User talk:FarSouthNavy/Archive 2

Battle of Top Malo House

Que tal che, en la playa ? Check out this [1] ?--Jor70 (talk) 13:42, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

STV Royston Grange

I've reverted your GF replacement of the Miramar source with a blog and a Spanish language source. Full explanation given on the talk page. Mjroots (talk) 07:06, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

A request

I have been accused of peddling a single sided nationalist agenda on Falklands related articles. I wondered if you would mind commenting on that here. Regards, Justin talk 14:36, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Many thanks, un abrazo. Justin talk 21:45, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Count on me every time, Justin.--Darius (talk) 22:36, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

FAA translation

Could you answer a few questions about this piece of text fromhere please:

Tres M-5 Dagger, indicativo "Gaucho", armados con bombas BRP. Misión: ladera Monte Longdon. Tripulación (1) Capitán Norberto Dimeglio, 
(2) Primer Teniente César Román, (3) Teniente Gustavo Aguirre (este último no decoló por falla de frenos). 1 y 2 despegaron de Río 
Gallegos a las 11:00. En ruta, la lluvia los obligó a desviarse 

Próximos a las islas, vieron un helicóptero en vuelo rasante. La sección eyectó cargas externas y lo atacó. El piloto de helicóptero 
ejecutó hábiles maniobras evasivas y eludió los dos pasajes de cañones de los Dagger. (Se trataba del Sea Lynx XZ 233- piloto 
Lt. C.H. Clayton, de la fragata Cardiff que operaba en el Estrecho de San Carlos). Regresaron a GAL, donde arribaron a las13:00 horas.

Se previeron seis salidas de M-5 Dagger de Río Grande con escolta de Mirage M-III de Río Gallegos.

• The Dagger's belonged to Gaucho flight, yes?

Right, every Argentine aerial mission had an specific code name (Gaucho, Torno, Poker, Galgo). Gaucho's target was the (eastern) slopes of Mount Longdon.

• Do you know what "BRP" bombs are?

BRP is a type of parachute-retarded bomb, of Spanish design, which the FAA used at the late stages of the conflict.

• Just to confirm: Lt Aguirre's Dagger did not join the mission due to a fault with the "brakes" yes?

Yes, he was unable to take off due to defective brakes.

• Please clarify: "En ruta, la lluvia los obligó a desviarse." Does it means rain/weather forced them to divert from their mission?

Yes. I think, however, that the rain only forced them to divert from the "main route" of the mission, not to cancel it and carried out an alternative sortie.

• What is "GAL"?

GAL stands for "Río Gallegos airbase".

• Please clarify: "Se previeron seis salidas de M-5 Dagger de Río Grande con escolta de Mirage M-III de Río Gallegos."

The translation: "They (FAA) planned six M-5 Dagger sorties from Río Grande, escorted by M-III Mirages from Río Gallegos."

Thankyou for your help. Ryan4314 (talk) 15:22, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVII (January 2010)

The January 2010 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, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Roll of honour

Hello again, do you know where I can find an Argentine roll of honour please? I'm curious to find out how eight men of 5th Regiment (RI 5), 3rd Mechanised Infantry Brigade were killed. They were apparently stationed at Port Howard. Ryan4314 (talk) 15:03, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

File:Mk-15-BB.jpg

I've replaced this image with a free image.©Geni 22:15, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

It's OK. Thank you!--Darius (talk) 23:39, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

COAN

Hi, I created the Argentine Naval Aviation article and now I really need your help to fill the List of Argentine Naval Aviation aircraft --Jor70 (talk) 11:33, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Hola, help will be coming soon.--Darius (talk) 12:43, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Muy bueno gracias. I'been working at Armed Forces of the Argentine Republic. Opinions always welcome--Jor70 (talk) 21:52, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Excelente trabajo, Jor. I promise to work on it as I did on the Naval aircraft stuff. Regards.--Darius (talk) 16:49, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

The Barnstar of National Merit for work onArgentina-related articles.

For your continuous good work. -- Alexf^(talk) 13:16, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Argentina Portal

I know you are doing good work on Argentina-related articles. I'd like to talk about the lack of Argentina editors. We used to have many and they have faded years ago. I'd like to remind people to become a member ofWikiProject Argentina and contribute there to coordinate efforts. Also to remind people to add your contributions to the Argentina-related regional notice board so we can all be informed of new pages or major article rebuilds. Now, to get to the main point of this message. Years ago theArgentina Portal was neglected for lack of maintainers. I became the de-facto main (and sole) editor in 2008 and have been adding news and contributions to the article/image of the month features ever since. I requested some collaboration at the time but nobody came forward. That is fine. I am not asking for contributions and I plan to keep on maintaining the site. I feel it is important to show a good image of Argentina to the en.WP community and to the English-speaking world at large. Hence the interest in having a good-looking, properly maintained portal. What I am asking for is a second set of eyes to look at it, comment and criticize, and to suggest good articles/images for the monthly feature. I know we are all busy with our own projects in Wikipedia. I am not asking for edits, just for suggestions when you come across a good article or image. Let me know by Talk message or email, and I will do the work of posting it (hint: I post article/image of the month way in advance to ease the load). I would like to get the Argentina Portal to Featured Portal status, but it is not easy to do without some help. At least C&C. Thank you for your attention and sorry for the long-winded message. -- Alexf^(talk) 13:35, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

First of all, thanks for the Banstar, Alexf. Well, I think that despite my contributions, I should be included also among those Argentine editors who 'faded away' in some degree. I rarely have browsed both on the Argentina Portal or the notice board in the last two years. What we need to do, I suggest, is to recruit editors from es.WP or find a way of making the portal more attracting to them. As a first step, I will post a couple of new Argentina-related articles I created recently. Thank you again. Keep in contact.--Darius(talk) 00:18, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough. I added a new feature today: "Anniversaries" (similar to what the es:Argentina Portal uses as "efemérides", but it is not a copy or related to it). I started adding events for the text files. If you remember, when you see a worthwhile event that should be commemorated (e.g. famous birthdate or the day of a famous battle) you could easily add it to the "calendar" by adding a line to the proper supporting file for that day of the year. That's it. Only rule: No redlinks. Only notable events pointing to existing Argentina-related articles in the English Wikipedia are acceptable. -- Alexf^(talk) 00:24, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Nominations for the March 2010 Military history Project Coordinator elections now open!

