Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:48, 9 November 2007

Welcome!

Hello RichyBoy! Welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions to this 💕. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 22:46, 11 April 2007 (UTC) Getting started Misplaced Pages tutorial • The five pillars of Misplaced Pages How to: edit a page • upload and use images Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Attribution • Neutral point of view • Notability Conflict of interest • Autobiography Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Citing sources • Footnotes Image use policy • Copyrights • Fair use External links • Spam • Vandalism Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry What Misplaced Pages is not • Deletion policy The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The "perfect" article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review Miscellaneous User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General - Spam - Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Why did you delete the name of the French WWI veteran

Just to let you know, from what I understand, it is not so much that the French veteran born Mar 23 1899 chooses to remain anonymous, but that the French tracker wants to hold the case back in order to embarrass the French officials. I do know that his first name is "Bernard."R Young {ł_talk} 04:43, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I note that you wrote this before you added comments to the Surviving Veterans page so I assume you've since seen the reasoning I applied at that time. As you say though if he himself has no wish to be anonymous then there is no issue at all about him being named. RichyBoy 09:30, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Surviving veterans of World War I

The photo was used for "illustrative" purposes to represent the people from the time period not a specific person. That's a typical editorial usage which is practiced all the time.

Regards back at ya... --Mactographer 04:19, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

An illustrative picture of "surviving veterans" would be a picture of a surviving veteran as they are now. RichyBoy 09:59, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

That's one possibility, another is to show the way they were. --24.6.29.122 18:57, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

The article is about suriving veterans and that is the time frame of reference - today, the here and now. I'm sure that for the history of American enlistment during WW1 a picture of a doughboy from that time period would make a fine addition.

In any event, there are no surviving doughboys from WW1 as far as we are aware, even if the picture was somehow relevant there are a number of serious issues with having a photograph of a generic soldier on such an article anyway - if there were it almost certainly couldn't be an American. If you started putting example pictures of every Allied Powers or Central Powers fighting force then it turns the article into a piece about the uniforms of 1914-1918. American forces didn't even total a small percentage of the total fighting forces to justify an American soldier as being representative - Germany had approx. 2 million casualties, Russia had approx. 1.8 million, France 1.4 Million, Austia-Hungary 1.1, United Kingdom 885,000 and so on, the US had approx. 166,000 casualties. In fact, for the Allied Powers, America only had 2% of the total military casualities. They didn't even enter the war until April 1917, approximately 2 million were sent to the European theatre, there were approx. 65 million combatants all in told. That's not to belittle them, their entry to the war helped bring it to a more rapid close and the contribution was massive - it's just that they are not really representative. This kind of thing has been discussed on the "surviving veterans" board before. RichyBoy 02:30, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Featured list and article improvement

I noticed that you nominated Surviving veterans of World War I for featured list status and I added my comments to the talk page. I do hope that it makes it and, although I have my doubts, I'll help you out if you need it to give the article the best chance possible. I do consider it an important endeavor.

Also, since it is in your field of interest, if you can provide any help with acquiring a picture for John Babcock, or if you have any other ideas for improving the article, please let me know. I think I've mostly got the image thing down, except for living people. I'd like peer review and then nominate Babcock for Good Article status. I think he and Henry Allingham are the best chances for getting a surviving WWI veteran a Good Article... mayyyybe even featured... before they pass. Canadian Paul 07:58, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I think that John Babcock's article is in better condition than Henry Allingham's because Allinghams is mostly proseline still. I'm going to spend some time bringing up Harry Patch to standard now I've almost finished his book. I think I need to spend some time reading some other FA biographies of perhaps "lesser" people to judge how much material is actually required - I feel that we are a little light still. I'll keep an eye out for photos as well. RichyBoy 09:24, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I've uploaded a picture of Henry Allingham under the fair-use policy - but I need to wait 48 hours now to see if it is deleted. I don't think it will be though as you don't get many public-domain photographs of a war veteran in full-fig, which may also be a answer to a photo of John Babcock. RichyBoy 11:17, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

So that one got deleted, but you managed to get permission for another one - well done! Maybe I should write to VAC for Babcock... Cheers, CP 19:51, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Good luck if you do - be careful though you need to ask for more than just plain old permission. If you've not done so already then have a flick through Misplaced Pages:Finding_images_tutorial and also read this one Misplaced Pages:Boilerplate_request_for_permission as there is a bit of copy and paste text in there containing the decleration of consent that is required. Good luck! RichyBoy 12:24, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators from a pool of fourteen candidates to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by August 28! Kirill 01:31, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Orin Peterson

