This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
I'm new to the Project but have just written this and greatly expanded this in the past week. I've written lots on both rugby codes but am now looking at more inspirational subjects. Hoping for your patience in coming to understand your protocols and looking for any pointers on how you do things. -Sticks66 11:15, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
FYI, I've created a skeleton for Vernon Sturdee. If anyone wants to restructure the article, now would be a good time. (i.e. Before the serious work starts.) Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 15:21, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
I can't seem to find any information about WWII LTGEN Edward Kenneth Smart MC, DSO. Can anybody point me at any useful sources? Thanks, Pdfpdf (talk) 15:25, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
For anyone interested, I have (at last) discovered a pile of information. I have summarised it at User:Pdfpdf/Smart2. Pdfpdf (talk) 07:06, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
I am looking for an agreed naming convention that relates to the Citizens Miltiary Force units after World War I, through to the creation of Australian Army Reserve as well as 2AIF units.
Q1. Should the CMF units which appear to trace their lineage back from the 1st AIF be linked back to the 1AIF units e.g. 1st Battalion (Australia), and include both their WW1 and CMF-era history?
Q2. Should the 2nd AIF battalions be named 2/1st Australian Infantry Battalion or 2/1st Infantry Battalion (Australia)?
Any comments? Kind Regards --Newm30 (talk) 05:48, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Ok, can it be said then, that 1AIF units and CMF units are the same unit and will be called 1st Battalion (Australia), that 2AIF units will be called or renamed 2/25th Battalion (Australia) unless they do not have a prefix, such as 9th Division (Australia). Can we get a consensus? Regards --Newm30 (talk) 22:49, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
I've been looking around, and it appears to me that CMF abbreviates "Citizen Military Forces". So far, I haven't been able to find a reliable reference to support "Citizens Military Force" (or any other variation).
I am canvassing other people's opinions. Please comment. Pdfpdf (talk) 11:53, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) This from the AWM might help shed some light. This says 'Citizen Military Force' rather than 'Citizens'. Additionally it says 'Australian Militia Force' was an unofficial name for the Reserves/Militia (so perhaps the lead needs to be changed to that). When I wrote Australian Army Reserve I used the name mentioned in the source at the time, however, the situation is somewhat confused so many sources used repeat the confusion (often changing between different names on the same page). I would support changing the names used in the article to being consistent with the source provided if it is deemed necessary, although I think it needs to be understood that in regards to the names of the Reserves and indeed the naming conventions of the battalions themselves (and their history/lineage) the situation has always been one of confusion, largely because throughout Australia's military history there doesn't seem to have been any regard for the poor Wikipedian who comes through later and attempts to write an article that is coherent...(joking to an extent, of course). — AustralianRupert (talk) 13:07, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Its in conection with the 6th Australian Division
I am sure this is the only time the Australian Army and the Waffen SS ever met in combat but I am unable to find a source so any help would be appreciated --Jim Sweeney (talk) 14:01, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
On a slightly different note, but related to 6th Division, can anyone advise whether the 6th Division created in 1917 and disbanded in 1917 in England is the same unit? Regards --Newm30 (talk) 01:14, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Twenty one RAN warships will be anchored in Sydney Harbour tomorrow, and will presumably be in port over the weekend. This is obviously a great opportunity to improve Wikipedia/WikiCommons holdings of photos of RAN warships. Photos of the smaller and less glamorous ships would be particularly valuable. The SMH has a good story on this here. Nick-D (talk) 10:18, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Okay, I've started uploading photographs... they are galleried at commons:User:Saberwyn/2009 Sydney Harbour Fleet Entry. Up at the moment are photos I took of the vessels as they entered Sydney Harbour. I was at North Head looking south. None of these images are currently categorised, and the gallery page currently lacks descriptive captions, so help there would be appreciated. I'll upload a second set of photographs in the next day or two: the ships at anchor as seen from the Manly ferry. -- saberwyn 07:30, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
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 {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 08:50, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)
I was wondering whether anyone supports the Template:Anzac being changed to along the lines of Template:USAAF 9th Air Force UK, listing Divisions, Battalions and other units. I believe that this would look cleaner and more modern than the current template. Please provide comments. Regards --Newm30 (talk) 01:16, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
