User talk:Keith-264/Archives/ 3
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Dash
In Battle of Polygon Wood, the counter-attacks is not using a standard en-dash but some other, perhaps a Hyphen#Unicode. I've fixed the AWB rule dealing with counterattacks. This might be an related to the situation you reported with AutoEd. It a complex problem because you can manually overwrite the hyphen in the text and save, and it unexpectedly keeps the original hidden character. Sun Creator(talk) 19:37, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
- It's the hyphen from this laptop - but I'm not an aficionado, do you mean that is should be counter–attack rather than counter-attack? Regards Keith-264 (talk) 19:39, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
- Battle of Polygon Wood has 'counter-attack' eighteen times, but only seventeen are exactly 'counter-attack' and other is on the wording which was replaced and reverted, it doesn't have a dash like the others. It could be that it is an Em-dash or it could be another Unicode dash. Sun Creator(talk) 20:43, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
WWI Casualties
Hello Keith. I would like to bring to your attention a new section I made on the talk page for the WW1 casualties article. Can I get some feedback on it, and if you agree, can you help make the required changes? Cheers. 98.221.136.220 (talk) 23:06, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
Hello Keith
I've just been doing a bit on the Crusader page, which I know you've had a lot to do with; I've left a suggestion on layout on the talk page (here) if you wish to comment. Regards, Xyl 54 (talk) 21:48, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
PS: Did you know there's a full set of military maps of North Africa online at the University of Texas? The index webpage is here. I found it tucked away as a reference on the List of North African airfields during World War II. They take a bit of getting used to (you have to search quite a bit to find places) but very interesting. Xyl 54 (talk) 22:11, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
- No, I didn't. How do you get an enlargement? Regards Keith-264 (talk) 22:18, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
- Sorry, wrong page! This is the index list; you pick the map wanted using the index map ref (the Crusader battlefield is on NH-35.1 (Bardia) and NH-34.4 (Al Adem), for example) and it should load up. Have fun! Xyl 54 (talk) 23:11, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
- Wheee!Keith-264 (talk) 08:19, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CLXIII, November 2019
Battle of Sidi BarraniI have finished with the OrBat. Two quick notes:
Best regards, noclador (talk) 20:47, 26 November 2019 (UTC) The Bugle: Issue CLXIV, December 2019
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. HelpThere is a discussion going on at the Easter Rising talk page about whether the revolt should be included as part of WW1 since it was influenced by it. Can you please contribute? 98.221.136.220 (talk) 18:57, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Highlight duplicate wikilinksHi Keith, I saw on Battle of Verdun that you mentioned a Highlight duplicate wikilinks script, can you please tell me how I install/use this? thanks Mztourist (talk) 04:32, 7 January 2020 (UTC) TobrukHi, Keith. In yr edit here you've left a few hasty little typos which you may care to fix yourself. Cheers, Bjenks (talk) 15:29, 8 January 2020 (UTC) The Bugle: Issue CLXV, January 2020
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. The Bugle: IssueICLXVI, February 2020
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. March Madness 2020G'day all, March Madness 2020 is about to get underway, and there is bling aplenty for those who want to get stuck into the backlog by way of tagging, assessing, updating, adding or improving resources and creating articles. If you haven't already signed up to participate, why not? The more the merrier! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:19, 29 February 2020 (UTC) for the coord team Operation Jupiter casualty figuresHi Keith, I'm researching a question on History Stack Exchange about the apparent gross disparity in casualty numbers in Operation Jupiter: British 2000 vs German 6,469. This does seem quite out of balance for a tactical failure. I have a copy of Sons of the Reich, though a different edition. I've confirmed the 2000 number in footnote 28 on my page 44 for July 10/11. I can't find the quoted 6,469 German casualties. Closest I see is at the end of the Jupiter chapter "In two weeks' fighting the Hohenstaufen had lost 1,891 men and the Frundsberg 2,289" which is 4,180 men for two weeks, not two days. How did you arrive at 6,469 German casualties? Thanks, Schwern (talk) 20:34, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CLXVII, March 2020
