There's really no such thing as having too many footnotes, in my opinion (with the proviso that multiple footnotes for a single sentence should be combined into a single note, so there's a natural limit of [# of sentences] footnotes for an article). Even if there was, ~60 would certainly not be a reasonable upper limit; see, for example, this article.
Hmm, I just figured out where said feedback was received.
My (strictly personal) advice would be to take the suggestions of the reviewer in question with a very large grain of salt; some of the points he makes are quite sillyâit's always a good thing to cite multiple sources, in particularâand he's espoused some rather... unusual... views in the past (e.g. here). Kirill Lokshin21:46, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for your helpful feedback on the talk page about the episode list I was editing. You made a very good point on the formatting of other tables to match as well. Per your suggestion, I've been working on those too. Would you mind taking a peek at those additional tables and providing me feedback, yet again? They are now located on the same page as the original list, which in turn is located here.
Though I am hoping for any and all feedback, I also am in particular need of feedback on the multiple use of "no image" links under secondary characters. I personally don't like it and wondered if by chance you might have an idea. Should I merge the summary section for each, until a photo is found? (x-posted to the Rome talk page) MagnoliaSouth | Talk07:27, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I think it's a great article already. One thing that could be done to improve it is to expand the Aftermath section a little. Were there are discernible long-term consequences from this struggle? Right now the Aftermath mostly speaks about how the war helped Crassus and Pompey rise to positions of power. That is certainly important, but I was just wondering if there was anything else that could go there.
All-right I've given it a thorough copyedit, but I think my edits might have undone some of your most recent ones (there was an edit conflict apparently). Check to see if I changed anything too drastically and just change those portions back to the version you like.UberCryxic16:48, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Mmm, please feel free to put it up! (If there are any other issues with the article, I doubt you'll find them without subjecting it to the full FAC gauntlet, in any case.) Kirill Lokshin14:55, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't involved myself with this article for a while, but I saw your edit summary comments and took a look at the content of the edits in question. I'd like to point out that the content of your edits, and those that you're arguing against, do not match your comments. Your "opponent" is not stating that anything--a negative or otherwise--has been proven; he's only saying that the theory your edits describe is not supported by current science. Furthermore, It isn't correct to say that "a negative cannot be proven." Any statement, including a provable one, can be stated as a negative (the square root of 9 is not 42). Even the in type of speculation where people tend to bring up the cliche' that a negative cannot be proven, the cliche' is often incorrect. Those who believe there is a Loch Ness Monster might say "you can't prove it doesn't exist." But you can: just drain the lake and check for any monsters flopping around in the mud. KarlBunker02:43, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Vedexent - yes you should take it as a compliment. I did want to read more, and maybe an "analysis" or future impact section would have been useful to add. I know the sources are limited, so its perfectly ok. Rama's arrow16:07, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the advice. As you can see, I was intelligent enough to follow some of it. Did some grad work in the subject area, but at the time (the mid-80s) there just wasn't enough primary source material out there. Worked on a history of the Joint Chief's involvement in the escalation period for my master's thesis instead. Have always been fascinated by the tantalizing puzzle of SOG. Spent years prying it apart and putting it back together again. RM Gillespie03:05, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
WikiProject Military history Newsletter - Issue VII - September 2006
A new review process for potential A-Class articles is now operational. Much of the backlog of pre-review articles has already been processed; all project members are invited to take part in future reviews, and to nominate high-quality articles themselves.
The automation department, which schedules bulk tasks for bot and AWB processing, is now open; all project members can request new tasks and comment on existing requests.
The various requests for articles and images have been consolidated into the combined requests page, which now includes requests for article creation, maps and other images, translation, and article cleanup.
Personally, I have no intentions of participating in Citizendium. Aside from the fact that I consider forks to be a bad idea in general (see below), I have no formal education in anything resembling history, so my participation there would necessarily be as a second-class citizen. I'd much rather work in an (admittedly flawed) system where everyone has at least the potential to work on an equal level than one where anyone without a suitably long CV is relegated to grunt work.
More generally, forks tend to be very drastic things. Not only is there a split of the community, but, more fundamentally, a split of the encyclopedia itself. Nobody will actually bother merging changes to one copy of the article into the other, because it would simply be too much work to keep them synchronized. Insofar as Wikipedia functions as a market externalityâin other words, where the benefit for someone to use it is proportional to the number of other usersâcreating a split version will lead to poorer-quality material in both, since the overall number of editors fixing things will be smaller in each case. (Although the flaws will likely be in different topic areas.)
(All this quite aside from the practical problems with Sanger's proposal. The requirement of using real names is extraordinarily problematic; the effect will be that articles which are controversialâparticularly where certain additions may provoke legal (or extra-legal!) reprisalsâwill simply be abandoned.)
Actually, I'm pretty sure this isn't the case; I vaguely recall that a majority (and perhaps as much as 80%) of anonymous edits are constructive. It's only a relatively small number of prominent articles that seem to attract large numbers of vandals; the vast majority of the article base has only occasional edits, most of which are genuninely helpful. Kirill Lokshin20:34, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A new guideline concerning "In popular culture" sections has been introduced.
The new unit and formation category guidelines are being implemented; assistance with bringing the category tree into conformity with them is appreciated!
You are correct that none of the main characters are Mormon, but in the book there is a whole Mormon colony that is described as being warned to evacuate, they don't, and they are slaughtered. In the movie it is instead shown as a short news bulletin, with the unmistakable Angel Moroni statue shown above the compound with the dead colonists strewn around. They don't play as major part in the story as they did in Heinlein's Sixth Column, but they are there. -- 71.35.41.9205:04, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I just did a text search of the book. The word "Mormon" is not in the text anywhere.
It was included in the movie because it was in the book. I don't have a "searchable" copy other that my 60's era hardcopy, so it'll take a while for me to find the exact page(s). I was unaware that it was legitimately available in electronic form at this time -- is it available online, and if so what is the URL? That might make it easier (and faster) for me to give you the citation that way, as we'd be looking at the same thing (page number getween the various printings aren't exact). Other key words you could try in your search are "Latter", "Latter-day", "Saints", "Utah", "Colony", and "Colonists". If I have time tomorrow I might look though the book & find it. -- 71.35.41.9205:46, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ahem. Well. I didn't say it was a legitimately available electronic text file of the book. However, I have done a text search for "Latter", "Latter-day", "Saints", "Utah", "Colony", and "Colonists". "Latter", "Latter-day", "Saints", "Utah" come up negative. "Colony" turns up references to "Sanctuary" (the Terran Federation's "alternate Earth"), Iskander (the human colony in the proxima centauri system), "Faraway" (which is mentioned as a human colony that has been occupied by the Arachnids, but is not mentioned as being Mormon), Sheol (which is an Arachnid colony). The only other planets I remember being mention are Klendathu (the Arachnid home world) and "Planet P" (another "Bug" planet and not even a colony, but "an uncompleted advance base").
A Google.com search for "Starship Troopers Mormon" as well as "Starship Troopers Latter Day Saints" yields many references to Mormons in the film version, but no mention of Mormons in the book version. In fact, I found the following:
"Bob Heinlein was never a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but he had friends and acquaintances who were. Many of his novels and short stories include Latter-day Saint characters or references to the Church. These include Stranger in a Strange Land; Tunnel in the Sky; Citizen of the Galaxy; Friday; Double Star; To Sail Beyond The Sunset and Job: A Comedy of Justice. The novel If This Goes On (now published in the collection Revolt in 2100) features extensive references to Latter-day Saints and an extended scene that takes place in Provo, Utah.
Despite Heinlein's propensity for including references to Latter-day Saints in his writing, and the fact that there is just such a reference in the film version of his Hugo Award-winning novel, I have not been able to find such a reference in the book. There are two possibilities: The references to "Mormon extremists" and "Port Joe Smith" may appear only in earlier editions of the novel, but has been edited out and does not appear in recently published editions. Alternatively, this scene showing a Latter-day Saint colony on another planet was entirely imagined up by the movie's screenwriter or director. " - References to Latter-day Saints (Mormons) in the movie Starship Troopers (1997) - my italics
The only possible Mormon reference I can see is if the name "Regato" is uniquely Mormon, which doesn't seem likely.
"Clearly enough put. Do you remember Madame Ruitman? I was on a few days leave after I finished Basic and I went home. I saw some of our friends, said good-by -- she among them. She chattered away and said, `So you're really going out? Well, if you reach Faraway, you really must look up my dear friends the Regatos.' "
"I told her, as gently as I could, that it seemed unlikely, since the Arachnids had occupied Faraway.