An example of how it would look, obviously in a draft format, is available in my sandbox. Any comments and suggestions are welcome. Regards --Newm30 (talk) 05:23, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Something which has passed me by is that Military history of Australia is the current Australian Collaboration of the Fortnight (ACOTF). The article is presently very patchy - much of it is good, some of it is too detailed and some of it needs a lot of work. All up, this looks to be an easy article to grab a chunk of and make a difference with. Nick-D (talk) 09:38, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Guys, I'd like to start a drive to get the Australian Chiefs of the Naval Staff and other notable naval personnel to a level of quality and comprehensiveness in keeping with their brethren in the RAAF and Army sphere. We have editors who've taken some ownership of the senior Army officer space, namely Hawkeye, and the RAAF officer space, namely myself, plus we've got Bryce having taken on some Army and RAAF articles following his work in the Australian VC and GC space. I just don't see the equivalent of this on RAN personnel articles - many CNSs for instance don't even have articles, let alone decent ones. It seems to me there are two things we can do: 1) someone step foward and take on RAN bios as their pet personnal project (and if someone's got an interest in RAN officers but is unsure of their experience in the WP bio area, I for one would be happy to mentor); or 2) the above-mentioned and anyone else who's keen slice up the required articles, starting with the CNSs, and share the effort over time without unduly affecting our pursuit of current areas of interest/expertise. Thoughts/interest? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:04, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
The RAN's ever-wonderful Seapower Centre has a current program of digitalising old editions of Navy News and placing them online here - 1958-1973 are available so far, and it's stated that more will be uploaded. While Navy News isn't an independent source given that it's always been an in-house Navy publication aimed at sailors, it is a useful source for news items, statistics and the like. Interestingly the website states that the digitalised copies have been "placed in the public domain as part of the Sea Power Centre - Australia's digitisation project" - I wonder what their definition of 'public domain' is? Nick-D (talk) 10:49, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I wrote an article today about a former Western Australian politician who, it turns out, fought in several WWI campaigns and was promoted to Major and decorated. He later seems to have enlisted, at age 56, as a "voyage only" soldier, and retired in 1942. If someone could review the article and the source at the NLA (click on "r - View digital copy") and ensure I've done it right, I'd be most grateful. Thanks - Orderinchaos 08:02, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
I am currently working on an article on Australia-Russia relations, and I am including some information about the 1870 visit of the Boyarin to Hobart. One of the sources I am using mentions that the ship crews gave to the city two mortars from the ship, and that these mortars still stand at the entrance of the "Hobart Barracks". Can a project member possibly tell me which barracks these may be? Would they be the Anglesea Barracks, Hobart by any chance? I would like to be accurate within the article, and would obviously like to include the correct barracks in the article. Any assistance in answering this question is appreciated. I am cross-posting this query at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Australian military history task force and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tasmania in order to get the, hopefully, quickest possible reply. Cheers, --Russavia Dialogue 09:44, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi all on the Anzac article there is a footer Template:Australian and New Zealand Army Corps, I was going to add the New Zealand Mounted Rifles Brigade to the brigade section. But when you click on EDIT or VIEW its blank ! The talk page is there because I added it before looking at the vanishing main page. Anyone know where its hiding ? --Jim Sweeney (talk) 18:15, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Guys, for those who haven't noticed, AWM has changed its search and presentation of honours and awards - see new search page. First off, you can do one search and net both recommendations and actual awards in one go, rather than search for awards in one spot and recommendations in another. I find this a time saver. In one way, however, the results aren't quite as friendly and may result in broken links in some articles. You used to be able to get on one page each award for a particular person and all the details associated with those awards. With this new search engine you can still get a list of all the awards but you then have to enter each record to see all the details that you used to get for all awards on the one page. For those of us who have included links to such pages in WP articles, the link will now simply take you to the search engine. I don't think this is a disaster by any means, as most people link to the London Gazette for each award citation, but it's as well to be aware. The good news is that links to AWM recommendation PDFs still appear to work as before. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:25, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
As a quick note, the updated edition of The Oxford Companion to Australian Military History is now available on Oxford Reference Online. This online service is available through many libraries websites (I can access it at home through both the National Library of Australia's website and the website of my local public library) and is easy to use. The Oxford Companion is an outstanding reference for Wikipedia editors as it provides a good and authoritative summary of most aspects of Australian military history. Nick-D (talk) 23:39, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:35, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
I have been working on 39th Battalion (Australia) for sometime now with the hope of at least bringing it up to a B class. It is currently a Start, which I think is a sorry state of affairs given that it (rightly or wrongly) is considered an iconic unit of the Kokoda campaign. I have done what I can to it, but it still lacks for some citations. I have rewritten most of the Kokoda campaign section, but I haven't been able to do as much work on the formation section (WWII) as required. I have tweaked it here and there, but do not have the source materials that whoever originally wrote it used, so am having trouble adding in the necessary citations.
