User talk:Ryan4314/Archive3

GA

Yeah, it's my first :) Yours too? I'd review it, but I'm trying to learn how. It's good that since you don't want to focus on the meta stuff, you are able to work on articles. Justin^(Gmail?)_(u) 15:36, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Cardiff

Don't quite remember how I came to be there actually, probably from the Falklands War article, or maybe talk MILHIST, or maybe from Good Article Nominees David Underdown (talk) 10:40, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

May I suggest you first inform yourself (or at least use the talk page) before actually delete something ?? [1] --Jor70 (talk) 20:27, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

The plural of Hercules

is C-130s. :) Haus^Talk 19:36, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Or Fat Alberts, as opposed to Fat Albert

ALR (talk) 19:58, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Look! There goes a Hercules! Look! There's another one! Howard C. Berkowitz (talk) 20:05, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

LOL, this is the biggest response I've had to a question... ever ;) Ryan4314 (talk) 20:09, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: HMS Cardiff - LOCE

I will do some copy editing on the article soon, a few questions first about things I found unclear:
1) 'She was launched on 22 February 1974, by Lady Caroline Gilmore and commissioned on 24 September 1979' what did she do during this time?
2) Does to the Falklands war and the Gulf war sections need to have the dates by them (were there 2 wars of the Falklands?)
3) 'Cardiff's arrival in the Total Exclusion Zone (TEZ) on 26 May, allowed a damaged HMS Glasgow to return home for repairs.' you might explain where/how Glasgow was damaged?
4) 'Since the Gulf War, Cardiff's deployments have included a deployment with the Standing Naval Force Mediterranean' you might add a sentence explaining what the 'Standing Naval Force Mediterranean' is.
5) 'Cardiff underwent a further period of maintenance' what is maintenance? (I mean is it repairs, training or what?)
6) 'After taking part in the multi-national biennial exercise Bright Star' What is the 'multi-national biennial exercise Bright Star'?
7) What does the 2nd paragraph in the Gulf War section have to do with Cardiff?
These questions I'm afraid display my frightful ignorance of this period of history, but I think it is better to verge on explaining too much than leaving the reader confused. :) Harland1 (^t/_c) 19:59, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Saw this and posted a couple of answers on Harland's talk page. Justin talk 20:09, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks here are my answers

4) You should be consistent if you feel a link is enough then you should take out all the comments in brackets in the second paragraph in the Falklands section which make it very hard to understand.

5) Yes I think if you can't find out what it is you should drop it as it only confuses the reader

6) I want this to be put in the article, just a sentence would be fine.

Thanks, Harland1 (^t/_c) 09:28, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

One more thing: 'In November Cardiff became the first Royal Navy ship to enter the Lebanese capital of Beirut for 27 years' November of what year? (1995 possibly but mayhap not?) Harland1 (^t/_c) 09:39, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

No I just mean explanations. Harland1 (^t/_c) 09:48, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah that's fine I'll do some work on it later today probably but I am very busy at the moment, I got back from holiday yesterday, so it may have to wait till tomorrow, but yes I definitely will do it. Harland1 (^t/_c) 10:09, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Mirages

According to Freedman's Official History of the Falklands Campaign, the attack on 13 June was by Daggers not by Mirage III. Externally they're virtually identical so it would be an easy mistake to make. I don't have much information on the activities of the 707 but I've an Argentine friend who might know. I'll get back to you. Justin talk 11:02, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I see, I think its a case of mistaken identity then. Freedman is notoriously anal for checking his facts, misidentification was common during the war leading to all sorts of errors in the books published immediately post conflict Justin talk 11:57, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Freedman doesn't name his source unfortunately, it was actually a flight of four Daggers not three. These engagements could get very confusing as the formations were broken up. The Mirage did have a rocket pod but I'm not sure that the Argentines used it. I'll check. As far as I know the Mirages weren't flying over the Falklands at this time. Justin talk 12:42, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

My information on the Argentine Air Force in 1982 indicates that only the MB339 and Pucara had rocket pods. They weren't used on the fast jets. Justin talk 19:40, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Three F-5 Dagger, callsign "Gaucho", armed with BRP bombs. Mission: hillside Mount Longdon. Crew (1) Captain Norberto Dimeglio, (2) First Lieutenant Cesar Roman, (3) Lieutenant Gustavo Aguirre (the latter did not take off due to brake failure). 1 and 2 took off from Rio Gallegos at 11:00. En route, the rain forced them to abort

Near the islands, they saw a helicopter flying at low altitude. The dropped external stores and attacked. The helicopter pilot conducted evasive maneuvers and evaded two attacks by the Daggers with cannon. (It was the Sea Lynx XZ 233 - pilot Lt.. CH Clayton, from the frigate Cardiff operating in Falkland Sound). They returned to GAL, landing at 13:00 hours.

I think the next bit says something like (but not 100% sure):

Mission called for 6 Dagger from Rio Grande escorted by Mirage M-III from Rio Gallegos.

BTW Estrecho de San Carlos is Falkland Sound and not San Carlos bay. Justin talk 11:59, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

The first mission was shortly after 11 am, three MV Dagger to bomb the foot of Mount Longdon. One of them had to return immediately following problems with the landing gear. The other two, when they arrived in the islands, met a helicopter of a radar picket and three Harrier aircraft, which meant the element of surprise was lost, they returned to their base. The second was in principle identical to the first (curiously, there were the three members of the squadron "lathe" that on the May 1 conducted the first attack on the English fleet). One of them was unable to take off due to mechanical problems and the other two, captain and first lieutenant Dimeglio Roman met a patrol helicopter, which they attacked, but once again had to abort the mission.

