User talk:Peacemaker67/Archive 10

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5 ← Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 → Archive 15

Your GA nomination of 1st Army Group (Kingdom of Yugoslavia)

The article 1st Army Group (Kingdom of Yugoslavia) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:1st Army Group (Kingdom of Yugoslavia) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Anotherclown -- Anotherclown (talk) 20:02, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2nd Army Group (Kingdom of Yugoslavia)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2nd Army Group (Kingdom of Yugoslavia) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of AustralianRupert -- AustralianRupert (talk) 06:01, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2nd Army (Kingdom of Yugoslavia)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2nd Army (Kingdom of Yugoslavia) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of AustralianRupert -- AustralianRupert (talk) 06:02, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 July 2014

Your GA nomination of 2nd Army Group (Kingdom of Yugoslavia)

The article 2nd Army Group (Kingdom of Yugoslavia) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2nd Army Group (Kingdom of Yugoslavia) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of AustralianRupert -- AustralianRupert (talk) 09:02, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Battle of Öland FAC

Since you provided helpful comments and/or reviewing in related quality assessments, I'm dropping a notice that battle of Öland is now an FAC. Please feel free to drop by with more input!

sincerely,
Peter Isotalo 05:44, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

April to June 2014 MILHIST reviews

 The WikiChevrons 
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer, Good Article, A-Class and Featured Article reviews for the period April to June 2014, I am delighted to award you the WikiChevrons. During this period you undertook 15 reviews. Your contributions are greatly appreciated. Without reviewers it would be very difficult for our writers to achieve their goals of creating high quality content. Cheers, Anotherclown (talk) 09:54, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Images for WP Military history

I've tagged a few, such as.[1] Inform if they are correct or not. Thanks OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 14:04, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

G'day the class=File bit is fine, but you need to add a task force field to the banner as well, such as Aviation=y or US=y. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 14:10, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the response. It is automatically marked as file so wouldn't need that, but "Aviation=y" or "US=y" seems helpful. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 14:13, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
No worries. If you don't add a tf, it comes up on Category:Military history articles with no associated task force and you end up just making work for someone else. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 14:27, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2nd Army (Kingdom of Yugoslavia)

The article 2nd Army (Kingdom of Yugoslavia) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2nd Army (Kingdom of Yugoslavia) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of AustralianRupert -- AustralianRupert (talk) 20:22, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

10th Battalion

G'day, Peacemaker, I've done a little bit more on 10th Battalion (Australia) today, but please feel free to work on it whenever you are keen. It would be fantastic to see it progress towards FA if you have the time. I've been thinking of retiring from Wikipedia for a while and will probably do so some time after the next co-ord election, but I'd be keen to collaborate with you until I go. I don't have a copy of Kearney any more, unfortunately, but if I can help out in any way, I'll certainly try. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 22:29, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 July 2014

Credo

Hello! You have received preliminary approval for access to Credo. Please fill out this short form so that your access can be processed. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:50, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

You may be interested in this

http://hrcak.srce.hr/index.php?show=clanak&id_clanak_jezik=29739

A paper on the "The Bjelovar uprising of 7–10 April 1941". Maybe you've already seen it. I assume, since you are using Terzic, that you can get by with a Serbo-Croatian source. Srnec (talk) 20:27, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks. Perfect for 4th Army. Yes, I'm ok using latin script, on military matters at least, but not so good with the cyrillic. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 23:55, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 July 2014

Assistance with vandalism please on German military history data entry

I have been updating data and improving the overall content of Military production during World War II since June, with a particular focus on including more data about Germany, the Axis, historic context, German technical achievements and other information related to the German experience of the war. Today, Bender235 deleted over 3 months and 300 hours of my work and that of others, 40,000 characters of edits, and hundreds of constructive additions to the page. I am in the midst of uploading an enormous amount of PRIMARY SOURCE DATA and he deleted everything done so far as "wikipedia can not be a source for itself". I am enraged. There was not one comment, warning, question, request, or suggestion from this "editor". Can you please help me reverse all the deletions and keep this guy off the page. There are ongoing constructive edits from several other individuals watching this site. I was worried this would happen as soon as I started to upload data about Germany. Please help resolve this. These actions were not constructive and have reduced the quality of the material to a shadow of its last version before his vandalism. --Brukner (talk) 19:26, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Sorry mate, I can't help you. This is blatant canvassing. You need to use dispute resolution if you are in a content dispute. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 00:04, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue C, July 2014

