Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/World War II task force/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

• The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
• The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
• A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 21:06, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

A-Class review for Panzer I now open

The A-Class review for Panzer I is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill ^(prof) 01:54, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

A-Class review for 172nd Infantry Brigade (United States) now open

The A-Class review for 172nd Infantry Brigade (United States) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Woody (talk) 10:10, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Peer review for SS Pennsylvanian now open

The peer review for SS Pennsylvanian is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Woody (talk) 15:15, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

A-Class review for Kaunas Fortress now open

The A-Class review for Kaunas Fortress is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Woody (talk) 12:59, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

A-Class review for Operation Ke now open

The A-Class review for Operation Ke is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill ^(prof) 23:23, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

A-Class review for SS Pennsylvanian now open

The A-Class review for SS Pennsylvanian is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 15:07, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

A-Class review for 2nd Canadian Infantry Division now open

The A-Class review for 2nd Canadian Infantry Division is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Woody (talk) 09:49, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

A-Class review for USS Iowa (BB-61) now open

The A-Class review for USS Iowa (BB-61) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! TomStar81 (Talk) 03:55, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

A-Class review for Guadalcanal Campaign now open

The A-Class review for Guadalcanal Campaign is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill ^(prof) 12:08, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Do we need this template on every ww2 article

As the section head says, do we need the above template at the bottom of all these articles? I find them to be god-awful and very unnecessary on articles about battles/operations etc although on an article for a campaign or theater i can sort of see the point of it.

So is there a policy or something which states it needs to be there?User:EnigmaMcmxc 29 August 2008 (UTC)

At one point, there was a push to replace the bulk of these with a link to Portal:World War II, which is much more compact; but that effort seems to have never been completed. Kirill ^(prof) 18:22, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

So we looking to put the following into all See Also sections as oppose to the butt ugly ones above:

I know with the American armed forces portal (which for some reason was absslutly everwhere) there was a picture to go with it, so is there a paticular graphic we want to use for the WW2 one?--EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 10:09, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Well ive added the portal link as shown above to all articles to do with the North African Campaign and will do the Normandy articles when i can assed :) --EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 11:09, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Peer review for Francis Hassett now open

The peer review for Francis Hassett is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill ^(prof) 11:48, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Flag use on military equipment info boxes.

Ive posted this exact same question in the Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (flags). It is related to world war 2 military hardware mainly.

Should we have flag icons in the info boxes or not? most of the info boxes have them although some don't for example the panzer 1 did up till a few days ago when they where all removed.

have a look at my post here and say what you think. I feel we need a set of guide lines for this, so that we don't have some info boxes with flagicons and some with out. We need either all of them having flag icons or none of them. My self im pro flags and think they make it look better and easier to read. They maybe a bit decorative but i feel they make it look cleaner and more comprehensive and easier to read. although i know some people disagree.

Wonx2150 (talk) 12:26, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

A-Class review for USS Nevada (BB-36) now open

The A-Class review for USS Nevada (BB-36) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Woody (talk) 22:43, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Mediterranean, Middle East and African theatres of World War II

See 1st Discussion See 2nd Discussion

There has recently been a discussion on the Mediterranean, Middle East and African theatres of World War II talk page which is going no where.

Philip Baird Shearer, who apprately missed the two above discussions regarding the creation of this article opposes it, while Grant65 was willing to just revert all edits which have been done to take everything back to the way it was at the beginning of the year.

The structre as it is now is basically as follows:

• Mediterranean, Middle East and African theatres of World War II
  • Campaign articles
    • battle/operation articles

So there is one article which deals with the theater and talks about the different campaigns, each section then links to the article on said campaign and they link down to the battles/operations etc

The two above mentioned users disagree that this is one theater, to quote Phillip:

"the "Mediterranean Basin was one theater"?* Since when were Iraq, Iran, and the Horn of Africa in the "Mediterranean Basin"? I think it makes much more sense to keep the three articles separate with emphasis on the land campaigns, pre US involvement in the Middle East and post US involvement in the Mediterranean (with the ending of the Middle East Article when the 8th Army moved from Middle East Command to AFHQ. Would you EnigmaMcmxc suggest that we combine the 5 Far East theatres into one article if not what is the difference between those theatres and these 3/4 theatres? --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 07:46, 6 September 2008 (UTC) "

(*)prior to the creation of one article to deal with the theater, there was several seperate and overalappign articles on the different geographical areas and none covering the theater as a whole.