I've assumed fiota was a typo for flota, which means fleet. Justin talk 07:56, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Just about to load a couple of pics. I've looked at Morgan for 13 June but I can't see mention of three Harriers. Were you thinking of the near blue-on-blue on June 12? Justin talk 19:41, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

OK they're not mentioned, Morgan considered the 13th a "quiet day" from an air defence perspective. Justin talk 21:03, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

The other thing you might consider is Sharkey Ward's book but I don't have a copy. It could be they were from Invincible rather than Hermes. I did check with a mate who was deployed in 1982 and he doesn't recall any sightings of Daggers by Harriers on 13th June. Justin talk 21:40, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Possibly they were GR.3 but checking several sources I can't find a British reference to this particular attack. It could be they spotted Harriers but in turn were not spotted. a) Blue Fox performance over land was pants and b) GR.3 and SHAR relied on visual search over land so it is possible the Argentine pilots spotted the Harriers but in turn were not detected. Justin talk 22:12, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

LOL there is more than a grain of truth in that version. Justin talk 22:29, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of HMS Cardiff (D108)

The article HMS Cardiff (D108) you nominated as a good article has passed , see Talk:HMS Cardiff (D108) for eventual comments about the article. Well done! Million_Moments (talk) 15:54, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		Congratulations on getting your article up to GA! Keep up the good work! Justin(Gmail?)(u) 17:54, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Well done. Congrats! TomStar81 (Talk) 04:26, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, Cannon was done with the help of these guys. My GA is our next goal to FA. Justin^(Gmail?)_(u) 02:10, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Argentine 707

Apparently they only had the one, Freedman/Gamba-Stonehouse, Signals of War and Argentine air forces in the Falklands War. Justin talk 23:01, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

See what you mean about that source, although TC-91 could be a typo. Justin talk 23:43, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Looks like they were wrong, there were 3 707 in-service [2]. Justin talk 23:48, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

TC-91, TC-92 and TC-93 [3] Justin talk 23:52, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry just off to bed, I can check out your email tomorrow. Justin talk 23:53, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Cardiff

I wasn't involved in Cardiffs participation, but I have been involved in a number of USN experimentation exercises in different ways. They're generally quite interesting, and have now ramped up to a more joint approach. We tend to run the UK end out of dstl Portsdown Hill.

ALR (talk) 10:58, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Found some pics of Tiger Bay in 1982, whilst in Argentine service in Stanley. Any use? Justin talk 21:45, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

UNINDENT

Minor point the Type 42 were fitted with the DS30B, mounting a 30mm KCB cannon - not the Oerlikon. It wasn't removed when they fitted Phalanx. At least that was the case a few years ago. Justin talk 13:46, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Linky [4] Justin talk 13:50, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

You might need to get back to Ken. The pictures shows a GCM-A03, which has two 30 mm cannon (BMARC from memory but they went bust years ago). Last time I worked on the Type 42, they had a Phalanx Block 1B and a DS30B with a single 30 mm KCB cannon on each side but that was about 4 years ago. I vaguely remember the BMARC were replaced by the DS30B when Phalanx were fitted. Justin talk 15:09, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

ATBE

Hi Ryan, thanks for the question. Could be "All Things Being Equal" or possibly "Average Time Between Edits" depending on context. Where did you see it? Dreadstar † 15:30, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Ahh, the chart, yes, that's "Average Time Between Edits". You can check edit statistics with this tool. Select the project (e.g. en.wikipedia) then put the page name in and click the search button. Check it out, it's a cool tool. Dreadstar † 23:26, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

A-class review for HMS Cardiff

Hi. I've just opsted my thoughts on the state of the HMS Cardiff article, and will freely admit that I'm pretty tough and nitpicky.

To show my intentions as good, I humbly request permission to go to town on the article, and see what I can do to nullify my complaints and get the good ship to A-class and beyond. -- saberwyn 09:24, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

That's fair enough on the slow reply, I don't expect anyone to be sitting in the Wiki 25/8.

I will say that the edits you've made over the past few hours have really improved the quality of the article. Also, I don understand the effort you've put into this... I know from experience how hard dragging an article to FAC is, and I don't want to steal any of your thunder. Instead of messing with the article itself, I've been working in my userspace on some tweaks, mostly phrasing, layout, and some MOS fixes (see User:Saberwyn/The Slab/HMS Cardiff-Saberwyn goes to town). Feel free to run through there and steal whatever you think is worth anything.

During my work, I noticed a few minor things you may want to look into.

• There is a little bit of excessive wikilinking - links to topics that aren't really relevant to the reader. For example, in the Falklands War paragraph, you currently have. "Cardiff's crew performed various training exercises such as; air defence (involving simulated attacks by British Harrier and Jaguar aircraft), Nuclear Biological Chemical Defence (NBCD) drills, diver training, first aid lectures and practising Exocet (a type of anti-ship missile) countermeasures." From that, I'd probably remove the first-aid and frogman links, as Average Joe Reader is very likely to have a basic enough understanding of these subjects to not need direction to an article, and increased knowledge of the subject is not going to aid the understanding of the ship's history. To prove the flip-side, Average Joe Reader likely knows very little about Harriers, Jaguars, and Exocets, and being able to better understand those will lead to increased understaning of this article. You may also want to have a read through Wikipedia:Only make links that are relevant to the context
• Putting in explanatory material in brackets breaks the flow of the article, and in several cases isn't necessary. Instead, it can usually be easily worked into the text, or omitted entirely. To use the above example, the break for the Exocet explanation can be rewritten as "practising countermeasures against Exocet anti-ship missiles." The sentance flows better, takes up less space and fewer words, and if the reader needs more info, there's a handy wikilink there for them. Later in that paragraph, you've got "...four SAS troopers (British Special Forces)..." You could get away with omitting that entirely, or by spelling out and wikilinking Special Air Service, because the wikilink and the surrounding context establish that these four soldiers are pretty special (for those few that don't know that SAS is short for Elite Awesomeness^TM)
• There may be an excess of citations as well. I will admit here and now that I haven't looked at all of the cites (my boss is happy for me to muck around on Wikipedia, but is somehow less happy if I'm 'just bumming online'), but I think its a bit over the top in some parts. Example: the last line of the Fa;klands War paragraph talks about new anti-missile weapons for Cardiff. There are three citations for "later replaced by the Phalanx close-in weapon system." I've managed to look at all three, and all you need there is the first, which states that "the Phalanx CIWS replaced the 30mm cannons".