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 03:47, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you

For wrapping up the GA review. Darkness Shines (talk) 07:53, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

No prob. Happy to help. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 10:01, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject military

Why some of the pages still include mention of WikiProject military on header?[2] I am pretty active these days, would you like me to recheck all stubs and start class articles? Many of them have been expanded for better status, I can probably update the classes. Thanks. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 17:11, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

I have no idea, I have never seen that at the top of an article page before. It is actually referring to WikiProject Biography, not WikiProject Military History. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 04:13, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 July 2014

Disambiguation link notification for July 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Operation Rösselsprung (1944), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Captain. 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) 08:57, 27 July 2014 (UTC)


How come the attempted assassination of Steidle in June 1933 is not mentioned?

This is a hugely significant event as one of the assassins was the 21 year old Baron Werner von Alvensleben, son of the Schleicher associate Werner von Alvensleben senior.

Von Alvensleben was exchanged by the Nazis in Germany in 1934 for Richard Kaaserer (later Oberfuehrer RuSHA). Alvensleben moved to the RSHA in 1939 and worked under Theodor Dannecker who sent him to Mozambique to examine the logistics for the proposed Madagascar Plan. When this fell through in late 1940, he remained in East Africa and provided information on Allied shipping passing through the straits as well as on information pertaining to British activities in Southern Africa. While nominally working for the Auslandsamt, Alvensleben reported all information back to the RSHA rather than to the Abwehr. Even as late as 1945, Alvensleben reported directly to Adolf Eichmann !

Alvenslben was a cousin of Ludolf Jakob von Alvensleben, first and final SSPF for Adria West. Kaaserer was SSPF in Yugoslavia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.103.204.29 (talk) 23:15, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

NPOV in Bleiburg repatriations talk page.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

While I wholeheartedly agree that what I wrote wasn't in any way neutral - neither were any of the other contributions. That's because it was a TALK PAGE, not the main article (where something like this obviously doesn't belong). I guess based on your IFOR background, you have an anti-Serb bias. That's fine, but it doesn't make an opinion that killing Nazi collaborators is not a crime invalid, even if you disagree with it. IDiO (talk) 23:58, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Don't make guesses about bias. From what I saw, there were virtually no good guys there, just victims. You might like to WP:AGF. BTW, killing anyone without due process was (and is) a crime under international humanitarian law. Partisans, Chetniks, Ustase, Germans, Italians, Bulgarians, Hungarians etc etc, all killed people without due process in Yugoslavia during WWII, and they were all crimes, whether you think they were justified or not is immaterial. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 00:56, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
It's incredibly idealistic and frankly unrealistic to expect any side in a total war to play by the rules of modern warfare. Only if reprisals were excessively brutal, murdering innocent civilians without any strategic goal would I consider actions of anti-fascist forces to be criminal in that particular instance. Overall, however, the currently "fashionable" theory about massive crimes of the Eastern allies against their fascist opponents is incredibly misguided. The MILLIONS of CIVILIANS murdered by fascists in USSR, SFRY, PPR, and CSR would easily justify almost any amount/type of reprisals. What little revenge that was had by the victorious forces in the east cannot be classified as "criminal" by any honest, thinking person. That's crazy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IDiO (talk • contribs) 02:51, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
I'm really not interested. The article needs to be NPOV, like every other article on WP. If you want to edit the article, please keep that in mind. If you're not going to edit the article, I fail to see what the purpose of this discussion is, other than you giving your opinion about my views. Opinions are like arseholes. Good luck. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 03:05, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The Signpost: 30 July 2014