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 8 March 2010! More information on coordinatorship may be found on the coordinator academy course and in theresponsibilities section on the coordinator page.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:16, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

File:EndOfThePatrols-75.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:EndOfThePatrols-75.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —Bkell (talk) 11:56, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Also File:XmaglenSniper.jpg. —Bkell (talk) 11:56, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Sad news

A-4C pilot Tomas Lucero [2] died yesterday in an aviation accident near es:Tío Pujio --Jor70 (talk) 20:57, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Really sad, Jor. He was the first Argentine pilot shotdown and captured over San Carlos, I remember some pics of him on board the Fearless, with a broken leg and assisted by a British medical staff. Sé que sus amigos en la FAA lo llamaban "Tom". Que en paz descanse, es uno de esos héroes que nos faltan hoy día.--Darius (talk) 22:56, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVIII (February 2010)

The February 2010 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) 22:10, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Argentine defense industry

You are welcome to participate ! Once completed I'll ask Ryan do the usual c/e --Jor70 (talk) 22:11, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Great job as usual, my friend. I think we should expand the page with a reference about theballistic missile programs of the '90s (Alacrán and Cóndor II).--Darius (talk) 22:22, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

New Article

I almost finished Battle of San Carlos and would be very grateful if you can help me with some of yours well known sources and references --Jor70 (talk) 21:19, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations for the new page, Jor. Bomb Alley or the "Battle of San Carlos" deserved an article apart, definitively. Besides the aerial operations, I think that we need a section about Lt. Esteban actions, which resulted in the loss of two Gazelle choppers for the Task Force.--Darius (talk) 16:10, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

gracias che, imperdible [3]

national images

I was wondering if we could obtain a commons template like the one of Presidencia[4] but for the MinDef[5] and EMC [6]. The otrs method seem bit complicate to me but there are plenty of articles could benefit from their images. abrazo --Jor70 (talk) 01:23, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Coordinator elections have opened!

Voting for the Military history WikiProject coordinatorelections has opened; all users are encouraged to participate in the elections. Voting will conclude 23:59 (UTC) on 28 March 2010.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:37, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Altantic_Ocean#Notable_crossings

no el tema sino esa balsa de troncos q cruzo el atlantico en los 80s, te acordas ? me acuerdo q la fui a ver al obelisco. No eran de mar del plata ? --Jor70 (talk) 20:54, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Amerita q te crees el articulo :-D --Jor70 (talk) 13:44, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Courtesy

Seriously, was this edit summary really necessary? I understand your frustration but it's not an obsession or "paranoia" with copyrights that governs the use of non-free content, but the overall mission of WMF itself, which is why we don't use non-free content except where it's truly unavoidable, and those are usually pretty obvious to all parties.

As a side note, I'm going to assume that your username is not an ethnic slur against Italians. howcheng {chat} 03:25, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi. Don't take that summary as something personal. I just pointed out to the readers (by the way, Wikipedia is intended for them, not for we users, nor for administrators) the reasons behind the deletion of an irreplaceable image. Just my personal opinion, but it is also discussedhere, thus it is hardly "pretty obvious to all parties". Don't worry about my "frustration", I am free to upload this and other pictures elsewhere. And regarding my user name, you're right, you must assume GF. See hereif not convinced yet. Thank you.--Darius (talk) 11:11, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

imperdible

Lami Dozo [7] --Jor70 (talk) 19:32, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Gracias Jor. Por fin alguien lo dijo: la Armada primero tiró la piedra y después escondió la mano, y del día a la noche se tuvo que improvisar una guerra. Si podés conseguirlo en algún lado, te recomiendoGuerra bajo la Cruz del Sur del Capitán Eduardo Acosta. Es la mejor autocrítica de la actuación de las FFAA que se escribió en Argentina. Saludos.--Darius (talk) 22:30, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIX (March 2010)

The March 2010 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) 21:32, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : L (April 2010)

The April 2010 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) 19:13, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Coordinates in sexagesimal rather than decimal

Just curious what advantage you find to sexagesimal as opposed to decimal representation. I'm inclined to the latter myself but if there's an advantage to sexagesimal, I'm all ears. TIANatty10000(talk) 18:57, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Sexagesimal has no special advantage over decimal, I just follow most of the printed sources which use degrees, minutes and seconds for coordinates. Cheers.--Darius (talk) 21:26, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Teniente Jorge Eduardo Casco

Honor y Gloria. [8] --Jor70 (talk) 14:57, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Gracias, Jor, imperdonablemente me había olvidado que sus restos habían sido recuperados. RIP, Teniente Castro. Como tantos otros, el es nuestro héroe.--Darius (talk) 16:28, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Happy 25th May

For your outstanding work of Argentina related articles I respectfully award you the Argentine Barnstar of National Merit. --Jor70 (talk) 16:52, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LI (May 2010)

The May 2010 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) 20:58, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Cartel-nuevo-de-el-secreto-de-sus-ojos.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Cartel-nuevo-de-el-secreto-de-sus-ojos.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go tothe file description page and edit it to include afair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described oncriteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:10, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Rationale added now. Thank You.--Darius (talk) 14:08, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Empire Comet

You changed the display of the coord from in the text to title, which made it disappear from the text and thus the text didn't make much sense. If you want the coord to appear at the top of the page, use|display=inline, title so that it still appears in the text too. Mjroots (talk) 11:47, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

My mistake, thanks for the correction.--Darius (talk) 15:43, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

File:Dhm9025detail.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Dhm9025detail.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Prezbo (talk) 02:19, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Loughgall Ambush

I noticed you've made some good contributions to the Loughgall Ambush article recently. Bearing that in mind, you may want to have a look at the comment made here by 2 Lines of K (aka One Night In Hackney). It seems he plans to merge Loughgall Ambush back to that page because it's a "mess", but he hasn't given any specific reasons why.~Asarlaí 01:26, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LII (June 2010)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LII (June 2010) Front page Project news Articles Members Editorial

Project news Catch up with our project's activities over the last month, including the new Recruitment working group and Strategy think tank	Articles Milhist's newest featured and A-Class content
Members June's contest results plus the latest awards to our members	Editorial LeonidasSpartan shares his thoughts on how, as individual editors, we can deal with frustration and disappointment in our group endeavour
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:52, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Flagcruft

Hi. Care to explain this? Thanks in advance.--John (talk) 00:33, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi John. Sorry for reverting your edit without explanation (my mistake), but I am not aware of any WP guideline against the use of flagicons on missile infoboxes (see here); may be some consensus have been reached on the issue. If this is the case, can you clarify it, please?. Thank you.--Darius (talk) 00:56, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Firearms/Archive 7#Question about the usage of nationalist flags in firearms articles was maybe what I was thinking of, although I recognize this is not directly applicable to the article we are talking about. I feel sure that consensus at the aviation project is not to use flags in infoboxes, and WP:MOSFLAG recommends against it. Flags in long lists and large tables are held to aid navigation, but singular flags in infoboxes are (generally) frowned upon as mere decoration. Sports articles and articles about countries or localities are obviously exceptions to this, and so is the campaign infobox like on Battle of Cape Spartivento. I'll see what else I can dig out. The real question, I suppose, is "what does the flag add to the information about the country of origin"? --John (talk) 01:30, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Here's another recent data point of where community consensus is on this. --John (talk) 01:37, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

nice pic

Do you have any idea how we can get to use this pic [9]--Jor70 (talk) 15:08, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LIII (July 2010)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LIII (July 2010) Front page Project news Articles Members Editorial