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. TobrukSuggestion: combing air and sea war aspects as there is so much overlap. Dapi89 (talk) 13:46, 31 March 2020 (UTC) The Bugle: Issue CLXVIII, April 2020
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. WW1I hate to bother you, but I'm at my wits end with the Banner. He just reverted every edit made on the World War I casualties page up to mid-2019. It's essentially vandalism at this point. With the reversion he got rid of losses from countries like Brazil, which literally declared war on Germany, and which I provided reliable sources for. What now? Do I just ignore his irresponsible actions? 2601:85:C101:BA30:85AA:4FD2:627D:4738 (talk) 13:52, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
breaking spacesYou do understand that if No. 92 Squadron shows up on your browser as 92
The Bugle: Issue CLXIX, May 2020
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. Templates on military aviation articlesDo you think we need a navbox for the airwar in Western Europe for the Second World War? Something a bit between Template:RAF WWII strategic bombing and Template:Campaignbox Western Front (World War II) - could link in Coastal Command, Fw 200, the Baltic ops later in war, Blitz(es), V-1, Bodenplatte... GraemeLeggett (talk) 08:22, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
DYK for Battle of Boulogne On 23 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Boulogne, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that during the Battle of Boulogne on 23 May 1940, a shell from the British ship HMS Venomous (pictured) made a German tank turn "over and over, like a child doing a cart-wheel"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Boulogne. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Battle of Boulogne), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. VerdunHi Keith! The transfer of an entire field army from Verdun to the Somme Offensive occured in July 1916 as a response to the german transfer. Only the german transfer was mentioned for unknown reasons, so I included it. May I know why you removed it claiming those transfers didn't occur in the same month? (Jules Agathias (talk) 15:27, 23 May 2020 (UTC)).
KanalkampfNot opposed to reinstating Smith, but Murray's work must be heard. More reading needs to be done to see what else is out there at any rate. Dapi89 (talk) 11:18, 3 June 2020 (UTC) Operation Ramrod 16I left a comment on the talk page of Operation Ramrod 16, my German sources do not fully match the current wording in the article. May be worth considering. Cheers MisterBee1966 (talk) 18:36, 3 June 2020 (UTC) Thanks for that, I've left a reply. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 18:39, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Operation Ramrod 16I left a comment on the talk page of Operation Ramrod 16, my German sources do not fully match the current wording in the article. May be worth considering. Cheers MisterBee1966 (talk) 18:36, 3 June 2020 (UTC) Thanks for that, I've left a reply. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 18:39, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
A possible target for your skillsI see you've taken on Kanalkampf, but I was wondering if you had time to bring your skills to bear on Operation Jericho starring our favourites in 2 Group No. 464 and No. 467 squadrons. Not to give it the full Ramrod treatment but to clear up couple of obvious questions when reading it as it stands. What happened with the Typhoon escort (if 3 squadrons ordered, what happened to the third and did they do anything constructive in the raid)? And what was the Luftwaffe doing (one Fw190 brought down as Mossie, so where were the rest)? GraemeLeggett (talk) 17:43, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CLXX, June 2020
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. No.2 Group knowledgeI've found an area where your knowledge base might be useful - the Dieppe Raid. Obviously the article focuses on the ground events but there was a large RAF involvement. Spitfire squadrons keeping German aircraft away from the naval force etc is one thing but the article as it stands mentions 7 squadrons of 2 Group involved (as well as Army Air Cooperation Command Mustangs and Hurricane "fighter bombers"). And that's about all that's mentioned. Struck me that 2 Group contribution might have been Circus/Ramrod style to draw attention away from Dieppe and/or isolate Dieppe from nearby ground reinforcements. Can you throw any light on situation? GraemeLeggett (talk) 10:21, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