It could probably also do with a copy edit from someone who is looking at it with fresh eyes.
If anyone out there is interested, your help would greatly be appreciated. I think it doesn't need too much more work to get it up to a B class. Cheers. AustralianRupert (talk) 05:12, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
As is standard for the period around Anzac Day, articles on prominent incidents in Australian military history (and particularly relating to the Galipoli campaign) are suffering a spate of vandalism. It would be great if everyone could keep a close eye on the articles they've watchlisted for the next week or so. Nick-D (talk) 08:51, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
This article in The Australian about the tensions between popular and more serious accounts of Australia's military history is interesting and well worth a read. Nick-D (talk) 00:09, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
http://mappingouranzacs.naa.gov.au/about.aspx provides another way into finding WWI service records held and digitised by the National Archives of Australia, and things like place of birth and of enlistment have been extracted and might be a useful addition to articles. May provide some interesting stats for Military history of Australia during World War I as well. David Underdown (talk) 10:42, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Dont know if this has been reported upon in Australia but it may be of interest to some - Work has begun to recover the bodies of up to 400 British and Australian soldiers believed to have been buried at the First World War mass graves at Fromelles in northern France. the link is here [5]... --Jim Sweeney (talk) 13:40, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi all, Just wondering what the copyright status is on maps included in the official histories? Lawrence, M.J. (talk) 02:15, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
I have found that it is possible to view service records through the National Archives of Australia website. I don't know if everyone knows this, so I am mentioning it here in case anyone is interested. I have found them useful while working on some of the VC biography articles, particularly for dates of service, and other facts like that. Just follow this link for the search page. One can then view digital copies of official service record documents. Hope this helps. — AustralianRupert (talk) 07:28, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
I imagine you've reached consensus before on the question whether i) articles on military personnel should contain an honours/awards section and link to medal names perhaps with ribbon images, and ii) if so, do you only put in certain bravery/gallantry awards and leave out service awards like this? Can someone steer me to such a discussion or resolution ?-Sticks66
(Outdent) Guys, I haven't even re-checked the previous round of discussions, preferring to let memory and current ideas express my thoughts. PalawanOz, the format you mention above can't be said to have achieved any consensus, as I and others (I won't speak for them individually) still consider it image- and list-cruft, too much non-essential imagery and highlighting of routine service/campaign medals that everyone gets for being in the right place at the right time, which overbalances the average biography—and this is a relatively mild case, given only four medals, many others could have a dozen or more. The only thing there I think we all agree on is that at least there is no OR, as all the medals have cited sources.
Now, Pdfpdf and I have been working offline on a compromise which I'm going to put forward here. I hasten to add I still prefer not to bother with these ribbons and service medals at all, but I also don't believe those who want their ribbons will completely change their stance and we have to work to meet somewhere around the middle. My solution was to have a show/hide of the (cited) service medals in the infobox, without ribbons (example here). Pdfpdf's modification of this was a show/hide at the end of the article, where we put templates and so on, similar to mine but including the ribbons (example here). This at least resolved my issue with the imagery being in your face and overbalancing the article. I put this one into practice at Haywood S. Hansell when I reviewed it for GA, it previously having them in a standard section. The author and nominator of that article, Reedmalloy and Hawkeye, were satisfied with that compromise, perhaps others will be as well.
