Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Archive 31

message: If I'm writing about a soldier from the South, do I use Southern names for the battle, i.e. Sharpsburg instead of Antietam, or do I use the Northern (more univerally familiar) names? plange 00:50, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I use the name selected for the Wikipedia article about the battle. About the only deviation from this is that some editors (not I) use Manassas instead of Bull Run, but they obviously end up pointing to an article called Bull Run, which might be confusing. IMHO, all of the other alternative names for battles (Sharpsburg, Murfreesboro, Pittsburg Landing, Boonsboro Gap, etc.) are too obscure for most readers. Hal Jespersen 01:50, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If an event/battle is called by two names, then the introduction should mention both names in both - the example, the Battle of Antietam does. I would, however, probably use the more widely (internationally) used name of the battle to be consistent across articles. Megapixie 02:03, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks, will do! plange 02:20, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which names of battles do I use for the CW? 

message: Hey, would anyone like to personally adopt Able Archer 83 and guide it to Featured status? The author (User:Natebjones) seems to be gone, and I wouldn't know what I'm doing, but I estimate that it won't need much! Melchoir 04:27, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I’m all over it. TomStar81 08:28, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Able Archer 83 

message: T-34 is a candidate for featured article.  Please comment at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/T-34/archive1.  —Michael Z. 2006-07-04 23:06 Z
:It's already listed in the announcement box; there's no real need for further notes on the topic ;-) Kirill Lokshin 23:26, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Oops.  Sorry, I've been watching some of the project discussion pages, but never noticed changes to the box.  —Michael Z. 2006-07-05 00:53 Z
It went  FA today. Gongrats to the nominator and to all people who helped to promote it to featured status! -- Grafikm (AutoGRAF) 15:25, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  T-34 nominated for FA 

message: Thanks to the efforts of Grafikm, the various old task force banners (listed here) have been removed from the remaining places where they were being used in favor of the integrated task force tags in .  Does anyone have objections to listing the lot of them for deletion, or is there some reason we need to keep them around? Kirill Lokshin 23:52, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There are two options: we can either delete them as they are or subst them everywhere they are not and delete them. Either are fine by me. :) -- Grafikm (AutoGRAF) 23:56, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, since nobody else seems to care, I'm going to go ahead and list these all on WP:TFD.  Kirill Lokshin 20:01, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Go for it :) -- Grafikm (AutoGRAF) 20:05, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I've nominated them all for deletion here, if anyone wants to comment. Kirill Lokshin 22:15, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Obsolete banners 

message: In light of the fact that we're doing a lot of article tagging and hence seeing a number of recurring questions from people who've just had their first exposure to the project, I've started a FAQ of sorts and linked it from the  banner.  I think I've gotten most of the questions that I've seen come up repeatedly, but I'd appreciate someone looking over it to see that I haven't missed anything obvious, as well as any other comments on the thing. Kirill Lokshin 19:23, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a great idea. Good thinking. ;) -- Миборовский 03:48, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  FAQ 

message: Would someone gop and rate this page USVA emblems for headstones and markers? --evrik 17:44, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done.  For future reference, any articles you want rated can be listed here, and somebody will get to them shortly. Kirill Lokshin 02:30, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Rating

message: Someone filed a request for expansion of Operation Matador (Iraq). Anyone care to help ? Megapixie 01:41, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for expansion of [[Operation Matador (Iraq)]] 

message: I would like to bring project members attention to my new article British anti-invasion preparations of World War II in the hope that it will be integrated into the military history project. So far, I have contributed 99% of the content myself and it is time to encourage others to look it over. I am not finished with the article by any means, but I think it is coming along nicely. Contributions, feedback and advice will be appreciated. Gaius Cornelius 10:09, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: British anti-invasion preparations of World War II

message: A thought: might it be a good idea to merge the two pages?  We would then have two different sections for requests on the assessment page; one for simple assessments and one for more thorough reviews (which would contain the merged contents).  This might make it easier to use the assessment page as a sort of one-stop location for all of our reviewing and rating.  Comments?  Kirill Lokshin 00:14, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The volumetry is not the same. I think it would be best to keep them separated. -- Grafikm (AutoGRAF) 00:15, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Mmm, fair enough.  I was thinking more in reference to some of the proposals above to have a multi-person review for moving articles to A-Class; I wonder if something like that would begin to blur the line between assessment and peer review. Kirill Lokshin 00:20, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Assessment & peer review 

message: I'm a new editor, and just found this great resource you folks are working on here. I recently created FSB Ripcord, (it still needs a lot of work) and Andre Lucas, and fanned out and wikilinked them to the appropriate existing articles. I'm somewhat of a student of the 101st in I Corps, Vietnam. I'll put this project on my watch list and try to help out when I can. Crockspot 00:21, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Welcome aboard! Kirill Lokshin 00:32, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just Checking In 

message: Someone has proposed that :Category:Military leaders be merged with :Category:Military people.  Any comments would be welcome. Kirill Lokshin 15:30, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category: Military leaders 

message: I keep hearing this term as applied to future events in Iraq. Can someone please tell me the meaning of "civil war" as it applies in this instance?  
--66.241.87.108 15:58, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This question might be better asked at the reference desk.  (It does, incidentally, point out that our civil war article is not exactly stellar!) Kirill Lokshin 16:01, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  civil war  

message: Germany, WWI and WWII.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 18:08, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A small word of caution from a old stub sorter; please note that WP:WSS operates with a size threshold meaning that new templates normally requires that we can list at least 60 already existing short articles "requiring" the proposed template. The German and WWII proposals are above this limit but the WWI material is way too small according to WP:WSS rules (we normally don't split off new "children" before the parent is has around 800 articles assigned to it and the WWI cat. only has 134 articles.) If anyone knows of very short articles about WWI not properly tagged with  please do so, so we can properly assess the situation. Valentinian (talk) 19:27, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New battle stubs proposed