I suspect that you are incorrectly remembering an instance of Mormonism in a different novel as being in Starship Troopers. Given that Heinlein did in fact make numerous references to the Latter-Day Saints in his writing, it is an easy and understandable mistake to make. Alternatively, I just haven't found it yet. If you can find the reference in the text, please let me know - you have me wondering now :) - Vedexent (talk) - 14:03, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thanks for the copyedit. I was aware it was a colloquialism but was trying to liven up the section headers :-) Since you obviously have some knowledge of this area, I don't suppose that you would be interested in helping to expand the article into full prose? It is in an early state at the moment but we are trying to work it into a narrative account of the roman military's campagin history, with notes on other factors such as political impact, structural changes etc, where relevant. WOuld you be interested in helping? Cheers - PocklingtonDan15:20, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Just a note about your restructuring of the Roman military articles; are you not, essentially, re-creating a portal through a hierarchical structure of articles like that? Have you considered creating a Wikipedia:Portal for the project? - Vedexent (talk) - 23:25, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I have set up a (start class) portal now. Please have a look at it and let me know your comments for improvement and tying it in tot he articles and areas it covers. Cheers - PocklingtonDan10:56, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Vedexent, this is my second revert on you, today, but I assure you I have nothing personally against you. My second revert was caused by two things: (1) bolding the name of the author in the note has no support anywhere, as far as I know; (2) MacBride is a book about legions, while the CIL is referenced just for a "footnote".--Panarjedde13:38, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
*Laughs* I think the content of User talk:Panarjedde speaks volumes on its own for the validity of the "calm, rational, polite and 'oh-so-wounded by your unreasonable attitude'" facade you project here as your "parting shot". - Vedexent (talk) - 22:56, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue IX - November 2006
Hello! I guess I could understand your request for a citation if had I stated "Shadowrunâ was inspired by Neuromancer" within the article. But all I did was add a link to a Wikipedia article about Shadowrun to the "See also" section. Neuromancer was published in 1984; Shadowrun followed closely in 1989. If the game was not inspired by "Neuromancer", then what was the inspiration? Both involve cybernetic enhancements (including retractable razors, a direct lift from the book), a Japanese theme (including a samurai character class, another direct lift), Cyberspace Decks/Decks (direct lift), and most telling...The Matrix. Do any of the writers/authors of the game specifically credit Neuromancer? Not that I can find; from my research, my understanding is that Mr. Gibson does not approve of Shadowrun, nor was he ever paid anything for the lifts, so the game designers are probably thanking their lucky stars that they haven't been sued. I imagine finding such a citation would be nigh on impossible. Would it make you more comfortable if I removed the phrase "inspired by Neuromancer"? Thanks! -- weirdoactort|c -- 18:00, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings.
I asked specifically about a citation, for two reasons:
The "holy grail" of Wikipedia (and the only way to stop edit wars) is verifiability.
This edit here - which was not done by me, and is not cited either (i.e. I can't tell with any certainty if Gibson said this or not).
It seems that this is a (possible) "point of contention" over the article, so I think given that it is a minor point, it should probably be left out unless it can actually be cited.
I admit there are many similarities between elements in the book, and elements in the game. Does this mean that Neuromancer was a direct inspiration? Personally, I believe it is pretty clear that it does. Personally, I agree with you. However one can make the argument that Neuromancer heavily influenced all other Cyberpunk genre stories (pretty much every element you have mentioned can be found elsewhere), and that Shadowrun merely borrows from the genre. I suspect this is why the makers of Shadowrun have not been sued.
In short: I think you're right, but it is a possible flash point of an "edit war" (as stupid and petty as that is), and it is not an unassailable position (even though it seem "common sense"), and given that it is a minor point, unless it can be defended under strictest verifiability guidelines, it might be wise to just leave it off the article.
A stupid veering into Wikipedia politics, I know - but we cannot change human nature
I agree with every point you make. I'll add my own conjecture that another reason the Shadowrun creators were not sued is because it was a less litigious era; if such a monumental lift of story elements were to happen in today's climate, the lawyers would be billing hours before you could say "stimpack". It was most certainly not my intention to start an edit war; do you think it would be alright for me to leave the wikilink in the "See also" section if I remove the phrase ""inspired by Neuromancer"? Thanks! -- weirdoactort|c -- 19:30, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think you should use your own judgment as to what would be best. I'm just warning you that the point (and the link) might be removed later for the reasons stated in that aforementioned edit summary, unless you can provide some sort of external published reference to a link between the game and the novel. I have no inclination to take it back out, but someone else might. I guess we'll just have to see if it stays in the article :) - Vedexent (talk) - 20:56, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've adjusted according to what I think is best infomationally, and to satisfy any further requests for citations. I'd like to find a citation for Gibson's opinion of the game; I found one earlier, and now I can't seem to find it...heh. Thanks for your help! -- weirdoactort|c -- 21:12, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue X - December 2006
You seem to be the most active fellow in the Classical warfare task force, so I thought I'd bring my idea to you.
I've been thoroughly fascinated with Classical Greece for some time now, especially the wars between Athens and Sparta. I've participated in a great number of debates about such wars, normally about the Peloponnesian Wars and the Persian invasions of the 5th century BCE, and during this time, I've developed a slant toward the Spartans, almost in the same fashion in which people may develop a slant toward a specific football team.
Since many people whom I've discussed this topic with have a similar such slant, usually toward either the Spartans or Athenians, I thought, well, why not make a userbox for it on Wikipedia? Perhaps similar people would like to display such slants on their userpages. So I did, a few moments ago. They look a little base, and the page which they link to (which also tries to explain this issue) looks quite sad, but hey, it's still just an idea. If you wouldn't mind giving me your thoughts, I'd be most appreciative.
A set of five criteria for B-Class status has been introduced; new parameters are available in {{WPMILHIST}} to keep track of articles' progress with regard to these criteria.
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect seven coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 11!
Hi, I have self-nominated Campaign history of the Roman military for featured article status: FAC nomination. However, people are being incredibly reticent about remarking on it either positively or negatively, I think a lot of people lack the specific subject knowledge to confidently support or oppose the nomination. Since you I belive have a sound knowledge of ancient Rome, would it be possible for you to post your own comments on whether or not you believe the article is of featured article quality, and any improvements to the article that you think are called for. Many Thanks - PocklingtonDan11:17, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting seven coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by February 25!
The new consolidated review departmentâcombining the existing project peer review and A-Class review with a listing of project articles undergoing various external featured content candidacies and reviewsâis now operational.
Two new templates have been introduced:
{{Infobox Firearm Cartridge}}, a primary infobox for use with firearm cartridges and artillery shells.
An effort is being made to have task forces maintain annotated bibliographies for their topic areas; several task forces have already begun to construct them.
The project reached two important milestones this month: 500 active members and 30,000 articles in the assessment system.
A military version of Wikipe-tan has been created; a new userbox featuring one of the images is available for interested project members.
Congratulations to the winners, and thanks to all of the candidates who put themselves forward for this responsibility, and to the retiring coordinators for all of their efforts to improve the project!
{{Infobox National Military}} is being developed to replace the old {{Military}} template; comments on the draft version are welcome.
A proposal to introduce a category tree for military campaigns, as well as a number of associated classification guidelines, is being discussed; comments would be very appreciated.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.
Hi, I'm working on Structural history of the Roman militaryâ at the moment but really struggling to find concrete info on Roman military structure from the later empire (150 AD onwards). I appreciate that it isn't as well documented in the primary sources for a start and that most people's research nowadays is into the republic and early empire but there must be something out there on the later empire. Do you have any texts at all that you think would be helpful that you can either recommend for purchase or else that you would be willing to scan for me to have a look at? Many thanks - PocklingtonDan (talk) 21:22, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No problem with your change. I inserted that for obvious reasons. What gets a bit lost in your change however is that I wanted to discourage every Star Wars / Star Trek ship ending up here on the argument "Hey, the Millenium Falcon is here, so I can add the T-Wing (or whatever) - as well!" MadMaxDog12:17, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The new contest department has now run through its first month of competition; Carom and Kevin Myers were tied for first place, with ten points each. All project members are encouraged to submit the articles they're working on as entries.
A new level of the project award, the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves, has been introduced to recognize contributions of truly incredible quality or importance in the area of military history; it is awarded by the project coordinators in the name of the project as a whole.
Cla68 has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his many valuable contributions to military history articles, and, in particular, his leading role in the creation of numerous featured articles on the topic of the Pacific Theater of World War II.