Now to be fair the section on Madagascar is proably stretching it a bit however splitting an article on a theater up based on military commands and different nations involvment is nonsence.

The wiki itself describes a Theater as:

"a theater or theatre is defined as a specific geographical area of conduct of armed conflict, bordered by areas where no combat is taking place. In many ways the term is derived from the Colosseum of Rome. A theatre is defined by the need for separate planning to be occurring at the highest command echelon of the participating armed forces, including where separate Services are concerned. The delineation occurs along regional boundaries or maritime areas that require distinctly separate approach to planning from other regions bordering it. A single conflict may be waged in multiple theaters, and a single nation or an alliance may be participating in multiple theaters. "

The fighting which occured in the Balkans, Africa, Middle East, Italy and on sea etc qualifies as such by the intro on the above article. What Phillip is talking about is Fronts, which essentially is an armed frontier. Germany fighting in the Crimera, along the main frontline within the USSR and in Finland is 3 examples of fronts in the one theater of operations.

The original proposal made in the first discussion was that the British Official History rounds all these different campaigns into one series of books: The Mediterranean and Middle East series. While in the introduction states "Middle East" does not refer to the geographical area but the army command (see: Middle East Command), the intro acknowledges that later on the Allied Forces Headquarters took control of operations fought in the "Mediterranean and Middle East".

One is not wanting to focus too much on the meaning of the "Middle East" in the title of the book but the overall meaning of the series which is summed up on the last page of the intro:

"Fighting in the Mediterranean and Middle East began in June 1940 when Italy decided to enter the war. IT wnet on for five years - which was longer than in any othre theartre.

- Playfair, Volume I, p. xxv

It would also appear that he Americans looked upon the fighting in this geographical area as one theater as shown by : Mediterranean Theater of Operations.

To sum up the fighting in the Med, North and East Africa (not to mention the battles in West Africa), the Middle East (in the geographical sence), Balkans, Malta, Italy etc are all one interconnetected theater: The Italians were carving there own empire out of the Med basin, the Germans lent a hand to halt British actions in the Balkans and then aided in North Africa with a goal of securing the geographical Middle East oil supplies, the fighting in North Africa gave way to the attacks agaisnt Italy - Allied forces in North African and Italy helped tie down German forces in the Balkans etc And calling this a theater is supported by at least two documents - one British and one American.

Thank you for time and applogies about any spelling errors.--EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 18:02, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

This is not the place to have a discussion about an article the correct place to have the discussion on on the article's talk page. So please continue the discussion on the article's talk page Talk:Mediterranean, Middle East and African theatres of World War II. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 21:18, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Considering there was no discussion on the article page, now the entire task force can be involved and can reach a decission on what should happen to this article.--EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 00:30, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

I am all in favour of broadening the discussion but the discussion should take place on the article talk page. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 10:29, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

A-Class review for Operation Epsom now open

The A-Class review for Operation Epsom is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 18:03, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for World War II

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 20:40, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Comments please: Jagdgeschwader 1 (World War II)

Hello!

I am working on taking this article to A-Class (Currently B) and it is currently undergoing a peer review. All comments (and help) will be very much appreciated. perseus71 (talk) 15:54, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Allied leaders of World War II

This article would benefit from attention by informed editors. I did a quick run-through of it the other day, and found that three of Australia's five wartime Prime Ministers were missing and that incorrect statements were being made about other leaders (for instance, Patton leading the 3rd Army in North Africa (where he commanded II Corps) and Sicily (where he commanded the 7th Army)). Nick Dowling (talk) 06:18, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Soviet-German WWII operations

The longstanding and inclusive debates about naming Soviet-German WWII operations have been consolidated into one discussion, with a proposal to move 36 articles. As the outcome of the discussion will probably resolve this, all interested editors are urged to comment here. --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 10:06, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

This issue has now been resolved but individual articles may have point-of-view/balance concerns. It would be appreciated if editors could take a look at the articles with a view to fixing them. This also applies to the articles in Category:Battles and operations of the Eastern Front of World War II. --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 11:27, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

