User talk:Grant65/Archive Feb07-Mar07

War combatants

Hello Grant65.

Can I ask why you're changing the units involved in several WWII conflicts to 'Allies' and 'Axis' instead of the units actually involved? There was a discussion about this sometime ago on WP:MILHIST and an agreement was made to use specific units if it was less ambiguous. IMO, the conflicts you are altering do not need a catch-all as only specific formations were involved, not the entire Allied or Axis side.

Please refer to the template for details, specifically: "This is most commonly the countries whose forces took part in the conflict; however, larger groups (such as alliances or international organizations) or smaller ones (such as particular units, formations, or groups) may be indicated if doing so improves reader understanding." (emphasis mine)

At the very least, I ask that you bring the discussion to the WP:MILHIST board before taking such action. Oberiko 17:47, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I definitely agree with you on the inaccuracy of the First Battle of El Alamein. Interestingly, that's pretty much the reason why it was decided to use units in the combatants; to many battles in WWII had multiple (over five) nations participating on one side of the battle, and some with only a few units at the brigade level. Oberiko 14:00, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Java

Good to see your refs in - I could never get over the fact that the Yogyakarta to Srandakan (i think it was in Bantul) was lifted and transported to Manchuria - lines, rolling stock the lot! Satu Suro 09:09, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

japanese casualties by campaign

On the ww2 casualties page I listed official Japanese government information from John Dower's War Without Mercy p. 297 on casualties by theatre of war. This ties ties out to information given to MacArthur's office by the Japanese in 1947( 1.688 million military war dead). In any case in a conversation I had with the author Ted Cook in 1998 I was told that in 1956 the Americans turned over to the Japanese the official military records from the war. They are kept under lock and key and mouaccess is controled by the Japanese authorities who want to supress information on war crimes. Anybody with an axe to grind against Japan is shown the door--Woogie10w 11:49, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just got into work, when I get home tonight( after Tae-Kwan do) I will give you the breakout of the statistic from 1947 by year.--Woogie10w 12:48, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Data from Annual Changes in Population of Japan Proper-July 1948(Prepared by GHQ Tokyo 1948) Deaths-1935/36-12,400; 1936-37/38,226; 1937/38-38,127; 1938/39-40,319; 1939/40-30,195; 1940/41-28,023; 1941/42-78,003; 1942/43-135,083; 1943/44-222,790; 1944/45-1,064,572. Total 1,687,738. This data was provided by Japanese on 11 July 1947. The heavy losses in 1944-45 were due to lack of food and medicine for troops because LOC were cut by US inderdicition campaign. A Korean doctor who served with the Japanese told me in a personel conversation that he had no medicine to treat tropical diseases and the men were dying of starvation. He insisted that the Allied POWs had the same rations as ordinary Japanese. --Woogie10w 15:02, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I met the Korean doctor at a party about 30 yrs ago, he became very angry when I mentioned the mistreatment of Allied POWs. This guy had a strong pro Japanese POV, he lived in Japan--Woogie10w 17:15, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar, WWII

Hey, I notice you reverted my edit on WWII. I had changed "breakthrough" to "break through" and your summary said: (rv to last by Wallie ["breakthrough" is a word])

Well listen, I know it's a word. I changed it because it was the wrong word. The sentence was:

"Worse still, the British and Canadians who had been bogged down in their sector now began to breakthrough the German lines."

Breakthrough, one word, is a noun. It's like saying, "The British began to shoe, and planet and carriage." They're all words. It doesn't mean they're the right words.

"Break through", two words, is a phrase. You break through a spot of writer's block. You don't breakthrough it, although breaking through it might seem like a breakthrough. I don't want to start an edit war, but before you revert grammar edits, please check Google or a dictionary or something, just to make sure.