Comment from unknown editor

Peacemaker, Omitting any discussion with regards to the paragraphs in your qasi-profile page where you disparage a lot people - I surmise you have had some passionate back-and-forth with people that disagree with your editing/reediting. I'm trying to respectfully understand your issue with my edit - it's not synthesis air opinion it's fact "pan-european" (Webster's identify pan-european as "of, relating to, or involving all or most of the nations of Europe". This edit takes the SS an echelon beyond "multi ethnic, multi-national" description. Additionally were response to me that they were not elite at the the time is incorrect. No timeline is or was given - meaning ambiguous, when I attempted to define the stage of WWII that it became pan-european - you slide your same default answer to me. My experience with this subject is not derived from history books and Tv shows. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sveltica (talk • contribs) 13:26, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Listen chief. I don't give a rat's arse what you "think". As I have pointed out to many editors before you, opinions are like arseholes. You either have a reliable source for your edit or you don't. If you don't, piss off until you do. If you do, cite it. That is how we roll on en WP. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 14:16, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

WP:JSTOR access

Hello, WP:The Wikipedia Library has record of you being approved for access to JSTOR through the TWL partnership described at WP:JSTOR . You should have recieved a Wikipedia email User:The Interior or User:Ocaasi sent several weeks ago with instructions for access, including a link to a form collecting information relevant to that access. Please find that email, and follow those instructions. If you were not approved, did not recieve the email, or are having some other concern or question, please respond to this message at Wikipedia talk:JSTOR/Approved. Thanks much, Sadads (talk) 21:19, 5 August 2014 (UTC) Note: You are recieving this message from an semi-automatically generated list. If you think you were incorrectly contacted, make sure to note that at Wikipedia talk:JSTOR/Approved.

WP:OUP access

Hello, WP:The Wikipedia Library has record of you being approved for access to Oxford University Press's humanities materials through the TWL partnership described at WP:OUP . You should have recieved a Wikipedia email from User:Nikkimaria several weeks ago with instructions for access, including a link to a form collecting information relevant to that access. Please find that email, and follow those instructions. If you were not approved, did not recieve the email, or are having some other concern or question, please respond to this message at Wikipedia talk:OUP/Approved. Thanks much, Sadads (talk) 22:12, 5 August 2014 (UTC) Note: You are receiving this message from an semi-automatically generated list. If you think you were incorrectly contacted, make sure to note that at Wikipedia talk:OUP/Approved.

WP:Keesings

Hey Peacemaker67, you received access instructions via email about a month ago for access to Kessing's please make sure to complete the form. Sadads (talk) 19:02, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Balli Kombëtar

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hello from Greece, i am no new on English wikipedia, but only little things i have write here. Excuse me, but there is none citation that you have reverted my contribution.

Don't you know that 2000 men cannot fight 30.000 and this is a common exaggeration? Don't you know that Balli Kombëtar was a NAZI Collaboration group that had made a nazi puppet Goverment? Why you had reverted all my contribution? I seek only to write the truth and nothing more.

Istoria1944 (talk) 10:32, 8 August 2014 (UTC)


Ali Këlcyra

His name is remembered in particular in connection with the so-called Dalmazzo-Këlcyra Agreement of 5 March 1943 that foresaw a ceasefire between Balli Kombëtar and Italian forces in Albania. In mid-October 1944

What he did during early 1944? Wikipedia should say or not?

Quisling we say in Europe the puppet governments that was allies with Germans. But i am sure that you know it.Istoria1944 (talk) 10:57, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Mate, I'm from Australia, and I know something of the Ballists. These articles are constantly edited/vandalised by trolls, and many NPOV editors simply revert poorly worded and unsourced additions on sight for that reason. Provide reliable, published sources for your edits on en WP. If you do, there will be no issue unless you fail to maintain WP:NPOV. Fail to do so, and other editors will be likely to revert you. It's simple. Good luck and enjoy editing. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 00:57, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