Project news New parameter for military conflict infobox introduced; Preliminary information on the September coordinator elections	Articles Milhist's newest featured and A-Class content
Members July's contest results, the latest awards to our members, plus an interview with Parsecboy	Editorial Opportunities for new military history articles
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:18, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LIV (August 2010)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LIV (August 2010) Front page Project news Articles Members Editorial

Project news The return of reviewer awards, task force discussions, and more information on the upcoming coordinator election	Articles A recap of the month's new Featured and A-Class articles, including a new featured sound
Members Our newest A-class medal recipients and this August's top contestants	Editorial In the first of a two-part series, Moonriddengirl discusses the problems caused by copyright violations
To change your delivery options for this newsletter please list yourself in the appropriate sectionhere. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:06, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Torpedo

Re your edit to Torpedo, do you have a WP:RS for your addition? David Biddulph(talk) 12:30, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Opinion about White Argentine

Hello, DagosNavy: Veo que tenemos cosas en común; vos también sos argentino de ascendencia italiana. Te molesto sólo para saber tu opinión sobre el artículo "White Argentine" y escucho propuestas sobre cosas que creas que están faltando. Hace unos meses lo traduje para la Wiki hispana -era más corto e incompleto entonces- y lo entraron a tildar de racista/racialista, pidieron una consulta de borrado y lo borraron de prepo. ¿Creés que como está el artículo ahora puede que lo acepten de nuevo? Por supuesto, retitulado como "Población blanca en Argentina" porque me parece que el título "Argentino blanco" despertó mucha oposición.

Además me interesa saber en qué consiste el Wikiprojecto:Argentina. Yo puedo contribuir traduciendo artículos de la WP hispana al inglés. De hecho, ya creé dos, del cantante Sergio Denis y de la banda Invisible. Espero tu respuesta.--Pablozeta (talk) 11:33, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Yo tambien creo que tiene rasgo racista. Ya hay 2 articulos creados al respecto: Demographics of Argentina and Argentine people --Jor70 (talk) 11:53, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

El artículo White Argentine no lo creé yo, ya estaba creado desde bastante antes que yo lo tradujera. El artículo fue creado el 14 de Junio de 2007 por un tal Sergiorencio, y yo lo traduje en Abril de este año. El principal argumento que esgrimí yo -y los que me apoyaron, que fueron por lo menos seis- fue que ya había artículos que hablaban sobre los dos grupos minoritarios en Argentina (amerindios en conjunto -no etnia por etnia- y afro-descendientes -también en conjunto-), por lo tanto el grupo mayoritario -eurodescendientes como un todo, no etnia por etnia- también tenía derecho a tener su propio artículo. Lo mismo ocurre acá en la WP anglo; estos dos grupos minoritarios tienen sus propios artículos. Por otro lado, los artículos Demographics of Argentina y Argentine people hablan de TODOS los argentinos, y yo con este artículo hablo sólo de un sector de la población argentina; importante, pero sector al fin. Le voy a comentar lo mismo a Jor70. Gracias por tu ayuda.--Pablozeta (talk) 20:36, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

The Milhist election has started!

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. You are cordially invited to help pick fourteen new coordinators from a pool of twenty candidates. This time round, the term has increased from six to twelve months so it is doubly important that you have your say! Please cast your vote here no later than 23:59 (UTC) on Tuesday, 28 September 2010.

With many thanks in advance for your participation from the coordinator team,  Roger Davies ^talk 21:29, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

ARA ships

Que tal che, FYI [10] --Jor70(talk) 17:34, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Renaming "Battle of Top Malo House"

Hello, FarSouthNavy. You have new messages at Talk:Battle of Top Malo House.
Message added 22:28, 12 October 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The secret in their eyes

Thanks for your interest in the article. I'm quite certain that trivia does not belong in articles. For example, this guidelines: Wikipedia:Handling trivia covers the matter. In this case, I don't see how a fact not mentioned in a film belongs in the plot section. If it was important to the film, it would be mentioned in the film. However, if you can find another place to include that information in the article, that might work. Personally, I don't see its importance but I'm open to good ideas. Please let me know if you feel differently, and thanks again for wanting the article to be as good as possible. --Ring Cinema (talk) 17:43, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Had you read the "Production" section, you would find an appropriate mention to the stadium scene... Had I read the essay WP:HTRIV, I would not argue with you about such a minor issue... By the way, I'am the main contributor to this articleand much more than this, I'am a Huracán fan, therefore my interest in "The Secret in their Eyes" is understandable. ;) Thank you.--Darius (talk) 23:15, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm going to keep the whole exchange in one place. Thanks. --Ring Cinema (talk) 23:40, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LV (September 2010)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LV (September 2010) Front page Project news Articles Members Editorial

Project news The results of September's coordinator elections, plus ongoing project discussions and proposals	Articles A recap of the month's new Featured and A-Class articles
Members Our newest A-class medal recipients, this September's top contestants, plus the reviewers' Roll of Honour (Apr-Sep 2010)	Editorial In the final part of our series on copyright, Moonriddengirl describes how to deal with copyright infringements on Wikipedia
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 21:12, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

History

[11] --Jor70 (talk) 23:48, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Gracias Jor, aunque te parezca mentira, no sabía que La Gaceta Marinera tenía un sitio tan completo en internet. Te envío info sobre la base naval de MDQ, pero que está relacionada con lahistoria del COAN. Saludos.--Darius (talk) 01:09, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

ARA 1922 – 1938 [12] --Jor70 (talk) 11:26, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

illegal?

I'm not sure it's right to say the judge learns of an illegal procedure. He doesn't seem to express that, and I'm pretty sure he does not know about the stolen letters. What's the basis for your claim? And many thanks.--Ring Cinema (talk) 05:24, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

The judge questions Espósito and Sandoval for breaking into a house without a writ, not for stealing the letters. I understand that a home invasion is illegal, even in the Argentina of 1974--Darius (talk) 11:55, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

I didn't remember that the judge knew they entered the house. I thought it was just surveillance.--Ring Cinema (talk) 12:52, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

I know that "just surveillance" in the Argentina of that time was unlawful if not supported by awarrant. The legal term was merodeo (something like "stalking") and was considered a criminal offense.--Darius (talk) 15:45, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. Couldn't do it without you. The more I study this film the more I revere it. --Ring Cinema (talk) 15:48, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks to you, Ring Cinema. I think that "The Secret..." is the best Argentine movie of the last 25 years. Regards.--Darius (talk) 15:56, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Submarines and Gibraltar

Hi Darius,

How on earth did you manage to dig that up?

Regards,

Justin talk 14:16, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

I was amazed you were able to find what out what actually happened, as all the reference books I have ever seen list the origin of the attack as unknown. Kudos for that.

