This user may have left Wikipedia. Oliver Nouther has not edited Wikipedia since 6 October 2021. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

User:Oliver Nouther/TalkArchive

The difference in colour is to symbolise the different layers of fabric as shown below. http://www.servicecomm.co.uk/media/image/products/49ba494129826.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darcy.cartwright (talk • contribs) 09:17, 15 March 2012 (UTC) Read incorrectly! My bad! Will update images and upload the new ones!!!!!!!!!!!! --darcy.cartwright | Talk | Contributions 09:26, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Exactly what I would have said if I wasn't so lazy. Pdfpdf (talk) 12:40, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No Worries! --Oliver Nouther (talk) 20:47, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I notice you've been creating a few new CAS articles. You might've seen I've done a few of them myself; now the MilHist World War I contest is over I was planning to do a few more. Are you already under way with Ray Funnell? If so I'll get on to Les Fisher and then we can see who gets to Errol McCormack first - let me know. Also you probably won't be able to get away with fair use on any CAS still living, unfortunately, despite what the Defence site might say. Certainly Jake Newham's won't cut it because we have a PD shot (even if it's not a proper portrait). On the other hand, I've established a dialogue with a lady at RAAF Copyright and am negotiating possible free use under the GNU for all the post-1955 portraits. Can't promise anything but we'll see how we go... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:08, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ian, Yep I have started research for Ray Funnell, more on James Rowland and David Evans. I'll leave Fisher etc to your experienced hands.

I tried the CAS shot as the one on the Geoff Shepherd seems to have got through the system.

Any ideas or suggestions are warmly welcomed!

Regards, --Oliver Nouther (talk) 12:13, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What are you trying to achieve?
P.S. Do you know about <br> a.k.a. <br />?
Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:08, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
The previous version had the top row of ribbons off centre due to the Info Box on the right hand side...
I merely added lines until it worked! I will read up on <br> a.k.a. <br />? when I get a chance.
Cheers, --Oliver Nouther (talk) 12:16, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah ha. I get it - it's a page-width thing.

Fair enough. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:23, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(P.S. I've taken the liberty of editing your reply to show you what <br> does. Pdfpdf (talk) 12:23, 11 March 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Your'e a champ... I have removed the offending blank lines and added <br> s and one more to fix the Personal header too.

--Oliver Nouther (talk) 12:28, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your'e a champ... - Sadly, you are in the minority, but nevertheless I appreciate reading such things. Best wishes, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:47, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'm hooked. Tell me about "This user has visited 11 of the 8 states and territories of Australia.". Pdfpdf (talk) 13:51, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brilliant! I liked this User Box because is says 8 States or Territories and the link lists 16. In addition to the 8 I've been to Jervis Bay, Cocos Island and Norfolk Island. Glad someone took the bait. ;) Cheers, --Oliver Nouther (talk) 21:01, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I always find something interesting on the States and territories of Australia page each time I look.

And I never tire of looking at File:Australia history.gif

Pdfpdf (talk) 12:06, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. It seems that infobox needs updating.

So: There's no arguement that there are 6 states. (At least, I don't think there is ... )

Then there are "two major mainland territories", which gives the 6 + 2 = 8.

But as you point out, there are others.

I always thought Jervis Bay was part of ACT, but apparently not! So 6 + 3 = 9.

Then there are these "External Territories" (an undefined term) of which there are (depending where you look) 1, 3 or 7. So 9 + 1, 3 or 7 = 10, 12 or 16.

Thus, the options are 8, 9, 10, 12 or 16.

To me, 16 would seem to be the "obvious" choice, but On-The-Other-Hand, 7 out of 8 looks much more impressive than 7 out of 16.

Hmmm. It seems that infobox needs updating!

Pdfpdf (talk) 12:06, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have to admit getting the Australian States and Territories from your User page because I thought it was amusing. I got the Islay one from elsewhere but have just noticed it on your Userbox page. Care for a Laphroig? --Oliver Nouther (talk) 00:31, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

a) Only one?

b) Is the Pope catholic?

Pdfpdf (talk) 12:06, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This user has visited 11 of the states and territories of Australia.

