User talk:Djmaschek/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5

File source problem with File:Louis Emmanuel Rey.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Louis Emmanuel Rey.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 06:12, 4 February 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. FASTILYsock(TALK) 06:12, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVII (January 2010)

The

talk
) 03:22, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

French and Austrian generals, Battle of Wagram; Battle of Toulouse (1814)

Hello, thanks for your message and congratulations for your contributions. The two generals are now on my watchlist too, so I will help keep vandals and irrelevant content away. Austrian generals are a subject I'm interested in, although I will work on French ones exclusively. But it's good to know that someone competent is giving the Austrian generals the attention they deserve. Just to let you know, I am planning a massive extension of the Battle of Wagram, like the one I wrote on the Romanian wiki. It would be useful to have some more extensive articles on the following commanders: Prince Reuss-Plauen; Rosenberg-Orsini; Johan von Kollowrat; Archduke John; Prince Hohenzollern-Hechingen; Prince von Liechtenstein; general Radetzky; French émigré Armand von Nordmann; generals Grunne and Wimpffen and French general Roussel d'Hurbal who at the time was fighting for Austria. If you feel like contributing to creating/expanding any of these biographies, it would be great, as it would help achieve better coverage of the battle of Wagram in preparation of the expansion work that I'm planning.

Regarding the battle of Toulouse, I know that it's often the subject of debate. I've added the point of view of 3 mainstream French specialists who have written some standard work on the Napoleonic period. They believe that it was a French victory. We now have both points of view - that it was a Anglo-Allied or a French victory and we have both claims well sourced so debates should be over.Best,--Alexandru Demian (talk) 18:20, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Nominations for the March 2010 Military history Project Coordinator elections now open!

The

talk
) 21:21, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVIII (February 2010)

The

talk
) 22:15, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the plaudit!Urselius (talk) 10:56, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Coordinator elections have opened!

Voting for the

talk
) 21:41, 18 March 2010 (UTC)



Austrian generals

nice article on Keinmayer.  :) I'm trying to put together a better list than the one that just lists the names. Here: User:Auntieruth55/Habsburg Field Marshal List. Would you take a look and see if I should do something different as I'm working on it? (better now than later). Auntieruth55 (talk) 01:10, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the compliment. I notice it when you add articles to the list of Austrian Empire generals of the French Revolutionary Wars. Your Habsburg list would make an interesting article. Technically, your format looks okay. I wonder if it might look better to sort the Lt. Field Marshals, Feldzeugmeisters/Generals of Cavalry, and Field Marshals into their own separate tables, rather than mixing all three ranks together. Just a thought. Will the list include only the 1792-1815 period? Djmaschek (talk) 02:42, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
Yes, I'm thinking now only 1792-1815, but of course many of them fought before and I guess after that too. What do you think? The list allows for sorting, so I figured I could put them all together and then sort them out later, breaking them up that way. It could also be sorted by Regiment. 8th Hussars, etc. Auntieruth55 (talk) 03:07, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
The table is a bit crowded. I wonder if a column could be eliminated, like putting Inhaber in Comments, for example. If it were me, I'd make separate lists for FMs, FZMs, and FMLs because each list could grow to encompass 1500-1918. When a table reaches a certain size, it becomes overwhelming. See Ban of Croatia for a long table. But, you're doing the work so it's your call! It's great that you write many well-researched articles about this interesting historical period. Djmaschek (talk) 05:26, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
Auntieruth55, please see
List of United States Senators for a really attractive table, including pictures. The trick is to make the rows a uniform size. If you used this table you could ignore my 25 March comments. Djmaschek (talk
) 01:28, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
that is a neat table, but I think you overestimate my abilities with tables. I'll be happy for some help, though. Which would be better, making separate tables for each rank, or making a single table that is color coded? Auntieruth55 (talk) 01:43, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
My vote would be for separate tables for each rank. The list of FMs alone looks huge! Djmaschek (talk) 01:51, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
possibly just the Lieutenant field marshals. You could add Provera. Auntieruth55 (talk) 01:57, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

take a look now. I'm thinking about omitting the campaigns, expanding the notes section. Or adding a column for "origin" since the Habsburgs tried to match up units with commanders of the similar ethnicity. Auntieruth55 (talk) 20:00, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

You are still on the letter A. It's a big job that you've taken on. Good luck! Djmaschek (talk) 01:04, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
as you come across them, feel free to add them to the list. Also: Category:Austrian Lieutenant Field Marshals.  :) Auntieruth55 (talk) 00:35, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Provera added. As you come across them, Dj, you might stick them in the list. 17:53, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIX (March 2010)

The

talk
) 21:36, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : L (April 2010)

The

talk
) 19:16, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LI (May 2010)