A-Class review for Stanley Goble now open

The A-Class review for Stanley Goble is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Woody (talk) 17:26, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Peer review for Captain class frigate now open

The peer review for Captain class frigate is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill ^(prof) 01:03, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

A-Class review for Alaska class battlecruiser now open

The A-Class review for Alaska class battlecruiser is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 17:57, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Peer review for Bruce Kingsbury now open

The peer review for Bruce Kingsbury is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 17:31, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Peer review for Tribal class destroyer (1936) now open

The peer review for Tribal class destroyer (1936) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 04:46, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Peer review for USS Nevada (BB-36) now open

The peer review for USS Nevada (BB-36) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 20:13, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Attack on Sydney Harbour will be the featured article on 2 November

Hi, Attack on Sydney Harbour will appear on Wikipedia's main page as the featured article in about 30 minutes. It would be great if interested editors could watchlist this article and counter the inevitable vandalism. Thanks! Nick Dowling (talk) 23:41, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Not a problem, it's been on mine for a while. -MBK₀₀₄ 23:42, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

North Sea

Hi, I'm GA-reviewing North Sea, which makes it seem that nothing of military / strategic importance happened there during WW II. Was it really so quiet? Either way, can you point me towards relevant WP:RS? Many thanks, --Philcha (talk) 15:00, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

HMS Glorious (77) was sunk in the North Sea i believe, cant think of anything else myself.--EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 20:50, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Anything from any of the Norwegian campaigns? Evacuation of the Norwegian royal family, something of the like? I dunno... Maybe something on the units of the German Navy that were stationed in Norway? Just spewing out random ideas. :) —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 18:03, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Bombing of Dresden in World War II

There is a dispute about the interpretation of WP:NPOV and the structure of the section "Post-war debate". There is an open RFC on the talk page in the section "Far-right in Germany" but few have yet expressed their opinions. It would be really helpful if a few more editors would join the debate. --PBS (talk) 17:58, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

A-Class review for Four Freedoms (Norman Rockwell) now open

The A-Class review for Four Freedoms (Norman Rockwell) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 22:13, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Peer review for Japanese World War II destroyers now open

The peer review for Japanese World War II destroyers is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 04:18, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

A-Class review for Lexington class battlecruiser now open

The A-Class review for Lexington class battlecruiser is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 22:07, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Peer review for Heinrich Bär now open

The peer review for Heinrich Bär is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 17:45, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Peer review for 130th Engineer Brigade (United States) now open

The peer review for 130th Engineer Brigade (United States) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 20:39, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

A-Class review for Operation Cobra now open

The A-Class review for Operation Cobra is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! --Eurocopter (talk) 18:15, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

'Quinalt Victory' or 'Quinault Victory'?

The Victory ship SS Quinalt Victory destroyed in the Port Chicago disaster is spelled with no 'u' in Robert L. Allen's definitive book The Port Chicago Mutiny. The ship was built in Portland, Oregon in June 1944 and was part of a series of Victory ships named after towns in the Pacific Northwest. The place the ship was named after is Quinault, a small community in Grays Harbor County, Washington.

Various official sources list the name with and without the 'u' in Quinault:

• With the 'u' --
  • Navy Historical Center. Port Chicago Naval Magazine Explosion on 17 July 1944: Court of Inquiry... etc. (page 4b)
  • National Park Service. Common Ground magazine, Summer 2004
  • United States Merchant Marine. Port Chicago Disaster - July 17, 1944
  • US Coast Guard. Merchant Ship Losses. WWII July 1944
• Without the 'u' --
  • The U.S. Coast Guard in World War II by Malcolm Francis Willoughby
  • Coast Guard Reservist Vol. XVII, No. 11. September 1970
  • Navy Historical Center. Port Chicago Naval Magazine Explosion on 17 July 1944: Court of Inquiry... etc. (page 3a)
  • National Park Service. Port Chicago Naval Magazine National Memorial
  • The Official Chronology of the U.S. Navy in World War II by Robert Cressman
  • Organization of American Historians. Chronology of Mare Island Mutiny Trial and the Segregation of the U.S. Armed Forces During World War II

