User talk:BusterD/Archive 7

selected bio's

I checked the archived 2007/2008, but didn't think to scroll down on the selected bio page itself, where the esteemable BGen Alexander was. So that was a test trial. However, it doesn't show up on the selected bio page, why is that? Grayghost01 (talk) 02:14, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

This portal, virtually unique in design, runs automatically by variable. Most portals allow information to be randomized. Instead, I plug information into the queue, and the information is "published" when the time period comes up. This is Month 11 and Week 48. For some reason, week always changes on Sunday evening, month changes on the 1st. A clue can be seen in archives, where I designate the time periods in which material previously ran. One way of looking at the portal is to look directly at the queue design. Doesn't seem like much until you see what it can do. Portal talk:American_Civil_War/Queue has some simpler discussion. Click around on the portal, learning what's in archives, suggestions, create. Try clicking the edit tab when you're looking at the portal main page, but don't fiddle too much. It's a lot at first, but I don't think it complicated at all. BusterD (talk) 02:49, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

BusterD, the Bruce Catton page got its image wacked. I've started on 2009, and replaced Bio-1. Let me know if you want me to insert something else on Bio-2, and then I'll take it from there. Regards, Grayghost01 (talk) 03:51, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Need your help

BusterD, I need your help. Please see Talk:Great Train Raid of 1861 in which Northshoreman's latest tactic is to try and rename the article. I feel that you have been reasonable and unbiased, thus my appeal for you to weigh in on this. Thanks, and I'll heave to on some more bios in the upcoming week. Sincerely, Grayghost01 (talk) 02:17, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIII (November 2008)

The November 2008 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.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 16:01, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

I'd like your opinion, please

I'm thinking about creating a stub-class article on a published author. It appears to me at this time that the article must be a stub class because there is a dearth of information on the subject. My question is this: How likely is it that an article will be nominated for deletion because of its length (or lack thereof)? Having been burned once by the AfD process, I'm in no mood to risk it again -- I'm still bitter about the last time.
--NBahn (talk) 12:33, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

A narrow subject, based on my cursory Amazon and B&N searches. We've got four novels by four different publishers? You'll need some sort of external review of one of the works, or some news coverage of the author. Remember that while pedians tend to prefer online sources, there's zero reason why an article published in print couldn't be used. I see that Amazon refers to two published reviews for "The Harbinger Effect." Same two sources are quoted for "Mackinnon's Machine." For best notability, I'd find the actual reviews, not merely the online quotes. BusterD (talk) 13:51, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

thanks

Thank you for your kind words. I hope that you enjoyed your vacation.
--NBahn (talk) 19:37, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy New Year

Hope 2009 is a great year for you!--MONGO 15:21, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

War of Redirect Aggression

Well, he upped the ante here, and I called his bluff here. It's out of my hands now, I'll just have to rely on a good draw from the deck. Just hope I don't get aces and eights! Rgrds. --Tombstone (talk) 14:14, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIV (December 2008)

The December 2008 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.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:11, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

You have fans

Here. I had your talkpage watchlisted for the time being, so I got yer back. They got blocked for awhile. Don't cha love this place? Rgrds. --Tombstone (talk) 14:53, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: Good luck regarding coordinating the new WikiProject (such as it is)

Thank you very much for your kind words! :-) Kirill 16:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: User warning templates

Hey, I'm just responding to the comment you left on my page regarding user warning templates. I accidentally removed your comment as I was responding to it, and I've tried to put it back, but now my talk page is taking a ridiculous amount of time to load for some reason; so, hopefully, that's not the case on your talk page. Anyway, what I was trying to say there was that I do implement user warning templates, just not in every initial case of vandalism. Sometimes I just wait until a user makes an unconstructive edit to a page a second time (unless they have an immediate history of making unconstructive edits). Otherwise, it can be a rather arduous task to do all of that after just one instance, since I have a ton of articles on my watchlist. Granted, I don't always follow that pattern, as I sometimes miss posting a user warning template on a second offense, but that's how I usually do things on here. So, yeah, I hope my explanation wasn't too confusing. Heh. If you have any further comments or questions, you can go ahead and reply on your talk page here if you want, since I don't know if my talk page is going to have problems loading again. Take care. -- Luke4545 (talk) 00:52, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

thank you

My RFA passed today at 150/48/6. I wanted to thank you for weighing in on the RFA--I will do everything I can to uphold the policies of this site, and try to make it a better place. All the comments, questions, and in particular the opposes I plan to work on and learn from, so that I can hopefully always do the right thing with the huge trust given to me. rootology (C)(T) 08:28, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Re:Welcome!