10th Battalion

G'day, Peacemaker, I've managed to locate Silent Voices in the local library - which was a shock, because I now live in a small country town in Victoria. Anyway, I've nominated the article for GA. I know you were thinking about trying to get it to FA by Anzac Day next year, so if you are keen, please feel free to participate in the review. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 06:51, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 August 2014

Eleventh Air Force

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Since Eleventh Air Force redirects to Eleventh Air Force (United States) why the need for disambiguation? Getting ready to start an article ? Cheers. Lineagegeek (talk) 23:27, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

No, we pre-emptively disambiguate military units by country per WP:MILMOS#UNITNAME. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 00:12, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
A convention that is universally ignored for USAF units. There have been previous discussions on that on the MILHIST talk page. --Lineagegeek (talk) 22:31, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
I was unaware of that. My view is I can't see any reason whatsoever why USAF units should be exempt from the policy, but if that is the consensus, perhaps we should add that exemption to MILMOS? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 00:11, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Lineagegeek - can you pls provide a link to the relevant discussion? I'm not aware of this either and I don't see any obvious reason why we would treat them any differently. Anotherclown (talk) 11:06, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
IIRC, it's in an archived MILHIST Talk page, and my limited computer skills won't let me locate it without devoting all my Wiki time to the effort. My recollection of the discussion was that it was decided to let this exist as a legend. Even if omitting the (United States) from the page is US-centric, establishing a special rule for US units would be even more US-centric. I think inertia was a factor as well. I would estimate that between 5000 and 10,000 pages would have to be moved for the USAF alone. In addition to the page you moved, I'm only aware of a couple of USAF unit articles (air divisions) that include (United States). A quick peek at "field artillery battalion" indicates that the US army is a mixed bag of articles with and without the designator. US Navy articles generally avoid the issue by titles like VMF-nnn or USS Foo. If the discussion is as hidden in archives as I suspect, perhaps it's time to reopen the subject. My sense is that there is little need for the disambiguation because most non-English speaking country's aviation units tend to have names like Lufttransportgeschwader n or Escadrille de Chasse n even on the English Wikipedia. Commonwealth units tend to be in the form No. n (Fighter) Squadron, rather than nth Fighter Squadron. I can think of an exception for Canadian units for specific cases, since I believe they now use the form of n Fighter Squadron (although I think their squadrons are all numbered in the 400s because of their past as RAF units), which could be confused with nth Fighter Squadron. --Lineagegeek (talk) 22:37, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
I'm copying this to the MILHIST talk thread so we can have the discussion in front of the whole community. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 22:45, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Disambiguation link notification for August 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 10th Battalion (Australia), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Meritorious Service Medal. 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) 09:30, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 1st Army (Kingdom of Yugoslavia)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 1st Army (Kingdom of Yugoslavia) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:21, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CI, August 2014

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:23, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 August 2014

Changes Simovic, Dusan

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hello Peacemaker67,

I saw that you turned back my changes to the article on Dusan Simovic: I made these changes "witness in the trial against Draza Mihailovic.[1]"

Do you think we could still maybe add the fact that Simovic was apparently a witness at the trial? Or do you think the source is not POV?

Regards,

Be1981 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Be1981 (talk • contribs) 10:06, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure we should be using the trial documents, they are Communist POV, of course. He also wasn't questioned about Simovic's statement, I can't see anywhere it was even raised except in the summing up. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 12:33, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ THE TRIAL OF DRAGOLJUB-DRAZA MIHAILOVIC - STENOGRAPHIC RECORD AND DOCUMENTS(Belgrade), 1946, p. 487
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Your GA nomination of 1st Army (Kingdom of Yugoslavia)

The article 1st Army (Kingdom of Yugoslavia) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:1st Army (Kingdom of Yugoslavia) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 13:02, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Battle of Turjak Castle

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Dear Peacemaker67,

I would like to discuss with you about this battle, also I wanted to mention that my view is totally equilibrate, I'm just telling the facts, and if you have the time I can send you more fundaments (books articles) mainly written outside Slovenia/Yugoslavia. Remember that the country was a state with limited freedom until 1991, and for this reason, many of the local books were written by people without a neutral point of view. I propose you to keep the changes I made and work with you to show you more fundaments about my point of view.

