User talk:Rrostrom

German resistance

I don't dispute the correctness of the changes you have made, but since the text as it stood came from Fest, a reputable source, we need to see a source for your changes, particularly since I don't know you. Adam 23:30, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. The Fest book I am using is "Plotting Hitler's Death" (1994), not his Hitler biography, but I guess Schlabrendorff as an eyewitness takes precedence. (I have just bought a new Canaris biography so I will probably be making more changes to the article soon.)
On old US election stats, if you can send me the stats in the same format I have been using and in a form which I can upload to my website without any further work by me, I will be happy to do so and to credit you with having done the work. Regards Adam 07:11, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling and Grammar

I noticed that you made a few edits where you changed words like "honour" and "rumours" to the American versions (for example this edit [1]). Those edits are incorrect, and I have reverted them. Take a look at the Wikipedia policies on when to use different variants of the English language [2] For articles that are about British subjects, British spelling should be used. Cheers, JCO312 17:10, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I should also say that there is no preference for any particular style, unless it is an article about a subject with strong ties to one country. Thus, you shouldn't change "honour" to "honor" unless the subject of the article has strong ties to the U.S. I should have mentioned that earlier. Cheers, JCO312 19:19, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this edit, please read WP:ENGVAR. Mutt Lunker (talk) 21:01, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Mamelon (dentistry)

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Mamelon (dentistry), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. MuZemike (talk) 17:09, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Murder on the Orient Express

I've reversed the change you made to this article and in answer to your question, the wikinovels template is found here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/ArticleTemplate--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 19:38, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani article

In relation to your comments on Talk:Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, it should be noted that the quality of Wikipedia articles is to a significant extent related to the willingness of contributors to develop material through writing and research. If you feel that you have knowledge or research that would improve the article, you can assist by incorporating any contributions that you might have into this article. Cyril Washbrook (talk) 12:52, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Phil Bucklew

Thanks for the help...I'm still cleaning it up, the original piece was so full of inaccuracies and broken English that it was unreadable!--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 19:47, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nausicaa changes

Just as a heads-up, this is more a house style thing, but all fictional works are by default described in the present tense (Wikipedia:WAF#Contextual presentation). So changing all of Nausicaa's story to be in the past tense is slightly weird... not indefensible, because you can argue she might have been real, but she's definitely portrayed more as a literary character in the article. SnowFire (talk) 06:09, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Right-wing

Hi, I did not disagree with your edit on Don Carlos (although I think I would even prefer leaving out the adjective "fanatic"), but did want to point out that your "Edit summary" is probably not correct in saying that the term right-wing is anachronistic. It seems it arose during the French revolution and was used quite commonly in France at the time Verdi wrote his opera there in the 1860s. In fact, it would not be wrong to say that much of the "politics" of the opera is anti-right-wing, even though the character of King Philip is treated rather sympathetically. A paragraph on the politics of the opera might be an interesting addition to the article, as long as it was carefully phrased and well sourced. Not sure I would want to be the one to do it though!) :-) --Robert.Allen (talk) 21:52, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On further consideration, it would have been anachronistic at the time of the story in the opera, so you are actually correct in saying that. It doesn't seem to belong in the synopsis, but in a separate section per above. --Robert.Allen (talk) 21:55, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I checked the only biography of Verdi I have (George Martin, 1963). According to him, Verdi was "anti-clerical", but supported a constitutional monarchy, so it might be a gross over-simplification to describe Verdi's politics as "anti-right-wing". --Robert.Allen (talk) 22:07, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ossewabrandwag

Congratulations on a very nicely done cleanup of the Ossewabrandwag article. I've just looked through the article history and the confused (and confusing) nonsense that was there before you fixed it was incredible. The mind boggles how anyone could actually write such rubbish. Thanks for helping to clean out the trash. Roger (talk) 13:43, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Question about South Pacific (musical)

Hi Rrostrom. On November 24, 2009, you changed the ethnicity of de Becque's children to half-Melanesian (as opposed to Polynesian). The sentence remained as you had edited until today, when someone switched it back to Polynesian. I just now changed it back to your revision, based on viewing the current Broadway revival, in which the children are black-skinned with Afro hair. But do you have anything to back up this sentence? Do you have the script of the play? Or another citation? People get confused by the movie, in which ethnicities are not consistent with the play. Thanks in advance. Softlavender (talk) 01:11, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