11

Comments?
Pdfpdf (talk) 12:47, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mmmm a bit cumbersome, I prefer the enigma! --Oliver Nouther (talk) 09:19, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair comment. OK, your turn ... Pdfpdf (talk) 10:20, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What about numerous? Boring? Its too late to be inspirational. --Oliver Nouther (talk) 12:40, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since this template is in use on over 50 user pages, perhaps this discussion could take place on the talk page in order to best determine consensus? Regards, — Kralizec! (talk) 14:06, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. Good point.

In the meantime, I'd better revert it. Pdfpdf (talk) 14:42, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On second thoughts, I see Oliver had the right idea - why mention a total at all? After all, none of the others do. e.g. these two don't:

99	This user has set foot in 99 continents of the world.

9999	This user has visited 9999 of the 208 countries in the world.

Pdfpdf (talk) 15:00, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For those interested enough, the discussion continues at User talk:Pdfpdf#Template:User Australian states and territories visited and User talk:Kralizec!#Oz template. Pdfpdf (talk) 12:59, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On March 25, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Neville McNamara, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 02:22, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not trying to rain on your parade, but there are a few problems with Australian General Service Medal Korea, and I don't know the answers. (I hope you do!)
I will not be offended in any way if you undo my edits, (as long as you address the problems!)
Meanwhile, good work on creation of the article. Well done.
Best wishes, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:21, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yep the link to the Gazette website is a difficult one, I had a bit of trouble with it but have fixed. It was signed by GG 12 Mar 10, so thats the creation date, the press release was 12 Feb 10 by the Minister. The Bravery awards are completely different. I will correct your 'fix', correct the link and add some more info for you. Let me know what you think when I am done. --Oliver Nouther (talk) 09:19, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It looks pretty good to me.

(It will look even better if/when we can get images of the medal and/or ribbon.)

Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 15:03, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you noticed that User:PalawanOz has been busy? Pdfpdf (talk) 12:08, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure have! Looks good. I assume the colours are right. --Oliver Nouther (talk) 19:46, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I had a similar reaction. Here's the answer. By-the-way: He's also addressed your other "request". (You might want to drop him a thank you note ... ) Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:51, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Images have been released here. I updated the ribbon, needed to darken the yellow ever so slightly. Also uploaded medal images to the Australian General Service Medal Korea page. PalawanOz (talk) 08:29, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Once again top work! Pretty good colour match! Thanks.--Oliver Nouther (talk) 09:07, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BTW: The minister made an "information free" press release on Saturday saying that he had presented 3 of them, but saying absolutely NOTHING else new.

I rang his press secretary - she knew nothing. She disappeared for a few minutes, and then told me that the presentation had been on Thursday 15/4/2010. I asked to whom, where, and are there any photos. Her response was very polite, but was basicly: "I don't know. I'll get back to you. What's your phone number & email address?"

I'm waiting. Pdfpdf (talk) 12:34, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also BTW, last week I discovered this fancy template that I like. It's called ((od)).

You use it like this:

Cute, isn't it! Pdfpdf (talk) 12:34, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I guess that ticks the the medal will be available for dispatch to some eligible recipients before Anzac Day 2010 box!--Oliver Nouther (talk) 18:08, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RE: : It is regular practice for senior officers in combined HQs to wear a common rank insignia. I first noticed Stormin Norman wearing Saudi insignia in the 1st Gulf War.
I thought it was desert fatigues that he was wearing... B. Fairbairn (talk) 09:17, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure is, he is wearing his US insignia but also check out the rank slide on his chest. --Oliver Nouther (talk) 16:43, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry guys, I missed this conversation. Could you supply (some of) the missing links please? Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:12, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Check out Stars v Insignia --Oliver Nouther (talk) 13:23, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's the answer I was after. Thanks. Pdfpdf (talk) 13:55, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think my link to the picture works any more. Image Google him and you'll fine one. Good night. --Oliver Nouther (talk) 13:57, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You've been a busy boy! Good stuff!! Pdfpdf (talk) 13:09, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ta ! Still more to be done.--Oliver Nouther (talk) 13:10, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That, my friend, is the story of life! Pdfpdf (talk) 13:55, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the good spirited response! Pdfpdf (talk) 14:01, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Oliver. I'll respond on your Talk page because this looks like a matter of your expertise. In the List of Companions of the Order of Australia page I decapitalised those military titles that had been capitalised, for three reasons.

• First: to make them consistent with those that were not (and still are not).
• Second: to make them consistent with other titles, such as "Prof" (I don't think anybody writes "PROF").
• Third: because I think the decapitalised form looks more appropriate in an encyclopedia.