I never realised you were interested in the Spanish Civil War at all. Quite amazing really given we've worked together so often. I don't know if you were aware but my grandfather and mother came to the UK as refugees during the Spanish Civil War. I tend to avoid it as a subject area as given my family history I wouldn't say I was entirely objective. Thanks for filling me in. Regards, Justin talk 16:39, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

May I ask for your input?

See Talk:Falklands War#Malvinist?. I must ask a rather delicate question, I used the word Malvinist to describe Anaya. I was completely unaware of any negative connotation attached to the word, so if there is I must apologise humbly for using it. I would welcome your comments. Un abrazo. Justin talk 21:01, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Many thanks, your help and input is much appreciated. Justin talk 14:56, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LVI, October 2010

Your Military history Newsletter Project News: Editors for the newsletter, GAN backlog reduction drive Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: EyeSerene sums up our "Five years of military history"

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit thenewsroom.BrownBot (talk) 22:16, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Dubious?

The photograph of two Brazilian officers in the War of the Triple Alliance which you've called was taken around 1868, when the allied forces were besieging Humaitá fortress for almost 2 years. During that time, all military operations were halted. Both sides remained still. So yes, it was taken very near the battlefront. Why only that caption needs source, one God knows, right? --Lecen (talk) 18:36, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LVII, November 2010

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors, "Military Historian of the Year", New Incubator, Black Project Report Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: bahamut guides us through "Nominating military biographies for deletion"

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit thenewsroom.BrownBot (talk) 22:12, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Did I miss it?

[13] Support your edit, just wanted to ask if we'd done this already and someone had added it back? Wee Curry Monster talk 01:04, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Don't worry, it's not just you, WE did miss it :). The guy who moved the contents of the old page simply forgot to delete the "victory" entry as agreed on the discussion page and nobody notice that. The IP user 190.138.26.249 only added a bogus figure for the British casualties. Darius (talk) 01:34, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

And a question [14] do you know of a cite to support this edit? Wee Curry Monster talk 01:08, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

The statement is basically true, and I found a reliable source in English to cite:Martin Middlebrook's "The fight for the Malvinas". I will edit the article accordingly. Best Regards. Darius(talk) 01:39, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mission Bravo Tango

There's no AfD template on the article. Corvus cornix_talk 21:32, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Corvus. My computer developed some problems at the time of my AfD request, thus I couldn't complete it in time. Thank you again.--Darius (talk) 23:14, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

I saw you were having problems, so I added the template for you. Good catch by the way, it looks like a hoax article. Wee Curry Monster talk23:41, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, mate ;).--Darius (talk) 23:42, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Falklands War#Malvinist

Hi Darius,

Your comment on a proposal is invited. Wee Curry Monster talk 22:40, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Shipwrecks

Hi, just a note to say that if the ship does not have an article on Wikipedia, then a ref is required for an entry on a List of shipwrecks in (year). Mjroots (talk) 16:08, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Battle of Mount Longdon

I would appreciate your perspective on recent edits that the Argentine conscripts in the Falklands War were well fed and that the allegations of maltreatment of the conscripts is untrue. See Battle of Mount Longdonand WP:NPOVN#Battle of Mount Longdon. Regards, Wee Curry Monster talk 11:45, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LVIII, December 2010

Your military history newsletter – Volume LVIII, December 2010 From the editors • "Military Historian of the Year"• Discussions • The month's new featured and A-class content • Review awards Contest results • A-class medal recipients • bahamut teaches us proper usage of "Jargon and acronyms" To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewedhere. BrownBot (talk) 20:32, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

don't want to bother you...

...but I've become curious: what leads you to this conclusion? Just to show you examples from contemporary Bolzano: [15],[16]... --Mai-Sachme(talk) 16:12, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

You're right; these images speak for themselves...Noblesse oblige :). We need, however, inline citations for this and other statements contained in the article. I will re-edit the article accordingly. Thank you!.--Darius (talk) 17:31, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Original research on Operation Banner

I removed your text from OP Banner. This is an almost classic example of the use of selective quotes and is thus original research. Please if referencing the report try and either summarise the material accurately or use quotes from the report. Kernel Saunters (talk) 12:04, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Volume LVIX, January 2011

Your Military history Newsletter Project News: From the editors Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: EyeSerene discusses "Writing neutrally for Wikipedia"

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit thenewsroom.BrownBot (talk) 15:28, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

		The Modest Barnstar
		Thanks for your recent contributions!Mike Restivo (talk) 19:10, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Article

Did you by chance keep a copy of "Mud and Blood at Goose Green" by David Aldea from Military History April 2002? The online copies have disappeared.

Regards,

WCM

Hi WCM. While a have a lot of online reports and books saved on my computer (most of them PDF), I didn't download this one. I hope we could find it in the nearer future. Best Regards.--Darius(talk) 19:20, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

P.S.: Well my friend, at least I found on E-bay. No bids yet. Something's better than nothing :).--Darius (talk) 19:25, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Move

Do you have any opposition to me moving Lion of Babylon tank to Lion of Babylon? It is better known as just the Lion of Babylon. Marcus Qwertyus 17:43, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

American help in Falklands

Hi there it seems you support the IRA and also seem to defend the Argentines in the Falklands. Americans helped with satellite images and financed the UK during the Malvinas war in 1982 not to mention the Sidewinder missiles that helped the British air forces.Foob (talk) 19:46, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi Foob. Remember that Wikipedia is not a forum; however, I will reply your comment anyway. Well, First of all, I also support the US, although with some reservations ;). Now that I am an adult person, I understand that USA and the UK were close allies in 1982: could they have acted differently?. Regards.--Darius (talk) 01:02, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Indeed. US saved UK's ass in Falklands/Malvinas... just to point out interesting bio on Peter T. Kingwho supported the IRA in the 80's when he met them and delivered a great speech.Foob(talk) 20:45, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I forgot to mention today King's speech (not the movie, obviously :D) in my last comment.--Darius (talk) 02:10, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LX, February 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: Ed talks about real-world collaborations and how you can help

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit thenewsroom.BrownBot (talk) 21:28, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Battle of Martín García (1814) and Project Military History

(Message also copied to User:MBelgrano and User:IANVS)
I have noticed (not for the first time), there is very little input into the Project Military History from our side. Of our battles (Independence and Civil War) one of the best articles we have to offer is Battle of Martín García (1814). Somebody (don't know who) had reviewed it and found it lacking. I did most of the translation from es:wp. I'd love to hear your input and see what we can do to get more of South American military history into a more prominent display at MilHist. Please don't discuss here but better at the article's talk page so we can keep all the comments together. -- Alexf^(talk) 15:13, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Galleon

Hello DagosNavy. I've noticed that you've added the galleon to the category of Spanish Inventions. Though I've played (too big) a role in promoting Spanish inventions, I feel very uncomfortable with the "galleon" as an "invention". I know that you could argue that it was an "invention" but I prefer to think of it more as a "development" or "improvement" and that we should reserve the word "invention" for really startling breakthroughs like the radio, or the gyrocopter or some of the pioneering submarines. Otherwise the wikipedia is going to have endless lists of "inventions". So, I'd prefer that the "galleon" was removed from the category of Spanish inventions. I think it is enough that Bazan's role in designing the definitive galleon (something you rarely see) is recognised. Provocateur (talk) 01:59, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Warrington bomb attacks

I see you've been doing a lot of work on "Troubles-related" articles lately. If you have the time, could you look at this discussion and help clear-up the confusion? Thanks. ~Asarlaí 12:59, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Inventions v progression?