UPDATE: I decided to check the script, and it reads "Eurasian" [3]. Later on, the script is more specific and calls them half-Polynesian: [4], so I've changed the article accordingly. So, despite the conventions of the current Broadway revival, in the original script the children are not half-Melanesian. Thanks for your understanding. Softlavender (talk) 10:43, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply; that makes perfect sense. It also explains why the Michener novel uses the n-word for Emile's wife and kids. Now it all computes, and yeah, Hammerstein must not have known better. Ah well. Still, the article needs to follow the script, so I'll leave it as is. Interesting that the Broadway revival uses black children, in a sort of nod to Michener's original; also it makes more sense racially for a modern audience. (Oh, yeah, just a reminder: Remember to sign your Talk page posts by using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ ) Thanks again, Softlavender (talk) 06:03, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

USS Saratoga (CV-3) edit question

Hi Rrostrom. Your 04:06, 15 April 2010 edit to USS Saratoga (CV-3) changed "six Japanese planes scored five hits on the carrier in three minutes" to "... five bomb hits ...". The description of the accompanying image, File:USS Saratoga Kamikaze hit 21 February 1945.jpg, suggests that the first five hits were Kamikaze strikes. Do you have a source indicating that they were bomb hits instead? Best regards. -- ToE^T 16:10, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, but I see no reason to make a fine distinction between bomb and kamikaze hits; a kamikaze was just another form of bomb. The important point was that these were not torpedo hits (the other form of aerial attack against ships). Just saying "hit" was too vague and ambiguous. The photograph may show one kamikaze hit; but there were non-kamikaze bomber attackers too, and possibly the hits were of both kinds. --Rich Rostrom (Talk) 21:13, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The source of the image (probably not a RS itself, but likely reflecting information from a RS) indicates that, not only were all the planes in the initial attack kamikazes, but the 1900 "additional bomb hit" was also a kamikaze, with the bomb in that instance doing the majority of the damage and the plane sliding over the side. That said, I am unfamiliar with WWII article guidelines regarding mention of kamikaze attacks. I just found the article, as it is now, confusing in its mention of kamikazes in the image caption, but not in the article text. -- ToE^T 01:10, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Stewarty of Kirkcudbright

On 26-Oct, you tagged Stewarty of Kirkcudbright with {{rfd}}, but you did not complete the nomination by listing it at WP:RFD. Can you please complete the second step of the nomination per the instructions at the WP:RFD page? If you do not list it within a reasonable amount of time, I'll assume you no longer wish to see it deleted and will remove the template. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 12:38, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cszhech/Zschech

Hi Rrostrom, I notice in the edit history of the 'Daniel V. Gallery' article that you have changed the spelling of the skipper's name of U-505 from 'Cszech' to 'Zschech'. I wondered if there was any particular reason for that as in Gallery's 1958 book We Captured a U-boat, his name is spelt 'Cs...'
Regards
Oops, I put this query on the wrong page, sorry about that; I'll remove it now.

RASAM (talk) 19:29, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Beriah Magoffin

Wow! What a drastic re-work you did to Beriah Magoffin. Your changes left many one-sentence paragraphs and substantially reduced the size of the lead. This article has already passed a GA review, so I'm a little skeptical that it needed such a severe overhaul. Would you please take your specific concerns to the talk page, and we can work from there? Thanks. Acdixon ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 13:41, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lebel and Bertheir Rifles listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Lebel and Bertheir Rifles. Since you had some involvement with the Lebel and Bertheir Rifles redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). FuFoFuEd (talk) 00:44, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for editing article of lovely Isabella. I am Miha, and it is glad to me if you want to be my friend. Do you know - if I can say - was this queen an inspiration for Princess Isabel Fortuna in telenovela Muhteşem Yüzyıl? (Isabella met Sultan in Istanbul, but was she his lover or mistress? This is shown in the series, but I do not believe in it.)--Miha (talk) 13:07, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Otto Lecher, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

—Anne Delong (talk) 21:51, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Simon Girty, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Beaver River and William Caldwell. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:22, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Robert Rhett, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fire-Eater. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:38, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 14 November

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the 45th Infantry Division (United States) page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited My Fair Lady (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Charles Fredericks. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:16, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:22, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

January 2016

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to SS Normandie may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.