Thank you for welcoming me to Wikipedia. :) Franklinville (talk) 15:40, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I greatly appreciate your compliment, and thank you likewise for your own efforts to combat vandalism on the Franklin Pierce article. As you have said, articles like this need to have a close eye kept of them. Franklinville (talk) 16:41, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXV (January 2009)

The January 2009 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.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:16, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Nav box re Sherman's Civil War Engagements

BusterD: As you probably recall, you put the info re W.T. Sherman's civil war engagements into the proper nav box format. It seems to me there may be something wrong with the nav box, as it exists on the Sherman page, anyway. If I open the nav box and click thru to one of the engagements, that works. But if you then back out of that to retrun to the nav box, it automatically closes itself. This is annoying, because it prevents one from sampling the information re the other engagements. Is there something wrong with the nav box, or is this natural, or is there something wrong with my computer. I have no idea how these things work, but assume you would be able to fix the nav box if there's something wrong with it. Thanks, Hartfelt (talk) 21:14, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

OK, BusterD, thanks for looking into the matter. I'l try on a different computer and see what happens. BTW, on another issue, I posted an item in the Sherman discussion page a while ago asking why we don't semi-lock the article, to cut down on the large amount of vandalism (which takes up the time of people who have to revert it all). Both the Lincoln and Grant pages are semi-locked. Any thoughts? I wouldn't know how to do that, but people must have considered the possibility before. Thanks again, Hartfelt (talk) 22:08, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

BusterD, FYI, here is my experience with the nav box issue. I use Internet Explorer as a browser. If I go to the standalone nav box, I can go back and forth to different linked items satisfactorily. However, on two different computers, my experience has been different in trying to use the nav box as it is embedded on the Sherman page. On the Sherman page, on both computers, my experience is that you have to open the nav box. Then you select a link. Then, if you back out of the link, the nav box closes itself. To check another link, you have to reopen the nav box. Doesn't seem like that should happen. Hartfelt (talk) 16:04, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

incivility

Sending mistaken warnings to yourself might be taken by some editors as incivility. Please think about this ;) Gwen Gale (talk) 22:13, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

I was under the general impression I could warn myself with impunity, as long as I don't also take offense. I'll be more careful when refactoring my talk page to hide the POV that sometimes I just can't take much more of myself. BusterD (talk) 00:12, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

You mustn't be too hard on yourself, else other editors think you've lost self-esteem and then believe they must lose self-esteem to show good faith. This is why claims of self-incivility can get ugly. Thanks for understanding. Gwen Gale (talk) 00:36, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Thomas Jackson Rodman

I noticed you added this to the requested bios ACW TF page. Did this small mention inspire you, or was it something else? Just curious. Either way, his article is now complete, and I hope you enjoy reading it! Kresock (talk) 04:25, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

It's very nice work. I've been doing some work about Confederate States Armies recently, filling in redlinks on the CSA page, and was reading the Rodman gun article one morning. Was shocked we hadn't covered him. Really amazed. The growth of staff officer corps prior to the ACW is a subject of continuing interest of mine. I have a pretty fair home library for the purpose, but haven't really dug into the work, for wikipedia purposes. You should get yourself a DYK out of the effort. BusterD (talk) 17:52, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVI (February 2009)

The February 2009 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.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:39, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Article on Ecsite

Hello! I work for Ecsite, the European network of science centres and museums. We are linked to on Wikipedia, but as yet, no article exists. Since an article exists for ASTC, our US equivalent, and since our network represents 385 member institutions across Europe, we think this warrants inclusion! We would like to draft an article, and to avoid a conflict of interests, submit it to you to see what you think. How does this sound? Michael Creek, Ecsite 87.65.225.111 (talk) 14:48, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your message, I'll have a go! Michael Brusselism (talk) 09:59, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Milhist coordinator elections

The coordinator election pages are now all set up. Do feel free to nominate yourself here :) — Roger Davies ^talk 07:47, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Nominations 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 13 March!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:18, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Portal picture

I do see quite a few but I don't know which ones are on there already or are suitible. Are there any that you are looking for. I actually live in Spotsylvania, Va and I have 3 battlefields basically in my backyard. I also work in DC so its easy for me to get images from the National archives, USMC archives or the Naval History museum at the Washington Navy Yard.--Kumioko (talk) 00:37, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm just looking for about 35-40 high quality, visually interesting, ACW-related images. The archives link on the main page takes you to more than 70 weeks of archives. I simply don't see as many pages as you, so if you see any images you like, then add them yourself or list some on talk. I'm always looking, but real life often makes it impossible for me to get all the work done myself. Appreciate any effort you make to help the portal. BusterD (talk) 01:10, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Coordinator Elections

Thanks for the Vote, It is always great to see members of the WikiProject getting involved. It seems that some people really do care about the future of the WikiProject. Keep Up the Good Work! Have A Great Day! Lord R. T. Oliver ^{The Olive Branch} 21:02, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. We will be selecting coordinators from a pool of eighteen to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on Saturday, 28 March! Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:21, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Charles Pomeroy Stone