Thanks for understanding. If you'd decided to restore what you'd done I wasn't going to oppose you. Now, like a lawyer, politician or economist, I have to (almost) contradict myself. I think Narcis' and Peral's submarines warrant inclusion in the list of inventions because they were trying out a several new technologies on these submarines that were to have an important influence. What do you think? (By the way, is there a list for Central and Southern American inventions, one that could include indigenous inventions, like the Aztec, Maya and Inca calendars and writing systems, medicines? ) Provocateur (talk) 03:01, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to take part in a study

I am a Wikipedian, who is studying the phenomenon on Wikipedia. I need your help to conduct my research on about understanding "Motivation of Wikipedia contributors." I would like to invite you toMain Study. Please give me your valuable time, which estimates about 20 minutes. I chose you as a English Wikipedia user who made edits recently through the RecentChange page. Refer to the first page in the online survey form for more information on the study and me.cooldenny (talk) 01:40, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Done :)--Darius (talk) 02:29, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi DagosNavy . I appreciate for completing the survey two weeks ago. I would like to return your favor with a reward of an online gift card with no condition. Please leave your email address inthe final version of survey of my project. In addition, you can get chance to win $50 worth of gift card. It takes only 10 minutes to complete the final version because it contains only 35 questions. If you have Wikipedia friends, please introduce this survey to them. Thank you so much. cooldenny (talk) 14:00, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Done again, and good luck with your survey.--Darius (talk) 18:57, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXI, March 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: Dank helps you see what article writers want from reviewers

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit thenewsroom.BrownBot (talk) 01:30, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXII, April 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: Buggie111 discusses neutral point of view

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit thenewsroom.BrownBot (talk) 22:08, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

First Battle of Sirte

Hello Darius
I notice you flagged the conclusion here as original research. The conclusion is based on what's in the article; can you be more specific as to what you are unhappy with?
Similarly with references. The text is drawn from the books listed; do you feel any particular statement needs verifying? Xyl 54 (talk) 04:18, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the vote of confidence! I’m wondering now if I can live up to it. The books I used when I worked on this were from the city library, which is in boxes at present; I don’t really know when I’ll be able to get access to them again. I'll see what I can do.

With the conclusion I was mainly trying to get some neutrality; older British sources tend to label the Sirte action as a victory, which is a bit of an overstatement (the British force faced down the Italian fleet, and got their convoy through, but then, so did the Italians) while Italian sources seem to conflate the action on the 17th with the Tripoli action the following night, which is a bit of a selective reading. Groves (IIRC) describes all the events of the period, so I drew a lot on that.

I was flummoxed by the order of battle BTW; should it list all the ships mentioned in the article, or just those involved in the Sirte action on the 17th? Xyl 54 (talk) 12:09, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

OK; in the meantime if I can find anything else I'll add them. The order of battle thing makes sense; looking at it (off the top of my head) that's what it does have. Regards, Xyl 54 (talk) 12:50, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:PookRescued.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:PookRescued.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn(talk) 17:45, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIII, May 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors –Contest results, A-class medal recipients Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Editorial: Hawkeye's thoughts on the article writing process

To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate sectionhere. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:20, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Ciao

non so se capisci l'italiano, ma ho visto che hai cambiato la data di morte di Evaristo Barrera.. it's wrong, there is a source where it's written he was dead in Novara, Italy, in another month.. a question: in Argentina it's possibile asking informations about census? There are some Napoli players from Argentina (in Naples we love infinitely your country :))..) from the first years and we ignore when they were dead, so it seems they are alive at 100 or more years old.. I'm speaking about Antonio Angel Capuano, Carlos Martin Volante and Antonio Ferrara and Nicola Ferrara.. 93.56.39.55(talk) 17:57, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Ciao, capisco un puo di Italiano, ho trovato la data di morte di Barrera (Ottobre 1982)in questa pagina di Central Córdoba di Rosario. Nonostante, si sai d'un altra pubblicazione dove la data sia quella del 7 Giugno, va bene, la pagina web di Central Córdoba non mi sembra molto affidabile comunque.

Thanks for your accomplishments, I guess Diego's legacy still remains alive there in Napoli :) I always remember the match Italy-Argentina in 1990, especially a banner which read "Benvenuti a Maradonia" ;). No online access to the 2010 census, but I promise to research about all the bios you mention. Cheers.--Darius (talk) 21:00, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

uno strano errore :).. ah, se vuoi intervenirequi la wikipedia italiana ha bisogno di te, vogliamo migliorare le voci sul calcio argentino.. spagnolo, inglese o italiano puoi usare qualsiasi lingua tu voglia, ovviamente :)..93.56.2.147 (talk) 21:14, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Mount Kent Skirmish

I saw you'd been editing this article, hope this edit of mine [17] isn't a problem? Wee Curry Monster talk 09:39, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

No problem at all, WCM, I agree that the "v" word should be avoided, once consensus was reached on this matter. Best regards.--Darius (talk) 11:52, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

File:AbramsLost-1991.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, AbramsLost-1991.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Armbrust ^{Talk to me} _Contribs 16:28, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIV, June 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Finland and Spitfires Op-ed: Fifelfoo and hunting for plagiarism

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go tothis page. BrownBot (talk) 22:42, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXV, July 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Zeebrugee and Afghanistan Op-ed: WereSpielChequers examines RfA

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go tothis page. BrownBot (talk) 21:47, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVI, August 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Carthage and Australia in Palestine Op-ed: Remembering 9/11

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go tothis page. EdwardsBot (talk) 17:45, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

1991 Cappagh killings

Thank you for the excellent work you have been doing on the 1991 Cappagh killings article. Your additions really improve the article!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 16:19, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your recognition, Jeanne! I also appreciate your marvellous work on Troubles-related pages. Congratulations!--Darius (talk) 16:33, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVII, September 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D and Ian Rose look at Australian air power Op-ed: Buggie111 ruminates about WikiLife and WikiDeath

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go tothis page. EdwardsBot (talk) 02:01, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Coalisland-1992.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Coalisland-1992.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message onWikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation.--ImageTaggingBot (talk) 22:05, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVIII, October 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D analyzes three books from Osprey Publishing Review essay: Nick-D reviews the new Bundeswehr Military History Museum

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page.EdwardsBot (talk) 08:01, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