I might have some more stuff you may want to look at later, but we'll see how things go. If you need to talk to me at any time (i.e if you have questions, rebuttals, abuse, etc for me), buzz me. 137.111.143.135 (talk) 00:01, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

And next time, I might actually sign in to reply. Sorry. -- saberwyn 00:02, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Glad you approve. I usually play around with Royal Australian Navy ships, but its good to see that my skills can be applied elsewhere. I'd be happier if you merged the material you wanted into the mainspace article. That way you get the best synthesis of the current main and my fiddlings, and then I could copy the updated article back into my userspace and mess around a bit more. Keeps things under control and focused on the end goal... a shiny star in the top right corner. Regarding your comments:

• Refs. Fair call, it was just an observation.
• First construction sentance: In that sentance, I felt that having a link to the class was more relevant than having a link to HMS Sheffield, because (theoretically) the former has information on the class as a whole, while the latter only has information on one ship. Its not that big an issue to have a wikilink below an identical {{main}} link.
• TC-92: Fair enough. I haven't done any research myself yet, just been playing around with your words. It may be better to state that there are conflicting views, and provide both (with sources, of course).
• GroupX-ray: Oops. I am ashamed. :P

Play aroud with it, merge in what you will, and let me know so we can do it all again! and maybe next time I'll actually sign. I'm useless, aren't I? -- saberwyn 21:51, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

• Drop the Sheffield/class link.
• TC-92: Maybe a sentance or two (at most) each explaining the opposing viewpoints, there's no need to go to town here. I don't know what the sources say, but something like "Source A attributes the miss to the distance between Cardiff and TC-92,^[citations] while sources B and C claim the pilot successfully evaded the missile.^[citations]"
• But first, get some sleep! We have until the deadline to finish this. I'm going to be busy for the next few days anyway, and while you do the merge, I'll do some reading and get to know this fine ship a bit better. -- saberwyn 23:14, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Congrats on the A-class passing! Next step, FAC, but before then we need to do a bit of work on the article... the shinier we can get it, the less painful the Featured Article run is going to be. -- saberwyn 01:18, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Had a play, and have a few questions/comments. (1) On what day did the TC-92 incident happen?

(2) I've re-jimmied the section on the Dagger attack of the helicopter, can you make sure the sources line up? Otherwise, looking alright! -- saberwyn 21:58, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm happy with it, but I'm going to have a play with the TC-92 section over the course of the day. I'll move it to the article and drop you a line when I finish, seeing as its probably some ungodly hour where you are. -- saberwyn 23:43, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

All cool. What's next? -- saberwyn 07:21, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

If you want to work it in, by all means go ahead. I didn't think the reference added anything to the information in the article, as everything in that particular section is covered by other sources. Although, I do admit that I was using a machine translation (AltaVista's Babelfish) to read it, pnly had a few minutes to skim through it and try to find relevant information, and I may have missed the significance. -- saberwyn 11:59, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Ryan, congrats on the A class article status. Well deserved. I noted some of the comments on RFA Tidespring and for information the RFA didn't have the air surveillance radar to detect an aircraft. Mk 1 eyeball could have played a part but I'd have though Cardiff or Bristol would have had it nailed long before then. Justin talk 12:29, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Last Canberra

Just a heads up... I've got some sources that attribute the kill of B-108 to HMS Exeter (D89), not Cardiff: This Naval-history.net page and the book Falklands - The Air War by Rodney A. Burden and published in 1986.

Images

No, don't worry about it, it was like that before you did the changes. There are a number of very interesting images on commons, we just have to make sure we don't cramp the text. I have to say, this is a rather rare occasion, a multitude of images as opposed to a dearth of images! ;) Woody (talk) 20:12, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

HMS Cardiff (D108)

Congratulations! It's an A-Class article. There's plenty of good advice from the A-Class review to follow if you decide to take this to FAC. The article does need a good copy-edit though. You might ask Maralia (talk) for this; she's very good and knows an awesome amount about ships :) The downside is she's busy so it might be a while before she gets round to it. Good luck and well done, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 01:11, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Well done! I'm always here if you require any more material.Griffiths911 (talk) 14:43, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello Ryan. I've given her a copyedit. There are a few sentences that I think need a little more rewriting, but not so much that we couldn't handle them at FAC. My one remaining overall concern is the use of italics: there are so very many ship names that are (rightfully) italicized that you need to be really careful not to gratuitously italicize other words, like the names of operations, exercises, etc. Foreign language words should remain italicized, but in some cases those are both italicized and marked with single or double quotes, and that's a bit of overkill too. Could you give it a readthrough for extraneous italics? If you're not sure what I mean, drop me a note and I'll point out some examples. Maralia (talk) 20:50, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Potential revert war at Iran-Iraq

I personally agree that the US flag doesn't belong in the infobox, but I'm concerned we have changes and reverts from an editor who isn't explaining it. I will send him a message, but you might want to call for Admin help before it gets to 3RR.