RM Gillespie has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his massive efforts to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the Vietnam War, and, in particular, his development of a substantial portion of the project's A-Class articles.
Wilsbadkarma has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his work on lists (included two featured lists) and portals (including one featured portal). Lists especially are an undermanned area of work, and his excellent efforts deserve commendation.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.
Hello, Vedexent. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Aspis.gif) was found at the following location: User talk:Vedexent/archive2. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk04:38, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thx for the message about references. Many delete without thinking or asking. I had left a post on the articles talk page explaining why there were no references attached. I have a recent National Geographic documentary on Spartacus and there is still a lot of edits I want to do but need to watch it again to make sure I get it right and to get the names of the four historians who narrate it so i can find their other work on spartacus. The Doco says it is latest research on him and includes much detail missing from the article. Wayne23:22, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I did include one fact that was speculative (the reason he deserted) and I'm thinking of a way to reword it. The assumption according to the researchers is based on the fact he deserted while serving in Thrace (being a free citizen and married it would not have been an easy decision) and his later behaviour which indicates a very high moral standard. A not unreasonable claim worthy of inclusion. Wayne23:48, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Some debate going on here, and verging on a revert war, over whether it's fictional/historical/mythological (and should be categorised as such), or any combination of the above. (IMHO, even if the ship never existed, fictional is unsuitable as it's not in a 'work of fiction' per se but a history, and mythological is unsuitable as mythology is generally many centuries earlier than 200 BC.) Any outside opinions/arbitration would be greatly appreciated. Neddyseagoon - talk20:02, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the work on the Dyson sphere article - in particular, the images you have uploaded for illustrating it. A slight problem though, is that the conversion of the images to GIF seems to have reduced each image to being dithered of a palette of around 7-10 colours which, unfortunately, has slightly spoiled the quality of your images.
I was wondering, if you still had the original, undithered images, whether you would be able to reupload them as PNGs? The PNG image format is capable of storing full-colour images, and saving them in this format can bypass a colour palette reduction that could potentially degrade the quality.
Kevin Myers has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his outstanding work on early modern warfare in North America, and, in particular, the creation of four featured articles on the topic.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.
The contest department has completed another month of competition. The leader for this month, with 16 points, is Kevin Myers; Carom and Cla68 tied for second place with 10 points each. Kevin is also the overall leader, with 36 points in total. All project members are encouraged to submit the articles they're working on as entries.
Noclador has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his outstanding work on structural graphics for land-based forces worldwide, his contributions to the Alpini and other regiments, and all his other military graphics.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.
Originally founded by Phoenician colonists, Carthage grew into a vast economic and political power(any source that such a thing existed or only sources that the city was rich) throughout the Mediterranean Sea (source?), accumulating wealth and influence through its economic (trading) prowess(source?). Carthage was a major power of the Mediterranean, contemporaneously with the Roman Republic of the 3rd and 2nd century BC(how does it happen that Carthage was founded several hundred years prior?), and was its rival for dominance of the western Mediterranean(source?). Eventually this rivalry led to a series of three wars known as the Punic Wars(source that they were rivals, enemies yes?), each of which Carthage lost. These losses led to a decline in Carthage's political and economic strength(archeological greatest economic strength after the Second Punic War- bullshit?), mostly due to the harsh penalties imposed on Carthage by Rome as conditions for the cessation of hostilities. The Third Punic War ended with the complete destruction of the city of Carthage(sources, Scipio said he won't touch the temples) and the annexation of the last remnants of Carthaginian territory by Rome. Distinct Carthaginian civilization waned, but remnants contributed to later Mediterranean cultures(what later cultures?).
The contest department has completed another month of competition. The leader for this month, with 23 points, is Blnguyen; JKBrooks85 is in second place, with 17 points, and Carom is in third place, with 13 points. Carom is also the overall leader, with 45 points in total. All project members are encouraged to submit the articles they're working on as entries.
Wandalstouring was awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his long and dedicated service as a project coordinator and his many contributions to the structure and operations of the project.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.
The contest department has completed its sixth month of competition. The leader for this month, with 57 points, is JKBrooks85; Kyriakos is in second place, with 16 points, and Blnguyen and Woodym555 are tied for third place, with 10 points each. The overall results for the past six months show JKBrooks85 in first place, with 92 points, followed by Carom, with 45 points, and Blnguyen, with 38 points. All project members are encouraged to submit the articles they're working on as entries.
A stress hotline is now available for project members' use.
The bulk of the project's guidelines have been moved to a separate subpage.
A proposal to formalize the project's style guide as part of Wikipedia's Manual of Style has been made and is being discussed; comments and suggestions would be very appreciated!
Awards and honors
SandyGeorgia was awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of the instrumental role she plays in the featured article process, both by checking the project's featured article candidates to ensure that citations are formatted correctly, and by helping clear out the backlog of featured articles that no longer meet the criteria. Sandy is the first non-member of the project to receive this award.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.
The contest department has completed its seventh month of competition. The leader for this month, with 22 points, is JKBrooks85; Kyriakos is in second place, with 21 points, and Blnguyen is in third place, with 10 points. Overall, JKBrooks85 remains in first place, with 114 points. All project members are encouraged to submit the articles they're working on as entries.
The B-Class checklist in the {{WPMILHIST}} project banner now generates categories corresponding to the areas in which an article needs attention; similar sets of categories exist for each task force as well. The available categories are:
JKBrooks85 has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his diligent efforts to improve our coverage of fortifications in the American Civil War, and, in particular, his creation of a substantial number of A-Class articles.
Tony the Marine has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his considerable efforts in raising Puerto Rican- and Hispanic-related military history articles to featured status.
What isTag & Assess MMVII? We'd better explain. A month or so back, we ran a script to list all the articles in categories related to military history. This gave us about 165,000 articles. Some of these are already tagged and assessed as military history; some are military history but not yet tagged and assessed; some are not military history articles at all. This huge project — working thorough 165,000 articles — is called Tag & Assess 2007. To make it manageable, the list has been broken down into 330 ranges each of 500 articles. This is where you can help.
Just...adopt-a-range from the available worklists then keep track of your tally on participants' list. The tagging is easy, just follow the simple instructions. Afterwards, as our way of thanking you, you'll be presented with service awards and barnstars based on the number of articles you process. Remember... the ranges are broken down into sub-sections of ten articles, so you work through them at twenty or thirty articles a day if you wish. To make Tag & Assess 2007 a success, we need your help. Please sign up now. Thanks.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.
I haven't read all that much about him, just little tidbits from various sources. I do know however that he earned "the great" moniker due to his conquests in Africa and that he was generally considered the head of that faction that was against war with Rome in the first two Punic wars and as the primary opposition to the Barcids (Hamilcar Barca, Hannibal Barca, Hasdrubal Barca, and Mago Barca) he is usually considered responsible for the lack of reinforcements and support sent to Hannibal in Italy during the Second Punic war.
Anyways, I figured that we shouldn't refer to him as an inept General based solely on his defeats in the Mercenary War when he had such a long career. Also it sounds kinda funny but that fact that he was never executed maybe is indicative that he wasn't all the inept anyways (The Carthaginians were notorious for killing their Generals who were unsuccessful).- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk17:54, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
With reference to a comment you made on the discussion page for Antonines, I had always thought that the definition for the Antonine period was as you describe - based on the selection procedure and including several emperors from Nerva to Marcus Aurelius. As for sources, I know that J.M. Roberts' New Penguin History of the World refers to Nerva through to Marcus Aurelius as the "age of the Antonines" so perhaps it should be changed? Then again, at present wikipedia is making a distinction between the Nervo-Trajanic dynasty (Nerva, Trajan and Hadrian) and the Antonine dynasty (Antoninus Pius and Marcus Aurelius), so maybe this is the correct system. Blankfrackis (talk) 18:48, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXI (November 2007)
The contest department has completed its eight month of competition. The leader for this month, with a massive 92 points, is Blnguyen; Woodym555 is in second place, with 32 points, and Cla68 and TomStar81 are tied for third place, with 15 points each. Overall, Blnguyen is now in first place, with 140 points, followed by JKBrooks85, with 120 points, and by Woodym555, with 63 points. All project members are encouraged to submit the articles they're working on as entries.
Tag & Assess 2007—the project's first major article tagging and assessment drive—is continuing; all project members—and anyone else who's interested—are invited to assist with this effort.
Mike Christie was awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his outstanding work on Anglo-Saxon military history, including the production of numerous featured articles.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.