Which OH? Regards Keith-264 (talk) 12:18, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
Typhoon tailsI see you've been extending and polishing Op. Jericho some more and found another instance of a Typhoon and its tail socially distancing. "You wouldn't get me up in one of those things" is the phrase. GraemeLeggett (talk) 13:54, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
Battle of Heligoland Bight (1914)Hi Keith. I've been trying my hand at editing the Battle of Heligoland Bight (1914) article, and I've run into confusion over the usage of the term "torpedo boats" for the Imperial German Navy as a substitute for destroyer. If Germany only operated torpedo boats (in lieu of destroyers) during the First World War, then why does it say in the infobox that 1 German "destroyer" was sunk? I noticed you had edited articles like and similar to these, so I assume you must have knowledge on this- should the article say "3 torpedo boats sunk" or "1 destroyer and 2 torpedo boats sunk" as it is now? Right now it looks very confusing to have no destroyers for the Germans in the strength section but 1 destroyer sunk in the casualties section. Awaiting your reply, Snagemit (talk) 17:58, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CLXXI, July 2020
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. disruptive editorI am concerned about the disruptive editor that you warned yesterday[1]. If you look at the sheer volume of edits produced[2], it would appear impossible for the problem editor to consult any sources before making edits and moving on to the next article. I am not someone who is fully versed in all the procedures for dealing with such an editor, but surely an administrator needs to put a stop to this before hundreds of articles are damaged. What do you think is the best course of action?ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 07:54, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Why did you revert my edit on the Gallipoli campaign article?It was a constructive edit that corrected the internal link, preventing that unsightly '(Redirected from First World War)' note at the top of the 'World War I' article. And if you somehow believed that it was necessary to revert my edit, it was rude to not acknowledge my intentions in your summary, and cite my "Good faith" per Wikipedia:Assume good faith. It's little wonder that newcomers often don't feel particularly welcome, and would question the point of editing to improve Wikipedia. Thanks. Crackersgreen (talk) 09:53, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
New message from Serial Number 54129 Message added 14:15, 6 August 2020 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. ——Serial 14:15, 6 August 2020 (UTC) The Bugle: Issue CLXXII, August 2020
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. East African CampaignGood evening (translate google). It was Jean-Luc Maillet, the author of a study on the free French air forces who told me about this book he used for this work. Here is the study in question: http://francecrashes39-45.net/recits_avions/org_fafl.pdf 21. FBF N ° 1 - French Free Grand Reconnaissance Squadron n ° 1 (French Bomber Flight n ° 1). On July 3, 1940, a small group of airmen flew 2 Glenn-Martins from GB 1/61 based at Youks-les-Bains (near Tébésa in Algeria) to reach Heliopolis in Egypt. Integrated into RAF Squadron 8 and based in Aden, the unit was quickly decimated and disbanded. Its 2 aircraft were shot down over Abyssinia in September and December 1940, killing 5 members of the small squadron. I contacted him two days ago because he had made a typo, 6 killed (and 2 prisoners of war) instead of 5. He sent me the photos of the pages of the book in question - the biography of crews killed in action - that I have. put in link below, no page number sorry: https://www.flickr.com/photos/93591301@N04/ I cannot find for the moment the human losses of Free French Orient Brigade (1st Free French Division). L'amateur d'aéroplanes (talk) 20:26, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
What do you have against my Channel Dash edit?You said my "prose was abysmal." But I'm not even writing new prose, I'm just fixing some of the more egregious problems with the existing prose. Let's look at some examples. Original:
My edit:
The original is nonsense. How can you object to this edit? Original:
My edit:
The repetition of "the ships" is unnecessary, and removing it is good style.
Original:
My edit:
The original sentence isn't even grammatically correct.
Original:
My edit:
Are we really expected to believe that the issue here is that the mines in the vicinity were not available to support Unternehmen Rheinübung? That's what the original sentence implies.