Howard C. Berkowitz (talk) 15:48, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Falklands war task force

Hello :) I'm considering setting up a Falklands war task force on wikipedia and noticed you've edited the subject quite a bit. Would you consider joining the group if I go ahead and create it? Thanks, --Tefalstar (talk) 19:33, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Haha sixth sense or what :P I've been editing and organising with the Crusades Taskforce for ages but I've done all I can and the Falklands war has always been my other area of military interest. I've sent Justin a message and it would be great if we could all get something going together. --Tefalstar (talk) 19:43, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

No worries man, all we need is enthusiasm. I'm not really up to scratch about running the thing, but I reckon a few of us interested in the topic could make some real headway together. I'll wait and see what Justin and a few other people say and we can make a move. Would be a good learning curve for us all anyway i expect. Glad your interested anyway man :) --Tefalstar (talk) 19:55, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Done and done --Tefalstar (talk) 21:21, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't mind giving this a go, give me a few days to sort a few things out and I'll start to put things together. I've a lot on my plate at the moment so it may be slow. Justin talk 11:27, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

FAC for Cardiff

Well first off I think you should list the article for Wikipedia:Peer review, which is normal before listing for FAC. I notice that it has had a wikiproject peer review, but it's useful to get comments from people who know nothing about the subject in case there is jargon ect. In my opinion it is an excellent article, the only article I have ever passed without it having to be put on hold first. But I do suggest a peer review to avoid having to make to many corrections during the FAC process. I will take another look at the article either here or on the peer review page should you list it. Million_Moments (talk) 13:27, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Unfortuently I am too bogged down at the moment to look at her, however I will look at the article when I get back. Sorry for any inconvience this may have caused. TomStar81 (Talk) 04:58, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Confused by what happened

It's now out from under Cardiff, but I don't understand why it's red-linking. AFAIK, I followed the peer review procedure. Howard C. Berkowitz (talk) 16:12, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Cardiff 1982-1990

Just looked at the FAC but I thought I'd raise this with you 'offline' first. Is there nothing you can find for the history from 82-90? Surely there is some mention of her participation in exercises, etc? Buckshot06 (talk) 22:17, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Are you in the UK? Have you checked your local public library? Or rung the Naval Historical section - address is in a talk archive - and stated your question - need verifiable data - and asked for help? Buckshot06 (talk) 09:41, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

It's not Wales that's important, it's your distance from MOD in London. But these chaps might help: the Naval Historical Branch

Naval Historical Branch

Admiralty Library,

Naval Historical Branch (Naval Staff),

No 24 Store (pp 20),

Main Road,

HM Naval Base Portsmouth,

PO1 3LU.

Tel: 023 92 724327 or 725300

Fax: 023 92 724003

Ring them and explain you need verifiable references, not original documents. I'm sure you'll get pointed to masses of various sources. Cheers Buckshot06(prof) 09:05, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Have some yummy revenge...

Hey - just in case you feel like getting back at me, I just opened a peer review on the bulk carrier article. Cheers. Haus^Talk 03:01, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Task Force

I'm working on it.... Justin talk 22:35, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Congrats

		The WikiChevrons
		For working on HMS Cardiff and promoting what I believe to be the first destroyer ever to achieve Featured Article status I herby award you with the WikiChevrons. Congratulations, and keep up the good work. TomStar81 (Talk) 04:37, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

You may be interested to know that I believe that the Cardiff was only the second destroyer to attain A-Class, the first was HMS Ledbury (L90). -MBK₀₀₄ 07:51, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Aw yes, but it was the first British, Cold War Destroyer named after a capital city beginning with a "C" to reach GA class ;) Ryan4314 (talk) 17:08, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Blurred RMs pic

Hi Ryan. I had to enhance this photo by using a watercolor effect (another guy changed the contrast and uploaded it to Commons later) because the original was in a very bad shape. If you, or somebody can find a better copy of this original -scanned from the defunct Argentinian magazine Siete Días-, feel free to replace my version. Thanks.--Darius (talk) 20:51, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: Starting a new taskforce

You mean for the Falklands War, or something else? In any case:

1. The appropriate thing to do would be to propose creating it on WT:MILHIST.
2. Given how inactive the South American task force is, I'd encourage you to use that for the time being, as I rather doubt there's enough activity that an entirely separate task force would be needed for the Falklands at this point.

Hope that helps! Kirill ^(prof) 23:27, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Falklands War Montage.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Falklands War Montage.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is 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. Polly (Parrot) 15:55, 26 May 2008 (UTC) --Polly (Parrot) 15:55, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVII (May 2008)

The May 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:57, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Huge pat on the back.