The article on Morphological analysis started out as a relatively simple reference to Zwickyâs ideas, a definition of the process, a few references and some external links. I did not initiate this, but whoever did referred to me and the Swedish Morphological Society. This was fine with me: I went in and added a few details which I though relevant to the subject, but more or less left things as they were.
Then, a Mr. I. Tjahyo Sarwono came along with some very complicated diagrams, rather poor English, misinterpretations and explicit errors (a parameter he mistakenly calls a value, and a value he calls a parameter). I am in despair over this, as I donât want morphological analysis to get a bad name because of a sloppy Wikipedia article. I would like to go in and give the article a major overhaul â but I donât know what the policy is about throwing out other contributorsâ texts and diagrams. Can you give me some council on this?
Tom Ritchey -- The Swedish Morphological Society. (ritchey@swemorph.com]
Peter Vasiljev: In response to your question - as far as I remember, in "Johnny Mnemonic" Hideo (or one of his clones) had a monowire whip implanted in his thumb. But since I cannot find the actual reference, I'm willing to concede the topic to you.
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXII (December 2007)
The contest department has completed its ninth month of competition. The top scorer this month is Blnguyen, with 22 points, followed by Dreamafter, with 8 points, and Redmarkviolinist, with 6 points. Blnguyen also remains the overall leader, with 162 points in total. All project members are encouraged to submit the articles they're working on as entries.
Blnguyen has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his efforts in improving the quality of articles related to Vietnamese military history, including the creation of numerous A-Class articles.
Woodym555 has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his outstanding work on topics related to the Victoria Cross, notably including the creation of featured articles, featured lists, and a featured topic.
Although the drive is officially closed, existing participants can continue tagging until January 31 if they wish, with the extra tags counting towards their tally for barnstar purposes.
We'd like to see what lessons can be learned from this drive, so we've set up a feedback workshop. Comments and feedback from participants and non-particpants
alike are very welcome and appreciated.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.
I saw your invitation to tackling some Roman law articles in the archive of wikiproject law. As the holder of a BA in Greek and Roman Classics and a current law student, I would be happy to help on specific articles. Your initial stated project was on Roman citizenship. I started the Pro Archia Poeta page some time ago and know something of the topic. My current real life research is on ancient rape legislation and its influence on the common law (for a paper due in April). If there is something in particular on which you would like to collaborate, let me know. cheers! Legis Nuntius (talk) 00:53, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIII (January 2008)
The project 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 February 14!
The contest department has completed its tenth month of competition, which saw an unprecedented 44 entries. The top scorer this month is Dreamafter, with 95 points, followed by Cla68, with 42 points, and Ed! and Woody, with 21 points each. Blnguyen remains the overall leader, with 182 points in total. All project members are encouraged to submit the articles they're working on as entries.
A new auxiliary infobox, {{operational plan}}, is now available.
A new page for military history essays has been created; project members are encouraged to post their own advice and opinions on matters within the project's purview.
New guidelines concerning precision and ship pronouns have been added to the style guide.
A category restructuring workshop is now open; brainstorming regarding the arrangement of the top-level military history categories is currently ongoing.
Awards and honors
Bwmoll3 has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his superior contributions to a variety of articles about the United States Air Force, including a great number of those dealing with wings and installations.
Bedford has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of the outstanding contribution he has made to the project's organization by going above and beyond the call of duty in tagging, assessing, and classifying a massive number of articles during the 2007 assessment drive.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.
In the simultaneous referendum on project organization, you voted almost unanimously for a primus inter pares structure. As a tangible reflection of this, Assistant Coordinators are now known as Coordinators.
The contest department has completed its eleventh month of competition, which saw 10 entries. The top scorer this month is Dreamafter, with 28 points, followed by Smsarmad, with 13 points, with Blnguyen, Ed! and jwillbur also fielding entries. Blnguyen remains the overall leader, with 188 points in total. You are encouraged to submit articles you're working on as entries.
A new B-Class Assessment Drive ("BCAD") will go operational no later than 11 March. Of great interest to experienced wiki-gnomes, it is small in scope, about 4,500 articles, and will be supported by the usual awards, including a golden wiki. To keep up to date with developments, and to get off to a flying start when it opens, add WP:MHA-BCAD now to your watchlist.
Awards and honors
Kirill Lokshin has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his outstanding organizational work, his painstaking maintenance work, and his unstinting advice, throughout his two years of project leadership.
MBK004 has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his outstanding effort to improve our compliment of naval ships by updating infoboxes, replacing deprecated infoboxes, and locating sources for ships in the employment of their respective countries' navies.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.
The main project talk page is now automatically archived; MiszaBot II will archive any sections that have had no comments for 21 days.
The contest department has completed its twelth month of competition, which saw 13 entries. The top scorer this month is Woody, with 22 points, followed by Dreamafter with 13 points, with Ed!, jwillbur, Redmarkviolinist and Borg Sphere also fielding entries. Blnguyen remains the overall leader, with 188 points in total. You are encouraged to submit articles you're working on as entries.
A Linguistics section has been added to the Logistics department, for help with non-English language sources and translation of snippets. It supports 19 languages so far.
Kirill Lokshin has been appointed coordinator emeritus to reflect his on-going involvement in the project. The appointment ends concurrently with the other coordinators' terms in September 2008.
Tag & Assess 2008 launched on 24 April and will run until 4 July. We have around 60,000 articles to check, so all assistance is very welcome. As usual, there are barnstars galore and service awards for contributing editors.
The project scope has been amended to include specific reference to historically accurate video games. Songs and music with long military associations are also now included.
The Contest department has completed its thirteenth month of competition, which saw 27 entries. The top scorer this month is Ed! with 37 points, followed by Cam with 22 points. Woody, Howard C. Berkowitz, Redmarkviolinist, Nousernamesleft and Outdawg also fielded entries. Blnguyen remains the overall leader, with 188 points in total. You are encouraged to submit articles you're working on as entries.
The coordinators have "adopted" task forces to act as prime point of contact. A list of which coordinators have adopted which task forces is here.
An interesting proposal to set up teams to deal with specific tasks, like taking the Top Ten most frequently read military history articles to featured articles status is here.
The coordinators are exploring ways of developing and improving our fifty or so task forces. More information is here.
All editors are invited to contribute to a discussion about the naming of military operations in an endeavor to reach consensus.
Awards and honors
Congratulations and kudos to the four top-performing editors in BCAD: CAM (1st); Legotech (2nd); Harland1 (3rd) and Smsarmad (4th). They helped assess 4303 B-class Milhist articles. Well done!
Editors needed for Tag & Assess 2008. To coincide with the summer holidays, it will be gearing up from 15 June. As usual, barnstars galore!
Partner peer reviews: for a thirty-day trial period, we'll be running joint peer reviews with Wikiproject Video Games. The idea is simple: we help with their reviews; they help with ours. This way both wikiprojects benefit from new reviewers and new ideas!
We're notable: A new book, Simon Fowler's 2007 Guide to Military History on the Internet (UK:Pen & Sword, ISBN9781844156061) rates Wikipedia as "the best general resource" for military research (p. 7). Of the military pages, he says: "The results are largely accurate and generally free of bias" (he also suggests people join the wikiproject). When rating WP as the No. 1 military site (p. 201) he says "Wikipedia is often criticised for its inaccuracy and bias, but in my experience the military history articles are spot on."
A-Class reviews: the usual four-day review period may now be extended by up to three days (ie seven days in total) in the following circumstances:
the article has no opposes but has insufficient support for promotion or
the article's nominator requests more time to resolve matters arising during the review.
The special projects department has opened. It will focus on specific ad-hoc high-priority tasks and implement them with informal, short-term groups of editors.
The Contest department has completed its fourteenth month of competition, which saw 16 entries. The top scorer this month is Cam with 21 points, followed by Redmarkviolinist with 11 points. Woody, Dreamafter, Kyriakos, Nousernamesleft and Outdawg also fielded entries. Blnguyen remains the overall leader, with 188 points in total. You are encouraged to submit articles you're working on as entries.
A discussion has been opened into the structuring of top level operational categories, starting with Category:World War II. All interested editors are invited to help establish a consensus.
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.
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
Congratulations to Buckshot06, who has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his consistently excellent edits and his continued commitment and tireless efforts towards improving the quality of articles pertaining to military history.
Congratulations to Piotrus, who has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his outstanding contributions to Polish military history, including the creation of numerous Featured Articles, A-Class articles, and Good Articles on the subject.
