User talk:Mesoso

Welcome!

Hello, Mesoso, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! - Mailer Diablo 16:20, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Argentine National Gendarmerie[edit]

Can you please tell me why you have chosen to revert almost all my edits to this article. If there are better translations of the rank titles then please add them, but it is far more useful to have the actual ranks than some faux English version. If the Spanish ranks are incorrect then I apologise, but they were taken directly from the main rank insignia website. Again, if they're wrong then change them, don't just revert the whole lot. Also note that it is usual to capitalise an abbreviated form of a proper name when referring to it in that form (e.g. it should be Gendarmerie throughout, not gendarmerie). You have also delinked links which I linked. Groupment is a term used in English for a unit, while grouping is not. If one is going to translate terms (and I would actually rather not - information is more useful in its original form) then it is more useful to use actual English terms than bizarre literal translations which make no sense in English. The Spanish name of the organisation should take precedence in the first paragraph, since that is its real name. Our policy is to use English for the title, if there is a common English name, not throughout the article. If there are mistakes then address them, but don't just revert unless there has been vandalism. This is really not good manners. -- Necrothesp 21:13, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the talk page. You are mistaking policies dealing with titles with policies dealing with articles as a whole. Nowhere does it say that English either takes precedence within articles on foreign organisations or should be used exclusively. You are also mass reverting because you disagree with a few things. This is what is bad manners. Change individual things if you must (although I may change them back again), but please do not change things such as spellings back to blatantly incorrect versions. -- Necrothesp 18:35, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Updates to User_talk:Atomaton#.5B.5BArgentine_National_Gendarmerie.5D.5D have been made. Updates to User_talk:Atomaton#.5B.5BArgentine_National_Gendarmerie.5D.5D have been made. Updates to User_talk:Atomaton#.5B.5BArgentine_National_Gendarmerie.5D.5D have been made.

Multiple users[edit]

Please, take a look at the multiple account policy. I suggest you to use only one user in the wikipedia. Take care, Mariano(t/c) 13:53, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Page Deletion[edit]

Why did you delete that entire page Mesoso? JFBurton 19:46, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:JFBurton#deletion

References on Corvette Captain[edit]

Yes, it is a short article, but references sure can't hurt.(WP:CITE) I guess it just seemed a little suspicious to me, as I thought all the major ranks would have articles by now, and here someone claims this is another rank but with no references. Anyways, I guess I was wrong, and this seems perfectly legit. Still, it would be good if you could reference somehow, but if you can't find any good informative sites, that's ok, feel free to take the notice down. It seems to be well linked and verified by other wikipedia articles. Danski14 01:15, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, keep up the good work!Danski14 01:16, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

British and United States military ranks compared[edit]

Hi I have reverted this page back to the edit before your changes it (concerning enlisted comparrsions), but also put in some references that can be seen in existing wikipedia articles and outside of wikipeduia. If you have issues please respond on the article's discussion page. Dainamo 13:30, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. The primary evidence for the rank comparrison is the Cross referencing of existing Wikipedia various articles on military units. You will see in each case of fireteam, squad, platoon that they are comparble units between US and UK forces but the ranks given the respondibility to lead them are different. I also enlcose an HTML link to forces chat actually telling us the repsonsibilities givein to individuals among other things. Dainamo 12:25, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aircraftman[edit]

Please note that the Oxford English Dictionary only lists Aircraftman as an RAF rank, not as a generic term. Please provide reliable evidence that it is used as a generic term. You say "in common usage "airman" has implications of actual aircrew". Not in Britain, where an "airman" is specifically a non-commissioned member of the RAF (as opposed to a commissioned officer) and generically any member of the RAF. I have only ever seen Aircraftman used as a rank and the OED appears to back this up. -- Necrothesp 18:20, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

US Marshals Service[edit]

I'm not going to revert your edit regarding the use of the apostrophe in this article. However, I think you are incorrect in your statement that US Marshals Service should correctly be US Marshal's Service. The latter would only be correct if it was a service belonging to the US Marshals. For example, "The Queen's Service" is correct, because it is describing a service for the Queen. The US Marshals Service in comparison is a service of US Marshals, not belonging to the US Marshals and as such the possessive form is not correct. I've checked this in a couple of on-line references and it is fairly clear to me. Anyway, not worth getting upset about! QuiteUnusual 11:37, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of British and United States military ranks compared[edit]

An article that you have been involved in editing, British and United States military ranks compared, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/British and United States military ranks compared. Thank you. Caerwine Caer’s whines 22:07, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, 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. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:08, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]