You made the main page mate, congratulations!!!!! Justin talk 21:16, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I dunno who nominated it, guess it came up on the radar being the first article in that class to make the grade. Anyway bask in the glory!!! Justin talk 08:06, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

No worries, guess I can stand down now. Justin talk 17:34, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Hang around some IP editor with an obsession with misplacing commas is giving the article grief. Justin talk 17:37, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Casualties of the Argentine air attacks at Bluff Cove

I actually created this over two years ago, but several other similar articles I created around the same time have been deleted and I decided to redirect it rather than have it deleted at Afd and lose the information. I don't think there is an essential consensus based decision process for this, but Rfd is required if there is a dispute about the redirect. I was being WP:BOLD.--Jackyd101 (talk) 17:43, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Re:FAQ

Looks good, I can see that you did in fact snarf a few points from WisKy (and by extension, th other four FA Iowas :) In this case, since you commented that the British naval custom is to mention all awards earned by a ship assigned a name previously used, you may want to mention that point in the FAQ as well if you do decide to adopt that format. TomStar81 (Talk) 23:48, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Your welcome, and thanks for the heads up. I highly recommend that you watchlist the article, and be prepared to deal with a butload of vandalism for the next 24 hours -- our vandals are famous for picking the FA of the day for drive by rewording. To help out, I will drop a message off at MILHIST and see about getting some extra eyes to keep the vandalsim to a minimum. TomStar81 (Talk) 23:57, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Before hitting the sack I was curios when you were going to put the FAQ page up on the talk page. TomStar81 (Talk) 00:04, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Also, a point of clarification: The main page blurb is protected, but the article itself won't be. It is there fore possible for anyone who elects to read the actual article to edit the article at there discretion, and that has in the pass lead to a number of interesting vandalism-based edits. Notable, vandals are fond of switching out images of the ship and other visual media for material that is gross or sexually explicit in nature, and they have a tendancy to both blank the page and add curse words to the page. Luckily, the RC patrolers will be watching the article all day, so you will have some protection, and I left a note at MILHIST asking for additional eyes on the page, so you will get some help there. In addition, the worst vandalism (blanking the page and such) will register on the radar of the AntiVandal bots operation on the site, so its not like the article will have to whether an assult by itself. Still and all though, it will be nessicary for you to check back on the page this time tommarow and ensure that all the material in the article today will there tomarrow. If it isn;t, you may need to add it back. TomStar81 (Talk) 00:11, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Crazy IP

Not sure what to make of it, he's converting any and all reference to Brits to English (I know everyone thinks Brits are all English and it pisses off we Scotsman). Justin talk 22:21, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

I've alerted admins, to ask for a second opinion, I'll see what they say. He's changed IP addresses already and posted on the admin page. Justin talk 22:26, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

You are a vandal - plain and simple. You know as well as I that I added sourced birth details to the articles, and added the more descritive and correct English description. You know all the articles I edited were of English people, none of them are Scottish, Welsh or N. Irish.

92.8.140.221 (talk) 22:28, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Possibly, I think I might know who. Hi Alex, editing anonymously now are we and adding wikistalking to your list of talents? Justin talk 22:30, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

If you feel tempted to help me out by reverting his changes, please don't, he is now accusing me of canvassing other editors to revert his changes. Justin talk 22:33, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Naa, Alex is an Argentine POV warrior. Justin talk 22:35, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

You're only part of the gang when you get your first death threat.  ;-p Justin talk 22:39, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

I realise you're joking but text can be a bit misleading sometimes, its probably best if we quit the joshing till an admin has had time for an objective look at this. We don't need to make their job harder. Justin talk 22:43, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Funnily enough I was just reading an e-book about the zulu wars. Justin talk 22:50, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

ROTFLMAO I misread South American for South African. Doh!!!!!!. I'll probably see you there!!! Justin talk 22:55, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Nothing so dramatic, just being going through some old family papers and found my great grandfather fought in the zulu wars. Justin talk

My grand parents were both in reserve occupations for WWII, not so lucky in WWI. One of my other great grandfathers was badly wounded on the Somme. Most of the ones we've traced so far never made it back. A lot of them were in one of the pals regiments that were decimated in 1916. Justin talk 23:08, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry just been over on the admin incidents page, the vandalism report was dismissed as edit warring. 40,000 hits eh? You must be so proud. Justin talk 23:24, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Ryan - if you actually look at the edits you will see that it was the person above who started reverting my edits and has been stalking ME. You will also notice that my edits were enirely constructive, unless you think birth places/dates are useless to articles?

92.8.140.221 (talk) 22:33, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

UNINDENT

Only in Glasgow could someone chin a guy on fire and become a national hero. Makes you proud, it really does. Justin talk 23:18, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Falklands Books

Couple of good books you should try and read, both are massive though:

Signals of War by Lawrence Freedman and Virginia Gamba-Stonehouse The official History of the Falklands Campaign, by Lawrence Freedman

And with that I'm off to bed as I should have been about 2 hrs ago. Regards, Justin talk 00:11, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Falklands FF Incidents

Replied on my talk page to keep the conversation together. Justin talk 07:51, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry mate, missed the question. I don't think I've got that book - do you have a title? As to the shiops have a shuftie at this website [5] HMS Newcastle was in refit, see also [6], Southampton was still in trials and accelerated into service and [7], [8] . The RN website can be a useful source of information. Not entirely sure what happened to Birmingham, it may have been the Armila patrol at the time. Justin talk 23:47, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I think my guess was correct - see [9] Single Type 42 for the Armilla patrol - that could only have been Birmingham couldn't it? Justin talk 23:53, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Milhist reviews March-May 2008

		The Content Review Medal of Merit
		In recognition of your contribution in improving Military history articles through A-Class and Peer Reviews, during the period March-May 2008, please accept this Content Review Medal of Merit, --ROGER DAVIES talk 02:11, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

British Occupations

Yeah, well Suez was three months but I guess it fits with what this category might be legitimately be used for. Justin talk 21:40, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Falklands Troop Numbers

From memory there were was 5000 ground troops on the British side, conventional doctrine has the attacker outnumbering the defender 3:1. In the Falklands it was usually the other way round. Justin talk 22:07, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

New Group you may be interested in

[10] Justin talk 21:34, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

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

The June 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 20:12, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

NI

I support NI independence for England and/or reunification with the true Irish state(preferably the second one).DrogLad 08:37, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Infoboxes

Hi mate, could you look at an article I'm authoring here (It's only done up to the "incident" section). I want to know what type of infobox I should use, the {{Infobox Military Conflict}} or {{Infobox Aircraft accident}}??? Cheers Ryan4314 (talk) 21:29, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

For friendly fire incidents, I use the infobox such as used in this article. Cla68 (talk) 21:37, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I look forward to reading the article once completed. It's almost inevitable that there's always some kind of coverup after these incidents occur, isn't it? Cla68 (talk) 23:05, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Air-to-air

It was the AIM-9L.