The Contest department has completed its fifteenth month of competition, which saw 15 entries. The top scorer this month is JonCatalan with 32 points, followed by Cam with 20 points. Ed!, David Underdown, CyclonicWhirlwind, and Blnguyen also fielded entries. Blnguyen remains the overall leader, with 193 points in total. The Chevrons go to JonCatalan and Cam gets the Writer's Barnstar. The May 2008 winners, Cam and Redmarkviolinist have been belatedly awarded the Chevrons and Writer's Barnstar for coming first and second respectively. You are encouraged to submit any articles you are working on as entries.
Tag & Assess '08 has now closed, with approximately 10,000 articles successfully tagged. Many thanks to all those who participated. The top three scorers were Jim Sweeney (Gold Wiki), Dashiellx (Silver Wiki) and Ejosse1 (Bronze Wiki).
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.
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:
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 Contest department has completed its sixteenth month of competition, which saw 22 entries. The top scorer this month is new entrant Bellhalla with 41 points, followed by Blnguyen with 33 points. Cam, Ed!, David Underdown, and Ferbess also fielded entries. Blnguyen remains the overall leader, with 226 points in total. The Chevrons go to Bellhalla and Blnguyen gets the Writer's Barnstar. You are encouraged to submit any articles you are working on as entries.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is underway, 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 14 September! Voting starts at 00:01 (UTC) on 15 September and runs until 23:59 (UTC) on 30 September.
A new barnstar specifically encouraging and recognizing excellence in Milhist article creation and development has been introduced. Any editor who has made a significant contribution to three or more Milhist A-Class articles promoted since 1 August 2008 under the new A-Class criteria is eligible. Nominations for the medal should be made here; should list the three A-Class articles for which the medal is sought; and must be subsequently supported by three or more project coordinators, who will be responsible for making the award. Editors may nominate themselves or any other qualifying editor.
A new discussion about whether Milhist should adopt C-Class is underway. All comments are welcome.
The 2008 Tag & Assess Workshop is still open, seeking input on ways to improve the efficiency, user-friendliness and organization of future Milhist drives. All comment is welcome, especially from people who didn't participate in the drive!
Awards and honors
Durova has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of her exemplary work on military history featured pictures, sounds, and articles.
The W1.0 Editorial Team have selected 1133 Military history articles for inclusion in the W0.7 test release. For convenience, these are broken by task force and you'll find a list on each task force headed "Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for [task force name]" on the task force talk page. You may nominate extra articles for inclusion or existing ones for removal. If you can improve any of the articles on the list, by adding references, or copy-editing, or cleaning up generally, please do so.
A new discussion has started about naming articles on Soviet WWII operations. All contributions are welcome as we hope to resolve this longstanding issue once and for all.
The debate over whether Milhist should adopt C-Class is continuing. All comments and suggestions are welcome.
Following a lengthy discussion, three new coordinators – EyeSerene, Maralia and the_ed17 - have been coopted. The purpose of the appointments is partly to fill the place left by the retirement of TomStar81 and partly to provide increased/improved coordinator capacity to cover existing coordinator absences and to help with upcoming major projects. As a reminder, coordinators are merely editors who have committed to go the extra mile for the project and that there are very few processes that require coordinator input. Specifically these are closing A-Class reviews, and endorsing two project award nominations. Any editors who wish to help with the nitty-gritty of this busy project (cross-posting A-Class review, peer review and featured article candidate alerts; responding to member questions and queries, helping with drives) are positively encouraged to do so.
A workshop has been set up to redesign and improve the newsletter. In our recent competition, a new name was chosen – The Bugle. All editors are welcome to participate, especially those with graphic and design skills!
Administrator and Milhist coordinator, Nick Dowling, has changed his user name to Nick-D.
Adoption of C-class remains firmly on the Milhist agenda with discussions approaching their fourth month of debate. More views are sought on this.
Awards and honors
Kyriakos has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his long and distingushed service as a Coordinator of the Military history WikiProject from February 2007 to September 2008.
LordAmeth has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his long and distingushed service as a Coordinator of the Military history WikiProject from August 2006 to September 2008.
EyeSerene has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his diligent and excellent copyediting of vast quantities of Military History articles—notably his work on multiple Featured Article Candidates.
TomStar81 has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of both his long and distinguished service as a coordinator of this project from August 2007 to October 2008, and of his exemplary contributions to articles on the vessels of the U.S. Navy.
Following a lengthy discussion, a new section - Personal libraries - has been added to the Logistics Department. The aim is to make sourcing and citation checking easier by sharing information about editors' personal book holdings. If you have half an hour to spare, why not add a list of your Milhist reference books?
This month saw 14 military history-related articles promoted to featured status, the highest number for a single month since the project's establishment in October 2002. Congratulations all round!
Design competition Editors with design skills urgently needed to design an eyecatching logo for this newsletter. The logo needs to incorporate a bugle motif as well as the newsletter's title, "The Bugle". Fame and honour (a barnstar) guaranteed for the successful design. Submit entries here please.
Who will be the three "2008 Military historians of the Year"? There are 13 candidates so far and the number is rising rapidly. The winning editors will receive the Gold, Silver and Bronze Wikis; and all other nominees the WikiProject barnstar. To nominate editors you admire, or to cast your votes, please visit here!
A new drive has been started to identify the core topics of World War I with the aim of improving their quality before the centenary of the start of World War I in 2014.
Don't forget the six-monthly Coordinator elections will take place in March for the April-September term. If you want to become more involved in the project, now's the time to start thinking about it!
Following extensive discussion, the structure of the A-Class Medal System has been changed to include three new medals: The A-Class Medal with Oak Leaves, the A-Class Medal with Oakleaves and Swords, and the A-Class Medal with Oakleaves, Swords, and Diamonds, each of which is respectfully awarded after 5, 10, and 20 groups of three A-Class Articles.
The number of our A-Class articles grew by more than 25% during this month, compared to the total number of A-Class articles existent at the end of December.
A drive is underway to identify the core topics of World War I with the aim of improving their quality before the centenary of the start of World War I in 2014.
A Survey is currently underway to determine how MilHist's processes, logistics, and management can be improved.
Abraham, B.S. has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his many valuable contributions to the project as an active reviewer, a thoughtful contributor to military history discussions, a fine content contributor, and a gentleman.
The Contest department has completed its twenty second month of competition, which saw 62 entries. The top scorer this month is Bellhalla with 93 points followed by Abraham, B.S. with 52 points. Cam, Georgejdorner and 11 other editors also fielded entries. Bellhalla remains the overall leader with 687 points in total. The Chevrons go to Bellhalla and Abraham, B.S. gets the Writer's Barnstar. You are encouraged to submit any articles you are working on as entries.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.
This month has been interesting for MILHIST, as we reorganized a few departments. The Outreach Department has been replaced by the tabs at the top of our totally redesigned project page; thanks to Kirill for the design and Bellhalla for the logo. We also created the Academy, a hub for practical advice about creating, editing, and reviewing quality content. All project members are cordially invited to fill in some of the red links, and new ideas are always welcome.
As you can see on the right, our A-class and featured content is growing quite rapidly; these numbers have now gone up by 45 for the second straight month! Great work! In addition, thanks go out to those who recently helped in reducing the A-class nominations backlog. Reviewers are still needed; if you feel up to it, please stop by and leave comments on an article—every review helps!
Article alerts are now available both for the entire project (on the status page) and for each task force (on the task force page).
The Military history coordinator elections, to appoint coordinators for the period April–October 2009, take place this month. If you are thinking of standing as a candidate, the schedule is as follows:
Nomination period: 00:01 Sat 7 March - 23:59 Fri 13 March
Voting period: 00:01 Sat 14 March - 23:59 Sat 29 March
Awards and honors
Ian Rose has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his outstanding contributions to Australian military history articles (including four Featured Articles, an A-Class article, and four Good Articles), his highly civil and collaborative editing, and his willingness to provide advice and assistance to other editors.
MisterBee1966 has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his contributions to seven featured lists on German military awards during the Second World War, and for contributing to four good articles and being instrumental in promoting three of them to A-Class status.
Raul654 has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his contributions to six current Military History Featured Articles, his flexibility in managing the "Today's featured article" list to accommodate relevant main-page appearances, and his generosity in providing many images for our visual library.
The Land has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his significant contributions to the area of maritime warfare, as he has authored six of the seven articles in the "history of the battleship" series, with four of them now being featured.
The big news of course was the seventh project coordinator election covering the period ending 30 September. The quality of the candidates was extremely high, with some of the project's top content builders running alongside highly experienced backroom people. Of the eighteen candidates, sixteen were finally appointed, giving us probably the most rounded coordination team so far.