Note also that this was in a US military bio article; I'd hope whatever agreement we came to here would be agreed at a MILHIST-wide level. If so, I won't be going around adding such sections to other articles because i think there are far more important things to do, but I won't object to others doing it as long as all medals have citations and the format is similar to the one we have in Hansell (i.e. only one ribbon is shown per medal, not the rows as well as in Robert Matthew Beatham). Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 08:59, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi all. I currently have the article Otto Becher up at FAC, and an edit has requested that I have a look at the book Australia at Arms by Norman Bartlett to see if there is any further information in that volume that I can place in the article, and I was wondering if anyone possessed a copy of the book, or had access to it? The same editor has also stated that I should have a look at the 1974 edition of Who's Who, so would anyone have a copy or access to that, as well? Any help/assistance in this matter would be much appreciated. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 06:07, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
The article says the operation is ongoing, but there hasn't been any significant development since August 2007. Likely there needs to be some streamlining of it with 2006 East Timorese crisis too. Circeus (talk) 01:52, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
The featured article candidacy for Edgar Towner 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) 00:16, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
There are a few important changes to the popular pages system. A quick summary:
-- Mr.Z-man 23:51, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
The peer review for Military history of Australia during the Vietnam War is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill [talk] [pf] 03:46, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
The A-Class review for John Lerew is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Ian Rose (talk) 23:45, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
The featured article candidacy for Adrian Cole (RAAF officer) 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! Ian Rose (talk) 04:47, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
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) 03:46, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi all,
I've just noticed that many pages featuring the RAN - ships, battles etc. include pictures of the Australian White Ensign, which was not adopted until 1967. Up until that point the RAN flew the British White Ensign.
I've made the odd change here and there but are there people who are prepared to help me remove this flag where it is anachronistic? Slac speak up! 02:22, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Could anybody help me track down a source...something I read, but cannot recall where it was from?
In the not-too-distant past, I read somewhere that Australian warships inherited battle honours from earlier British warships of the same name, as well as their Australian predecessors. However, this practice was to be / has been discontinued for new ships entering service after a set date...they will only carry honours awarded to Australian ships of the same name.
I ask because I plan to add information on battle honours to the various RAN shipindex articles (see HMAS Sydney for an example), and these would be good facts to include where relevant. Does anybody know where I might have picked these tidbits up? -- saberwyn 08:53, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
The featured article candidacy for Convoy GP55 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) 10:59, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
The featured article candidacy for James Newland 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) 06:10, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
The featured article candidacy for John Lerew 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! Ian Rose (talk) 19:24, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
A lot of them exist now, so I linked to them. All the divisions and corps now exist, although before they didn't. So don't feel afriad to link to them in VN War articles YellowMonkey (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 08:27, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
Is anyone intending to create this important article int eh near future? YellowMonkey (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 08:30, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
The A-Class review for Ellis Wackett is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Ian Rose (talk) 14:26, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
The featured article candidacy for HMAS Sydney (1934) 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 22:43, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
This article says
On the side the Viet Cong had written in blood: "DU ME UC DAI LOI", loosely translated as "Aussies Get Stuffed"
and is referenced. Well the source is wrong, as the slogan is obscene, and I suspect that if it wasn't a mistake due to translating skill, if was a deliberate mistake to avoid a [rather strong] obscenity for perhaps Political correctness reasons. Should it just be changed to its real meaning? YellowMonkey (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 07:11, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
The peer review for Henry Wells (general) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Abraham, B.S. (talk) 09:11, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
The peer review for Collins class submarine is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill [talk] [pf] 14:47, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
The featured article candidacy for Joe Hewitt (RAAF officer) 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! Ian Rose (talk) 13:32, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 12 September!