The first batch was, shall we say, liberated from NATO stocks, and the Americans (for which read Caspar Weinburger) turned a blind eye. I don't know if that is widely known or reported. The rest were shipped direct from the manufacturer from a batch intended for the USAF.

Aircraft integration wasn't really a problem as the Sidewinder has a standard interface umbilical, I dare say you could call it the first plug'n'play missile. Its now a de facto standard for most air-to-air missiles like ASRAAM and IRIS-T and Matra Magic. It was pretty much a straight swop, though its not quite that simple in practise. It was cleared under what is now known as an Urgent Operational Requirement, which allows you to bypass a lot of red tape. In theory at least the pilot interface was identical but having a better seeker and motor could be launched at greater stand off and could engage head on, which the older Sidewinder couldn't. In reality, much of the supposed advantages of the Lima are on paper only, all of the kills in the Falklands War were from the rear aspect, where the Lima did not offer a significant advantage.

Technically inferior is just bullshit, the SHAR was streets ahead of anything the Argentines had. The Mirage had the advantage of speed and height but the Harriers chose to engage only at altitudes that were of advantage to them. The big advantage on the British side was superior pilot training. The GR.3 was adapted to carry Sidewinders, they were cleared on the AV-8A for the USMC so they had provision for Sidewinders but until 1982 they'd never been carried in RAF service. It was never used during the war but in the post-conflict period GR.3 flew CAP.

Does that answer everything? Justin talk 19:42, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

AIM-9D/G and Sky Flash on the Phantom. Justin talk 20:19, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh right, that would have been the AIM-9D/G. Justin talk 20:47, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Argentine air forces in the Falklands War

Do u know whose baby Argentine air forces in the Falklands War is? Wanna add some pics, might need to remove some. Ryan4314 (talk) 16:49, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

RE:See wolf

Ahhh, sorry bout that. Thanks for taking care of it...silly me!  :) « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 05:15, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Argentine/Argentinian

I think they're pretty much interchangeable, I tend to prefer Argentine as Argentinian is a bit clumsy. Justin talk 07:54, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Iconic photographs of the Falklands War

I've just started a new article in my user space here. I'd welcome your comments on the images chosen and suggestions for any others. You are of course welcome to contribute if you would like to help. Justin talk 12:28, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Clayton

Ryan, it looks like you've probably got most things covered - there might be a few more things in the Gazette with a bit of hunting - should be possible to find more of his promotions for example (the RNs unwillingness to use service number in its Gazette notices does make it a bit harder to track down info on RN personnel in my experience). In the article about the RN personnel captured by Iran, there's a link to a pdf of a fairly recent Navy List which may also have some info. Is this for a particular article? David Underdown (talk) 09:25, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I think he'd actually be more notable for the appointments he seems to have held as a vice-admiral, rather than particularly for that incident - though helicopter v fighter seems unusual to say the least. Certianly seems a reasonable case for creating a stub. David Underdown (talk) 11:05, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, my mistake, he did only make it to rear-admiral. 2006 sounds about right. David Underdown (talk) 11:18, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I'd try User:ALR for those acronyms, if there's not a key anywhere. David Underdown (talk) 11:24, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

ah ha, abbreviations are listed in section 9, page 289 ish on. David Underdown (talk) 11:32, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Re:Dots

Thanks, Ryan. I find Wikipedia:MoS particulary boring, so I was not aware about caption policies preventing the use of periods in the case of nominal groups. I hope I got it right.--Darius (talk) 01:00, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on September 14!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:32, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

War hero and List of fictional war heroes

Actually, I am hoping that someone would take the List of fictional war heroes to AfD as it seems to be either A) original research or B) a synthesis... but in the meantime, at least the phrase "war hero" appears in both the title and the text of the latter. Of course, it all hinges on that definition as well, I suppose... 147.70.242.40 (talk) 20:31, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Lt Clayton.JPG

Independently of the ongoing NFCC debate, can you please clarify the source for this image? We need to know not only who took it, but also where and when it was published. (That would otherwise also be a deletion issue.) Thanks, -- Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:29, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Okay, no, that's fine then, thanks. I just needed to know it was actually published and hadn't just sat in some archive or some guy's private albums, because of WP:NFCC#4. Perhaps you could add the thing about the "Navy News" publication to the description page. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:33, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

I'd say just put it wherever you're talking about the source - together with the name of the photographer and all that? Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:45, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

After some to-and-fro I've listed my closure of this discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 September 15, and as a participant in the IfD I invite your comments - Peripitus (Talk) 03:46, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Captain Casado

Find it on Merco press this evening and immediately thought of your article. Its worth a look once in a while for this sort of thing. Justin talk 22:21, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The September 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fourteen candidates. Please vote here by September 30!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:23, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:HMS Cardiff Crest.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:HMS Cardiff Crest.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:41, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Thought I'd add this here, this doesn't quite tell the entire story. One bot converted the .gif to a .png and replaced it in the article, and then another bot noticed that the .gif was orphaned, tagged it, and sent you this message. The image is still in the article, just under the name Image:HMS Cardiff Crest.png. Pfainuk talk 09:22, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

RAS

Ship to ship transfers at sea are called Replenishment at Sea (RAS) which is a generic term for refueling or the transfer of food, stores and munitions. That particular method is called Light Jackstay and the only permitted method for pax transfer.
ALR (talk) 10:55, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

HMS Sheffield

Sadly that is a common urban legend, you'd be surprised how often I've been told that. Even from senior military people who really should know better. Justin talk 18:47, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I'm back!