Best Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trueandpeace (talk • contribs) 03:45, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

I appreciate that English may not your first language, but it is critical for successful editing that you are clear about what is and is not appropriate on WP. Adding links to material on YouTube is (usually) a blatant copyright violation, and WP is very strict about copyright. It is very important that you do not add that link again, unless you can positively show that the material at that link is free from copyright. I am sure you believe the material you are adding is correct, but that is not the issue here. What you need is verifiable material cited using reliable published sources, which rarely includes blogs (except blogs by academics), and few websites except reputable news ones. I understand the issues with censorship etc in the former Yugoslavia, but many of the pre-1991 sources are still usable, they just need to be identified as "Partisan" etc to flag possible bias. There are plenty of reliable sources that mention the battle. When you have scholarly sources for your edits, you should re-introduce them into the article then. Attempts to force them into the article then discuss them will be reported to admins for action, which could include blocking you from editing WP. I encourage you to thoroughly read the basic policies, and find the academic sources needed. Continuing to edit war over this material will definitely result in a request to admins to block you from editing. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 03:59, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments, I will highly appriciate if we can negotiate the changes on this page, before we do that I will show you the sources and I believe you will accept those changes. Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trueandpeace (talk • contribs) 13:31, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Always happy to discuss once the sources are produced. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 13:34, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

33rd Alabama -- Thank you

Peacemaker, I know some folks don't care much for barnstars, so I hope you don't mind me sending you this one. You put a lot of time and thought into the 33rd Alabama Infantry article, and I just wanted to say "thanks" in some small way. As I said on the peer review page, I'm neck-deep in a book project at present, but I will be working on the things you suggested over the next several months, and I appreciate your interest and the suggestions you made. Best wishes, and cheers! - Ecjmartin (talk) 01:18, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

The American Civil War Barnstar
A special thanks to you for your recent contributions to 33rd Alabama Infantry and its associated peer review. I know it was long and detailed, so I just wanted to say I appreciated your time, interest and feedback. Thanks! Ecjmartin (talk) 01:18, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! It was a pleasure. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 01:26, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Battle of Orašje GAR

Hi! Thank you for taking time to review the Battle of Orašje nom. I found the remarks regarding the background section especially useful, and applied the same changes to a number of other articles. Cheers--Tomobe03 (talk) 13:13, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

My pleasure, great article. Look forward to seeing it at ACR. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 13:14, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 August 2014

Talk:Michael E B Banks

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hello Peacemaker67. I noticed your MfD of this talk page. As an alternative, you might consider withdrawing your MfD and replacing Talk:Michael E B Banks with a redirect to Talk:Mike Banks (mountaineer). It's unlikely that anyone would object, since there is no important content on either talk page. You could add any necessary project banners to the target page. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 00:33, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

First Battle of Picardy

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Didn't this get a B Class a couple of weeks ago? Could the assessment have been lost in the move?Keith-264 (talk) 07:57, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

I don't think it had a checklist. I'll have a look. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 08:04, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
No, it wasn't assessed properly if it was, because while the checklist was there, it hadn't been completed. I'll assess it now. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 08:06, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
I wrote "I finished off La Bassee and started moving the overwritten stuff from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_to_the_Sea and managed to get a new page "1st Picardy" completely buggered up, trying to change a redirect and it got a B class by mistake." on 7 August so it was marked as a B by the person who disentangled the move.Keith-264 (talk) 08:09, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
I had a look for the assessment request archive to check but couldn't find it.Keith-264 (talk) 08:11, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