Ylem 08:18, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reference for Mediterranean-type climate in Puget Sound region

I noticed your many changes about climate in the Puget Sound area and on climate pages, and you asking for a reference on the topic. Here's a scholarly one: Kruckeberg, Arthur R. The Natural History of Puget Sound Country, University of Washington Press, 1991. From page 59: ... our modified Mediterranean-type climate -- wet autumns and winters but nearly dry summers -- can have major departures from the normal... The passage is about local variations and the occassional very hot or very cold spell. By "our" he means "Puget Sound country" which he defines as the watersheds of streams that flow into Puget Sound, the Strait of Juan de Fuca and the Strait of Georgia, thus Seattle, Victoria, and even Vancouver.

Personally I find terms like "marine west coast climate" better than "modified Mediterranean", which has implications of places like Italy. Then again, the summers in the Puget Sound region are quite remarkable, with drought conditions normal, giving the land a "mediterranean" look, even if the temperatures are cooler.

But anyway, you asked for a source -- I think this one is a reliable one. Pfly 08:59, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that is a good idea, to be clear if using the term mediterranean that it isn't the usual definition. I agree that Oceanic or marine west coast is much better. The reason I reverted the Washington page was because the passage was describing the variations in climate. The Olympic rainshadowed areas are strikingly different from the rest of the region. Saying "dry" instead of sub-mediterranean would be fine, but the bit on how the rainshadow extends into Canada was simply deleted. It was late and I was tired, I should have rewritten in better wording than reverting, sorry for that. Pfly 03:29, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your reverts on Japanese war crimes

Warning

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing in Japanese war crimes. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 17:18, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RFC/discussion of article World War II

Hello, Grant65. As a prominent contributor to World War II, you may want to be aware that a request for comments has been filed about it. The RFC can be found by the article's name in this list, and the actual discussion can be found on Talk:World War II, in case you wish to participate. Thank you for your contributions. -- Krellis 01:02, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regional accents of English speakers

You're right the article is about regional variation: my slip-up. But what about the second edit which changed ''[[Australia]]n accents'' to ''[[Australin English|Australian accents]]'' (should have been ''[[Australian English|Australian accents]]'', another slip-up)? Would you think it better to link to Oz or AusE? Jim (cont/talk/wikt) 05:55, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I mean I made two edits.

The first was to change

{{main|Regional variation in Australian English}}

to

{{main|Varieties of Australian English|Regional variation in Australian English}}

which you were right to revert (I guess I forgot what the title of the article was).

The second was to change

The greatest variation in [[Australia]]n accents is along ...

to

The greatest variation in [[Australin English|Australian accents]] is along ...

which was also a mistake but perhaps one in need of correcting rather than reverting. I mean rather than changing this back to what it had been how about this?

The greatest variation in [[Australian English|Australian accents]] is along ...

Would you agree that a link to Australian English would be more appropriate than a link to Australia?

Jim (cont/talk/wikt) 06:19, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The greatest variation in [[Australian English phonology|Australian accents]] is along ...

Better still. J i m p 08:19, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Military history WikiProject!

Hi, and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.

A few features that you might find helpful:

Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
The announcement and open task box is updated very frequently. You can watchlist it if you're interested; or, you can add it directly to your user page by including {{WPMILHIST Announcements}} there.
Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, detailed article and content review, and project-wide collaboration.
We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, periods, and conflicts.
We've developed a variety of guidelines for article structure and content, template use, categorization, and other issues that you may find useful.

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 Lokshin 18:24, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Allies of World War II

I would prefer it if you did not remove cited information, when you seem to be excising it based on a personal POV. The creation of the United Nations and the UN Security Council is a direct result of World War II, and its creation was underway during the war. --Petercorless 03:42, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Read my quotation re: the Potsdam Conference. Also, please leave the section on the UN Security Council, as it is a direct result of the Potsdam Conference agreement. --Petercorless 04:02, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XII - February 2007

The February 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 15:13, 1 March 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Gang Toi Hills