The

talk
) 21:01, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

The WikiChevrons
For a decent article about military history that I have no idea to improve upon, I give you this barnstar. I dream of horses @ 03:45, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
Thank you I dream of horses. Please let me know the article or articles that you liked so much. Thanks. Djmaschek (talk) 22:01, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Hmm...I forgot, my fault, but it may have been
Battle of Orbaitzeta
.
Anyways, man, you deserved it! :-) --I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 23:07, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Djmaschek. You have new messages at AustralianRupert's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

AustralianRupert (talk) 04:48, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

French general officer ranks

Hello, Djmaschek. You have new messages at Roger Davies's talk page.
Message added 04:20, 18 July 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Caldiero and Sacile

Hello. Yes, I had seen your edits of the article about Caldiero and I'm very happy that due to your contributions, the article is now more complete. It has always been my point of view that, so long as a contributor quotes solid sources, any point of view is acceptable. So, no problem as far as I am concerned, on the contrary. My only objection comes when contributors try to present minority opinions as being mainstream. Caldiero is obviously not the case, but there are battles (e.g. Borodino) that are now presented on wikipedia in ways that are, in my view, historically inaccurate. Regarding the French army ranks, I've always used the actual names (translated versions such as General of Division or sometimes French rank names in italics). This is because I privilege accuracy, even if it makes things more complicated for the occasional layman reader (does a layman really care...?). Conversely, if the reader knows a thing or two about Napoleonic military history, he will probably be surprised to see the Major General rank in the French army. Best,--Alexandru Demian (talk) 19:43, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Battle of Verona (1805)

I want to thank you for creating such a great new article, Battle of Verona (1805). I was browsing the new pages when I came across your article and I had to stop to appreciate your work. A lot of the new pages created are not fit for Wikipedia, and it's really nice to see one as admirable as yours among the lot. Thank you. --Odie5533 (talk) 05:23, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Have assessed this as B. Good work. I think if you want to take it further a wider range of sources could help - just my opinion.Tttom1 (talk) 00:55, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for improving this article with an infobox! Herostratus (talk) 13:51, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Milhist coordinator?

The military history wikiproject will soon open the September 2010 coordinator elections to determine who among us will serve on the X Tranche, the coordinator tranche beginning 28 September of this month. The current coordinators have offered up the names of a limited number of editors who we believe would make good coordinators, and your name was included in the list. Therefore, I am leaving this message on behalf of the current milhist coordinators to encourage you to run for the position of coordinator. If you have any questions or comments about the position you are welcome to ask any members of the current coordinator tranche, we would be happy to answer your questions. Note that while this message is being left to encourage you to run for the position you are under no obligation to do so, and if you decide not to run this decision will not be held against you now or at any point in the future.

On belhalf of the Military history Coordinator IX Tranche, TomStar81 (Talk) 00:17, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Re: Battle of Piave and Napoleonic Wars

Thanks for pointing out the problem about the Piave River. I hadn't noticed the article about the WW1 battle because it had "the" in the title, so I thought there was no need to mention the year. Unfortunately, I can't move it to "Battle of the Piave River (1809)" because it already exists as a redirect to the current page and I'm not familiar with the procedure in such a case.

Regarding the Battle of Marengo, I've already proposed it for an A-class review and was working on creating stubs for the more important generals involved in the battle.

I'm glad that there are other users interested in such a domain and I'd really like to congratulate you on the articles you've expanded so far, especially as you've contributed with self-made maps as well. My other long-term goals are to bring

Imperial and Royal Army during the Napoleonic Wars (I'm not really happy with the title as a non-specialist reader would have no idea it's actually about the Austrian army) and maybe create an article on Napoleonic warfare. If you'd like to work on the same subject in the future, just give me a message and I'll see how I can help. You can also speak to Alexandru.demian
, who's a good friend of mine and has a wide range of research materials.

PS: A suggestion for your articles: I think you should move the larger OOB's to separate pages as they provide detailed information which for a simple reader would seem overwhelming and they also use up a lot space. Cheers, Andynomite (talk) 11:00, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Another thing: In
Marengo Order of Battle you've mentioned Peter Morzin as commander of the grenadier division, but according to Kudrna ([1]) he became FML only in 1830. I think you may have confused him with his brother, Ferdinand Morzin, who became FML in 1799 and is more likely to have participated at Marengo. Andynomite (talk
) 11:13, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

The Milhist election has started!

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. You are cordially invited to help pick fourteen new coordinators from a pool of twenty candidates. This time round, the term has increased from six to twelve months so it is doubly important that you have your say! Please cast your vote here no later than 23:59 (UTC) on Tuesday, 28 September 2010.

With many thanks in advance for your participation from the coordinator team,  Roger Davies talk 21:32, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Message

Hello, Djmaschek. You have new messages at ARTEST4ECHO's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Castelnuovo

Thank your for your interest. I've added several citations to the paragraphs lacking of them at their ends. About the grammar, I'll wellcome your help. ElBufon (talk) 16:46, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Battle of Graz