Many thanks, Roger Davies talk 04:06, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Not sure if this is the right place to ask for help, but Townsville, Queensland is up for a GA review. The subheading of Defence facilities is already an appropriate size and has appearance of good content. However I know nothing about defence and would be very grateful for an expert to look it over and make some comments. Many thanks! ROxBo (talk) 14:26, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
There's a proposal to consolidate TFs into larger, more active, ones. This includes:
Thoughts? Roger Davies talk 14:00, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Guys, at the recent FAC for Ellis Wackett, I was requested to tag Commons images with an assertion that they can be published in the United States, as well as their source country. The fact that Commons images need to be acceptable copyright-wise in the US—because that's where the servers are hosted—is not new, however this was the first time in my experience that an assertion to that effect was demanded in the image file, or that the year a photo's copyright expired here assumed such importance for its copyright status in the US. So I thought it'd be worth letting everyone on this task force know the outcome and make recommendations for forestalling issues in future reviews. This of course has implications for imagery sourced from all countries, but I'll start here before considering posting more widely...
The bottom line appears to be that just because an image is public domain in Australia, it may not be in the US, due to a rule which states that to be PD in the US, a foreign image must've been out of copyright in its home country on 1 January 1996. Therefore while Australian copyright laws state that any photo older than 1955 is PD—because it was at least 50 years old on 1 January 2005, when current Australian copyright laws were codified—unless that photo was taken before 1 January 1946, it's not PD in the US because it wasn't PD in Australia on 1 January 1996. Clear as mud...?!?
Now, things are not quite as bad for post-war images as this might suggest, as long as they come from the Australian War Memorial. The AWM website kindly asserts "Copyright expired - public domain" on all its pre-1955 images (and, indeed, on some dated as late as 1958, presumably where the government owned or would've owned the copyright per Clause E in the PD-Australia template). If an image bears this explicit declaration—which is taken to mean PD everywhere, not just in Australia—then even if taken after 1946, it will satisfy US copyright provisions as far as Commons is concerned. For that reason, I suggest including as a matter of course a PD-Author/Government of Australia template in addition to the PD-Australia template for every new Commons image you upload from the AWM which declares itself to be out of copyright and in the public domain, in order to negate any controversy (example here).
For images sourced elsewhere than AWM, to be uploaded as PD on Commons it'd need to be taken before 1 January 1946 and bear the appropriate template in addition to PD-Australia (example here).
If you’ve prised loose from the copyright holder a release for a picture under the GNU free documentation licence (example here, and for anyone wishing to try this for pictures that would otherwise be unacceptable on WP, I'm happy to offer what advice and assistance I can) then you shouldn’t need any special tag beyond that. The same should apply if an image qualifies for fair use. I welcome questions or comments on the above. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 03:20, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
An IP editor has (correctly) "hinted" that some of the links on the Slater page are now broken.
It's my understanding that everything that ever was on the web is archived "somewhere", (if you know where to look.)
I would expect that at least one of the members of the Milhist community must know something about these archives?
If "we" can locate them, then surely they provide more durable URLs than does the Oz DoD website?
Can anyone help? Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 14:39, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
As a quick note, the full-text of all editions of the ADF Journal back to 1977 are now online at: http://www.adfjournal.adc.edu.au/site/ The journal has covered a large number of topics relevant to Wikipedia articles, and there appears to be a very useful index of articles by topic on the website. Nick-D (talk) 03:55, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
As a member of the Military history WikiProject or World War I task force, you may be interested in competing in the Henry Allingham International Contest! The contest aims to improve article quality and member participation within the World War I task force. It will also be a step in preparing for Operation Great War Centennial, the project's commemorative effort for the World War I centenary.