The C-class referendum, held at the same time, produced a slight majority of votes for introduction, but was insufficient to demonstrate a clear consensus. So, for the time being at least, therefore, the project will continue without C-class. Otherwise, focus is likely be on the Academy and the development of courses to develop reviewing, copy-editing and article-building skills. Some review of our task forces is also probable, perhaps consolidating some of the smaller, quieter, ones. As ever, input from everyone is not only welcomed but positively encouraged.
The coordinators' gratitude goes not only to those who participated in the election and referenda but also to everyone who works quietly and conscientiously away to make participation in this project rewarding, successful and productive. Milhist is very fortunate in its membership! Thank you all, Roger Daviestalk16:15, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Once again, this month, we have a bumper crop of featured and A-class content, and our heartfelt thanks go to editors who have worked so hard to write these. But with our growth in quality content comes increased demand for reviewers. Which is where you can help.
Reviewing is easy and rewarding. You don't need any prior experience and you don't need to write a full review. Any input is helpful so you initially can just comment on what you're comfortable with. Most reviewers start off by focusing one or two things – say, the historical context, or the text, or the references, or the layout, or the images – and as they gain experience, they broaden the scope of the review. You can easily keep up to date with which articles need review, by copying this text – {{WPMILHIST Review alerts}} – to your userpage or talkpage. Thanks in anticipation, Roger Davies
JonCatalán has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his distinguished service as a coordinator of this project, his thorough article reviews, and his exemplary contributions to 14 featured articles, one featured topic, and many A-Class and good articles.
With end of year exams beckoning for many members, this has been a quiet month on the talk pages for Milhist. (If you are facing exams yourself, we all wish you the very best of luck!) During this quieter period, some of our most active reviewers are busy revising so it would be really appreciated if you can help with peer reviews or A-Class reviews. You can easily track articles needing review, by copying {{WPMILHIST Review alerts}} to your userpage.
This month sees our first newsletter editorial. The idea is to provide regular tips and hints to help editors get up to speed with our large (and sometimes complicated) project. This month's piece, by EyeSerene, explains the workings of the project's main template, which is at the core of the project's tagging and assessing activities. Roger Daviestalk20:26, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In a welcome addition to a long under-represented area, this month saw the creation of the Pakistani military history task force, which hits the ground running with 11 participants.
Welcome to a new occasional feature of The Bugle, where over coming issues we'll be exploring some of the roles, tasks, and technical functions that go into creating what archivist and researcher Simon Fowler has described as the best general resource for military history on the internet.† As a project we can rightly be proud of that accolade, and we gratefully acknowledge the debt we owe to those dedicated editors from across Wikipedia that have helped to make the Military history WikiProject what it is today.
Many editors' first inkling of milhist's existence is when they spot our project banner on an article talk page. The banner can be easily added to appropriate articles by any editor, by typing {{WPMILHIST}} at (or near) the top of the talk page on a new line, and saving the page with an appropriate edit summary. This short form of the template will add the article to our project, and also flag the article as needing assessment and assignment to a task force by automatically adding it to the unassessed articles and articles with no associated task force categories.
As with many templates in use on Wikipedia, additional parameters can be specified. Possibly the most useful to include is the class parameter, because this will help out any editors who come along later to assess the article. To add the class parameter, edit the template markup to look like {{WPMILHIST|class=}}... and if you wish, have a read through the assessment guidance on milhists's quality scale and assign a rating from Stub- to B-Class yourself. A banner template with, for example, a Stub-Class article rating will look like {{WPMILHIST|class=stub}}. Because B-Class is assessed against a checklist it has some additional parameters, so when adding the project banner to an article talk-page, even if you don't intend to assess the article yourself it can be a real help to subsequent editors to include these too. This version of the template can be entered as {{WPMILHIST|class=|B1=|B2=|B3=|B4=|B5=}}. For detailed guidance on exactly what the five B-Class criteria are, see the B-class checklist.
Finally, when adding the milhist banner it's useful to assign the article to one (or more) of our task forces. This will help to bring it to the attention of those editors most likely to be interested in, and knowledgeable about, the subject. As with assessment, task force assignment is accomplished by adding a parameter to the template—in this case, simply the name of the task force followed by =yes (or =y). For example, to assign a Start-Class article to the Second World War and Canadian task forces, the template should read {{WPMILHIST|class=start|B1=|B2=|B3=|B4=|B5=|WWII=yes|Canadian=yes}}.
For a full list of all the banner template parameters and more detailed usage instructions, see Template:WPMILHIST; if you are unsure as to whether or not an article belongs with milhist or what task force(s) might be appropriate, or if you have any other questions, you are welcome to ask at our main project talk page. Happy templating! EyeSerenetalk
†Simon Fowler, Guide to Military History on the Internet, UK:Pen & Sword 2007, ISBN9781844156061, p. 7
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.
The big news this month is the launch of the Academy content drive (see below if you want to help). But otherwise it has been a very busy month for both reviewing and contest department entries, surprisingly so considering the wind down of the academic year.
Introduced in February, The Academy is an online school for new members. This month, we're launching a drive to increase the breadth and depth of its content. If you can help, by writing four to six paragraph articles, please do so! Barnstars galore to be won!
Perhaps the most important—and, indeed, most respected—aspect of the Military History project is our rigorous A-Class Review (ACR) system, which puts articles through the most robust review outside of WP:FAC. Although reviewing might seem daunting to newcomers, this article will give you an outline of three popular reviewing methods so you can actually start contributing yourself.
General nit-pick - this is one of the easiest - and one of the most common - reviewing styles seen throughout Wikipedia. It is a similar approach to that you would see in proofreading and classroom marking. Basically, it is a general overview of the article, not getting too specific on aspects of the prose. The most common statements include This article could benefit from a light copyedit before going to FAC or You might want to check the endash and emdash placement in the article. It's a style that is incredibly easy to manage, and one that requires little-to-no experience in previous reviewing.
Specialization - it often is the case that those who have been reviewing articles for a long time will move away from the general review towards more specific areas of articles. As an example, Tony usually stays within the realm of prose and copyediting while reviewing Featured Article Candidates, Tom used to focus almost entirely on external links and disambiguations, while others specialize their focus exclusively on copyediting, reference formatting, dashes, punctuation and flow, image licensing, and a host of other areas. This is a review method that is not nearly as time-consuming as other methods, as it allows you to quickly scan an article, spot the things that you work on, and how they need to be fixed.
Sectional - My preferred style of reviewing, this is one of the most informative styles. Unfortunately, it is also one of the most time-consuming and exhaustive styles. Essentially, it involves going through the entire article, section by section, and pointing out every major (and often many of the minor) flaws present within each section. Everything from prose to reference formatting to content. It is a reviewing style that is exhausting, and often takes two or three goes through the article to get everything (sometimes even more), but it gives the article's main contributors two benefits. First, everything is well organized, mostly under section headers like this one, and it often makes finding individual sentences or refs much easier, as they are within that section. Secondly, it points out a lot of the problems from a lot of the areas.
We current have an astonishing fifty articles within our scope up for promotion to Good Article and it's a bit backlogged. Can you help with reviewing to speed up the process?
The Military history Academy content drive is underway with nearly twenty new essays so far. More contributions are welcome. Just click on the one of the redlinks here and start writing!
Are you missing out on an A-Class medal? These are for editors who have significantly contributed to three or more military history A-Class articles promoted since 1 August 2008. Alternatively, perhaps you can help with reviewing? For more information, see here.
More eyes would be welcome on the ten articles currently being peer reviewed. It doesn't take long to peer review an article and your perspective is appreciated!
Contest department
The Contest department has completed its twenty-eighth month of competition, with 77 articles entered by 9 editors. Sturmvogel 66 was placed first again this month with an amazing 94 points, closely followed by Ed! at 91 points. They receive the Chevrons and the Writer's Barnstar respectively. Parsecboy commendably came third with 76 points, with honorable mentions going to Woody (29), Wild Wolf (25), Ian Rose (21), and AustralianRupert (16). Thanks go to Starstriker7 and Piotrus, who also fielded entries.
Awards and honours
Congratulations go to Parsecboy, who has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves for bringing almost all of the WWI-era German battleships up to GA, A, or FA class. His single-minded determination in this field has helped immeasurably with the project's WWI Centennial Drive.
The voting phase of the eighth coordinator elections, for the October–March term, started on 13 September and will run until 23:59 Sat 26 September.