I am the one who received the letter from Orin Peterson's Nephew. His Nephew relates that he did not enlist until 1919. However, as in the case of Harry Landis and others, they didn't consider themselves veterans. I have Mr. Peterson's Nephews address, if you would like to write him. Mr. Peterson is blind and unable to write. My address is - Pennington2007@aol.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 162.114.40.32 (talk) 17:01, August 21, 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XVIII (August 2007)

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

Delivered by grafikbot 10:07, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

WPMILHIST Elections

Thank you for your support. It was much appreciated. --ROGER DAVIES  16:50, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Last veterans of World War I

You said that you wanted to delete this page of yours? The easiest way for you to do this (if the mods will accept it, they should, but they may not), is to blank the page and then request that it be speedily deleted. If you're unsure how to do this, then just blank the page and let me know, and I'll nominate it for speedy deletion for you. Cheers, CP 17:47, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I've blanked it - if you could do the request that would be great. I tried the rfd template and the QD template but rfd template went to articles for redirection and QD was plain broken. RichyBoy 09:08, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I've nominated it for Speedy - hopefully that will be the end of it. Cheers, CP 14:51, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

It's gone now. Cheers, CP 18:07, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XIX (September 2007)

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

Delivered by grafikbot 10:22, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

FL Main page proposal

You either nominated a WP:FLC or closed such a nomination recently. As such, you are the type of editor whose opinion I am soliciting. We now have over 400 featured lists and seem to be promoting in excess of 30 per month of late (41 in August and 42 in September). When Today's featured article (TFA) started (2004-02-22), they only had about 200 featured articles and were barely promoting 20 new ones per month. I think the quality of featured lists is at least as good as the quality of featured articles was when they started appearing on the main page. Thus, I am ready to open debate on a proposal to institute a List of the Day on the main page with nominations starting November 1 2007, voting starting December 1 2007 and main page appearances starting January 1 2008. For brevity, the proposal page does not discuss the details of eventual main page content, but since the work has already been done, you should consider this proposal assuming the eventual content will resemble the current content at the featured content page. Such output would probably start at the bottom of the main page. The proposal page does not debate whether starting with weekly list main page entries would be better than daily entries. However, I suspect persons in favor of weekly lists are really voicing opinions against lists on the main page since neither TFA nor Picture of the day started as weekly endeavors, to the best of my knowledge. See the List of the Day proposal and comment at WP:LOTDP and its talk page.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 19:58, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XX (October 2007)

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

Delivered by grafikbot 14:48, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

LOTD proposal

You have nominated a recently successful WP:FL. There have been two recent proposals to begin a List of the Day feature on the main page, which have both received majorities but have not been approved as overwhelming support sufficient to change the main page. WP:LOTDP is a new proposal to try to get the ball rolling based on the original proposal. You can voice your thoughts on its talk page. Basically, what the proposal entails is attempting to run an official trial, and then vote after the trial run on whether to change the main page. Support to run a trial requires much less consensus than support to change the main page. Should we succeed at eventually getting such a feature on the main page it would tentatively look like this. Whether or not you support an experimental trial or not you should come discuss the matter at WP:LOTDP's talk page. I apologize if you have either already voiced your opinion on this matter or already tired of hearing about it.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 21:45, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Are the Oldest-Old or Final Few notable?

Greetings, User Brown-Haired Girl has waged a campaign to wipe out the entire 'supercentenarians' field on Misplaced Pages. This has included:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_November_1#Category:Supercentenarian_trackers

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Robert_Young_%28longevity_claims_researcher%29

http://en.wikipedia.org/Louis_Epstein_%28supercentenarian_tracker%29

And, even, a man dead over 100 years:

http://en.wikipedia.org/William_Thoms

I find it incredulous that one would attack even the man who invented the term 'folklore' and started the field of 'supercentenarian tracking.'

Such mass hysteria seems to be working. User BHG is one of the top-10 editors by edit count on Misplaced Pages and has lots of friends. I can't imagine most WWI veteran articles surviving if this trend continues. I do urge everyone who considers tracking the oldest-old, whether WWI vets or no, to chime in on these debates.

Sincerely, Robert Young Ryoung122 16:42, 9 November 2007 (UTC)