German Cross

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Regarding your recent changes to my edits. According to the statute on the German Cross, Article 3,3 it required prior award of the Iron Cross 1st class. Thus that category is redundant. ÄDA - DÄP VA (talk) 10:26, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Could you provide a link to that? Peacemaker67 (send... over) 10:28, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Sure [3] ÄDA - DÄP VA (talk) 11:52, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Ok, so the War Merit Cross 1st Class with swords was also a possible prerequisite for the award of the German Cross, if I'm reading it right? Peacemaker67 (send... over) 13:09, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
In the silver version, yes. Otherwise one would be recommended for the Iron Cross. Whereas someone with an Iron Cross could be recommended for both versions. ÄDA - DÄP VA (talk) 14:28, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
So, you would also be removing a redundant category for anyone with the German Cross if they also had the War Merit Cross 1st Class with swords? Am I understanding this right? Peacemaker67 (send... over) 01:11, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
No, as the Silver German Cross is a meritorious award, which requires KVK I or EK I, whereas the golden version is awarded for bravery and requires an EK I. Thus, it is not clear whether a recipient of the silver version had received an Iron Cross or "only" a War Merit Cross. It is my understanding, BTW, that the categories are not supposed to be filled with any recipient but only with those who have not received any higher awards. But I am not sure that this principle can be sustained in the face of enthusiastic categorization. ÄDA - DÄP VA (talk) 08:14, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

For my better understanding of article 3 of the RGBL which states that the road to GCiS or GCiG can be

  • EK 1 (1939) -> GCiG or GCiS
  • Clasp to EK 1 -> GCiG or GCiS
  • War Merit Cross 1st Class with Swords -> GCiG or GCiS

Is there another RGBL or an addendum to the RGBL which states that the GCiG must be preceded by the EK 1 only? MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:50, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Your version was how I read it, MB. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 09:39, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
I see the point. The text is not very straightforward, but quite clear when you think of it. If Fritz shows excellent leadership or extraordinary bravery, he will receive an Iron Cross. As the GCiG is for repeated acts of bravery or excellent leadership, the War Merit Cross does not matter. However, if Fritz has the EK1 or the clasp, but ends up in a position where he can't show bravery or leadership, but does other useful things, he can still get a German Cross in Silver although he can't get a WMC . ÄDA - DÄP VA (talk) 14:00, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Have we come to an agreement then? ÄDA - DÄP VA (talk) 17:05, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
It is still not clear to me, I must be missing something in the German grammar. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 22:34, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • EK 1 (1939) -> GCiG or GCiS
  • Clasp to EK 1 -> GCiG or GCiS
  • War Merit Cross 1st Class with Swords -> EK2 -> EK1 -> GCiG (or GCiS)
  • War Merit Cross 1st Class with Swords -> GCiS
There is no virtually no difference between the EK1 (1939) and the clasp, only that those who already had a cross wouldn't get an other one. However, because of Art. 4 of the War Merit Cross statute, they could not be awarded a WMC with or without swords. As the GC stands for 6-10 deeds meriting an EK or a WMC, Art.3.3 is actually opening the GCiS for the recipients of the EK1 rather than the other way round, as anyone who had been awarded a WMwS1stC would be awarded a EK2 at first occasion and a EK1 the second time round and only then they would start counting for a GCiG. Hope that clears up things a bit. ÄDA - DÄP VA (talk) 16:44, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification. I believe you are going to struggle to maintain this categorisation tree in the face of many editors (like me) who don't understand the intricacies of the statutes. Perhaps the best way to try to strengthen your approach would be to place explanatory text at the top of the category pages. Good luck with it. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 23:46, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the tip, will do that. It comes down to basic maintenance, I'd guess. ÄDA - DÄP VA (talk) 10:19, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

SS Handschar and the Jews

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

You just can't write that SS Handschar commited crimes on Jews without footnote on that specific statement. You can't just say "well, you have sources there down", and there are like dozens of books named there. I would like to see a specifically book and number of page where it can be read that SS Handschar commited some crime on Jews. You obviously are not historian and please give a job to someone who understand this type of stuff. Thank you.

The appropriate place for this discussion is on the article talk page. Please take it up there, so that all interested editors can be involved. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 22:33, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

You've got mail!