Each candidate garnering twenty or more endorsements will be appointed, to a maximum of fifteen. This election has a strong field of sixteen candidates running, offering many skills and representing all aspects of the project.
People with an interest in clearly presenting battle information, and First World War buffs, will find the discussion about a new campaign box for the Battle of the Somme interesting.
With the recent increase in enthusiasm, Wikipedia-wide, for creating "outline" articles, there's an ongoing discussion here. The idea is to produce guidelines for overview articles for Milhist editors and reviewers.
Proposals have been made to introduce a new self-scoring "honour" system for Contest Department entries. Contributions, especially from regular nominees, are welcome.
Editorial: Getting to FAC via A-Class - some interesting new facts
Well, it’s official. Milhist articles have a much better than average chance of success as featured article candidates. MBK004 has done some useful number-crunching following the fortunes of the 97 Milhist featured article candidates submitted between January and July this year. The research shows that 70% of Milhist articles were promoted against an overall average of 51%.
Looking behind the figures, some other interesting facts emerge. First, 84% of our promoted articles had successfully passed a Milhist A-Class Review before going on to FAC. Second, of the 29 Milhist articles that failed, less than half (41%) had had an A-Class Review. Third, the 97 Milhist articles accounted for 16% of all FACs submitted between January and July of this year.
The clear lesson is that if you want a string of featured articles to your credit, you may find Milhist's A-class Review process to be of benefit to you! Roger Daviestalk
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.
Greetings to all members of the Military history WikiProject, and to those outside the project who receive this news letter as well! My name is TomStar81, and it with a great sense of pride that I assume the position of lead coordinator for the project. On behalf of all the coordinators, both new and returning, we wish to thank those of you who participated in the September elections, and we look forward to working to advance the goals of the project for the next six months.
With the elections concluded, there are two changes. First, Roger Davies has been appointed a coordinator emeritus, joining our first coordinator emeritus Kirill Lokshin. Secondly, for the first time ever, the lead coordinator for the Military history WikiProject will be taking a lengthy wikibreak. For those who were unaware of this, I am an undergraduate student, and will be taking a leave of absence, effective end September, to focus on graduating in December. However, with fourteen coordinators, and two coordinators emeritus, I am confident the needs of the project will be well taken care of. For the VIII coordinator tranche, TomStar81 (Talk)
This month witnessed an all new and improved scoring system and process established in the Contest Department, which has run both smoothly and successfully. A total of 54 articles were entered this month by 11 editors. Parsecboy placed first with an astonishing 143 points, followed by Sturmvogel 66 on 105 points. They receive the Chevrons and the Writer's Barnstar respectively. Honorable mentions go to the_ed17 (41), Auntieruth55 (38), AustralianRupert (17), Radeksz (12) and Ian Rose (11), with our thanks going to Piotrus, Abraham, B.S., Skinny87 and David Underdown, who also fielded entries. All interested editors are encouraged to submit entries for next month's contest; it can be a rather exciting experience!
Awards and honours
The WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves has been awarded to Roger Davies for his outstanding leadership of the Military history WikiProject, including his introduction of the logistics department, his dedication to the Tag and Assess 2008 & B-class Assessment Drive efforts, and his astute advice and never-ending support and encouragement as both a coordinator and lead coordinator.
As a member of the Military history WikiProject or World War I task force, you may be interested in competing in the Henry Allingham International Contest! The contest aims to improve article quality and member participation within the World War I task force. It will also be a step in preparing for Operation Great War Centennial, the project's commemorative effort for the World War I centenary.
If you would like to participate, please sign up by 11 November 2009, 00:00, when the first round is scheduled to begin! You can sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:50, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIV (October 2009)
The contest department has completed its thirty-first month of competition; its second month under the new and improved scoring system. A total of 53 articles were entered by nine editors. Sturmvogel 66 came in first with 96 points, followed by Auntieruth55 on 80 points. They are presented the Chevrons and Writer's Barnstar respectively. Honorable mentions go to Ian Rose (38), Abraham, B.S. (33) and Parsecboy (10). Our thanks go to Cuprum17, Ed!, The ed17 and Piotrus, who also fielded entries. All editors are encouraged to submit any articles that are working on for next month's contest.
The Academy Content Drive concluded on 31 October. The first place Golden Wiki went to TomStar81 for 13 entries; the Silver Wiki was awarded to YellowMonkey for 11 entries, and Patar knight was presented with the Bronze Wiki for 3 entries. All other entrants were awarded the WikiChevrons or a barnstar for their contributions. Thank you to everyone who fielded an entry! All editors are encouraged to check out the newly expanded Academy.
A discussion about the notability of military people has resulted in an update to our in-house style guide. Prompted by some recent "articles for deletion" discussions, members felt that we should provide clearer guidance on the types of person that are most likely to meet Wikipedia's biographical notability criteria. The resulting advice, which you can see here, should be very helpful in both future deletion discussions and in deciding where best to focus article-writing efforts.
Our Task Force housekeeping discussion is now coming to a close. In October a number of proposals were made for rationalising our extensive list of Task forces. Although a few areas remain to be decided, project members have approved the changes summarised here. These will be enacted shortly, so if you haven't yet had your say, now's the time!
The contest department has completed its thirty-second month of competition; its third month under the new scoring system. A total of 52 articles were entered by seven editors. Sturmvogel 66 came first with 168 points, followed by Ian Rose on 51 points. They are presented the Chevrons and Writer's Barnstar respectively. Honorable mentions go to Auntieruth55 (31), Ed! (26), Abraham, B.S. (26), The ed17 (17) and Piotrus (7). All editors are encouraged to submit any articles that are working on for next month's contest.
Happy New Year to all! I shall take this opportunity to reflect upon the past year. In 2009 our project grew impressively, adding nearly 100 new featured articles and doubling the total number of featured lists. Overall the total number of articles within our scope surpassed 95,000 in 2009, and if these numbers hold steady we will surpass 100,000 articles in 2010. Thank you all for your outstanding efforts.
We are currently working on several proposals to improve the project for 2010. These include bringing the Milhist Academy up to full operational status, as well as spicing up and streamlining the task force structure. Also, any help you can offer to clear the current backlog of Military History good article nominations would be appreciated.
Coordinator Emeritus Kirill Lokshin has been re-elected to the Arbitration Committee for a two-year term in the 2009 elections. Kirill is one of four present or former coordinators of the project to be appointed to the Arbitration Committee; he was originally elected to a three-year term in 2007. The others are YellowMonkey (2007–2008), FayssalF (2008–2010), and Roger Davies (2009–2011).
The Contest Department has completed its thirty-second month of competition; and its fourth month under the new scoring system. A total of 45 articles were entered by seven editors. Sturmvogel 66 came first with 82 points, followed by Auntieruth55 with 74 points. They receive the Chevrons and Writer's Barnstar respectively. Honorable mentions go to Ian Rose (51), Abraham, B.S. (21) and Parsecboy (16). Ed! and Binksternet also fielded entries. Please submit any articles you are working on for the January contest.
It's only a month into the New Year, and we've already made changes to the project's infrastructure, merging and improving several task forces (see below). Much content within the project's scope has also been improved: eleven new featured articles, two featured lists, two featured pictures, a featured sound, and seventeen A-class articles. Thanks and congratulations to all editors who contributed and/or nominated these items.
In other news, the elections for new project coordinators are coming up in March. Think about whether you would like to run or not, and self-nominations will be coming up at the beginning of next month.
Lastly, our project's A-class review process is desperately in need of new reviewers. Please consider looking at least one and leaving comments, no matter how small or trivial. It will be greatly appreciated by the article's nominator(s).
Our thanks go to all editors who participated in our recent task force housekeeping discussion and to EyeSerene who implemented the technical side of the approved changes. The new line up is as follows:
The Contest Department has completed its thirty-third month of competition; and its fifth month under the new scoring system. A total of 91 articles were entered by ten editors. Sturmvogel 66 came first with 152 points, followed by Kumioko with 98 points. They receive the Chevrons and Writer's Barnstar respectively. Honorable mentions go to Auntieruth55 (87), Abraham, B.S. (48), Parsecboy (41), and Ian Rose (41). Binksternet, Radeksz, Ed! and D2306 also fielded entries. Please submit any articles you are working on for the February contest.
March, as you know, is an election month for our project, when we pick the coordinators for the next six months. We are seeking motivated individuals willing to devote some of their time and energy to the project so it continues to grow and prosper.