Good day BusterD! Appreciate the captioning of Stone's Egyptian pic. I wasn't sure what to put there, not being up on their protocol and such. We don't really have a lot of info on this period I think. Also, as I add to his page, please keep moving those images around to where they look best. I've never been too good at that. If you're interested, after the 'Arrest' section is done I'm gonna go after his early life and Mexico service. Kresock (talk) 22:32, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Wish I could cite the daughter's name. Here's my reasoning: That wonderful featured pic in the infobox with his kid names her "Hettie" and since his first marriage was ten years prior to the pic in 1863, the time frame fit. His other two daughters, names currently unknown, were from his second wife he hitched in 1863, so either could not be old enough for the image if it was taken that year. Could be considered OR, so please delete it in that case, but I'll look into finding their names right now. You're other small fixes to Stone's page are greatly appreciated. Good day, sir! Kresock (talk) 23:52, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Sniffing around! Got his wife's parents; I'm leaning toward the daughter being names Esther and nicknamed Hettie or Hetty, but nothing definitive yet. Kresock (talk) 01:28, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm going to be down at Ball's Bluff next weekend helping get the park ready for this year's tour season. You anywhere close? BusterD (talk) 02:09, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm in CT... not so close. Kresock (talk) 00:04, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm in the NYC metro. Making the trip for fun and to help out. BusterD (talk) 00:27, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

I'll keeep the locations in mind. Job too busy around Easter holiday (plus opening weekend of MLB.) Appreciate the invite, though. Good day! 13:53, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you very much for your support for me in the Military History coordinator elections. I am honored that I was elected to my new position of assistant coordinator, and hope that I can satisfy all the community's expectations. – Joe N 01:26, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

		Milhist Coordinator elections
		I wish to thank you for your gracious support during my bid for a position as Coordinator of the Military history Wikiproject in the recent March 2009 elections. I was initially apprehensive to stand for election as I was unsure on how well I would be received, but I am pleasantly surprised and delighted to have been deemed worthy to represent my peers within the project. I assure and promise you, I will strive to do my upmost to justify your trust in myself with this esteemed position. Thank you, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 01:48, 29 March 2009 (UTC) Soldiers of the 4th Australian Division crossing a duckboard track through Chateau Wood, Ypres on 29 October 1917.

Ball's Bluff

I would be interested in helping out at Balls Bluff, though it would depend on exactly when it's going on Arbogastlw (talk) 05:12, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately I had a prior commitment and could not make it. Sounds like it was a lot of fun though, and in the future I would be interested in more activities like this. Thanks for inviting me. Arbogastlw (talk) 16:07, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Finally got a start on Wilson-Kautz Raid

Needed an article to go with your nice map. Just started. See if you can knock away all the chaff before I get too far. BusterD (talk) 20:06, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Excellent. That's been on my to-do list for a long time. I did some light editing. The big white space ought to be fixed once you've expanded the Background and Opposing forces text. One note for you to consider: you're using the old format for campaign articles that I devised a long time ago, the one with the indented battle paragraphs. I no longer use that and am slowly going back around to expand and reformat such articles. See Chattanooga Campaign for example, Gettysburg Campaign, or Retreat from Gettysburg. Hal Jespersen (talk) 22:34, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

	I seem to have drawn a crowd of support!
	I'm honored to have been elected as a coordinator of the WikiProject Military history and most sincerely thank you for your vote of support. I will endeavor to fulfill the obligations in a manner worthy of your trust. Many thanks. — Bellhalla (talk) 14:32, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
	A World War I U-boat draws a crowd after grounding on the Falmouth coast in 1921.

• The above statements are all false. Pictures shows is SM U 118, it is in 1919 and at hastings please read my article at SM U 118 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gonzosft (talk • contribs) 09:16, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVII (March 2009)

The March 2009 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.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:06, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Loudon County trip

BusterD,

I have been off work and out of Wiki communications following surgery to repair a detached retina, and still cannot drive. Hope you had a good time, and perhaps we can meet up in the future! Scott Mingus (talk) 11:51, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Regarding this edit summary

Do we have an automated-edit-using editor who's decided to just stick these in for completeness' sake? Did I miss all this? BusterD (talk) 14:34, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I don't know, it looks like that. I have not seen other instances of him doing it. Since this particular article has no footnotes, it is pretty unlikely that those books were used, but I gave him the chance to think about it based on my editing comment. Hal Jespersen (talk) 15:24, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Gentlemen, I think you both are referring to the refs I added to Huger's page, not by our good friend Kumioko. Sorry for any confusion, and yes I'll use them all as I expand his bio. I can't believe I've mispelled Warner's book for over a year now - thanks for catching that Hal! I fixed all instances of that I could find. Good day sirs! Kresock (talk) 18:25, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. Congrats on getting Stone back to an earned "B" class. You are just writing up a storm recently. Keep up the good work. BusterD (talk) 01:22, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