Hello, Peacemaker67. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 03:35, 26 August 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Nikkimaria (talk) 03:35, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Death on the Rock/archive2

G'day mate. I never got round to fully addressing your comments during the first FAC for Death on the Rock, but now I have a little more time on my hands I've made a few edits and renominated it. Any chance you could take another look? Thanks, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:54, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

10th Battalion

G'day, I am thinking of nominating this for an A-class review in the next couple of days (depending on how much time I get to edit this week). Would you like to be listed as a co-nom? Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 11:23, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Rupert, I don't think I've made enough of a contribution. All yours. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 23:43, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
Ok, no worries. Thanks for all you've done on it so far. I will see how I get on. Work is very busy now due to a couple of secondments, so I may have to leave it for a while. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 20:00, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 August 2014

Sutjeska

First, Vojska itself is not the source, instead, they are quoting the German military's field report. And the breakdown of german casualties coressponds to the overall number of the report itself (proving its accuracy). Second, please provide some evidence that the source is not reliable. Just saying its not reliable isn't really a reason. EkoGraf (talk) 21:47, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Vojska is basically a gaming site, not "a reliable, third-party, published source with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy". Of the many pages on Yugoslav/NDH/German etc orders of battle, only a very small percentage even contain information about where the information on that page is drawn from. There is no footnoting. The author does not claim any academic qualifications (so far as I am aware). They are the reasons why it does not meet WP:RS. In that respect it is no different to axishistory and other similar websites, which really fall into the "fanboi" category. If you have access to the German primary source, use it, perhaps with in-line attribution so it is clear they are German figures. There are huge differences between Yugoslav and German casualty figures for many operations. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 00:52, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Peacemaker67, you are invited!

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

RE:POV Tag on Draza Mihailovic article

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

 Done

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Re : Recent edits to Croatian Spring and Croatian Defence Forces

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I don't agree with you about my personal points of view and editing.Anyways, my mistake was that I didn't put sources for every line.I fixed that,so you don't need to be upset.Missunderstand was also reason of minor edit/regular edit.I will keep that in mind.Thanks. Knightserbia 07:56 10 May 2013 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Thanks

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Thanks for the congrats. You did an impress job yourself. I just wish I could have improved some articles like you did. (Unfortunately, I'm having trouble finding sources.) Wild Wolf (talk)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Important Notice: Your 2013 Arbitration Committee Election vote

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Greetings. Because you have already cast a vote for the 2013 Arbitration Committee Elections, I regret to inform you that due to a misconfiguration of the SecurePoll we've been forced to strike all votes and reset voting. This notice is to inform you that you will need to vote again if you want to be counted in the poll. The new poll is located at this link. You do not have to perform any additional actions other than voting again. If you have any questions, please direct them at the election commissioners. --For the Election Commissioners, v/r, TParis

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Merry Christmas

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


◅ PRODUCER (TALK) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

September 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Franjo Šimić may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • Order of the Iron Trefoil]] III Class in late 1942 for his role in the defence of [[Kupres]] and [[BugojnoHe was allegedly assassinated in Mostar in 1944 under unknown circumstances.<ref>[http://www.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:27, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Question

G'day mate. I noticed that you, among others, have cool text like "send ... over" instead of "Peacemaker67 (talk)" and I was wondering how it is you do that? Cheers. Jonas Vinther (talk) 13:49, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

G'day. All you have to do is go to your Preferences, go to Signature, use something like: Peacemaker67 (send... over)" (which is my markup), and tick the "Treat the above as wiki markup" box. And it's done. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 13:53, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
OK, cheers mate. Jonas Vinther (talk) 14:11, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
And no worries - I wont use your markup. :) Jonas Vinther (talk) 14:11, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 September 2014

Alexander Löhr

Hi, although I wanted to retire from Wiki, at least that was my plan a few weeks ago, I still find too many open ends I want to get my hand on. I recently bought two books on Alexander Löhr. Since his doings fall into what I believe to be your area of expertise (Balkans) I was hoping that you might want to assist? Thanks MisterBee1966 (talk) 18:03, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

What a great idea. He is such an interesting character, an Orthodox/Austrian/Russian. I'm in! Peacemaker67 (send... over) 03:12, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
Let's see what we can achieve here. I made a first start, see "Early life". Happy editing MisterBee1966 (talk) 12:53, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Dekoracija


