Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Archive 21

message: From the recent thread I raised the question of a CSB taskforce (or department). I think we ought to have a discussion here, as that subheading has been hijacked by map fanatics! :D
OK, a few points I think we should talk about first:
#Is CSB reverse discrimination? (Probably have to do with the whole concept of CSB, but it leads to the next question:)
#Is CSB, directed by a group of people, involving coordinated effort by the said people, placing an importance on articles of a certain nature at the expense of other articles, reverse discrimination?
#How many hands can we expect to be helping out if a CSB taskforce was created?
#How coordinated an effort would a CSB taskforce be? We all have our own specialties. Should this be a contribute-if-you-can type of project, or would we be diverting substantial atttention to counter SB, if so, would we be doing what I described in point 2?
-- Миборовский U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 00:23, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur fully Durova. Even the CSB project itself, doesnt really seem to do much of anything except argue. To my mind WP:NPOV trumps CSB. If it were followed more closely, CSB would be hardly needed at all. Also, my friends, we must beware of TASK FORCE BLOAT...that is having too many which try to do too much and end up doing nothing. Too much of a good thing..etc. --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 10:17, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK... Anyone else wanna chip in? -- Миборовский U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 03:50, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the objections are pretty fair ones, especially insofar as creating a dedicated group for this sort of thing might cause problems if anyone joining it decides to pick fights with the other project members.  My suggestion would be to work informally for the time being—for example, by adding items to the wanted articles list and the worklist—and to come back to this idea when the entire department/task force structure has had some time to mature; once we figure out how to run semi-autonomous subgroups successfuly, we'll be in a better position to handle something like this. —Kirill Lokshin 03:58, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmkay. Can I request that :Template:WPMILHIST Announcements be expanded to include a section for articles (whether created or not) that could benefit from some CSB work? -- Миборовский U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 23:40, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure thing; just give me a good word for it (and some articles, obviously). —Kirill Lokshin 23:41, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't think of a better word than: "CSB:"! :S For articles, we can have Military history by country, the appalling number of red links there is not good. The Second Italo-Abyssinian War could use some work. List of Chinese battles has lots of red links which look rather ugly, some really important battles like the Battle of Shanhaiguan are missing. (Note that my own systematic bias causes me to be biased towards Chinese military-related articles as opposed to, say, African ones. :D ) -- Миборовский U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 00:04, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done!  (Although CSB is slightly cryptic to the uninitiated.)  Feel free to maintain that list as you see fit. —Kirill Lokshin 00:09, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: w00t! Thanks! Let's hope it wouldn't just be me maintaining that list... -- Миборовский U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 00:15, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  CSB department/taskforce discussion 

message: Think there's enough interest to start a requested images page on this project?  I've been sniffing around Wikimedia Commons and other language versions of Wikipedia for images to import to our medieval armor articles.  It can take a lot of sleuthing: a bascinet finally turned up on the Hebrew edition incorrectly identified as a great helm.  Haven't found an armet anywhere.  This could be a good chance for SCA types to get their pictures into an encyclopedia, as well as for art buffs to add free domain images of their favorite battles and commanders. Durova 21:39, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd add one :) I can't find a public domain image of Marcus Licinius Crassus. There is a very common image of a grumpy looking bust of crassus in whitish stone agaisnt a dark background; you see it everywhere on the net. Unfortunatly, it appears to be an image scan out of a book, and therefore it isn't in the public domain, so I/we can't use it in Wikipedia. Does anyone know any other Crassus images? - Vedexent 04:30, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested images 

message: I've started :Category:WikiProject Military history (and a number of sub-categories) to keep some of the random subpages/templates/whatnot we have in a place where we can find them.  It's still very much a work in progress (and it's not really meant to replace the navigation template and main project page, which will continue to be the primary places where links are given).  Comments are welcome! —Kirill Lokshin 20:05, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New category 

message: Not sure if there is one out there but what does everyone think about creating an infobox for military bases.  Looking around at the US bases for all services the pages are pretty weak and need alot of work.  I think there are enough bases out there to warrant one.  Interested to here thoughts.--Looper5920 22:06, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think  is pretty usable for that.  Are there some specific fields you think need to be added? —Kirill Lokshin 22:11, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'll use that one.  No other base had a box so I thought maybe it was for a reason.  Don't know about fields just yet.  Let me try a few out and see if any are needed.  Thanks--Looper5920 22:22, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need for a new infobox 

message: I would be interesting in getting involved in an article detailing British preparations for invasion c1940. There is, of course, an article on Operation Sealion and a couple of articles on GHQ Line and the Taunton Stop Line, but I am sure there is a lot more to be said. WWII is not really my era, but as it happens I live very close to the GHQ Line and I know there is lots of material from my general interest in local history. Anyone interested? Gaius Cornelius 20:06, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I can help you as far as Canadian order of battle and equipment states; we had one division reasonably well equipped at that time (May-Jun 1940) and another arrived in August 1940 in the UK. If you are looking at specific units, that is.Michael Dorosh 21:04, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Michael: I am sure that such contributions would be very welcome. For my own part, I was really thinking of writing about physical defences and the Home Guard. This is a big topic that is hardly touched by wikipedia at the moment and what there is is spread all over. Gaius Cornelius 17:26, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: British preparations for prospective invasion in WWII