No problem. Mainly just looking out for Kumioko. From time to time he gets dumped on a little for his style of editing, and I should be blamed for this one, not him. Might be in Gettysburg's Nat. Cemetery in late June if you're interested, or pics perhaps? (goes for both of you sirs.) Good day! Kresock (talk) 22:02, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

April 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to User talk:DGG, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Yourname (talk) 21:10, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Linking diff, so any casual readers can see for themselves what little value this warning possesses. BusterD (talk) 21:14, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

For the record, this user, a few minutes after posting the above warning, was blocked for a period of 72 hours for edit warring on User talk:DGG. The user seems to be experiencing frustration because he or she can't seem to figure out the criteria for speedy deletion, and he seems to blaming one user who has been providing useful feedback. BusterD (talk) 21:51, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Copyright issues

		The Copyright Cleanup Barnstar
		Thank you very much for helping deal with the copyright crisis over Easter weekend. Your help was greatly appreciated.  Roger Davies talk 07:55, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Regarding one User:67.90.10.18.....

Do you know of any administrators who would be willing to block this address for up to five days? Whomever this is has entirely too much time on his/her hands.
--NBahn (talk) 20:20, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ernst Christian Wilhelm Ackermann

I had to reclose this AFD to fix the formatting but I gave you credit for the close in my closing statement. If you intend to close future AFDs then I recommend using this script. It allows you to close and relist AFDs with one click. I also recommend you read WP:NAC if you haven't already. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:49, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

If you have time, then may I trouble you about this?

I took a class on the subject, so I have an interest in it. I'd really like your advice before I try anything radical like creating a new, breakout article.
--NBahn (talk) 02:27, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Regarding Joe Klein

He invariably suffers from Hoof in Mouth Syndrome; but if I was to attempt to resurrect my Klein article, and state that he did what he did because: (A) He is lazy; and (B) He doesn't want to infuriate his connections, then I would immediately be accused of engaging in original research. Since I avoided that in the article, I was then accused of writing about a non-noteworthy subject. When I gave my reasons for stating that it was noteworthy, I was told to "calm down". It was obvious then that this was a precursor to using anything that I wrote as a pretext to subject me to some sort of ban; I had no recourse but to shut up and take everything that they dished out at me in silence.

If I sound bitter, it's because I still am; I poured my heart into that paper, and it was treated like just so much trash; and that's why I'm so reluctant to attempt a new article -- having been (badly) burned once, I am not at all eager to run the risk of receiving that sort of treatment again.

--NBahn (talk) 01:58, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

If you're willing and able.....

May I trouble you to look at this? I'd rather not submit it until at least one other pair of (trusted) eyes has gone over it. Obviously the Transactional analysis article is far from being complete (assuming, of course, that it is possible to ever say definitively that an article on Wikipedia is "complete".
--NBahn (talk) 06:18, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Sourcing? You should include your bibliography and start including inline cites. You're going to get a bunch of unnecessary edits just on the basis you haven't backed up your assertions. BusterD (talk) 11:05, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

My assertions? Ouch. *grimaces* I'm surprised that the entire TA article hasn't been trashed on that basis alone. I'm not quite certain what to do; if you compare the proposed article with what is actually in the TA article, you'll see that my edits are quite minor. It's not my intent to actually add any new material to the proposed article, just do the bare minimum editing required. The reason that I want to break out that section into its own article is to reduce the size of the whole TA article. (It is true that I'm thinking of adding a substantial amount of information to the "games section", but I'll cross that bridge when I come to it.) Perhaps I should solicit some help from the psychology portal; maybe someone there would be knowledgeable enough to add the requisite references. As far as I am concerned, I no longer have access to my old textbooks.
--NBahn (talk) 11:37, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

You misunderstand. We're writing very different pagespaces, I'll concede, but the same nomenclature applies. Any statement makes assertion. Assertion must be cited. For good reasons, not the least of which is reliability. Look at the two most recent pages I've started: Alexander Hamilton Bowman and Oswald Herbert Ernst. I've cited virtually assertion of fact in both pages (at least the beginnings of both pages, I'm not done with either) even though many of the assertions (ex: they were U.S.Army officers and West Point superintendents) seem obvious and irrefutable. What you're writing and what I'm writing seem different in this regard: you're not rooting your text in citation. When I read a well-cited wikipedia page I trust not the author of the page, but the sourcing behind it. A page without sourcing is rootless, to use a botanical metaphor. Since you haven't cited your sources, nobody can come behind you follow your process and help improve your work. If someone was to come behind me on my latest works, any reader could find work to do already on the page, seeds, that is, sources to quote and read for further enlightenment. By seeding the page with sources and inline citations, I've given my pagespace deep roots, which are likely to be influential in page development, no matter who follows me. BusterD (talk) 11:51, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Based on your "citation needed" markups, it would appear that I'm going to have to go to the library and see if I can find a copy of Berne's Games People Play. (Somehow I doubt that I'll find a copy of Born To Win: Transactional Analysis With Gestalt Experiments by Muriel James and Dorothy Jongeward -- It was published in the early 70's and is now probably out of print. *sigh* It was one of my favorite books, too.)
--NBahn (talk) 12:28, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Or go to a used bookstore and look through their dollar bins. Or get it on Amazon for next to nothing (plus shipping). I have a small library I use for reference, but also take advantage of googlebooks and amazon searchinside access. BusterD (talk) 12:37, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Alexander Hamilton Bowman

On April 21, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Alexander Hamilton Bowman, 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.