Hi Grant, I found this website (http://www.awm.gov.au/encyclopedia/vietnam_mia/no_known_grave.htm) today concerning the engagement between the 1RAR and a VC regiment in the Gang Toi hills. I want to know, would you consider the battle to be Australian or VC victory??Canpark 11:48, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE:Operation Hump/Gang Toi

I've read that stub article and it doesn't offer much in the way of information, and I can't find much about the Australian involvement either. Oh well, I'll keep researching.Canpark 06:20, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

World War II Mediation Case

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/World War II, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible. —Krellis (Talk) 21:21, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Syria-Lebanon campaign

I want to ask what's wrong with using term "british empire"? "British commonwealth" doesn't effectively serve the purpose what I tried to achieve: drawing line between independent states(including Australia) and colonial territories(British Palestine and India).--Staberinde 16:32, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was away from wikipedia for some time but now I got new idea for that infobox. It should serve purpose what I originally wanted to achieve, drawing line between independent states and colonies. What do you think of it?--Staberinde 08:58, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Age category

Hello! If you are receiving this message, that means that your user page is in a specific year category. Per a recent user-category per deletion, all specific year categories are to be deleted. If you wish to continue using year categories, you have two options:

Using an age group category, such as Category:Wikipedians in their 30s
Using a decade category, such as Category:Wikipedians born in the 1970s.

If you wish, you may do both. Hopefully, this change in categorization will be quick and painless. Happy editing! --An automated message from MessedRobot 12:33, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On 9 March, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Patrick Stanley Vaughan Heenan, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Carabinieri 17:45, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PD Australia

Hi Grant. The reason I didn't use the PD Australia tag for Tamatave landing (AWM P02018-104).jpg is because the first condition which appears in the box is "This image was created in Australia", which a photo taken in Madagascar certainly wasn't! The generic PD box does the job and seems to be the best option I know of. --Nick Dowling 23:42, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I can't say that I'm too fussed about it and suspect that the PD-Australia tag is OK. However, a photo of Australians in europe during WW1 I uploaded was nominated for delation a while ago due to the use of the PD-Australia tag and switching to the generic PD tag led to this being withdrawn so it might be to safer/easier option. --Nick Dowling 04:13, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Meridian/BPF

Given your interest in these topics: I think I've seen a report that NZ (and other?) pilots were captured and subsequently executed. Do you have any info to include? Folks at 137 06:50, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalization

The rules of capitalization are not an opinion dick head. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 14thArmored (talk • contribs) 02:41, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

T-34

I've left a few comments on the talk page concerning recent events. Would you be so kind as to browse them and comment please? Tirronan 13:08, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

East oz/rivalries

I think the eastern oz article could be developed in tandem with the regional rivalry article - just saw you there - almost every w.a. premier has attempted to utilise political capital out of the mean 'tothersiders! Satu Suro 04:16, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Captain Patrick Heenan of the Indian Army

Thansk for the article, a most interesting article. :-) --Philip Baird Shearer 11:05, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there / Batu Lintang camp

Hello Grant - I wonder if I could bother you? I have made a page on Batu Lintang camp (Kuching, Sarawak, liberated by the 9th Division in Sept 1945): it's at User:Jasper33/Batu Lintang camp. It's still very much in a draft stage, but there are several things I'd like to ask you:

I know it's very long and has a ridiculous number of citations, but I've been told off for not citing before now so thought I'd go too far the other way and can then edit out those that are unnecessary. Trouble is, I'm not sure about how you judeg where a citation is needed or not. I'm sure I read somewhere that only contentious statements need citations; but I've seen loads of what look like non-contentious statements with citations. So I'm a bit confused. I certainly need to get my numbers down though.
I know next-to nothing about military history - could you check that I haven't included any howlers? Any comments/criticisms/contribs gratefully received - I want to make this article as good as poss. Do yuo know any other editors who might be interested? As you'll have gathered from its length, I'm an inclusionist rather than a deletionist when it comes to content!
I've looked at the upload images page and it's like Double Dutch to me - is there any chance you could tell me (in Mickey Mouse terms as I'm a technophobe) how to upload the Australian War Memorial images I've selected? I see you've put some in some of your articles. What about copyright? Is there a limit on how many you can use in an article?
I'm not sure what categories the page should be put under - any ideas?