Also, I am making a personal appeal to each of you, the members of this project, to come out and vote for the candidates that run. These users will be responsible for managing the assessment process, answering questions, and making sure that the project's other needs are met. We have approximately 1,000 users who identify as being a part of our project, yet on average only about one-tenth of that number participate in elections. Moreover, as we typically hold referendums on major issues affecting the project along with these election, those who do not vote miss the opportunity to give their opinion on matters affecting the project as a whole. Remember, one vote always makes a difference. For the coordinators, TomStar81 (Talk) 23:47, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A discussion has begun concerning our military history manual of style's guideline recommending preemptive disambiguation on the naming of military units. As the outcome of the discussion will likely effect a number of pages within our scope we are seeking input from the community on whether the guideline should be changed.
Late last year, several largely inactive task forces were merged. However, the mergers of the Australia and New Zealand task forces did not take place as there was no consensus for a new name. To resolve this, a discussion has begun and all editors are encouraged to participate.
Contest department
The Contest Department has completed its thirty-fourth month of competition; and its sixth month under the new scoring system. A total of 82 articles were entered by eight editors. Kumioko came first with 110 points, followed by Sturmvogel 66 with 87 points. They receive the Chevrons and Writer's Barnstar respectively. Honorable mentions go to Auntieruth55 (59) and Ian Rose (36). Binksternet, Cirt, Radeksz and YellowMonkey also fielded entries. Please submit any articles you are working on for the March contest.
Awards and honours
Brad101 has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his excellent reviewing and work on a sizable number of nautical articles that fall within our scope, producing a number of high-quality articles for the Military history and Ships WikiProjects.
Across Wikipedia, guidelines have been set up so that editors can vet sources for themselves. Links to some of these and a guide for checking if a source is reliable can be found in an excellent Signpost dispatch written by Ealdgyth (talk·contribs). However, for the majority of military history-related topics, we strive for more than just a basic reliable source. Specifically, we aim for peer-reviewed articles and books over, for example, most websites.[N 1] Contemporary news articles or accounts can and should be mixed in (if possible) to give a picture of the general view point of the time—were they calm, afraid, unsure of what was going on?
Another major tenet is neutrality. If an editor rewrote the article Dieppe Raid using only the official Canadian history,[N 2] we would have a problem; while it does contain a thorough and in-depth overview, a point-of-view can still be read. For one, it gives an undue amount of focus to Canada's input in the planning of the landing, and it would probably give an undue focus to their troops if a majority of the landing forces hadn't been Canadian. Granted, this is a book written to document that country's role in the Second World War, so you would hope it focuses on them, but this same reason makes it unusable as the primary basis for an article.
In this case, you would like to utilize a few recent, peer-reviewed books and journals, the official British, Canadian and German histories, possibly a few books written by historians from the aforementioned countries, and newspapers from that time period.[N 3] Obviously this is ideal, but you need to represent all three sides in this (the United States would be a fourth, but they played only a minor role in the planning and invading). This neutrality aspect applies especially for battles and to a lesser degree biographies, but it can be utilized in virtually every article in our scope. For example, it could be beneficial to obtain Japanese accounts of B-29 Superfortress bombing raids or non-Puerto Rican peer-reviewed sources for that insular area's role in the Second World War. —Ed(talk • majestic titan)
Notes
^It should be noted that certain sites like Combined Fleet or Navweaps, which are authored by recognized or published experts in the field, are not "most websites."
^For example, some of the Canadian newspaper articles written about the raid are listed on their War Museum's website here, while a London Gazette supplement written after the war can be seen on their website. Anyone with access to the archives of The New York Times can view the stories printed by that paper on the raid by searching their archives, and the Google News archive lists many newspapers, some of which were scanned by Google and are available at no charge; most of the non-free material requires a subscription to ProQuest.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.
I am pleased to report that the March coordinator elections have concluded, and that 15 members have been selected to serve as coordinators from April to September. Special congratulations go to AustralianRupert, Dank, MisterBee1966, NativeForeigner, Patar knight, and Ranger Steve, all of whom are newly elected coordinators. As we start this new tranche we welcome all returning coordinators, and wish those who decided not to stand for reelection luck as they move on to new things.
In other election news, a motion made to extend the coordinator tranche from its current six-month term to one full year gained consensus from the election participants. This will take effect in September, during the next election cycle. For the IX Coordinator Tranche, TomStar81 (Talk) 05:02, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In May 2008 a small group of editors, operating from a page in Cam's userspace, began work on improving Wikipedia's articles relating to the pivotal Second World War Battle of Normandy that took place in northern France between 6 June and the end of August 1944. Milhist has now adopted this collaboration as our third special project. The aim of Operation Normandy is to bring all core topics—official operations, battles, and the invasion beaches—to featured status by the 70th anniversary of D-Day on 6 June 2014. More information can be found on the project page; any interested editors are most welcome to sign up and help us meet this challenging goal!
Our Henry Allingham World War I Contest ended on 11 March with the following results: in first place was Sturmvogel 66; in second place was Ian Rose; in third place was Dana boomer; and the finalists were Abraham, B.S., Carcharoth, and XavierGreen. The contest produced an incredible 238 recognised article improvements, of which 6 were Featured articles, 13 were A-Class articles and 22 were Good articles. In addition 43 newly created or expanded articles were successfully submitted for the 'Did you know' section on Wikipedia's main page. Our warmest congratulations go to the medallists and finalists, and our grateful thanks go to all participants and particularly to Eurocopter for organizing the contest.
Would you like to get more involved in the project? There are many open tasks that could use your help. The project's review department is always in need of input at peer reviews, A-class reviews, FACs and FARs; these can be found here. Also, the project maintains a list of deletion debates for military-related articles that have been nominated for deletion; project members are encouraged to provide their opinions in this forum so that consensus can be established. Finally, if content creation is more what you are looking for, each of the project's 48 task forces maintains a list of requested articles.
Your comments are invited in the following ongoing project discussions:
Pre-emptive disambiguation. Since 2006 our in-house style guide has recommended disambiguating the titles of articles about military units whether another article of the same name exists or not. The continued need for this practice is under discussion.
Nick-D in recognition of his long and distinguished service as a coordinator of this project from February 2008 to March 2010; sterling efforts on "big picture" subjects, including ten featured articles; and his tireless participation in discussion and review.
Sturmvogel 66 in recognition of his distinguished service as a coordinator of this project, extraordinary performance within the Henry Allingham World War I Contest and other extremely valuable contributions to the project.
Editorial: Translating article writing to real life
I (Ed) am a college student in the United States, and as part of attaining my desired degree, I chose to take a course in Arab-Islamic history. We began in the early 600s and spent some time on the origins of the Islamic conquering of the Sassanid Empire and partial takeover of the Byzantine Empire (c. 634–750). From there, we have moved through the various ages of history, and the class recently began discussing the Ottoman Empire and other Islamic regions of more recent times.
As we began discussing the Ottoman Empire's role in the First World War, our professor mentioned that they were blockading the Bosphorus, using it as a chokepoint to cut off needed supplies traveling to Russia's only warm-water port, Sevastopol. An astute classmate, realizing this meant the use of warships, wondered what naval technology was like during this time. The professor turned and asked me to answer the question, as he knew I had been studying naval history and believed that I knew more about the subject.
The point of this anecdote is not to boast, but to provoke some thought. By virtue of the research Wikipedia writers must do to write complete, referenced articles, many of us are acquiring knowledge in specialized topics that can surpass even learned scholars. Wikipedia might even provoke some of us into becoming learned scholars through the subjects we find here. To profile one such case, take a look at Parsecboy.
Beginning in May 2007, he came across a few essentially empty stubs on German battleship classes. Nearly 3 years later, he's written or collaborated on more than forty articles rated as good or higher, including over a dozen featured articles and a featured list; the majority relate to German warships. The work Parsecboy has done for Wikipedia has had a tremendous impact on his academic career: to complete his undergraduate degree, Parsecboy is currently writing an Honors Thesis that will analyze the British and German battlecruiser squadrons during the First World War. Parsecboy plans to attend graduate school and continue his research in the area, culminating in a dissertation. He comments that "without a doubt, I would not have had nearly as much knowledge and interest in the topic, nor would I have known where to begin researching if I had not become so involved with the topic here on Wikipedia."
The knowledge you acquire through writing Wikipedia articles will remain with you for the rest of your life. Try to find a way to use it to your advantage.
-2007-05-15T04:38:00.000Z-Image:Aspis.gif){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![Governor Davey's [sic] Proclamation to the Aborigines](/wiki/File:Gov_Davey%27s_proclamation-edit2.jpg){kind=link}
_in_camouflage_coat,_1918_edit.jpg){kind=link}
