User talk:GhostlyLegend

Welcome!

Hello, GhostlyLegend, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Moonraker (talk) 02:41, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

GhostlyLegend, I'm not here to disrupt articles. I've attempted to improve the verifiability of United Kingdom Special Forces and related articles for the last year, and I have provided reliable sources for much of the content to bring that article in line with WP:NOR. I assure you, I'm not 'randomly deleting content in response to being challenged'. I'm trying to improve articles too. Regards, Rob984 (talk) 20:00, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Whilst I accept your point around intent, I think we have very different views around what constitutes a reliable source, particularly given the nature of these types of units and the tendency for excitable children to focus on the black overalls and highly kinetic end of the spectrum of activities, at the expense of the more support & influence and intelligence collection activities that tend to be the bread and butter work.

It's not an easy subject, many don't even understand how the military work, never mind the more specialist capabilities. I would hope that we can work in concert, to deliver a higher quality of article than currently exists.

GhostlyLegend (talk) 19:14, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

List of military special forces units

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Nick-D (talk) 07:11, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So whats this based on?

SF/ SOF What's the difference, if any?

I'd like to make you aware the 90% of the unit listed on the List of military special forces units are not actually special forces but special operations forces (you can look up the difference) but i'd like to request your assisstance to clean the page up and actually make it special forces not both special forces and special operations forces. Militaryhistoryguru (talk) 09:23, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Given that NATO, US and UK Doctrine use the terms Special Forces and Special Operations Forces as pretty much synonymous it's a bit of a moot discussion. In any case both the SF and the list of SF units articles have no definition of what one means by the term. That's meant that they become whatever the latest unit that the media are drooling over gets listed. You'll note the discusion that attempts to include a sub-unit of a conventional force as SF based on a book title.

What ti could do with losing is those units that are otherwise conventional, but unusual; Civil Affairs, PhsyOps, Combat Rescue etc.

GhostlyLegend (talk) 12:39, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Submarine Parachute Assistance Group

When the article was started the content was essentially identical to [1]. The creator did attempt a rewrite after the page was tagged as a possible copyright violation but it mainly consisted of moving the text around and the content was basically the same. Hut 8.5 16:30, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas!!!

E-e-bayer_lover (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

And remember to keep the CHRIST in CHRISTmas! E-e-bayer_lover (talk) 22:55, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Defence Explosive Ordnance Disposal, Munitions and Search School

Hi - Thanks for your edits to the Defence Explosive Ordnance Disposal, Munitions and Search School. Unfortunately quite a lot of the text you have added has not been sourced contrary to WP:SOURCE. Please could you add some citations. I did cull quite a lot of unsourced material from this article a little while ago and it seems a pity to have to do it again. Thanks, Dormskirk (talk) 20:11, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I have now added quite a few citations myself which I found relatively easily. I have also culled a bit of unsourced material. Please feel free to re-insert if you can find the citations. Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 23:34, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've been concentrating on trying to form the narrative, alongside collecting various sources to put in once that's in place. I'm also wanting to make sure that it's properly in the public domain before using it.

Life has rather got in the way since comig back to work.

GhostlyLegend (talk) 21:19, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]