WikiProjects

Hi, i was wondering why you considered the addition of the Terrorism WikiProject to 1994 Crossmaglen mortar attack was improper seeing as it was a terrorist attack making it relevant? Mabuska^(talk) 16:51, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Mabuska, We haven't enough sources (as required per WP:TERRORIST) to claim that this was a 'terrorist' attack. Bulk of sources related to the Troubles tend to classify as terrorist only those attacks which involved exclusively civilian victims (such as indiscriminate bombings or shooting sprees), and this attack on a pure military target clearly isn't the case.--Darius (talk) 17:02, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

I'd say there are enough reliable sources that would classify the IRA, and the other paramilitary organisations in Northern Ireland, as terrorist organisations who committed acts of terrorism which would quantify this as a terrorist attack. Also such a distinction of what is classified as a terrorist attack (only those on civilians as oppossed to military targets) i've never heard before and would assume that any attack regardless of the target would be a terrorist attack. If that still doesn't merit its inclusion, then by all means remove the WikiProject from any article i add it to that you disagree with. Mabuska^(talk) 17:33, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Try then WT:WTW to raise your concerns there. I just followed WP:TERRORIST. Thank you.--Darius (talk) 17:36, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Out of curiousity does WP:TERRORIST not apply to an articles content rather than the name of a WikiProject, which if it violated that policy, shouldn't even be in existence even though its been around since 2006? I only added the template to other Troubles articles as it was already on several so was trying to create a sense of continuity and cohesion. I'll make a request for clarification from that WikiProject as to what exactly falls under its scope. Thanks. Mabuska ^(talk) 23:19, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

WP:TERRORISM states that "While we have to date limited ourselves to acts of violence against civilians by VNSAs for political gain, users are encouraged to add their own new focus. It is impossible to fully separate "terrorism" from "counter-terrorism", as the methods used are often similar. One should use common sense in labeling an attack on unarmed civilians at the Munich Olympics as "an act of terrorism", while an attack against an Iraqi military base might be better suited to the Military history Wikiproject."

It's obvious that attacks on military forces don't fall under the scope of the project at least "to date". And I guess that even if any user is encouraged to "add his own new focus", that user would need a substantial consensus to change anything. Good luck.--Darius (talk) 00:01, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

IRA use of Irish Tricolour

I came across an edit who mainly does Military History on here so I asked him about the Tricolour usage ,here. I will try to find more out read other articles . I still would prefer the pheonix , but I cant see how .Murry1975 (talk) 18:03, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Murry1975. First of all, thank you for letting me to know Marcus' opinion. As you surely imagine, I heartily agree with him, particulary regarding his mention of WP:CENSOR. On the other hand, note that I've replaced the files which link to the national flag of the Republic for thisscaled-down banner (still the tricolour, however) on all the infoboxes dealing with the Provisional IRA, in line withwas agreed back in 2009. Best regards.--Darius (talk) 19:45, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your help on this. I still think it could cause confusion but I dont think there is anything that could be done about it now . Once again thanks for your help . Murry1975 (talk) 11:21, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks to you, cheers!.--Darius (talk) 11:42, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

1994 Crossmaglen mortar attack

I have moved article back to original title, not sure about the title you moved it too. I am open to discussion on article talk page about moving to a better title if one can be proposed, best Mo ainm~Talk 17:06, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

OK, best regards.--Darius (talk) 17:07, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

HMS Blazer (P279)

DagosNavy, I see that you have reinstated the section about the Cherbourg incident on HMS Blazer's page. As was mentioned on the edit history whilst the incident is noteworthy it takes up an unreasonable space on the page in relation to other details. It is only 1 incident and distracts from the main purpose of the ship, would a separate page be best to summarise the entire incident with the precursors and the events that followed as a whole, since HMS Blazer was only really a bit on the side?95.147.81.164 (talk) 15:06, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Done, regards.--Darius (talk) 19:07, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Henry.pearson (talk) 21:17, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

"And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold,

I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.

For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord."

Luke 2:10-11 (King James Version)

Wee Curry Monster talkis wishing you a Merry Christmas.

This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove.

Spread the cheer by adding {{Subst:Xmas4}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks, my old mate, and Merry Christmas to you!--Darius (talk) 21:40, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIX, November 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors– MHotY coming; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at the Congolese Wars Review essay: Ian Rose goes to El Alamein Op-ed: DCI's call to revitalize WikiProject History

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Ian Rose (talk) and Ed ^{[talk][majestic titan]} 20:21, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

North Russia Intervention

Hello DagosNavy, I have seen that you have been a major contributor to this article. I am going to tranlate it into French and I have a question. I am a little bit suprised because there were more than 2000 canadians and franch soldiers and there was no canadians or french killed or wounded. Strange, isn't it? Best regards, Skiff(talk) 16:21, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Stiff, my real name is Darius, unfortunately the sources I used to edit that article are focused only on US or British casualties, as frequently happens with English-language books or documents. I only known that in the northern front there was just a colonial French battalion (the 21th), thus I guess there were not major losses at least around Murmansk. The French role was more notable on the southern front, but apparently dessertions and poor command led to disastrous consequences. You should try book, which deals with the Canadian contribution to the Allies. I found anotherinteresting online source about the French intervention in the south, but there is no mention of global casualties as far I know. I promise to contact you as soon as I find anything more. Best regards.--Darius (talk) 23:42, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick answer. I will have a look on the sources you have found. I wish you a happy and a wealthy new year. Skiff (talk) 08:26, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Glad for helping you, Skiff, and Happy New Year!--Darius (talk) 20:49, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	You've put a hell of a lot of work into articles to do with incidents that happened during the Troubles, improving each and everyone article in terms of neutrality, information, and just all round improvement taking many to at least a B rating. Great job and keep it up!Mabuska (talk) 13:36, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks a millon, mate! ;)--Darius (talk) 15:49, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

I agree that you deserve the Barnstar for all your excellent contributions on Troubles-related articles!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 16:45, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks again Jeanne!!--Darius (talk) 17:39, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Happy New Year

Happy 2012!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 16:45, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Jeanne, Happy New Year and thank you for your marvellous work on Wikipedia!!--Darius (talk) 17:38, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Italian Navy codes

