User talk:Lloydelliot10

Replied on your talk page. Lloydelliot10 (talk) 15:56, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Glengarry not caubeen[edit]

The headdress worn by Irish Army pipers is called a Glengarry and is notting like a British army caubeen. It is not the same as the Scottish headdress of the same name. The Glengarry was designed in 1934 for the Cavalry Corps as a more practical headdress than the standard peaked cap in the confines of their armoured cars and tanks. The Glengarry is the same colour as the armys service dress uniform with a black band and two black swallow-tail ribbons at the rear. The cap badge is worn over the left eye. Officers in the RDF wear a similar Glengarry but with green band and ribbons as part of their service dress uniform. Army pipers and drummers wear a black Glengarry with a saffron band and ribbons and a dark green feather hackle.

Glengarry worn with SD No1s

Glengarry worn with DPMs

MFIreland • ^Talk 23:54, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification, they all look the same to me but I'm no expert on Hats. Lloydelliot10 (talk) 14:06, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have requested page protection until everyone involved actually decides to use the articles talk page to discuss what appears to be an edit war over the articles content and direction. Until then can no more edits be made to the article?

Also MFIreland you need sources to back up your claims. If you don't have sources then they hold no substance. Likewise in stating that they use a caubeen. Just because it looks doesn't make it one or not one. Mabuska ^(talk) 00:16, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Caubeen[edit]

Hi, i have got the Caubeen article locked until we can sort the article out to prevent MFIreland's continual PoV edit-warring over it. As a contribuator to the article i would like your participation in the articles talk page on improving the article. Mabuska ^(talk) 22:36, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Users may remove warnings from their talk pages[edit]

Hi. Re this edit: users, even IPs, are permitted to remove warnings from their talk pages - see WP:BLANKING. It is taken as showing that they have read them. Reinstating them only leads to unnecessary ill-feeling and edit wars. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 19:55, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Long Range Reconnaissance Patrol, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page G2 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:18, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Royal Navy[edit]

Can you self revet your last edit at Royal Navy its in breach of the 3RR and contradicts the article text, in breach of MOS. Also a section was started on the talk page to discuss the change. Jim Sweeney (talk) 18:53, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have added some further text to the lead - you can still comment on the additions on the talk page if you wish. Jim Sweeney (talk) 19:16, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A belated welcome![edit]

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Lloydelliot10. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! S. Rich (talk) 23:46, 23 January 2012 (UTC)--S. Rich (talk) 23:46, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your invitation to participate in a Wikimedia-approved survey in online behavior.[edit]

Hello, my name is Michael Tsikerdekis [1][2], currently involved as a student in full time academic research at Masaryk University. I am writing to you to kindly invite you to participate in an online survey about interface and online collaboration on Wikipedia. The survey has been reviewed and approved by the Wikimedia Foundation Research Committee.

I am contacting you because you were randomly selected from a list of active editors. The survey should take about 7 to 10 minutes to complete, and it is very straightforward.

Wikipedia is an open project by nature. Let’s create new knowledge for everyone! :-)

To take part in the survey please follow the link: tsikerdekis.wuwcorp.com/pr/survey/?user=88039375 (HTTPS).

Best Regards, --Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 12:04, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

PS: The results from the research will become available online for everyone and will be published in an open access journal.

UPDATE: This is the second and final notification for participating in this study. Your help is essential for having concrete results and knowledge that we all can share. I would like to thank you for your time and as always for any questions, comments or ideas do not hesitate to contact me. PS: As a thank you for your efforts and participation in Wikipedia Research you will receive a Research Participation Barnstar after the end of the study. --Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 12:14, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

		Research Participation Barnstar
		For your participation in the survey for Anonymity and conformity on the internet. Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 14:06, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Honourable Artillery Company - Published sources[edit]

Hi - As you know per WP:RS we can only use reliable published sources. Please can you confirm where "358TH ARMY DRESS COMMITTEE RECORD OF OUT OF COMMITTEE DECISIONS, Decision 4425" has been published. Thanks, Dormskirk (talk) 17:18, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]