Surely the decapitalised form is neither invalid nor offensive. (I was looking, because a friend of mine who is a "Prof" has just been awarded AO.) Hope you may agree. --Wikiain (talk) 04:56, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wikian. Your conclusions are sensible and logical, but sadly, wrong.

The "official" Australian abbreviations are block caps.

Personally, I think it's ugly and I don't like it. And I support your logic and sentiments. But as I said: Sadly, we're both "wrong".

Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 05:39, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wow,I didn't even get a chance to respond. Certainly different professions and institutions abbreviate differently, using capitals is the standard for the ADF ranks. I guess the issue here is whether the abbreviation makes sense to the lay person reading the encyclopaedia? Cheers. --Oliver Nouther (talk) 07:28, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear. (This is going to sound extremely cynical, and perhaps a little depressing.) As with Wikian's statements, yours are sensible and logical. Sadly, however, "whether the abbreviation makes sense to the lay person reading the encyclopaedia" is (sadly) not relevant. I guess that's why we make use of hyperlinks from obscure abbreviations to an explanation? Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 08:23, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is good discussion and I won't repeat what I said. However, it seems relevant to progress thereof that what I said was robotted as dot-pointed although I had only said "First" etc. That is, and I could expand: capitalisation almost certainly will not affect linking. All that I will say now is that, to the best of my knowledge, nobody outside the military ever capitalises military or any other titles. Capitalisation within the military (which I had never come across before, but I was never called to have military experience) appears to be only a matter of administrative convenience. I have never seen, for example, Major-General Michael Jeffery using it or being used in reference to him. I think the smalls have it. --Wikiain (talk) 11:13, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The smalls have it? While I have seen MAJGEN Jeffery used on numerous occasions I haven't seen a hyphen used. ;). If we are going to use abbreviations why wouldn't the correct, officially accepted ones be used? There are a number of references to the correct abbreviations. Editors shouldn't just make them up! I think the bigs have it. --Oliver Nouther (talk) 11:22, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This could get funny... But where have you seen the bigs? I have only ever seen smalls, used by everybody, in the public sphere which is where WP is. Perhaps you would accept, as I would, the Australian War Memorial. --Wikiain (talk) 11:52, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, that actually doesn't answer the point about abbreviation. However, at least Army publicity has used smalls. But, really, can we stay in the public sphere where bigs are NEVER used? As to hyphens, I do not argue. --Wikiain (talk) 12:04, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear Wikian - I've aready said, and explained why, you are wrong. With the greatest respect, what you (and I, and Oliver) have and haven't seen, and do and don't think, is irrelevant.

The simple fact is: the official AUSTRALIAN abbreviations are block caps.

And really, that shold be the end of that part of the conversation.

I really don't want to sound like I'm being rude about it, but, there really isn't any point or value in trying to weasel your way around it.

If you need an example that Oz is not completely out on a limb on this, the Yanks use block caps. (And no doubt others, too.) (Yank abbreviations are BG, MG & LG. I don't remember what they use for General).

Now, I could find and provide counter-examples to your questions/statements, but really, that's a big waste of my time, and anyway, you are just as capable of finding them as I am.

So, how about you just save everybody time and either take Oliver & my word for it, or go looking yourself?

I really don't like the turn in tone that my reply has taken, but you just don't seem to be able to accept the unpleasant but accurate answer we are giving you. Sorry.

In good faith, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:04, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Australian Defence Force Rank abbreviations

You may (or may not) find Talk:List of Companions of the Order of Australia#Australian Defence Force Rank abbreviations of interest. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 02:01, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad I could make you laugh! Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:45, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As to: "why do we bother?" - Bloody good question! Let me know when you have the answer.

As to: "why do we bother?" The answer is 42.

Pdfpdf (talk) 13:51, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(P.S. I'm finished for tonight - Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:55, 13 June 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Hi Oliver I noticed that you reverted one of my edits on the Governor of New South Wales ‎ wikipage. I will give you that I made an error on the start date for Capt John Hunter, but I disagree on the resignation date of Sir Ralph Darling being incorrect. I think that if you do a little more research, you will find that Darling sailed on the "Hooghly" in disgrace on 22 October and so could not be in charge. There are many cases on the internet where 22 Oct is used, but there are quite a few good references that give 21 Oct. I provide you with the following links to state my case.

http://colsec.records.nsw.gov.au/indexes/colsec/d/F15c_da-de-04.htm http://books.google.com.au/books?id=PaUNAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA414&lpg=PA414 http://www.lawalmanacs.info/almanacs/nsw-law-almanac-1907.pdf?1227115597 http://www.archive.org/stream/britishcolonial01unkngoog/britishcolonial01unkngoog_djvu.txt to name a few.