Hello Darius
Do you know anything about the Italian Navy codes? Specifically Allied penetration (or lack therof) of them? The Matapan page says the interception was made possible by Ultra decryptions (and I'm sure in other places I've seen reference to Enigma intelligence being a factor) but Blair says the Italians changed their codes (which didn't use Enigma anyway) in July 1940, and the Allies were unable to read them therafter. The Ultra page has it that they were penetrated in July 1941 (which is, again, after Matapan).
Do you have anything on this? Xyl 54 (talk) 15:33, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi Xyl 54
One of my first readings in English about the War in the Mediterranean, James Sadkovich, bring us some light regarding Matapan. He also agrees with Blair on the lack of Allied success in breaking the Italian code.
About Matapan, Sadkovich blames the use of Enigma by the German forces involved in the operation for the Italian defeat, since the British were able to read Enigma ciphers by the time. He also claims that the Germans asked the Italians to use their own Hagelin cipher machines (C38m) in Matapan. The Royal navy was reading the Hagelins since September 1940 (The Italian Navy in WWII, pp. 126-127, ISBN 0-313-28797-X). Another sources state that the Hagelin had been broken as early as 1937: see here.
What Bletchley Park was unable to crack after July 1940 and during the rest of the war with Italy was the main Italian naval code, in particular the code books (which don't need cipher machines). The Royal Navy remained clueless on the Italian Fleet movements until the 1943 capitulation, one example of this is Operation Harpoon (1942), where the first intel report to the British about the Italian fleet came in the form of 152mm rounds falling around them!. To make things worse for the Allies, when the Italian navy changed its code in 1940, they start to use separate codes for submarines, surface ships, operational orders, etc. (O'Connell, John: Submarine Operational Effectiveness in the 20th Century: Part Two (1939 - 1945), p. 133, ISBN 1462042570). Another Italian advantage was the use of wire instead of radio for high-profile operations.
According to Sadkovich, however, the weak point of the system were convoy operational orders, which were transmitted by Hagelin machines; this explains the efectiveness of British naval and aerial assets against axis convoys. John Winton, who makes an in-depth research on the matter in his book Ultra at sea (ISBN 0850528836), basically agrees with Sadkovich and O'Connell, but he asserts that the only source of intelligence about the Italians at sea was traffic analysis (this is, the volume of wireless communications between Italian Naval units and the Italian Admiralty).--Darius (talk) 18:21, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that, it makes things a lot clearer. What I had was Blairs comments (Hitlers U boat War vol I p165) on the first sorties by the RM’s submarine force; they lost ten boats (of 54) in about three weeks, leaving Supermarina “shaken”, and led to a decision to change the naval codes. This, he says, “came as a great shock to … Bletchley Park, who, until then, had been reading Italian codes currently and fluently. (the 1937 date in the Ultra article, I’m guessing) Thereafter, except for a brief period in 1941 ( the June 41 date given, presumably) they were unable to break Italian naval codes”. I'll have think on how it fits in with what the articles say. Xyl 54 (talk) 23:54, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Military Historian of the Year

Nominations for the "Military Historian of the Year" for 2011 are now open. If you would like to nominate an editor for this award, please do so here. Voting will open on 22 January and run for seven days. Thanks! On behalf of the coordinators,Nick-D (talk) and Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 22:55, 15 January 2012 (UTC) You were sent this message because you are a listed as a member of the Military history WikiProject.

The Troubles Magazine

Today I came upon the website of the Glenravel Local History Project. It publishes books and magazines on the history of Belfast. However, I was surprized to find that, since 2001, it's been publishing a whole stack of magazinesabout the Troubles! Each issue is an in-depth timeline of each month of the Troubles, drawn from old newspapers and the like. After more serching I found a website that lets you read them in their entirety (well, a lot of them). Surely sources can't get much better than this :-P~Asarlaí 13:06, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Fantastic finding, man!! A lot of work ahead, I guess :). Thank you!.

The Bugle: Issue LXX, January 2012

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D Nick-D looks into two recent Milhist books Review essay: Kirill Lokshin, the first coordinator Op-ed: Hchc's English Castles

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 Ed ^{[talk][majestic titan]} 23:52, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikimedia Stories Project

Aloha!

My name is Victor and I work with the Wikimedia Foundation, the non-profit organization that supports Wikipedia. We're chronicling the inspiring stories of the Wikipedia community around the world, including those from readers, editors, and donors. Stories are absolutely essential for any non-profit to persuade new people to support the cause, and we know the vast network of people who use Wikipedia have so much to share.

I find stories that drive our annual fundraising efforts. It's important to convey the incredible diversity of people who've come to rely upon Wikipedia every day.

I'd really like the opportunity to interview you to tell your story, with the possibility of using it in our materials, on our community websites, or as part of this year’s fundraiser to encourage others to support Wikipedia.

Your editing of military history is incredible. I'm curious what part of Argentina you live in?

I'm hoping you will elaborate on your story with me, either over the phone, by Skype, by facebook, by email, or any means you like. Please let me know if you're inclined to take part in the Wikipedia Stories Project and we'll set up a good time to discuss further.

Thank you,

Victor Grigas

user:Victorgrigas

[email protected] Victor Grigas (talk) 19:16, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Fortuna III article

Hi,

I created a new article for Fortuna III, maybe you want to add something to it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Fortuna_III

Best

bcartolo (talk) 00:48, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Bcartolo, I promise to add some info as soon as possible. Thanks for thinking of me for the job, Regards.--Darius (talk) 01:00, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Rivero

Hope you don't mind but I reverted your edit. The previous text was actually better in terms of English grammar, though I can see why a native Spanish speaker would make the edit you did. Drop me a line if you wish to have it explained. Regards. Wee Curry Monster talk 23:22, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

No sweat, my friend, I thought that the term "interior" makes more sense in Spanish than in English, thus I replaced it for "countryside" (I was thinking of another word of common use in the Islands, i.e. "camp"). It was just a case of overcorrection. Best Regards.--Darius(talk) 23:41, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXI, February 2012

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks into two recent Milhist books Op-ed: Ian Rose discusses article assessments

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 Ed ^{[talk][majestic titan]} 09:41, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for improving the article about Alceste De Ambris!

Enjoy a brownie! Sapere aude22 (talk) 06:42, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Nice for coffee time! ;). Thank you!.--Darius (talk) 15:44, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you DagosNavy for cleaning up the 1989 Jonesborough ambush article after another editor decided it needed a "major revision". Unfortunately he deleted an entre section besides other text. I left him a message on his talk page asking him to use the article's talk page first.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 12:34, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Jeanne. My only intention was to fix a notes mismatch, I was unaware that another editor had deleted a well-sourced section without notice. The page is now on my watchlist, I will monitor any undesirable activity there. Regards.--Darius (talk) 19:32, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

The section has since been restored - after hours of work. It is very important to include this section to present a NPOV article even if the RUC do reject Weir's allegations. On the other hand, Irish Supreme Court Justice Henry Barron found his evidence to have been overall, credible. As I said on the article's talk page, we as editors are not here to offer a sympathetic nor hostile viewpoint regarding the subjects of our articles just the facts, backed by reliable sources.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 16:26, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. If relevant info about a subject (and this is the case) is supported by the majority of sources, then it MUST be included in the respective article, no matter how controversial it is.--Darius (talk) 23:09, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

There is now an onging debate on Talk:1989 Jonesborough ambush as to whether it should be included.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 13:21, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXII, March 2012

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks into two recent Milhist books Op-ed: Hawkeye on Wikipedia collaborating with the AWM

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 Ed ^{[talk][majestic titan]} 02:06, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Provisional Irish Republican Army campaign 1969–1997