Shubinator (talk) 20:20, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations!
--NBahn (talk) 21:48, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

I caught up

I've caught up to you guys creating articles for USMA Supes. I've filled in bios and refs for all but the 9 remaining who need articles, ATTACK! ;-) — Rlevse • Talk • 01:28, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Looks great. Expect Tillman and maybe one other from me before the weekend's up. These gentlemen as pagesubjects are universally compelling, and fairly well documented, given tools like GoogleBooks and Amazon. Many of these individual subjects could be FAs one day. BusterD (talk) 01:55, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

If you add the UFO part to Tillman's article, you should DYK it. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:10, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm looking for better sourcing before I write that section. It's really cool if true. Could be a sort of ancient hoax. On the other hand, Union generals were certainly ballooning during the ACW, and if one was going to test a military secret like a powered lighter-than-air craft, North Texas would have been a good spot. BusterD (talk) 01:19, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Tillman seems was a Colonel, odd for the time to be Supe huh? — Rlevse • Talk • 12:09, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Rank is a big problem here. Normally Cullum is very helpful, but it seems Cullum shows 2nd Lt. and 1st Lt. promotions only. The superintendents' billet at the time was what, colonel? Cullum(1920) doesn't mention this, but shows he retired as Brig Gen. Probably need to go to loc.gov to find the Senate promotion confirmations. Can't find any pictures anywhere, either. Love to finish Tillman as a B-class before I move on to Townsley. Mostly done. BusterD (talk) 12:33, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

See [1] and [2] and [3] These are probably PD. — Rlevse • Talk • 13:52, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Suspect, but can't prove. I'm about to take on crafting the blog into the bio. BusterD (talk) 13:57, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Actually, there are still six because you need to fill in Townsley's article so I can do the summary. ;-) — Rlevse • Talk • 01:52, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

In such a hurry! Real life intruded, it was too nice out today. Productive weekend, all around. I'm still reeling over our steampunk airship engineer. Amazon might sell a book or two over this... (to me). Expect Townsley to flesh in the next day or so. I'm busy reading about Orsemus B. Boyd... BusterD (talk) 03:48, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

If I may trouble you for a favor.....

May I trouble you to leave a welcoming statement for User Manly0102? I'm unfamiliar with the process. Thanks!
--NBahn (talk) 07:25, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Any chance of a favour?

WP:MHA#BACKLOGS

You mentioned to me that you like gnoming. May I ask you to key an eye on the following dynamic links and pounce on the backlogs as they swell? We have several editors watching them but the lists are getting big again. I would be grateful if you could help ... I'm posting a general call for help on WT:MILHIST too.  Roger Davies ^talk 12:07, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

It would be good wiki-exercise. I'll put it on my radar and dip in when I have time. Love it if you'd give a look at my latest construction. Built it Saturday and Sunday from a redlink in the List of United States Military Academy alumni (Superintendents). User:Rlevse and new User:Ahodges7 have been working on getting the list to featured status, and I've been writing bios for the list for a while. We're down to five redlinks now (out of about 45 bios on the list). BusterD (talk) 12:53, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

That is one seriously referenced article, well done! If they're all that good, it'll be a cracking list :)  Roger Davies ^talk 13:19, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm practicing something new for me: starting with accumulation of all refs as links, then formatting the keepers in cite templates, then writing the text based on the refs (like a term paper, but much faster). These superintendent guys are universally interesting figures, lives filled with twists and turns. Many of them could be FAs one day. Of this one, I'm pretty proud. BusterD (talk) 13:37, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

You Mentioned Citations As Being Very Important

It seems to me that this article is in dire need of them and that you may want to give it some sort of "Citations Needed" tag.
--NBahn (talk) 14:23, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks, I figured I was making enough edits I should join the team.--Kumioko (talk) 18:32, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

You've been on the team for a long time. Just nice to see you wearing stripes. Still think you should hit preview more often, but look who's talking here... BusterD (talk) 18:34, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Happy BusterD/Archive 7's Day!

User:BusterD/Archive 7 has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, and therefore, I've officially declared today as BusterD/Archive 7's day! For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian, enjoy being the Star of the day, dear BusterD/Archive 7! Peace, Rlevse ~ A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it.