 Yugoslavia Order of Merit
To recognize his outstanding contributions on the subject of Yugoslav military history, this user is hereby awarded a long-overdue Yugoslav Order of Merit Barnstar. Just finished reading Operation Rösselsprung - its something indeed. -- Director (talk) 10:48, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Was thinking of adding this to the article, but noticed everything was well in hand.. -- Director (talk) 11:09, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

That gave me a laugh! Cheers! Peacemaker67 (send... over) 03:09, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
No problem [4]. -- Director (talk) 04:26, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

If I may, Peacemaker, I've been meaning to ask a personal question? How did you find Yugoslavia during your deployment? I gather you were in fact stationed near my hometown for a time? I remember watching IFOR columns as a kid and did in fact visit Divulje base during the time.. I don't imagine staying in old JNA barracks could have been particularly comfortable. -- Director (talk) 10:54, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

I did spend a couple of months based at Divulje, Sep to early Nov 95, but spent a lot of each week driving around Bosnia. Divulje was actually comfortable in comparison to pretty much anywhere in Bosnia. We moved up into Bosnia in Nov and stayed there until Apr 96, with bases right across central and northwestern Bosnia, Tomislavgrad, Vitez, Gornji Vakuf, Mrkonjic Grad, Bihac, Kupres, Glamoc, Gornji Ribnik, Sipovo, Banja Luka, Kljuc etc, even Kiseljak for a short time. The western areas of Bosnia had been fought over by the HV, HVO, ARBiH and VRS pretty recently and was largely destroyed. Plenty of bodies, dead animals, mines and burned out houses and armoured vehicles. The winter was bitter, especially in the Glamoc valley. When I think about it now, I think of it as a beautiful country, in a visceral sort of way. The Dalmatian coast was absolutely stunning, as were the islands off the coast. I enjoyed going to Trogir for a pizza and a German beer on the rare occasion I got the chance. I haven't been back, I'm sure I will one day. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 12:40, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
That's what happens when you institutionalize divisions, base a sense of unity on flimsy ideological foundations, and then train and arm the entire populace. Now with Syria, Ukraine, Libya, Iraq, all descending into civil war of the same sort, one can't but feel a sense of solidarity with people from those countries.
Bosnia (once the setting for the winter Olympics..) has yet to recover really. That's the impression anyway. When you're trying to rule out this or that "more exotic" pathogen, you still ask the fella if he's been to Bosnia lately. As depressing as the Croatian economy might be, Bosnia is worse.
My advice would be to book really early in the season, if you do take the trip. For me at least, this is the last place I want to be when the summer heat sets in. Hvar, Bol, Dubrovnik.. really nice places. Not Trogir though; being a hated old rival of Split, it is of course a terrible destination :). Split and Trogir actually fought several really nasty little wars in the 1240s, after enduring Mongol sieges. They were remarkably successful at weakening each-other sufficiently for foreign rule to really set in. -- Director (talk) 14:37, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

A-class review

Hey, I just have a question about the process. If folks come by and give feedback but never come back after it's fixed - what do I do about getting the 3 supports?--v/r - TP 22:40, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

It depends on whether they intended to do a full review, or just make a comment. If it looks like they were doing a full review, you could ping them on the review page, or leave a query on their talk page. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 01:48, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 September 2014

Mediterranean and Middle East theatre of World War II - request for citations

Gday again. Over the last few days I have been trying to add citations to the Mediterranean and Middle East theatre of World War II. Unfortunately I have a fairly limited library on this topic. There is a paragraph in the article that I think is in your area of interest that you would probably be able to cite and / or reword for accuracy if req'd. The para is in the section "Axis forces gain the upper hand" and begins: "In April 1941, Germans, Italians, Hungarians and Bulgarians made quick work of the Royal Yugoslav army..." Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance. Anotherclown (talk) 04:51, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 September 2014

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Peacemaker67/Archive_10&oldid=1143221073"