both at Milhist and at FAC. "Comment" is a way of avoiding participation in Support or Oppose, sometimes because the editor doesn't wish to oppose but doesn't think the article is ready for promotion. Without three supports, the article is not promoted. ACR is getting more rigorous and I expect that at first a higher proportion of articles will fail as editors get used to the new stricter approach. I don't think this means that the review process is dead :) --ROGER DAVIES talk 19:12, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

A-Class

Sure duder, but it might take a day or two, start my new job tomorrow and I've gt some volunteering at a charity shop to do. Should have a few minutes for ya though, so no worries. Skinny87 (talk) 22:10, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

¡España!

Thanks! Last night was like a dream come true, trust me. JonCatalán (talk) 09:19, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Request for future FAC

Hey Cam,

I have been very busy lately and am going to be for the foreseeable future. If you want to drop me a note when your next article hits FAC I will try and make time to take a look at it. Until then I don't think I will be able to review it. I actually have a list of articles that I have been asked to review, and some of them have been on there for quite a while. Sorry. KnightLago (talk) 23:38, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

As soon as I hit the save button I changed my mind. I added your article to the top of my list and will try and get to it as soon as I can (probably this coming weekend). The other articles are nowhere near FAC. KnightLago (talk) 23:41, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Contest Dept May 2008

 The WikiChevrons 
For significant article improvement in May 2008, particularly on Battle of Verrières Ridge, Operation Tractable and 272nd Grenadier Infantry Division, and winning the May monthly contest, I hereby award you the Military history WikiProject WikiChevrons. --ROGER DAVIES talk 02:42, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Contest Dept June 2008

The Writer's Barnstar
For significant improvements to Operation Tractable, The Moro River Campaign and Hill 262, and for coming second in the June article improvement contest, I hereby award you this Writer's Barnstar, --ROGER DAVIES talk 20:56, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the thanks :) You should think seriously about running for coordinator next elections. --ROGER DAVIES talk 05:42, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Hill 112

Hey! My father was nice enough to bring me the latest issue of WWII History to me in Spain (even though I'm going back to San Diego in two weeks!) and it has an excellent article on Hill 112, and since you run the Normandy Project I thought you'd be interested in looking for a copy of this issue in stands in Canada (I assume the magazine is available there). To be specific, it's the August/September 2008 issue. JonCatalán (talk) 13:07, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Third FA for the Everglades project!

Way to go team! Restoration of the Everglades has just become an FA! Three down and two to go! Geography and ecology of the Everglades and Everglades could use your eagle eyes! Awadewit (talk) 16:28, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

FA-Team Proposals

Please comment on the current FA-Team proposals. Thanks! Awadewit (talk) 16:41, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVIII (June 2008)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter
Issue XXVIII (June 2008)
Project news
  • With the holiday season upon us, we're very short of reviewers at A-Class Reviews and are likely to remain so for the next month or so. If just five new reviewers each reviewed one article a week, the problem would be solved! To keep track of Milhist articles for peer and A-Class reviews, simply paste the code – {{WPMILHIST Review alerts}} – onto your talk page.
  • Similarly, copy-editors are currently in short supply. If you can help out at the Copy-editing section of the Logistics Dept, it would be much appreciated. If you can help with A-Class Reviews and Featured Article Candidates so much the better! To keep up to date with Milhist articles needing copy input, just paste – {{WPMILHIST Copy-editing alerts}} onto your talk page.
  • The debate on whether Milhist should adopt the new C-Class has been closed, with a strong and clear consensus against adopting. The archived discussion is here.
Articles of note

New featured articles:

  1. Battle of Lissa (1811)
  2. Battle of Verrières Ridge
  3. Benjamin Franklin Tilley
  4. Brian Horrocks
  5. Lince (tank)
  6. Montana class battleship
  7. Saint-Sylvestre coup d’état
  8. Verdeja (tank)
  9. Viet Nam Quoc Dan Dang

New featured lists:

  1. List of Crimean War Victoria Cross recipients‎
  2. List of German World War II jet aces (promoted in May)

New A-Class articles:

  1. Battle of Mount Austen, the Galloping Horse, and the Sea Horse
  2. Battle of Strasbourg
  3. Operation Brevity
  4. Operation Tractable
  5. Operation Varsity
  6. Roman-Persian Wars
  7. SS Kroonland
Current proposals and discussions
  • The Milhist review structure is itself being reviewed. The idea is to see how it can be improved, or whether it needs changing or updating.
  • The month-long trial of partner peer reviews with Video games is being discussed. All feedback welcome!
Awards and honors

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:30, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks & Question

Thanks for the barnstar mate, much appreciated. I was hoping to tidy up my userpage, and was hoping to use a set-up like yours, with all the snazzy 'Show' tags and so forth. However, it looks exceedingly complex for someone who only just figured out how to change the pixel size of a photograph in an article. How would I go about using it to make my page look better? Skinny87 (talk) 10:49, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Cheers! I love the new design, but I can't get my userboxes to go in a horizontal line. Any ideas? Skinny87 (talk) 20:12, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
That's absolutely brilliant Cam, thanks. Now then, what can I do in return to say thanks? Anything need reviewing, copy-edited or such and so forth? Skinny87 (talk) 20:38, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Added some comments at the Tractable talkpage Skinny87 (talk) 23:07, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Cam, you read my mind. I was thinking of that only last night. I'd love to, but I don't know if you've been following the Husky talkpage. There are a lot of riled up and extremely POV editors there arguing over Axis troop numbers, so we'd need to get them sorted out first or face wave after wave of criticism and reverts. But I think doing Husky together would be ace. Skinny87 (talk) 10:25, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

FA-Team successes!

Indigenous people of the Everglades region, Draining and development of the Everglades and Restoration of the Everglades have all recently become FAs! King Arthur is now at FAC! Thanks to our hard-working team members! Awadewit (talk) 18:13, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

T&A08

You haven't got time to do the extra 30 and get the barnstar? --ROGER DAVIES talk 06:26, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

The traditional rfa thank you message

Thank you for the support!
Climie.ca, it is my honor to report that thanks in part to your support my third request for adminship passed (80/18/2). I appreciate the trust you and the WP community have in me, and I will endeovour to put my newly acquired mop and bucket to work for the community as a whole. Yours sincerly and respectfuly, TomStar81 (Talk) 03:10, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Citadel of Saigon

Hi there Cam. Per my comment on the ACR, unfortunately, it is believed that there are no drawings of the citadel. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:07, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

A map has been found. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:08, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

2007–2008 Ethiopian crackdown in Ogaden ACR

You've done a fine review there. Well done, --ROGER DAVIES talk 08:54, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

1st Sustainment Brigade (United States)

Hello. I was wondering if you had made any progress on your review of 1st Sustainment Brigade (United States). The GAN page says you have been reviewing it since 26 June. -Ed!(talk)(Hall of Fame) 00:01, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Re images

Hi Cam. I've been away for a few days myself, and only just got to this. I'll be happy to get the maps done, though they look fairly complex and will need to be scaled up, so it might take a while. I'll have a go when I get some time. EyeSerenetalk 07:42, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Request

Climie.ca, since you are a member of the WW1 task force who has stated that you have a particular interest in the battles of 1917, I would like to ask if you are able to add to the Robert Nivelle article. It is currently on GA hold, as it requires more information, particularly about his early life and legacy. If there is a chance that you could contribute to the article by July 21, the date when the review ends, I would be very gratful. Thanks in advance. EasyPeasy21 (talk) 22:40, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

You still adopting?