I think what has happened is that the day he left the 22nd, is confused with the day of his resignation, signed on the 20th to take effect on the 21st.

Also, you state that it is not supported by other references, but the references on that page are almost all dead. There are seems to be no references on that page that gives a good chronological listing of Governors.

Interested in what you think David.moreno72 (talk) 07:13, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, good references. I was using the book Clune, David; Turner, Ken. The Governors of New South Wales: 1788-2010 as the reference which has the 22nd of October. The Governor of NSW page needs a lot of referencing (it has been on my to do list for a while). The Governor of New South Wales official website has the same date but admittedly it is incorrect as they have missed Brisbane. --Oliver Nouther (talk) 23:47, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted to previous edit, the References denote the making of the award but NOT that they are in the Australian system. - Oh. That's disappointing. I thought you'd managed to resolve it! C'est la vie. Pdfpdf (talk) 13:14, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good! Now that's out of the way, maybe I can get back to how I prefer to spend my time. (And avoid raising dubious but probably deserved comments. No reflection on you, or any other wikipedians for that matter, but,) Maybe that might include enjoying reality before daylight saving ends? BTW: Where's that bottle of single malt? Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 10:26, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I highly recommend the Laphroaig Quarter Cask for such occasions! Cheers, --Oliver Nouther (talk) 00:22, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

;-) More a case of "avoiding the issue"? (Which these days seems to be standard behaviour. Thus, is this the new definition of "political correctness"?) Pdfpdf (talk) 12:49, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Where's that bottle of single malt? Empty again?? (Bother.) Pdfpdf (talk) 12:52, 8 May 2013 (UTC) [reply]

This user enjoys watching pointless animations.

Like it!
Thanks for the email, but what would have stopped him doing the same thing before the rename?
(Oh yes: Thanks for the warning.) Pdfpdf (talk) 16:28, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(P.S. If I sound grumpy, it's because I'm out of BOTH single malt AND cognac. Pdfpdf (talk) 16:28, 19 June 2013 (UTC))[reply]

Reminds me of 617SQN's motto "Après moi le déluge" or "After me, the flood". ;-) --Oliver Nouther (talk) 10:37, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at the death of Osama bin Laden Op-ed: Sturmvogel_66 presents his secrets of prolific contribution

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Kirill ^[talk] 18:33, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 22:07, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history Wikiproject has opened nominations for the Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year. Nominations will be accepted until 13 December at 23:59 GMT, with voting to begin at 0:00 GMT 14 December. The voting will conclude on 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:41, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This message was accidentally sent using an incorrect mailing list, therefore this message is being resent using the correct list. As a result, some users may get this message twice; if so please discard. We apologize for the inconvenience.

Nominations for the military historian of the year and military newcomer of the year have now closed, and voting for the candidates has officially opened. All project members are invited to cast there votes for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year candidates before the elections close at 23:59 December 21st. For the coordinators, TomStar81

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 29 September. Yours, Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 05:21, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 14:13, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On behalf of the Military history WikiProject's Coordinators, we would like to extend an invitation to nominate deserving editors for the 2015 Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards. The nomination period will run from 7 December to 23:59 13 December, with the election phase running from 14 December to 23:59 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:06, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway, and as a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 23 September. For the Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:01, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Oliver Nouther. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Wikipedia:WikiProject Oceania/The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia/The 5000 Challenge are up and running based on Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge which has currently produced over 2300 article improvements and creations. The Australia challenge would feed into the wider region one and potentially New Zealand could have a smaller challenge too. The main goal is content improvement, tackling stale old stubs and important content and improving sourcing/making more consistent but new articles are also welcome if sourced. I understand that this is a big goal for regular editors, especially being summertime where you are, but if you'd like to see large scale quality improvements happening for Oceania and Australia like The Africa Destubathon, which has produced over 1700 articles in 5 weeks, sign up on the page. The idea will be an ongoing national editathon/challenge for the region but fuelled by a series of contests to really get articles on every province and subject mass improved. The Africa contest scaled worldwide would naturally provide great benefits to Oceania countries, particularly Australia and attract new editors. I would like some support from existing editors here to get the Challenges off to a start with some articles to make doing a Destubathon worthwhile and potentially bring about hundreds of improvements in a few weeks through a contest! Cheers.♦ --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:12, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Time is running out to voting for the Military Historian and Newcomer of the year! If you have not yet cast a vote, please consider doing so soon. The voting will end on 31 December at 23:59 UTC, with the presentation of the awards to the winners and runners up to occur on 1 January 2017. For the Military history WikiProject Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:00, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This message was sent as a courtesy reminder to all active members of the Military History WikiProject.

