This user may have left Wikipedia. EZ1234 has not edited Wikipedia since 13 June 2018. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.
Hello EZ1234 just a point about your inclusion of flags in airline infoboxes, the project consensus is not to include them, you are welcome to comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airlines. MilborneOne (talk) 15:12, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
An Invite to join Aviation WikiProject
Hi, you are cordially invited to join the
Aviation WikiProject
! We're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to aviation. This includes aircraft, airports, airlines and other topics.
As you have shown an interest in Aeroflot we thought you might like to take an interest in this new WikiProject.
I've remarked your interest in various military history - related articles and I thought you might want to join our project. Please feel free to add your name to this list if you would like to join the
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask one of the project coordinators, or any experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Kirill 08:14, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Flags
Hi, and thanks for all your great contributions. Per
WP:MILMOS#Flags, we do not use flags in the infoboxes of weapons; after all they add nothing at all that the country name does not already give. Best wishes, --John (talk) 19:21, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Flags 2
Thanks for the question I dont think the project actually came to a consensus on infobox flags although the feeling was that they were not necessary in infoboxes. The only concensus was not to include them in destination lists. I will bring it up again at the project but it is not always easy to get a clear consensus. MilborneOne (talk) 12:21, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVI (April 2008)
I noticed that you are working on this, and I'd like to say that the whole list thing is in bad need of rethinking.
For a start it seems to me that while the terms such as campaigns, operations, battles and engagements remain undefined, it is absolutely pointless compiling such lists. If you have a look a the article I'm working through, you will see that I can add hundreds of "engagements" even at operational and strategic level, and these are only named for ground ops. Each one comes with an air op, and many with naval ops...and then I can go down to the thousands of lower-level "engagements". In fact there were thousands of cities fought over on the Eastern Front also, and since people think nothing of adding battalion actions, and even companies...
I had sometime last year proposed a more structured approach which was discussed and abandoned. I had also added a sort of an essay in the MilHist project pages. I have not had anyone comment yet, so please feel free...
I would suggest that there need to be Lists organised as follows (regardless of what the article title calls them)
Grand strategy
List of covert operations during the Second World War (continuous operation (including planning) that lasted more then a year)
List of land campaigns during the Second World War (any continuous combat action (from start of planning) that spans more then two seasons)
List of naval campaigns during the Second World War (any continuous combat action (from start of planning) that spans more then two seasons)
List of air campaigns during the Second World War (any continuous combat action (from start of planning) that spans more then two seasons)
Strategy
List of covert missions during the Second World War (continuous operative deployment for at least six months)
List of land strategic operations during the Second World War (any continuous combat action (from start of planning) that spans more then two months)
List of naval strategic operations during the Second World War (any continuous combat action (from start of planning) that spans more then two months)
List of air strategic operations during the Second World War (any continuous combat action (from start of planning) that spans more then two months)
Operational level
List of covert tasks during the Second World War (continuous operative deployment for as least six weeks)
List of land operations during the Second World War (any continuous combat action (from start of planning) that spans more then two weeks)
List of naval operations during the Second World War (any continuous combat action (from start of planning) that spans more then two weeks)
List of air operations during the Second World War (any continuous combat action (from start of planning) that spans more then two weeks)
Tactical level
List of covert actions during the Second World War (continuous operative deployment for as least six days)
List of land battles during the Second World War (any continuous combat action (from start of planning) that spans more then two days)
List of naval battles during the Second World War (any continuous combat action (from start of planning) that spans more then two days)
List of air battles during the Second World War (any continuous combat action (from start of planning) that spans more then two days)
Minor tactics
List of covert direct actions during the Second World War (continuous operative deployment for as least six hours)
List of land engagements during the Second World War(any continuous combat action (from start of planning) that spans more then nine hours)
List of naval engagements during the Second World War(any continuous combat action (from start of planning) that spans more then nine hours)
List of air engagements during the Second World War (any continuous combat action (from start of planning) that spans more then nine hours)
Note 1: I think that the use of "of" is bad English even if it has been used for centuries. Aside from the confusion with "off", "of" does not convey any meaning such as "in", or "near", of "for", etc. Most combat takes place over a period of time, and that period in this case is limited to the Second World War, i.e. during it, and not "of" it.