I hope you don't mind all these questions, and many thanks Jasper33 17:08, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Grant, thanks for getting back so quickly and for all your useful comments - I'll get on to them. Funny you mentioned about section 5 (the radio) being too long - I had wondered about taking that off as a separate article, as I have yet more detail about it. I'm going to have a crack at the photos now (gulp). Cheers Jasper33 10:44, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done! I've just released it into the big wide world as Batu Lintang camp - many thanks for your help, Grant. Cheers Jasper33 22:51, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mornin' Grant, and wow, thanks for all the corrections and for all the stuff on the talk page - that's a lot of projects. And not far off good article status? That's great - I'm so chuffed. What do you think it needs to get it up to GA standard? As you might guess, I can't look at the damn thing objectively. My main concern is POV: my grandparents were in the camp so it's hard to remain neutral. I try. I went overboard with the photos but thought what the heck. I've got some camp dollars and some of the IJA postcards that the prisoners were allowed to send at home (I'm away at the mo) that I can scan and add to the article later. Jasper33 10:22, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I love about Wikipedia: you're always leaning something new. Diptheria/tropical ulcers - well I never. And I feel a Homer Simpsonish 'Doh!' coming on about the KNIL/Dutch/Indonesian connection, which I simply hadn't made (told you I'm a numpty when it comes to military history). Thanks for all your edits - every one appreciated. I've put it up for DYK as it seems a good way of getting people to notice/edit an article (altho' I'm not so keen on the vandals ...); I'll wait til that's all over before doing anything about GA nomination. I'm really grateful for all your splendid help. Jasper33 16:49, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Grant - thanks for correcting my Anglo-centric worldview. Bad Jasper! I take your point about the order - I changed it because I wanted a mini-overview of the progress of the war in the Pacific in general, and then to focus in on the minutiae of what happened in the camp. I shall revist and fiddle.

Digressions are always welcome. My g/ps married in Singapore in 1930, and my grandfather was the manager of a rubber estate in North Borneo (my mum and her brother were born in Jesselton but luckily were sent back to the UK for schooling so avoided internment). Both g/ps survived, and went back to Borneo, but never talked about their life in the camp to us. Luckily my mum persuaded my grandmother to write about it, so we have some record, plus I have a massive collection of letters and photos from the 25 years they spent in Borneo. Both my sisters have been to visit Sabah and the old estate house (now a palm oil estate) but neither got to visit Batu Lintang and Labuan; I long to go but moolah is lacking... One day. Did you ever see the BBC tv series Tenko? It was partly based on Agnes Newton Keith's Three Came Home, and was hugely popular here in the UK. I also remember the Aussie tv series of A Town Like Alice, which introduced British womanhood to the glories of Bryan Brown ... I'm with you that BL makes such a terrible, gripping story. I'm wondering about making a page on 'prison camp literature' as there's been so much written as a result of people's experiences. Or maybe there already is one. I'm off to check ... Cheers Jasper33 19:42, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Changi in a Dennis Potter-stylee: now that I'd like to see: The Singing Detective is one of my all-time faves. I was glad to see that Jack Wong Sue has written his wartime memoirs - what I wouldn't give to go for a beer with him, as I bet he has some cracking yarns. By the way - is there an article on the SRD? I couldn't find one, but am never quite sure if this because an article doesn't exist, or if I am searching in the wrong way/using the wrong terms. I came across Tom Harrisson quite by chance - I was reading a newspaper article on Mass-Observation and it mentioned his amazing past in a throwaway line.

By the way - BL is on DYK at the mo and there have been a couple of nice comments left on the talk page - so well done us! Jasper33 19:10, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Time to start a new thread?