May 03 for you! — Rlevse • Talk • 20:38, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

My first barnstar, my first DYK, my 10,000th edit, and my very own wikiday, all in three weeks. I'm verklempt! BusterD (talk) 20:47, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Cheers to all that, BusterD! :) Gwen Gale (talk) 16:24, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Cleanup

I ask you to please review the guidelines noted in Wikipedia's civility policy; claims such as "That this article made it to FA status without such minor but essential changes reflects poorly on the FAC process," are provocative in nature, most rude, and extremely belittling to the authors—one of which is myself. Furthermore, I ask that you apologize as I am actually very offended by such a brazen jab at my integrity and character, not to mention my ability to write. The copyedit in question was extensive and executed without discretion nor was any warning message left on the talk page. The article, which has been a Featured Article for nearly two years, was copyedited prior to obtaining such a status multiple times; it also endured the rigorous process of FAC, which you quite clearly feel is inadequate. Users came to a consensus that it was of sufficient value to be promoted. Very little has, actually, been changed since September 2007 aside from several updates. The user who decided to change the wording drastically did so without consulting someone who is familiar with the text—either myself, or the no longer active Grim-Gym. I welcome improvement wholeheartedly but thousands of not only established editors but everyday web-surfers have viewed the time-honored incarnation of the article. I suggest that either you or the user who executed these edits contact me once the article is no longer being barraged by wandering eyes in order to rectify this situation and perhaps improve the article. It is simply astounding to me that an editor such as yourself—who has the audacity to claim that my edits implicate page ownership and insists that my revision be discussed on the talk page—is unable to realize that his "minor but essential" edits are not only excessively scrutinizing but are defaming an article on the main page by indiscriminately adding "vague" template at any point in which his comprehension is even minutely compromised. I am going to revert his edits for today simply because of that reason, but am one hundred percent open to discussion tomorrow. If you feel that this action is simply inexcusable and that the copyedit is so dire that it can not wait one more day then please feel free to contact me, but I ask that you keep the finger pointing, accusations, rudeness and incivility to a minimum please. NSR77 ^T 20:01, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Uh, ok. BusterD (talk) 23:27, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Hey, man, I wasn't the one throwing out preconceived notions left and right. I'm being, or at least trying (quite hard in fact) to be understanding and open minded. I don't have any issues with you at all; I respect you if you respect me and that is clearly not going on right now. I need you to reciprocate in some form or another. Replying with a sarcastic "Uh, ok" doesn't really accomplish this, to say the least. But I suppose I may be asking too much, or perhaps I'm just flat out wrong. I really only asked that you stop being confrontational and you respond with a challenge for me to "first get someone to agree with you, and then take this to ANI." And whether you or 500 other people think your comments were or were not a personal attack is irrelevant because it did make me somewhat angry, it did make me somewhat sad, it did make me somewhat hurt and it did make me feel like you were unnecessarily jumping the gun. But I just want to put it all in the past and at least try and work amicably. If you don't want to do so, fine. I may not continue with Wikipedia much longer anyway; this whole situation reminds me again of the faults of this encyclopedia and why I'm better suited away from it. Cheers, NSR77 ^T 01:43, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Hah, and if I've been a stressed out lately and somewhat despondent in my personal life for reasons that are my own I don't need to come on Wikipedia—a place that I try to improve articles on topics that fascinate me when I have some free time—and get shit from people who are insensitive to their fellow man. I don't need to take shit for reverting something and leaving a poor edit summary because I was going out. I don't need to "grow a thicker skin", either, just because you think I'm being too "soft" or whatever. You don't know me, you don't know my life and what I may or may not be going through; that's why I responded as tersely as I did. When Tparameter showed some form of understanding I reciprocated with appreciation. This might be overkill, but who cares. Wikipedia is a cliché unto itself. NSR77 ^T 01:56, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

See this. BusterD (talk) 14:03, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. NSR77 ^T 14:14, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

USMA Supes

Adding months and days to the years causes sorting problems and is getting hit at flc review. Pls leave years only. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:08, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

No problem. BusterD (talk) 23:14, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Comm of Cadets, honestly you may have trouble making justifiable wiki articles for several of those guys, but if you can more power to you. I plan to concentrate getting the main list, List_of_United_States_Military_Academy_alumni to FA status and only make sublists when needed, ie, when there are lots of people in a section. If you do get your new list to FL status, we can certainly include it. I can help with your new list though. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:16, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Samuel Escue Tillman

On May 5, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Samuel Escue Tillman, 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.

Dravecky (talk) 07:30, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVIII (April 2009)

The April 2009 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.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:35, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

DYK for William Ruthven Smith

On May 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article William Ruthven Smith, 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.