What exactly are you objecting to in these edits? I apologise for taking you for an American, it's an occupational hazard on wiki. I don't mind you blamming typos but you punctuate conjunctions and your more ambitious efforts tend mirror your objections. I would never use "so" to begin a description of an event following another. I'd be quite interested in going over the article with you word by word, I think we could write a better article and learn something from each other. Regards. --Jtle515 (talk) 09:11, 19 August 2020 (UTC) Keith-264 (talk) 09:42, 19 August 2020 (UTC) Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations openNominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:05, 1 September 2020 (UTC) The Bugle: Issue Issue CLXXIII, September 2020
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. Milhist coordinator election voting has commencedG'day everyone, voting for the 2020 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2020. Thanks from the outgoing coord team, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:17, 15 September 2020 (UTC) Fewer for numerable nouns, less for uncountable nounsBut I will leave your revert. Perhaps you use a different form of English. Or I could be mistaken. — Neonorange (Phil) 07:54, 17 September 2020 (UTC) Corfu trilogyLooks good, yes. The question is how much fiction there is in those books, but that's a different story. Taurus Littrow (talk) 11:40, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
Drive-by formattingHi Keith, I would appreciate if you left formatting issues to the article writers. Formatting is generally a style issue, and covered in guidelines rather than policies. I saw this article get to Good Article status through extensive effort, and would prefer to keep the paragraphs not wedged between images like your drive-by edit made it. ɱ (talk) 19:21, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
(talk page stalker)All I'm gonna say is that the images sandwiching the text on my monitor, notably the source and the Balloon Festival pictures, need to be moved or otherwise dealt with.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:19, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
Operation CompassHi Keith, this is about your reversion of my edit [4] on Operation Compass. I made that edit as a link was needed there. I understand you would have had a good reason for reverting; could you clarify why? HalfdanRagnarsson (talk) 04:43, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CLXXIV, October 2020
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. DecisiveHi Keith, I hope you can help me. I understand we don't call victories "decisive" in infoboxes. Could you point me to the guideline or policy that says this? Just noticed 5.47.39.109 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) adding "decisive" to a lot of Ottoman victories. Thanks, DuncanHill (talk) 13:24, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
much vs. lots ofAlthough "much" and "lots of" overlap in meaning, I believe the former is the better choice in Wikipedia when they are both appropriate. The latter sounds informal. When one word suffices, why use two words to say the same thing? Jellysandwich0 (talk) 17:11, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CLXXV, November 2020
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. Nominations for the 2020 Military history WikiProject Newcomer and Historian of the Year awards now openG'day all, the nominations for the 2020 Military history WikiProject newcomer and Historian of the Year are open, all editors are encouraged to nominate candidates for the awards before until 23:59 (GMT) on 15 December 2020, after which voting will occur for 14 days. There is not much time left to nominate worthy recipients, so get to it! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:45, 10 December 2020 (UTC) Looking for a sourceHi Kieth, I am not sure if you can help, but I am working on Battle of Heraklion and am looking for a source to support the statement that the 2nd Leicesters, which arrived four days before the battle, was transported from Alexandria to Heraklion by HMS Gloucester and HMS Fiji. Do you have any suggestions? Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 23:17, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CLXXVI, December 2020
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. Comma usageHi Keith - I was surprised to see this reversion. I've never heard the rule that you "never punctuate a conjunction," and every single source I can find says that you should put a comma before "but" if it's separating two independent clauses, as it is here. Let me know if this is some kind of WP:ENGVAR weirdness or something, but for now I've gone ahead and undone the reversion. (Your reversion also - perhaps by mistake - restored a certainly-wrong comma after "14 December.") -Elmer Clark (talk) 20:52, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
Voting for "Military Historian of the Year" and "Military history newcomer of the year" closingG'day all, voting for the WikiProject Military history "Military Historian of the Year" and "Military history newcomer of the year" is about to close, so if you haven't already, click on the links and have your say before 23:59 (GMT) on 30 December! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:34, 28 December 2020 (UTC) for the coord team The Bugle: Issue CLXXVII, January 2021
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. thanksThanks for the thanks, man! Bulgariansoviet1878 (talk) 22:54, 24 January 2021 (UTC) The Bugle: Issue CLXXVIII, February 2021
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. The Bugle: Issue CLXXVIII, February 2021
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. The Bugle: Issue CLXXIX, March 2021
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. oclcHi Keith, may I ask (for information – I'm not objecting!) why you removed the oclc parameter here? Because it's redundant to the ISBN? Thanks, Wham2001 (talk) 07:42, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
I found out about sfnm recently too. I'm a shift worker now so editing and re-editing is about all I have time for. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 18:20, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
|