A mellow evening spent with a glass of wine watching the article when it was at DYK - and not one vandal, hurrah! There's been talk of getting Batu Lintang camp up to FA. I'm a bit daunted by the prospect, but would love to improve the article. User:Camptown suggested putting it to peer review. What do you reckon? Jasper33 10:15, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've bottled it and gone for a military history project peer review as going for FA when I'm a newbie just seemed a bit cheeky. But thanks for your offer of support - you'll regret it! ;) Jasper33 18:14, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I forgot to say - strange how these things go, I also came across this ref to Operation SEMUT and others by chance a while ago - it came up when I was googling the name of my grandparent's rubber estate in Sabah. I think the undercover/commando activity in Borneo is a very interesting subject (for one who generally turns the telly off when there's a war film on!), so I look forward to reading your page on it. Cheers Jasper33 20:48, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Hi there! Just dropped by to say hello. Came to your user page via Batu Lintang camp. The photos are interesting. Thought should chat a little mit. I am from Kolkata (Calcutta), India. Nice to see your dedicated works. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 10:27, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome to attend the match! I have attended one Aus-Ind one-dayer there. Well, in fact, I remember I attended one test, too. The one in which VVS Laxman scored a double hundred and Harbhajan Singh made a hattrick.

I first noted the Batu Lintang camp in the DYK, and found the article was already great! I do not have any particular interest. But like reading articles on WW2, though do not know much. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 15:12, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P-40 stuff

Hi Grant, I can see where you are going with the article but there are so many pictures here that an established policy of not using an oversized image format was agreed upon in the aviation forums. What is done is to remove the "px sizes" and revert to the thumb sizes throughout; the infobox picture then becomes the primary image which is not bounded by the thumb limit. Any user will "click" on the photograph they wish to see in full size and then go to the uploaded image. As to citing sources, I am a librarian with 33+ years experience in cataloguing and since I am as old as Methusalah, I can still "scratch catalog" and have reverted the P-40 referencing to the original format that I instituted months ago. It is based on the MLA (Modern Language Association) style guide for main references. The MLA guide is specifically used for research articles and although the Wikipedia templates are provided, they are based on the APA (American Psychological Association) which although, it is used for research, is a simpler and less stringent guide (I remember that University profs usually assigned this to the newcomers as a way to cite references). The placing of the date of publication next to the author is confusing, as well, the dropping of the place of publication leaves out an important piece. The MLA guide and its step-sister, the so-called "Chicago Style" is the world's most used reference guide for publications and is most appropriately suited to the Wikipedia format. In the Wiki format guides, there is no declared or regulated style but since MLA is more complete and allows for all forms of media citations, it is the easiest to use once you understand its "Author, title, Place of publication, date of publication" format (ISBN is thrown in just for convenience since the International Standard Book Number is a good way to find the references source in publishers' and other directories). In order to link notes and references quickly, I am also using a "Harvard Citation" for footnotes that links well with the MLA guide. I would encourage you to look at the article first and see where and why changes were applied. 'Ave a good day, mate. Bzuk 12:51, 25 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I know that a whole range of bibliographic styles were found in the P-40 article so an attempt was made to standardize them. This is attributable to the inevitable "many cooks" syndrome. I noticed that you used the APA template but made some adaptations of it, however, the MLA style was already established and the mixing of style guides leads to an inconsistency. As to photographs, the P-40 article had more than ten images which is the "norm" and with a larger number of images, photographs or illustrations, an attempt to "marry" text and image was established where thumb sizes would predominate. There are some exceptions, notably when the uploaded image is so tiny that a thumb would be inappropriate, however, the guide on "thumbing" was made to allow the number of images to remain in the article and yet not "stretch" the pages too much. Your suggestion to find more images to fill in a "gap" is an excellent solution, IMHO. Bzuk 13:00, 25 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]