Hi Cam.. I have been around Wikipedia for a few years, but really only been getting involved for the last six or so months. Anyway, my main interest in Military History (mainly British related articles) and was wondering if you are ready to take on another 'adoptee' ?? Let me know ... Jez ☎ ✉ ✍ 22:43, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

FA-Team Mission 5: Solar solicitude/solidarity

Hi Cam,

As an FA-Team member, I'm soliciting your assistance with FA-Team Mission 5 on Scattered disc and Solar energy (and possibly others). Your MoS and formatting expertise would be much appreciated. Please sign up on the mission page and watchlist the mission page and articles if you are interested in helping out. Thanks, Geometry guy 15:43, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

11th Airborne Division FAC

Hey Cam. Was wondering if you could swing by and take a look at 11th Airborne Division (United States)'s FAC; I forget how to link to it. It's already had one reviewer, who rather rudely stated that it needs a complete prose rewrite. Understandably that's dampened my mood somewhat, but any help you could give would be greatly appreciated. Skinny87 (talk) 17:46, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

With thanks

 Military history service award 
By order of the coordinators, for your good work tagging and assessing military history articles in Tag & Assess 2008, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject Service Award. --ROGER DAVIES talk 09:51, 1 August 2008 (UTC)


 Military history service award 
By order of the coordinators, for your great work tagging and assessing military history articles in Tag & Assess 2008, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject Service Award. --ROGER DAVIES talk 09:51, 1 August 2008 (UTC)


 Military history service award 
By order of the coordinators, for your excellent work tagging and assessing military history articles in Tag & Assess 2008, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject Service Award. --ROGER DAVIES talk 09:51, 1 August 2008 (UTC)


The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
By order of the coordinators, for your fine work tagging and assessing military history articles in Tag & Assess 2008, I hereby award you with this Tireless Contributor's barnstar. --ROGER DAVIES talk 09:51, 1 August 2008 (UTC)



Thank you very much indeed for your help with and commitment to the drive. May I please trouble you to comment at the post-drive workshop? Your feedback will help us to improve the next drive. Thanks in advance, --ROGER DAVIES talk 09:51, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIX (July 2008)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter
Issue XXIX (July 2008)
Project news
  • The criteria for Military history A-Class reviews have been overhauled. The new standard is deliberately set higher than before, and is much closer to featured article quality. The new criteria are:
  • A1. The article is consistently referenced with an appropriate citation style, and all claims are verifiable against reputable sources, accurately represent the relevant body of published knowledge, and are supported with specific evidence and external citations as appropriate.
  • A2. The article is comprehensive, factually accurate, neutral and focused on the main topic; it neglects no major facts or details, presents views fairly and without bias, and does not go into unnecessary detail.
  • A3. The article has an appropriate structure of hierarchical headings, including a concise lead section that summarizes the topic and prepares the reader for the detail in the subsequent sections, and a substantial but not overwhelming table of contents.
  • A4. The article is written in concise and articulate English; its prose is clear, is in line with style guidelines, and does not require substantial copy-editing to be fully MoS-compliant.
  • A5. The article contains supporting visual materials, such as images or diagrams with succinct captions, and other media, where appropriate.
  • The timescale for A-Class articles has also been changed to give more editors an opportunity to participate.
  • The six-monthly Coordinators' election has been moved back a month to avoid clashes with the holiday period. The sign-up period will run from 1–15 September and the elections themselves from 16–30 September.
  • The military land vehicles task force has been created.
Articles of note

New featured articles:

  1. Battle of Concepción
  2. Battle of Mount Austen, the Galloping Horse, and the Sea Horse
  3. Battle of Tory Island
  4. Early life and military career of John McCain
  5. Grass Fight
  6. Leopard 2E
  7. Operation Varsity
  8. Roman–Persian Wars
  9. Uriel Sebree
  10. USS Princess Matoika (ID-2290)

New featured portals:

  1. Portal:World War II

New A-Class articles:

  1. 11th Airborne Division (United States)
  2. 2007–2008 Ethiopian crackdown in Ogaden
  3. 2008 invasion of Anjouan
  4. Auxiliaries (Roman military)
  5. Citadel of Saigon
  6. HMS Ark Royal (91)
Current proposals and discussions
Awards and honors

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:21, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Climie.ca/Archive_4&oldid=1190237122"