It appears that the ship's name is spelled both ways within different parts of the US Navy, the US Coast Guard and the US National Park Service. So, which spelling should we use? What spelling was painted on the ship? Binksternet (talk) 22:44, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Go with the 'u' (I'd trust that they got the town name right), and then create a redirect from the other spelling. Then, at the beginning of the article,add a note right after the bolded name saying that the name has been spelled a different way in some sources. See note ^{[A 2]} in USS Nevada (BB-36) for what I did there (though that was about the # of torpedo tubes...) Allanon ^{♠The Dark Druid♠} 00:07, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

All of that is assuming that you don't find a picture that confirms one or the other. :) Allanon ^{♠The Dark Druid♠} 00:08, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! For the reasons you give and because User:Maralia found the ship in Lloyd's Register spelled with a 'u', I'm going with "Quinault". Binksternet (talk) 04:02, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Peer review for Walter Oesau now open

The peer review for Walter Oesau is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill 01:17, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

A-Class review for Dreadnought now open

The A-Class review for Dreadnought is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill 16:34, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

A-Class review for Jagdgeschwader 1 (World War II) now open

The A-Class review for Jagdgeschwader 1 (World War II) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill 01:30, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

A-Class review for John S. McCain, Jr. now open

The A-Class review for John S. McCain, Jr. is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill 15:56, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

A-Class review for SS Timothy Bloodworth now open

The A-Class review for SS Timothy Bloodworth is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Nick-D (talk) 01:26, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

A-Class review for Port Chicago disaster now open

The A-Class review for Port Chicago disaster is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Woody (talk) 15:26, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Hirohito

The wartime head of state for Japan during WWII, Hirohito is proposed to be renamed "Emperor Shōwa" via WP:RM 76.66.198.171 (talk) 08:13, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. The discussion of this is at Talk:Hirohito. Nick-D (talk) 09:52, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for William Bostock now open

The peer review for William Bostock is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Woody (talk) 14:35, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Battle of Kaiapit now open

The A-Class review for Battle of Kaiapit is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Nick-D (talk) 09:40, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for Armament of the Iowa class battleship now open

The peer review for Armament of the Iowa class battleship is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 00:40, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Yamato class battleship now open

The A-Class review for Yamato class battleship is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 05:38, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for Junkers Ju 87 now open

The peer review for Junkers Ju 87 is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 04:42, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Falaise pocket now open

The A-Class review for Falaise pocket is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! --Eurocopter (talk) 10:22, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Landing at Saidor now open

The A-Class review for Landing at Saidor is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Nick-D (talk) 23:40, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Tom Derrick now open

The A-Class review for Tom Derrick is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Nick-D (talk) 07:33, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for USS Texas (BB-35) now open

The A-Class review for USS Texas (BB-35) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 02:57, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for Lee-Enfield now open

The peer review for Lee-Enfield is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill 03:59, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Military career of Keith Miller now open

The A-Class review for Military career of Keith Miller is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks!YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:31, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Operation Totalize now open

The A-Class review for Operation Totalize is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Cam ^(Chat) 17:56, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Military history of Australia during World War II now open

The A-Class review for Military history of Australia during World War II is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Nick-D (talk) 10:52, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Japanese battleship Yamato now open

The A-Class review for Japanese battleship Yamato is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 22:56, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for USS Missouri (BB-63) now open

The peer review for USS Missouri (BB-63) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 23:19, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for Battle of Morotai now open

The peer review for Battle of Morotai is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Nick-D (talk) 01:45, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Frank Hubert McNamara now open

The A-Class review for Frank Hubert McNamara is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Nick-D (talk) 10:16, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Keith Miller now open

The A-Class review for Keith Miller is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill ^[pf] 13:00, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Battle of Sio now open

The A-Class review for Battle of Sio is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Woody (talk) 21:55, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Clare Stevenson now open

The A-Class review for Clare Stevenson is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Nick-D (talk) 09:52, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Good topic nomination for "Yamato class battleships"

The articles Yamato-class battleship, Japanese battleship Yamato, Japanese battleship Musashi, and Japanese aircraft carrier Shinano are under consideration for Good Topic status. Interested editors may comment on the topic's entry at the Good Topic nominations page. — Bellhalla (talk) 05:32, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for USS New Jersey (BB-62) now open