Gatoclass (talk) 07:32, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Serving My Country

BusterD ... apparently I missed a lunch invitation for Ball's Bluff that you extended to me back in March. First, thank you for the invitation. I am sorry I missed it, and am back on Wiki after an extended tour of service to my country in a last hurrah to wrap up the global war. Ironically we Southern boys are seemingly the last remnant of patriotic folks left in this policital day and age. If you are up this way again, lunch is on me. Sincerely, Grayghost01 (talk) 01:48, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Arthur Ducat

Hi. Thanks for helping out with the clean-up there. I've put your stubbed version in place. Hopefully you'll never encounter this situation again, but I just wanted to point out in case you do that when you copy text from a Wikipedia article you have to give credit to the content contributors in order to meet the licensing terms of the GFDL. Ordinarily, of course, this wouldn't be an issue when working in the same article, but when the history that shows the authorship is to be deleted, it can be a problem. I've taken care of it easily with this particular stub, since the creative component was entirely by one individual. (Frequently, I will put a note in edit summary giving a wikilink to the user who added the text. In this case, I've done it in edit summary & at the article's talk) Again, I appreciate your taking care of the copyright issue. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:41, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for reminding me. I appreciate you've been watchful on the recent and ongoing cleanup of copyvio issues. BusterD (talk) 11:55, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XXXIX (May 2009)

The May 2009 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.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:18, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Ambrose Burnside

The IP user whose changes to Ambrose Burnside you reverted seems to have got it right - the sources have his DoB as the 23rd, not the 13th. ClickRick (talk) 00:08, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for seeing this. I saw this edit by the ip, and made an assumption... BusterD (talk) 00:12, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Easily enough done. As you say, the dates have been in disagreement for a surprisingly long time, but the problem is always in finding a RS to resolve it. Fortunately there were a couple in this case. ClickRick (talk) 00:25, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Simon Bolivar Buckner, Sr.

Thanks for jumping in on my discussion about Simon Bolivar Buckner, Sr. I was concerned about not having access to Borderland Knight. I can get it on interlibrary loan, I'm sure, but not for the length of time it would take to read it, add its information to the article, cite the information, then shepherd it through the GA process. If your note is to be construed as an offer to help by expanding from and citing this work, I gladly accept. I'm going to comb the additional sources in the "Further Reading" section for additional information. Let me know when you feel you've added all the important stuff from Borderland Knight and we'll see if we can't get this article to GA or even FA. Thanks again. Acdixon ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 14:20, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

I've been reading through it, and will apply and diversify some of the cites. Might not be today. Give me some time to absorb the book a bit. I bought it a year or so ago, and it's been sitting on the shelf. BusterD (talk) 14:46, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

New creation

No problem, I see a couple things already but I will look at it in more detail. There are acouple of Disambiguous links for Georgetown and Whig. A couple of the references are redirects (2, 4 and 5 I think). 2 are from google, not sure about the 3rd one. You should reference the actual book or reference that you are pointing to on google rather than the google redirect. I will let you know if I see anything else.--Kumioko (talk) 14:04, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm off to my work day. Fix anything you want. Thnaks! BusterD (talk) 14:18, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Abraham Bradley, Jr.

I did some light editing on this, but overall I think it looks good. I cannot say that the subject matter interests me too much, but I am rather focused on my own discipline, as you may know. My only other suggestion would be to provide some subheadings in the lengthy Career section. And if this were a biography of a Civil War general conforming to my "style guide", I would have removed the date of death from the in-line text. :-)

DYK for Abraham Bradley, Jr.

On June 26, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Abraham Bradley, Jr., 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.

Wizardman 02:36, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Service academy lists

I do appreciate your help on these lists, but please keep formatting consistent with other entries. — Rlevse • Talk • 17:22, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for cleaning up. I'll be more mindful and always finish my work in featured pagespace. I thought Whittaker a major omission and I simply clipped the references from the Whittaker pagespace without close inspection. I'm going to continue to work on individual superintendent articles, adapting the references to look more like those in the list articles. Need pictures. Cullum, Partridge and Thayer in particular deserve love. BusterD (talk) 17:55, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Wiki-Conference New York Update: 3 weeks to go

For those of you who signed up early, Wiki-Conference New York has been confirmed for the weekend of July 25-26 at New York University, and we have Jimmy Wales signed on as a keynote speaker.

There's still plenty of time to join a panel, or to propose a lightning talk or an open space session. Register for the Wiki-Conference here. And sign up here for on-wiki notification. All are invited!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:12, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Your comments at Articles for deletion/Edenton Bell Battery

I read your comments at AFD (where you wrote about my approach to this article) and I just wanted to say thank you. Dealing with this kid has been a tough road and while I've tried very hard to teach him about WP process, it's difficult when the response is that I'm an offensive racist. It's very nice to get an attaboy instead.