I'm back! Sorry I left so suddenly. But it is good to be back. Justin^(Gmail?)_(u) 17:00, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

I noticed that. Cool! Justin^(Gmail?)_(u) 17:05, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Ha, that would have been cool. What was yours, and when was it on the front page? Justin^(Gmail?)_(u) 17:13, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh, nice. I'll have to check it out later. Justin^(Gmail?)_(u) 19:57, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

HMS Cardiff

Just checked the MOD announcement, not a sniff. I'd have expected the news to be posted there. I've reverted as uncited. Justin talk 23:15, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: Personal Attacks

Hey asshole, you called me a troll some time ago. That entitles me to attack you as well. And don't give me that "maybe you're not suited for a community like Wikipedia" bullshit. Is that a threat? Should I be scared? Fuck off. —Preceding unsigned comment added by UNSC Trooper (talk • contribs) 17:27, 29 October 2008

For the ease of readers, I have included my preceding comment that I placed on the above user's talk page per the WP:NPA policy; "If you feel that a response is necessary and desirable, you should leave a polite message on the other user's talk page."

Please don't make personal attacks, as you did on here. It's clearly obvious from the page history you edited the page's content. I would've commended you for fixing your mistake, however you have now sullied that with your personal attack. Per these edits it appears you have trouble maintaining a cool head. None of your edits are private and article history logs are for public viewing. Have you considered that maybe you are not suited to a community based atmosphere such as Wikipedia? I should also take this opportunity that you are more than welcome to remove this warning from your talkpage per WP:UP#CMT, as it's removal will confirm you have read it. Ryan4314 (talk) 19:33, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Kamau Kambon

An article that you have been involved in editing, Kamau Kambon, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kamau Kambon (2nd nomination). Thank you. Eastmain (talk) 00:29, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

To the scrapper ?

Hi Ryan, I see from here that Cardiff is leaving Portsmouth under tow tomorrow 19 Feb 2008. Will try to get a photo, weather permitting.86.145.68.143 (talk) 16:38, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

HMS Cardiff

Source for her scrapping [11], hopefully we can finalise the article now. Justin talk 17:22, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Title change discussion for November 11, 2008 incident off Somalia

During the deletion discussion for November 11, 2008 incident off Somalia, you suggested that the name of the article should be changed. I have now started a title change discussion (which can be found here: [12]) for the article, and I was wondering if you could contribute to it. Thank you very much in advance if you do so. Thanks for reading. BlueVine (talk) 16:12, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Dates

You can use my script to unlink dates yourself in just one click. Just add:

importScript('User:Lightmouse/monobook.js/script.js');

to the bottom of User:Ryan4314/monobook.js then clear your cache using the instructions on that page (press Ctrl-Shit-R in firefox).

Then when you have a page in edit mode, look for the blue text at the left of the page below 'What links here'. You will see a button called 'All dates to dmy' in blue. Just click it and it will detect all the dates and reformat them.

I hope that helps. Any questions, just ask me. Regards Lightmouse (talk) 07:50, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

I strongly recommend that before you start delinking dates, you read this, other recent edit warring cases involving date delinking, and various warnings from administrators that strongly advise against date delinking activities while an RFC is pending. Tennis expert (talk) 10:56, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

And I strongly recommend you follow the current WP:MOS guidelines on this matter and ignore any threats from bullying (and so-called retired) editors who seek to impose their own agenda on you. You are welcome to make edits as you see fit here, it's a Wiki after all and since you would not be editing against any guidelines right now, feel free to continue. The Rambling Man on tour (talk) 12:08, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Tennis Expert, the requested edit was for an article in my sandbox. That article is still a work in progress and will adapt as (or "if") policies change. I'd prefer if you kept your stalking of Lightmouse's talk page out of a private request between two editors, over an article that is not even in the mainspace! Ryan4314 (talk) 14:32, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Yep, we've all had to become accustomed to Tennis expert's antics—it's like living with the bomb, and keeping them in check like the weekly chore of putting out the garbage. Tony (talk) 07:57, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Ha ha, lol @ "living with the bomb"! How is the date delinking debate going by the way? Ryan4314 (talk) 03:01, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Regarding this