The peer review for USS New Jersey (BB-62) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! TomStar81 (Talk) 00:03, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Discussion over the Soviet Union negotiating to join the Tripartite Pact in the World War II article

There's currently a discussion over whether the negotiations between Germany and the USSR in which the Soviets considered joining the Tripartite Pact are important enough to be included in the World War II article, and if so, how this should be worded. All interested editors are invited to comment on this issue. Nick-D (talk) 07:23, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Hill 262 now open

The A-Class review for Hill 262 is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! --Eurocopter (talk) 21:42, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Design 1047 battlecruiser now open

The A-Class review for Design 1047 battlecruiser is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 02:08, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Battle of Morotai now open

The A-Class review for Battle of Morotai is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Nick-D (talk) 11:12, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Operation Freshman now open

The A-Class review for Operation Freshman is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill ^[pf] 02:34, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Japanese battleship Haruna now open

The A-Class review for Japanese battleship Haruna is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 05:29, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Nanking Massacre

There is an alert placed at WT:JAPAN#Nanking Massacre concerning this article. 76.66.193.90 (talk) 06:43, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Article alerts

This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 09:53, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

Alleged fabrication of the Nanking Massacre

renamed to Nanking Massacre controversy

FYI, new WWII era article: Alleged fabrication of the Nanking Massacre 76.66.201.179 (talk) 05:50, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

That looks like a bit of a POV fork - especially the photos (the photos which appear to be Japanese propaganda are taken at face value while those which depict the massacre are claimed - without citations- to have been falsified). Nick-D (talk) 05:56, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes. Some of it seems to have been split out from Nanking Massacre a couple of days ago.  Roger Davies ^talk 06:05, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

I see some cites, but nowhere near the amount need for such a controversial subject. TomStar81 (Talk) 06:15, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Please be patient... the article did start out as a POV fork using text that a Japanese denialist was trying to get into Nanking Massacre. Since then, it has evolved into an article that I think has real potential. I have compartmentalized the POV/OR stuff into one section which may need to be excised at some point. In the meantime, I am finding that this is a truly encyclopedic topic. The NPOV parts of the article have a fair number of citations. Give me some time and I hope to make this article worth keeping. --Richard (talk) 08:22, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

We are simply watching at the moment. If we see activity, in particular activity that suggests ongoing construction and improvement, we will likely adopt a "wait and see" approach before doing anything. TomStar81 (Talk) 08:37, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

The captions, in particular, probably most need reliably sourced references. Images always attract a lot of interest and captions are among the most read parts of an article. The new name, incidentally, is a great improvement :)  Roger Davies ^talk 08:46, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

It is back at its old (first) name at the moment. 76.66.193.69 (talk) 06:45, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Great: we've now got a POV fork of a POV fork. Nick-D (talk) 23:37, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

I just spotted yet another fork at in the new Historiography of the Nanking Massacre article. We now have Nanking Massacre, Nanking Massacre controversy, Alleged fabrication of the Nanking Massacre and Historiography of the Nanking Massacre. The three articles on the dispute over the massacre were all created by User:Richardshusr. Nick-D (talk) 04:59, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

We should probably AfD them and see what the outside world makes of it. My gut feeing is that absent serious independent scholarship this should at best be a paragraph in the main Nanking Massacre article.  Roger Davies ^talk 07:26, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Merge proposal for Pacific Ocean theater of World War II

There is a merge proposal and discussion on the talk page of this article. Inputs are welcome. Cla68 (talk) 00:24, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Category:Panzer commanders and aces

Category:Panzer commanders and aces has been proposed to be split into Category:Panzer commanders and Category:Panzer aces. See Category talk:Panzer commanders and aces#Split.