message: I've nominated Battle of Krasny Bor at Template talk:Did you know so it can be considered for Wikipedia's main page.  This project is generating some good work.  Let's make sure the rest of Wikipedia sees what we're doing.  New articles are eligible if they're less than 5 days old.  Most submissions that are well written and longer than sub-stubs get chosen, especially if they include an image.  We should make more use of this resource.  Cheers, Durova 00:34, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Very good choice.  It is a nice to see first effort, but needs some major work. But that's what we are here for I guess. :-) Andreas 10:34, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's well above average for the "Did you know" spotlight.  Nobody expects perfection in the first week. Durova 16:51, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would not. I think it is a lot better than any article I started. Andreas 17:22, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is why, from time to time, I'll snap and say some unpleasant things. OK, so it isn't exactly Stalingrad, but seriously: Twenty-five thousand men and eight thousand casualties at Saratoga =  EPIC  ...Yet fifty thousand men and fifteen thousand casualties at Krasny Bor = child's play. In fact, the appellation of "battle" is apparently an injustice; let's call it a "minor engagement" instead. I'll make the change myself, right after I move "Battle of Gettysburg" to "That little Gettysburg fracas." Albrecht 06:47, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Calm down, calm down. It's systematic bias at work. Channel your frustration to write more (and better!) articles to counter this! It's what I do, and works wonders! -- Миборовский U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 07:25, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In terms of the importance of the battle within the context of the war, it is clear that Krasny Bor is nowhere near e.g. Saratoga.  It does not even rate a mention in Ziemke, to give you an idea.  That does not make it a minor engagement though - it was part of a grand plan by the STAVKA that completely failed.  I intend to work this out a bit further, thereby showing why it is an important battle. Andreas 09:07, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done.  Comments welcome.  Andreas 15:09, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good work 

message: What is this, really? A google search turns up 2 pages, both linked to the WPMILHIST infobox. What is it in its original language, if any? -- Миборовский U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 04:30, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's from here, originally.  No idea what the person requesting it meant, though. —Kirill Lokshin 04:31, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately it sounds like a hoax to me. No google hits at all for the place name, even. :( Or it might be systematic bias at its full glory. *shrugs* Any way we can contact whoever put that up? Seems to be from a looooong time ago and I haven't got the spare time to track it down. -- Миборовский U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 04:53, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wondered this myself the other day! --Loopy e 05:27, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It sounds a lot like an Italian swearword.  Best take it off the list and wait if somebody can show what it was. Andreas 10:36, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've replaced it with another entry.  It's still on the wanted articles list, though, so maybe somebody will eventually figure out what it's supposed to be. —Kirill Lokshin 14:14, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Battle of Vafankou? 

message: My self and ERcheck have been working on infoboxes for all of the Commandants of the Marine Corps and we are running into issues of uniformity with regards to commands and medals and what precedence they should be listed.  Is there a standard that is already out there? --Looper5920 00:50, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not really, no.  I would assume that they would be ordered either chronologically or by order of precedence; but feel free to do whatever works best in each article. —Kirill Lokshin 00:58, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: On another note, keep in mind that the "Years of service" field should give the actual years (i.e. "1918–52"), not just the duration; great work aside from that! —Kirill Lokshin 01:00, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

text: * Thanks for the info on years of service.  All of the Commandant of the Marine Corps articles have been updated to include actual years vs duration. —ERcheck @ 05:25, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox order for commands and medals 

message: Having found another neat template trick... any comments on this?  The summaries are somewhat hastily constructed and thus probably incomplete, but I think the general idea is clear.  Would this be worth using, or should we just stick with the numbered list?  —Kirill Lokshin 02:49, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Snazzy.  My main concern is for users with poor eyesight.  The text is very small. Durova 02:54, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the font size there is controlled by the main MediaWiki CSS pages; I suspect it's set to 90%, which isn't too unusual. —Kirill Lokshin 02:56, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice. I like the coolness of a hideable box. -- Миборовский U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 03:31, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I've added it at the top of the page; does it seem to work? —Kirill Lokshin 04:22, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Beautiful. Durova 05:58, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Cool. I gotta use that collapsible (sp?) table for Wiki articles :D OOBs maybe? -- Миборовский U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 06:07, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Possible, but be aware that that code is still somewhat experimental, so I wouldn't advise using it too widely yet ;-) —Kirill Lokshin 14:08, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I think it's just Firefox - I get the same thing visiting a forum that uses a similar thing. --Loopy e 04:29, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archive listing idea