G'day all, please be advised that throughout March 2017 the Military history Wikiproject is running its March Madness drive. This is a backlog drive that is focused on several key areas:

• tagging and assessing articles that fall within the project's scope
• updating the project's currently listed A-class articles to ensure their ongoing compliance with the listed criteria
• creating articles that are listed as "requested" on the project's various task force pages or other lists of missing articles.

As with past Milhist drives, there are points awarded for working on articles in the targeted areas, with barnstars being awarded at the end for different levels of achievement.

The drive is open to all Wikipedians, not just members of the Military history project, although only work on articles that fall (broadly) within the military history scope will be considered eligible. More information can be found here for those that are interested, and members can sign up as participants at that page also.

The drive starts at 00:01 UTC on 1 March and runs until 23:59 UTC on 31 March 2017, so please sign up now.

For the Milhist co-ordinators. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) & MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:24, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway. As a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 29 September. Thank you for your time. For the current tranche of Coordinators, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:39, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As we approach the end of the year, the Military History project is looking to recognise editors who have made a real difference. Each year we do this by bestowing two awards: the Military Historian of the Year and the Military History Newcomer of the Year. The co-ordinators invite all project members to get involved by nominating any editor they feel merits recognition for their contributions to the project. Nominations for both awards are open between 00:01 on 2 December 2017 and 23:59 on 15 December 2017. After this, a 14-day voting period will follow commencing at 00:01 on 16 December 2017. Nominations and voting will take place on the main project talkpage: here and here. Thank you for your time. For the co-ordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:35, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings,

"Military history" is one of the most important subjects when speak of sum of all human knowledge. To support contributors interested in the area over various language Wikipedias, we intend to form a user group. It also provides a platform to share the best practices between military historians, and various military related projects on Wikipedias. An initial discussion was has been done between the coordinators and members of WikiProject Military History on English Wikipedia. Now this discussion has been taken to Meta-Wiki. Contributors intrested in the area of military history are requested to share their feedback and give suggestions at Talk:Discussion to incubate a user group for Wikipedia Military Historians.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:30, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey y'all, the April 2021 WikiProject Military History Reviewing Drive begins at 00:01 UTC on April 1, 2021 and runs through 23:59 UTC on April 31, 2021. Points can be earned through reviewing articles on the AutoCheck report, reviewing articles listed at WP:MILHIST/ASSESS, reviewing MILHIST-tagged articles at WP:GAN or WP:FAC, and reviewing articles submitted at WP:MILHIST/ACR. Service awards and barnstars are given for set points thresholds, and the top three finishers will receive further awards. To participate, sign up at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_History/April 2021 Reviewing Drive#Participants and create a worklist at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/April 2021 Reviewing Drive/Worklists (examples are given). Further details can be found at the drive page. Questions can be asked at the drive talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:23, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are opening in a few hours (00:01 UTC on 1 September). A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:52, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for the upcoming project coordinator election opens in a few hours (00:01 UTC on 15 September) and will last through 23:59 on 28 September. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. Voting is conducted using simple approval voting and questions for the candidates are welcome. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:27, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick correction to the prior message about the 2022 MILHIST coordinator election! I (Hog Farm) didn't proofread the message well enough and left out a link to the election page itself in this message. The voting will occur here; sorry about the need for a second message and the inadvertent omission from the prior one. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:41, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for the upcoming project coordinator election closes soon, at 23:59 on 28 September. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. Voting is conducted using simple approval voting and questions for the candidates are welcome. The voting itself is occurring here If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:14, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]