76.66.196.218 (talk) 11:18, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Raymond Brownell now open

The featured article candidacy for Raymond Brownell is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Abraham, B.S. (talk) 01:50, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Battle of Britain

The Battle of Britain article has been Delisted as a Good article. Was hoping someone with a more firm grasp of the subject could fix it up. --dashiellx (talk) 11:49, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for Indian Air Force now open

The peer review for Indian Air Force is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Abraham, B.S. (talk) 12:12, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Albert Kesselring now open

The A-Class review for Albert Kesselring is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Abraham, B.S. (talk) 12:12, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Tartu Offensive

Hi. A dispute is ongoing in this article, with both sides having apparently exhausted their capacity for consensus building. Before further dispute resolution steps are taken, I would like to ask several members of this taskforce to comment on the issue to see if one or both sides will accede to a third, informed opinion.

The edit that is central to the dispute is this one (1st and 2nd intro paragraphs). The relevant discussion can be found here.

To summarize, one side (myself) wants to denote this offensive as a Soviet operation, in order to bring it in line with all the other Soviet offensives. The other side (user:Erikupoeg, a member of this taskforce) objects, citing NPOV concerns about describing a battle with two opposing sides as a Soviet offensive. --Illythr (talk) 17:48, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Calling it a Soviet offensive would be consistent with the naming conventions formally agreed upon at Talk:Baltic Offensive. – Joe N 00:24, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

WWII convoy listings

Copied from the WikiProject Ships discussion page:

The National Archives (UK) has recently improved their cataloguing of records of WWII convoys in the record series ADM 199, convoys are now searchable by ship name (escorts are not listed, any HM Ships shown were carrying some sort of cargo as well) and convoy number (no spaces or other separators are used), ports of departure and arrival may be given too, or there will at least be a general description such as UK to North Russia, dates of deaprture and arrival are also given. See for example a search for Empire Morn. Hope this may be of use to project members. I understand that the cataloguing team revisited all the original documents, and that the listings include all ships that sailed with a given convoy including those sunk or forced to retire (no indication of such fates is given in the catalogue), but not ships originally assigned to a convoy but which did not sail. David Underdown (talk) 14:32, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

copied by Bellhalla (talk) 16:51, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for 130th Engineer Brigade (United States) now open

The A-Class review for 130th Engineer Brigade (United States) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! – Joe N 23:02, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Operation Perch now open

The featured article candidacy for Operation Perch is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill ^[talk] [pf] 12:27, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Teddy Sheean now open

The A-Class review for Teddy Sheean is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Abraham, B.S. (talk) 05:31, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for USS West Bridge (ID-2888) now open

The featured article candidacy for USS West Bridge (ID-2888) is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! — Bellhalla (talk) 17:14, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for Military career of L. Ron Hubbard now open

The peer review for Military career of L. Ron Hubbard is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! — Bellhalla (talk) 04:05, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Alleged fabrication of the Nanking Massacre - nominated for deletion

Alleged fabrication of the Nanking Massacre has been nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alleged fabrication of the Nanking Massacre. 76.66.202.139 (talk) 06:05, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Sd.Kfz. 10 now open

The A-Class review for Sd.Kfz. 10 is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill ^[talk] [pf] 12:33, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Hastings Ismay, 1st Baron Ismay now open

The featured article candidacy for Hastings Ismay, 1st Baron Ismay is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Abraham, B.S. (talk) 05:40, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Otto Becher now open

The featured article candidacy for Otto Becher is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Abraham, B.S. (talk) 05:40, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for AHS Centaur now open

The peer review for AHS Centaur is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill ^[talk] [pf] 13:15, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Battle of the Coral Sea now open

The A-Class review for Battle of the Coral Sea is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! – Joe N 15:47, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Military history of Australia during World War II now open

The featured article candidacy for Military history of Australia during World War II is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Nick-D (talk) 11:30, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for German battleship Bismarck now open

The peer review for German battleship Bismarck is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill ^[talk] [pf] 00:38, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Battle of the Coral Sea now open

The featured article candidacy for Battle of the Coral Sea is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Nick-D (talk) 01:29, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Strategic bombing during World War II

There is an ongoing dispute about this article where consensus isn't being reached. The validity of some reference's accuracy and usage are questioned, accusations of POV etc. It is mostly revolving around events relating to Poland. It really could do with some help from wiser heads who can independently verify sources, and advise on how to resolve the issue. Hohum (talk) 14:28, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

The situation is getting worse. The article is becoming a battleground with constant edit warring! Help! Hohum (talk) 14:14, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for 45th Infantry Division (United States) now open