As indicated by multiple editors in the discussion, please note that deletion is not a legal option as the nominator merged some of that article's content that other editors other than the nominator had originally written prior to the nomination (see [13] and [14] for the merge of content written by myself and others and here for the GFDL regarding such merges}. Thus, technically, because the discussion can only legally close as "keep," "merge", "redirect", or "no consensus", i.e. anything other than "delete", it should be speedily closed without prejudice for a talk page discussion on the merits of the merge done by the nominator a few weeks back. Also, the two main characters Ax and Tyris are mentioned in international newspaper and magazine reviews, previews, etc. of the games they appear in and in some of these reviews at decent length. These reviews, previews, etc. verify much of the information in the article, which means significant coverage in reliable secondary or third-party sources and thus unoriginal research. See, for example, David Choquet, "Golden Axe," 1000 Game Heroes (Taschen, 2002), 331-334. They did apparently also make a toy of the character as well. Moreover, because the characters appear in multiple games, this article serves as a sort of gateway to those other articles. I do see and agree that the article should have better citations, but a quick glance on Google News and in some of my video game magazines shows that the characters are integral parts of the series and do receive enough out of universe coverage to justify their coverage. With that said, I wouldn't be opposed to a merge and redirect that maintains the edit history so that editors can use the vast multitude of sources available to improve the content when they have the sources to work from rather than having to start over, but in any event, my concern is that content I and others had been working on was merged unilaterally a few weeks back by the nominator to another article without attributing it to us in the edit summary followed by a challenge of the redirect by IPs (see here), and then instead of discussing the validity of the redirects on a talk page just nominated the article with our contributions for deletion thereby making it (if deleted) so that those of who actually wrote that content would not be acknowledged. Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 16:54, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Hello, after thoughtfully reading your message I have decided to keep my vote at a "delete". What you said about "deletion not being a legal option" because the nominator performed some merges a month ago, sounds to me like winging a attempt at gaming the system. If this were true then why hasn't this case been reported to ANI and closed by an admin? You then go on to try and justify the notability of 2 of the characters to me. Well this AFD isn't about those 2 characters, instead I'd recommend that if you believe these 2 characters are notable, that you should write an article about them. The question put to me in the AFD was; look at this list, do you think it should go?

Also I find it an extremely bad faith edit that you would attempt to debate my vote with me on my talk page and not at the AFD. Ryan4314 (talk) 18:24, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

The case has been reported to ANI as indicated in the discussion. --A Nobody^{My talk} 18:27, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Then there wasn't much point contacting me and attempting to influence my vote was there? I consider this matter now dropped, I am a wikisloth and do not wish to continue this discussion outside of the AFD. Ryan4314 (talk) 18:35, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Sneak preview?

User:Tony1/AdminWatch#Specific_policy_requirements Tony (talk) 16:15, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

List of fictional political parties

Does List of fictional political parties share the same issues the fictional governments list had? JBsupreme (talk) 18:27, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Weapons Tight

On it. Justin talk 23:45, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Ryan, with respect to Weapons Tight I suspect you're not on much more than a dicdef. The Plot article is a bit more substantive but is more than just a naval issue, the same terminology applies in the airborne world. I'll have to find time to have a think about it, but it's a decent start.

ALR (talk) 21:48, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Ok mate, yea I think you're right about the Weapons Tight, Narson mentioned it too. I might see if I can move it to Wikitionary, as I would like the link so I can use it in an article I'm authoring. Ryan4314 (talk) 22:16, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

South Georgia Helo

Its a Puma, one was shot down during the South Georgia invasion. Not a lot of point in recovering it as we operate it ourselves. That image is on my watch list as Argentine editors keep on labelling it as a British helicopter. Justin talk 09:51, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Haida Screen.jpg

I have deleted it :). Tip for next time: You can ask a file/page you created to be deleted by adding {{db-author}} to the page (the only condition is that you're the only author) :) I hope that helps! -- lucasbfr ^talk 10:09, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

DCEETA

Ryan, do you mind having a quick squint at that article please. I flagged it on the MilHist and OR talk pages but not much interest in addressing it. Tin-foil hats appear to be rig-of-the-day though...

Cheers

ALR (talk) 16:09, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

fwiw this is the version I culled it down to.

ALR (talk) 17:21, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

It's worth a look at the talk page, this article started as Area 58 and got deleted as unsourced and non-notable. The Author has gone for the block quote everything and they can't say it's unsourced approach. I think it's full of OR, misrepresentation of sources, synthesis and trivia. I'm not even convinced that it's all that notable. Looking at the overhead on Google Earth it doesn't appear to be much more significant than the old NATO SGS at Balado Bridge.

ALR (talk) 17:38, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

And then I find Balado, arrgh...

ALR (talk) 17:39, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

SINKEX

No idea, perhaps Naval Records in Portsmouth or the Naval Museum. There might have been a mention of it in Navy News. NN is probably your best bet, they run a regular ship history article so might at least be able to point you in the right direction.

ALR (talk) 17:21, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

AdminWatch

Hi Ryan; you asked me to let you know when it was up and running. It's not yet, but you might be interested in contributing your views about the coordinator positions. Can't see how to get around holding elections, but hopefully as small a deal as possible. User_talk:Tony1/AdminWatch#Coordinators Tony (talk) 00:38, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Can you delete plz

Hi, done most of them now. Except File:HMS Bristol Ascension 1982.JPG, can't find the same image among User:Griffiths911's uploads there File:HMS Bristol storing at Ascension Island 1982.JPG is quite simmilar, but not the same (helicopter have moved to the other side of the ship). --Sherool (talk) 20:29, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Mario Menendez

Dear Ryan4314

I saw on Talk:Falklands War that you had an interest in creating an article on Mario Menéndez. I created such an article a few days ago, and I was wondering if you would like to help beef it up. I would like to assure you that I didn't know of your interest before I created the article. Like you, I was surprised an article didn't exist on him, so I decided to start one up. I found out what you said on Talk:Falklands War through clicking the "What links here" on the Menéndez article that led me to the talkpage. Thanks for reading. Terrakyte (talk) 22:30, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the barnstar, and thank you very much for describing the article as good, as well as assessing and tagging it. I really appreciate it.  :) Terrakyte (talk) 22:43, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

A reply to you...

...can be found here. Cheers! :) —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 22:34, 29 December 2008 (UTC)