I am not sure that was simple vandalism. Please consider discussing with an editor who you are reverting. --John (talk) 21:33, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi John, removal of sourced content as this IP editor did is vandalism. Thank you.--Darius (talk) 21:37, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Not unless it was intended to damage the encyclopedia, which I am not sure this was. By repeatedly reverting without entering discussion with the IP you are edit warring and could be as vulnerable to criticism and/or sanction as the IP. --John (talk) 21:42, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Unexplained removal of sourced content damages Wikipedia, it's crystal-clear. If you agree with the IP editor, you can revert my changes.--Darius (talk) 21:48, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

I agree with you and have duly warned the IP, but I wanted to ask you to discuss edits you revert in the future. Could you, please? Even unambiguous vandals need a warning. --John (talk) 21:50, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Well done, John, next time I will warn the IP user as you did. Thanx.--Darius (talk) 21:55, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate that. --John (talk) 22:07, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of World War II Croatian concentration camps in former Yugoslavia

A tag has been placed on World War II Croatian concentration camps in former Yugoslavia, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

I assume this was supposed to go in the Category namespace, it exists there with the same name

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly]] to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Frood! ^Ohai _{What did I break now?} 00:55, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXIII, April 2012

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Bomzibar on Subhas Chandra Bose; Hawkeye on corps commanders; Nick-D on American special forces Op-ed: The Land on commemorating World War I

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 Ed ^{[talk][majestic titan]} 23:57, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Turbine_class_destroyer

Please see my question on the talk page for Turbine_class_destroyer. ~Eric F (Talk)<--98.26.28.41 (talk) 22:30, 3 May 2012 (UTC) 22:30, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Nevermind: (question answered). ~Eric F 98.26.28.41 (talk) 00:02, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXIV, May 2012

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Bomzibar on Chiang Kai-shek; Nick-D on the Falklands War Interview: Article writers discuss biographies Op-ed: Nick-D examines using news articles as sources

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 Ed ^{[talk][majestic titan]} 14:33, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

GOCE July 2012 Copy Edit Drive

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D on the Chaco War and the Bougainville Campaign Op-ed: Remembering conflict

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 Ed ^{[talk][majestic titan]} 18:47, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Cardiff Docks the biggest coal port!!?

"... work commenced on Barry Docks in 1884 and the first dock basin was opened in 1889 to be followed by two other docks and extensive port installations. The company developed extensive dock offices to cope with the administration of both the docks and the railway. Trade grew from one million tons in the first year, to over nine million tons by 1903, and as early as 1892 it was handling a third more coal than Cardiff Docks.[12] The port was crowded with ships and had flourishing ship repair yards, cold stores, flour mills and an ice factory. By 1913 Barry was the largest coal exporting port in the world handling 4000 ships and 11 million tons of coal,[2][[[Special:Contributions/90.208.98.181|90.208.98.181]] (talk)]

Taken from Wikipedia — Precedingunsigned comment added by 90.208.98.181(talk) 00:28, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I am not the bloke who added that info, perhaps you are mistaking me for somebody else. Regards.--Darius (talk) 13:52, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

USS Ranger (CV-61)

Hi, I noticed you added detail to the ship. I need help with an aritcle that may be related related. Most of the detail is on the talk page. Draft that needs notabilty, etc.The A-6 may have come from the Ranger.--Canoe1967 (talk) 21:39, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I've added the A-6 combat loss just because this aircraft belonged to USS Ranger, and the operation in which it was involved was an air-to-sea mission against shipping; to be frank, air-to-ground operations from carriers are not in my area of interest. I can help you, however, with a number of sources about the Gulf War I know. Best Regards.--Darius (talk) 23:36, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for responding. It happened way back in January, 1991. I would really like to get a better version of the footage. Do you know if they would keep it this long? I think everyone remembers it and I am wondering if it is the first time a laser guided bomb video had ever been shown widely to the public. That may help the notabilty and article survival. I could put it in sections everywhere but there are so many it would fit in.--Canoe1967 (talk) 19:06, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXVI, July 2012

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors: Wikimania 2012; special projects note Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D on the Australian 25th Battalion Interview: Article writers discuss buildings and fortifications Op-ed: Hawkeye7 reports on a weekend workshop

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 Ed ^{[talk][majestic titan]} 09:12, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Seriously...

Acting like this [18][19][20] just brings you down to a low-level - a level that makes you little better than the British-POV pushers here. I don't care if you hate the entirety British, or think that the actions of a few of them are a good enough reason to despise them, just keep it off Wikipedia. As a Brit (foreign born) I am both guiltless and in no way to blame for any grievances ^____^. --Τασουλα (talk) 21:07, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

You are right, Τασουλα, I took it in the wrong way...First of all, I don't "hate the entirety British"; one of the finest person I've ever met in life is a guy from East Anglia. But after six years in Wikipedia I hate trolls, vandals, PoV warriors, etc. If I overreacted and breached WP:CIVIL is because the so-called "user" brought in the Falklands issue, and he got the reply he deserved. My apologies to all the good faith editors from Britain like you, but if somebody attacks me, I will defend myself. I promise to keep my nerve next time and simply ignore the jerks. And of course, I really regret the deaths of so many people in The Troubles, including those of British soldiers. My apologies again and Best Regards.--Darius (talk) 00:03, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Topic ban

Per the consensus of uninvolved administrators in this AE thread, you are banned from all articles, discussions, and other content related to The Troubles, the Ulster banner and British baronets, broadly construed across all namespaces for a period of 3 months. Per WP:AC/DS#Appealyou may appeal this ban the appropriate noticeboard (currently Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement), or directly to the Arbitration Committee--Cailil ^talk 13:09, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Pietro Micca class submarine

I'm curious why you removed the (no. MC) acronym from subject article?Thewellman (talk) 05:48, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Just because pennant numbers and acronyms are not usual in articles about WWII Italian warships...feel free to restore it. Best Regards.--Darius (talk) 12:20, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

DYK for MT explosive motorboat

Orlady (talk) 00:04, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXVII, August 2012

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D on the legacy of World War II Op-ed: Bomzibar on German military history

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 Ed ^{[talk][majestic titan]} 00:45, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

List of cases of police brutality in Argentina‎

Hi, thanks very much for checking thoroughly over the new page List of cases of police brutality in Argentina‎. It's been quite a gruelling task reading over all those articles to find the key points (I also made most of the others in Category:Lists of cases of police brutality). Still, I think it was worth it; the lists are much more informative than the old categories.

I plan to review the American one... it needs trimming where it's too long, and there may be some mere "allegations" which should be removed. Anyway, thanks again for helping with the Argentina page. –Fayenatic London 19:54, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Initialy I disagreed with the plain deletion of the old categories; I've suspected that political correctness was behind the move. I acknowledge, however, that there were too many "allegations", as you say, and lists are more practical than categories because you can add a lot of sourced details and particular cases which are lost in the big picture. Thank you and Best Regards.--Darius (talk) 12:03, 7 September 2012 (UTC)