If you would like to participate, please sign up by 11 November 2009, 00:00, when the first round is scheduled to begin! You can sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here! Abraham, B.S. (talk) 13:29, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
There's currently a discussion on the number of fatalities which should be displayed in the articles infobox. Editors are invited to comment at: Talk:Bombing of Darwin Nick-D (talk) 10:22, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Would any editors be willing to watchlist and keep an eye on the featured article AHS Centaur over the next month? As a major search for the wreck of the hospital ship starts this weekend, it is quite likely that the article will become subject to higher traffic (and higher vandalism) over the next few weeks...particularly if she is found. Thanks in advance for your time. -- saberwyn 06:42, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
As per discussions held previously, can someone move the articles, 10th Infantry Brigade (Australia) to 10th Brigade (Australia) and 12th Infantry Brigade (Australia) to 12th Brigade (Australia) and delete previous articles. Regards Newm30 (talk) 11:54, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I stumbled upon this page today, and it strikes me as having more potential than most start-class articles I see. Cheers! momoricks 23:26, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 02:52, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
A new user has been making a number of changes to the 5th/7th Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment article. Can I please ask if any interested parties could take a look at the article and its recent history. While I'm trying to encourage the editor, and I believe his edits to be in good faith, I am of the opinion that the edits are not necessarily improvements. However, I am not sure if I am handling this right because attempts at communication do not seem to be producing anything meaningful. If I am making a hash of it, please let me know and I'll bow out gracefully. Cheers. — AustralianRupert (talk) 08:31, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
An IP has just added "Bruce Lockhart Bogle" to List of Australian generals and brigadiers ([10])
Is this a real person? (Or is it vandalism?) Pdfpdf (talk) 09:31, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi, how do I add requests for photographs on the to do list? I am after a photograph of the M2A2 howitzer of the 102nd Medium Battery, Royal Australian Artillery, that was captured by the North Vietnamese Army and retaken at Fire Support Base Coral, which is located at the AWM. Regards Newm30 (talk) 23:49, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
"Angus" Houston joined the RAAF as a cadet pilot in 1970
Can anyone suggest how I would pin down when in 1970? Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:36, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
I see that, in general, the Oz VC recipients pages were created with their so-called "full-name" as the title. As Bryce has pointed out at least once, these are not the names the people were known by, and the middle names are not required for disambiguation purposes, and I agree with him.
Does anyone object to these pages being moved to titles reflecting the names that these people were known by?
Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:15, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
While working on Torres Strait Light Infantry Battalion, I came across this: [12]. It is a 2001 transcript of an ABC Radio segment in which it is stated that a new campaign ribbon was established for service in the Torres Strait during the Second World War. The ribbon is referred to as the Torres Strait Star (along the lines of the Pacific Star, Burma Star, etc). I've never heard of this ribbon before and a search on [www.itsanhonour.gov.au Its an Honour] does not seem to bring any hits. Can anyone confirm or deny whether this campaign ribbon actually exists? If it doesn't I have to wonder why the ABC was talking about it. One would imagine that they are a credible source, particularly as they quote Dr Peter Stanley from the AWM. If it does exist, I'd be very interested in finding some sources in order to create the wiki article for it. So if you can help point me in the right direction, I'd be very grateful. Cheers. — AustralianRupert (talk) 14:23, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Hello all Australian military history task force members! I have updated the task force's To do list. If anyone is looking for something to do to help out, please take a look. There're quite a few red links for articles that have been requested, please feel free to take a crack at some of these (the Australian Dictionary of Biography Online might be a good start to find sources for some of the biographical articles). Please note that they are currently listed with their full names, however, naming the wider Wikipedia naming conventions would ask that the articles only include first and last name, with an appropriate disambiguator (disambig only if required, though), so please be mindful of this when creating. I've also added a number of articles that need expansion or clean up, if anyone wants to have a go at bringing these up to scratch, it would be greatly appreciated. Once they've been brought up to a decent level (say B class, for instance), please remove them from the expansion or clean up areas. If there are any questions, please feel free to contact me on my talk page. Cheers. — AustralianRupert (talk) 13:50, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
Hello all, can I please get a few more opinions in the discussion: here? The issue is mainly about the command structure field in the infobox on Australian Army units (i.e. whether it should be operational groupings such as brigade, or ceremonial such as Royal Australian Armoured Corps), with the flag icon useage secondary. I won't say more than that here, as I don't want to curry favour in any way, so please review the discussion and articles mentioned and provide your opinion whatever that may be. I'm happy to follow concensus however it pans out. Cheers. — AustralianRupert (talk) 21:31, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
The featured article candidacy for Douglas MacArthur 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 23:18, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
The featured article candidacy for Brian Eaton 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! Ian Rose (talk) 02:00, 29 April 2010 (UTC)