The peer review for 45th Infantry Division (United States) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill ^[talk] [pf] 13:29, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

List of subcamps of KZ Herzogenbusch

Is the information in List of subcamps of KZ Herzogenbusch accurate or should this lemma be deleted? Rubenescio (talk) 19:39, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for 7th Infantry Division (United States) now open

The A-Class review for 7th Infantry Division (United States) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Abraham, B.S. (talk) 04:42, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Photos and Documents from Pacific Theater

My father and I have a collection of hundreds of images and documents from the pacific theater. We have digitized the majority of them and are in the process of putting them online. Among these are better quality images of Clark Field, Fort Stotsenburg, Fort McDowell, and Kawasaki Camp 2B. Would these be of use? I wanted to check before I replaced any images in the articles themselves. Here is a general example of what I have: Documents and Photos.

Please let me know what would be useful, and if there is anything I can contribute to this project, I am more than happy to do so. Tanner M. Young Tannermyoung (talk) 17:28, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

The answer is Yes, they would be useful, but before uploading the images we need to ascertain their copyright status. Put in simple terms, we need to know who took the images. TomStar81 (Talk) 19:29, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually, WP needs to know if the copyright holder will release them for everybody to use without restriction, thus ending his copyright (to put it rather simply). Yours, GeorgeLouis (talk) 17:56, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I will check into it and get back to WP with what I find. Thank you, Tannermyoung (talk) 06:37, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

The majority of the documents were created by military personnel in the course of their duties, making them out of copyright. Do these documents have absolutely no copyright or can they be licensed under the Creative Commons or another license so that their source can be cited? Tannermyoung (talk) 16:09, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I've just gone through a lot of discussion with a WikiMedia Commons admin about licensing, so perhaps you'd find some of that discussion or your own dialog with the Admin helpful. Now I'm starting a project on the VPB-104 U.S. Navy WWII Squadron, and hope to add some photos there eventually so your question and the answers are of interes to me as well. Jw4nvc (talk) 01:02, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Nazi rule over the Danube River

You are invited to add military information to the above article, which right now focuses only on political affairs. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 17:53, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Indian Air Force now open

The A-Class review for Indian Air Force is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Nick-D (talk) 01:45, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Changes to popular pages lists

There are a few important changes to the popular pages system. A quick summary:

• The "importance" ranking (for projects that use it) will be included in the lists along with assessment.
• The default list size has been lowered to 500 entries (from 1000)
• I've set up a project on the Toolserver for the popular pages - tools:~alexz/pop/.
  • This includes a page to view the results for projects, including the in-progress results from the current month. Currently this can only show the results from a single project in one month. Features to see multiple projects or multiple months may be added later.
  • This includes a new interface for making requests to add a new project to the list.
  • There is also a form to request a change to the configuration for a project. Currently the configurable options are the size of the on-wiki list and the project subpage used for the list.
• The on-wiki list should be generated and posted in a more timely and consistent manner than before.
• The data is now retained indefinitely.
• The script used to generate the pages has changed. The output should be the same. Please report any apparent inconsistencies (see below).
• Bugs and feature requests should be reported using the Toolserver's bug tracker for "alexz's tools" - [1]

-- Mr.Z-man 00:46, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Lexington class battlecruiser now open

The featured article candidacy for Lexington class battlecruiser is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK₀₀₄ 16:24, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Convoy GP55 now open

The A-Class review for Convoy GP55 is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Nick-D (talk) 03:47, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for Battle of Dunkirk now open

The peer review for Battle of Dunkirk is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill ^[talk] [pf] 00:34, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

U.S. Navy WWII: VPB-104 Squadron wiki project

I started a project page on my User page, to collect material related to my father-in-law's squadron in the Pacific. I have part of his pilot's logbook that includes time in both PBY and B-24, and might add some of that material since it references other crews and events. Being a wiki newbie, I welcome any help or contributions. :) Jw4nvc (talk) 00:39, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Update: It's live at VPB-104 and again, all help is appreciated. Jw4nvc (talk) 08:16, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for 24th Infantry Division (United States) now open

The A-Class review for 24th Infantry Division (United States) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill ^[talk] [pf] 02:54, 30 July 2009 (UTC)