Again, thanks! Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 03:54, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure you agree with me that though these process should never get personal, we should remember always we are dealing with human beings, including ourselves! I was actually pretty impressed you got this far without losing patience. I've offered to mentor the user if he desires. I know a couple of actual southern heroes who edit here, and they might choose to model correct behavior for this youngster as well. All the stuff you've done/deleted so far has been important, because it made Daniel assign extreme value to this little nugget, which happens to be a keeper. Fear of immediate deletion might motivate a young user to prioritize and keep it simple. BusterD (talk) 20:05, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey, if you can simply convince him that plagiarism is bad and sourcing is good, I'll be impressed! Either way, I've decided to go with your suggestion of withdrawing my nomination for deletion, and I've closed the AFD. Score one for the good guys? Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 03:52, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

template talk:rescue

The discussion you started on this page is within the scope of WT:ARS. Please review the archives of that page, in which you will find oodles of discussion rehashing essentially that same argument. template talk:rescue is for discussion of the particular nuances of that template only, not its usage, which is appropriately covered in WT:ARS, as the template is owned by WP:ARS. There's a ton of history, much of it contentious, and you'd be well served to read up on past discussions to avoid rehashing them. Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 04:25, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I appreciate your pointing this out and your wise advise. I had done some cursory reading on the subject, but insufficient, it seems. And as it regards Corrie, I didn't mean to sound like I know everything either. It was my reading, coming to this discussion in a disinterested way. Always a pleasure disagreeing with you. And not... Thanks again. BusterD (talk) 12:50, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XL (June 2009)

The June 2009 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.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:31, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

welcome to the Article Rescue Squad

Here to help articles tagged for rescue! Articles tagged for deletion and rescue Category Articles tagged for deletion and rescue not found Hi, BusterD, welcome to the Article Rescue Squadron! We are a growing community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to identifying and rescuing articles that have been tagged for deletion. Every day hundreds of articles are deleted, many rightfully so. But many concern notable subjects and are poorly written, ergo fixable and should not be deleted. We try to help these articles quickly improve and address the concerns of why they are proposed for deletion. This covers a lot of ground and your help is appreciated! If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the talk page, and we will be happy to help you. And once again - Welcome! -- Banjeboi 05:52, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

• • Footnote----My name is Buster7. I am also an active member of the Article Rescue Squad. To avoid any mistaken identities at article pages or RfD requests or the like, I would like to make a suggestion. I will be the editor with the huge 7 emblazoned on his T-Shirt. I would suggest you do the same (with a huge D of course) Thank You!--Buster7 (talk) 22:29, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

And if I choose to go barechested, I'll be the fellow who's painted Big D on his tummy. Thanks for the additional ARS welcome. I was wondering when we'd be introduced. In squadron tradition, I'll try to keep a majority of my edits in pagespace when attempting page rescue. BusterD (talk) 22:54, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Charles Pomeroy Stone

Thanks for taking care of the edits on Stone. I hadn't had a chance to get to that one yet and likely wouldn't have been able to until at least this evening. --Kumioko (talk) 13:23, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I was happy to see a reviewer as you were. Wanted to show eagerness and willingness. If you need help with a cite, let me know. BusterD (talk) 13:30, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you I might just take you up on that. Sorry I didn't get to it for a day or so I figured it took them more than 6 weeks to look at it they could wait a day for me to fix it. :-) --Kumioko (talk) 13:38, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Great sounds good, I was just going to leave you a message but my internet is moving at the speed of smell so you beat me to it. Thanks for all the help on the article. --Kumioko (talk) 01:58, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Charles Pomeroy Stone

Is a Good Article now! User:Kumioko and I did tweaks to the excellent work you did to build it up to pass B-class checklists. Thanks and congratulations. You deserve to share the credit with Kumioko (and I helped a bit). Hope you and yours are well; I look forward to seeing your datestamp soon. BusterD (talk) 02:16, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Appreciate the continued work on his page by both you gents while I was away. Glad to see he's still not forgotten. Kresock (talk) 22:27, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLI (July 2009)

The July 2009 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.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:58, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

publisher

Let me deal with this. I can explain things to him. DGG ( talk ) 16:57, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

No problem at all, I just reverted the message applied to your user page inappropriately. I also reverted the message on another's user page, but since the note was addressed to you, did not copy the message on that talk, letting you decide how best to deal (if at all). Librarians know book people well. Have a great day. The Queen City article actually looks pretty nice now... BusterD (talk) 17:03, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

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

Thanks for the note; I left a brief reply. --NBahn (talk) 20:46, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Result parameters

I too would like to see this resolved but (as I've intimated on the template page discussion) I think it will be the devil's own job achieving consensus. I've linked there to the previous discussion.  Roger Davies ^talk 17:01, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Decisive Discussion Thingy

Why'd you leave the discussion? Does that mean you have run out of ideas to support your cause?--Red Wiki 00:37, 1 September 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Valkyrie Red (talk • contribs)

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 Davies ^talk 04:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)