Note 2: As an Australian I prefer to use the more logical Second World War as opposed to use of II which is easily mistyped as I, or Two, which is easily phonetically misunderstood as "too", never mind that the first World War was not One given there were at least two, but is followed by second ;o)
I would not have a list of combined ops at all. They may have been combined in planning, but the phases were necessarily restricted to operations in the environment of the troops' Service. Once those glider landed and the LCI beached, the operation was over for the pilots and the seamen, though of course many had to fight in ground roles. Cheers--
Well, I am now trying to sort out the categories to see hat goes where because it proved to be extremely confusing to me when I tried to set up articles in my field of interest.
For a start I work from a sourced definition of what a military engagement is. It comes from a distinguished American military historian
I think there is a need for a naval air arm engagements category because there are numerous naval air arm engagements. EZ1234 (talk) 07:44, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Here is a good source for the USAAF 1941-1945 [1]--
Last time it was brought up the discussion did not come to a conclusion so I have started the conversation again. Not a big fan of flags myself but I am more concerned that all the articles have the same look and feel. We will have to wait and see what happens. MilborneOne (talk) 20:36, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion of changes to Aircraft Infobox
You might want to join in on this
discussion concerning your recent new additions to the infobox. Askari Mark(Talk) 18:11, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Re: Question
I'm sorry, but your question isn't actually clear. Could you please rephrase it? Askari Mark(Talk) 18:51, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies, but I didn't notice that I had two new messages on the 26th. For the purposes of the infobox, the final user's retirement of the aircraft should be used, and I would note the year, with the final user in parentheses, instead of vice versa. For a handy reference, check the Infobox Aircraft template description page. Askari Mark(Talk) 17:05, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
National origin
Please stop removing "National origin" information from the
Sure - what did you have in mind? --Rlandmann (talk) 10:33, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still experimenting; Please don't add those flag icons back - they really contribute nothing and just add visual clutter. I'm also not sure about separating historic and current types; I think the combined lists like the Israeli list are more useful - no switching between lists or having to guess whether a particular type is still in service. --Rlandmann (talk) 07:36, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVIII (June 2008)
It seems to me an air engagement can be either air-to-air or air-to-surface in nature, so for example attacks on enemy shore installations is also an engagement because the anti-aircraft fire would be encountered from aid-fence units--
Hi EZ1234. Very strange! I'm not sure what you're looking at the article in, but there very definitely is colour. The cells describing out-of-service aircraft were a pale grey, and those describing in-service aircraft were a pale lilac.
Tell me if you can see colour now; and if so, what colour? --Rlandmann (talk) 03:52, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Iraqi Air Force
Hi,
You're doing great work on the history of the Iraqi Air Force section. However, don't forget to put in references for all of the new material. Cheers.
Hi there, just wanted to say thanks for signing my guest book. Normally I give people a cookie or a smilie to thank them for it but my computer is kind of messed up right now and sometimes it doesn't let me do that ♥
I award you one for finding Trekphiler's page for people who always think that "new message" bar is real. Aren't you glad you checked your mail? TREKphilerhit me ♠ 08:42, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
WikiChevrons
The
WikiChevrons
Good work on the
ZSU-23-4 article. In recognition of your efforts towards maintaining military history and weaponry articles, please accept these Weaponry Task Force WikiChevrons! --Ŧħę௹ɛя㎥ 18:57, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIX (July 2008)
I've noticed that you have are great at creating infoboxes in SAM articles. Can you help fill in the infobx in 9K35 Strela-10?--EZ1234 (talk) 12:18, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ay mate! But it appears there is something fishy with the user reviewing it; not only he/she started reviewing it relatively fast in comparison to the time the request was made in, but also there is no evident lack of experience as a consequent of the user being so "new" to WP.
Hi! I have completed the GA review of Iraqi Air Force, with the full review being located at Talk:Iraqi Air Force/GA1. I have some serious concerns about the referencing in the article, and have put the article on hold until these concerns have been addressed. If you have any questions, you can ask on the review page or on my talk page. Dana boomer (talk) 18:08, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election
I'll just keep the conversation on my page; just watch my talk page and keep and keep an eye on it in your Watchlist. -talk-the_ed17-contribs- 04:24, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Don't be too intimidated; those are there just to show you what you need to source. If you could find a book on the history of the Iraqi Air Force at your library, most of those fact tags could probably be fixed by that! Cheers, -talk-the_ed17-contribs- 16:24, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As a member of the Aviation WikiProject or one of its subprojects, you may be interested in testing your skills in the Aviation Contest! I created this contest, not to pit editor against editor, but to promote article improvement and project participation and camraderie. Hopefully you will agree with its usefulness. Sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here. The first round of the contest may not start until September 1st-unless a large number of editors signup and are ready to compete immediately! Since this contest is just beginning, please give feedback here, or let me know what you think on my talkpage. - TrevorMacInniscontribs 00:21, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nominations open for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 12 September! Many thanks, Roger Daviestalk 04:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLII (August 2009)
Military history coordinator elections: voting has started!
Voting in the Military history WikiProject coordinator election has now started. The aim is to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on 26 September! For the coordinators, Roger Daviestalk 22:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIII (September 2009)
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 Daviestalk 21:37, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LV (September 2010)
Hi EZ1234! As your MILHIST Military Avation Task Force coordinator, I'd like to conduct a short questionaire to give me an idea of what you would the task force to achieve and the capabilities of yours that might contribute positively to the task force. The four questions of this questionaire are:
What are your strengths on Wikipedia?
Which four military aviation articles would you like to see be promoted to at least GA?
What detailed resources (books, journals, etc) about military aviation do you have access to? Please provide the publications' authors, titles and ISSNs/ISBNs.
Which three military aviation articles are you wiling to provide assistance? This can be expansion, copyediting, reference formatting, etc.
; ~~~
#My strengths
#Articles I'd like to see the task force improve
#:
#:
#:
#:
#Sources which I have
#:
#:
#Articles I'm willing to provide assistance
#:
The Military history WikiProject has started its 2012 project coordinator election process, where we will select a team of coordinators to organize the project over the coming year. If you would like to be considered as a candidate, please submit your nomination by 14 September. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact one of the current coordinators on their talk page. This message was delivered here because you are a member of the Military history WikiProject. – Military history coordinators (about the project • what coordinators do) 08:57, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Kirill[talk] 17:57, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Storyville (TV series), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Anonymous and The House I Live In (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy
describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
"Military history" is one of the most important subjects when speak of sum of all human knowledge. To support contributors interested in the area over various language Wikipedias, we intend to form a user group. It also provides a platform to share the best practices between military historians, and various military related projects on Wikipedias. An initial discussion was has been done between the coordinators and members of WikiProject Military History on English Wikipedia. Now this discussion has been taken to Meta-Wiki. Contributors intrested in the area of military history are requested to share their feedback and give suggestions at Talk:Discussion to incubate a user group for Wikipedia Military Historians.
Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open
Nominations 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. Cheers, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:53, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
G'day everyone, voting for the 2018 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 2018. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:35, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Milhist coordinator election voting has commenced
G'day everyone, voting for the 2018 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 2018. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:22, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
Note: the previous version omitted a link to the election page, therefore you are receiving this follow up message with a link to the election page to correct the previous version. We apologies for any inconvenience that this may have caused.[reply]
Have your say!
Hi everyone, just a quick reminder that voting for the WikiProject Military history coordinator election closes soon. You only have a day or so left to have your say about who should make up the coordination team for the next year. If you have already voted, thanks for participating! If you haven't and would like to, vote here before 23:59 UTC on 28 September. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:29, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy
describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be
deleted for any of several reasons
.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.