User talk:Cuprum17/Archive2018

Help!

I have nominated the United States Marine Corps Women’s Reserve article for GA, and it’s now being reviewed. The reviewer made the comment that follows and I am unable to grasp its meaning. Can you help?

See also section - you need to scrub these links to make sure they're not being used above (some certainly are)

Happy New Year! Pendright (talk) 01:55, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)@Pendright: G'day, Pendright, hope you are well. I have had a crack at fixing this for you. Fairly sure I got all of these. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 07:34, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

I get it now! Thanks to you and the Chief for bailing me out once again. I’m well and trust you are too. All the best of the New Year! Pendright (talk) 19:20, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXLI, January 2018

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 review: Hawkeye7 looks at tropical medicine and Operation Market Garden Op-ed: Hawkeye7 on US Army doctrine in World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:15, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

USMCWR

@Cuprum17: It’s me again, still responding to GAR questions about the United States Marine Corps Women’s Reserve article. Now, it’s about image fair use. I’ve reviewed some of the literature on image fair use but in practical terms, how does it actually work in the case described below:

File:Ruth Cheney Streeter.jpg needs a fair use rationale

Thanks for your help.Pendright (talk) 00:41, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

I have contacted User:Illegitimate Barrister, who has helped many times in the past when I had picture problems. If I understand the file information on File:Ruth Cheney Streeter.jpg you should be able to use the low resolution version (19K) of the photo without a problem, but my knowledge of the situation is kind of iffy. Illegitimate Barrister should be able to help and if he doesn't, then I have a backup plan. Nice work so far on the article, by the way. Let me know if there is a problem. Keep up the good work... Cuprum17 (talk) 15:04, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

The picture is probably in the public domain since it's from the 1940s (and is most likely a work of the U.S. government). – Illegitimate Barrister (talk • contribs), 18:29, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

@Illegitimate Barrister: Thanks so much for your response. The GA reviewer tells me the photo “needs a fair use rationale”, and I don’t understand what this actually means. Pendright (talk) 21:44, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

@Pendright:@Illegitimate Barrister: It would appear that someone has cleared the 30K version of File:Ruth Cheney Streeter.jpg for fair use. I'm of the opinion that it was a official government portrait which would be in the public domain. The file in Wikimedia Commons shows it as a public domain picture. Problem solved, I think... Cuprum17 (talk) 01:26, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

@Cuprum17: This means, as you understand it, the image does not need fair use rationale disclosure. In any event, thank you for always ready to help an old sailor. Pendright (talk) 03:18, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

@Cuprum17: Thanks for your edit on USMCWR. If you have time, please look at my note on the talk page under Article improvementl. It explains why the subject is WW II, not WW I and the reasons why. Thanks again. I hope the New Year has been good to you so far. Pendright (talk) 07:34, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

@Pendright: All is well with me. I didn't mean to throw a wrench in the works with my last edit. I can revert my edit in the lead if you wish, just say the word. The scope of the article wasn't clear to me and the edit citation made by the IP editor didn't conform to the established citation format, so I changed it. Let me know what you want done and I will be more than happy to make changes if that is your wish. There doesn't need to be a citation in the lead anyway. I am impressed with what you have done with the article in the GAR, but it looks like you are in a waiting game now. Cheers...and I hope everything is well for you. Cuprum17 (talk) 14:07, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

@Cuprum17: Anything to do with women who served the corps in WW I is beyond the scope of this article. This was understood when I started and the basis for the GAR. The WW I story was to be spun-off for another article. The subject of this article is the USMCWR, created by congress in 1942 to relieve manpower shortages during WW II. So if the edits made relate to the women’s service in WW I, they should be reverted.

Thanks for your congratulatory post.Without wiki-friends like you, I fear it would never have happened. Kudos to you as well! Pendright (talk) 02:22, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

@Pendright: I reverted my edits relating to citations and also the IP editors additions to the article relating to World War I service. Hope that helps...and I wish you well on your article relating to women in the Corps during World War I. Cheers! Cuprum17 (talk) 06:22, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

@Cuprum17: Thank you so much for your cleanup edits. I’m not sure every editor advances the cause of Wikipedia – you do – setting a high standard in doing it. Cheers right back at you! Pendright (talk) 06:14, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Thanks for supporting me through my block. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk • contribs), 23:33, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXLII, February 2018

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 review: Nick-D on the Napoleonic Wars and Hawkeye7 on World War II Op-ed: Hawkeye7 on generalship in 1918 Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 07:16, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXLIII, March 2018

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 review: Hawkeye7 looks at a work by Daniel Ellsberg Op-ed: TomStar81 on the 1918 flu pandemic Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 10:36, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

WAVES

@Cuprum17: You’ve been very generous in helping this old dinosaur, and, once again, I’m reaching out for your expertise. This time, it has to do with nominating the WAVES article for the ACR. I’m embarrassed to say after several attempts, I’ve been unable to get the template to work. I’ve read and followed the instructions, but without success. I’ve done it twice before, but the process escapes me now. Would you consider looking over the instructions and walk me through the process, step by step. Pendright (talk) 06:23, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject assessment/A-Class criteria

@Pendright: Okay, you are in territory that I've attempted only once and that has been sometime back. First, congrats on getting WAVES to GA status. I know that it takes a good deal of effort to even get that far. At the page Wikipedia:WikiProject assessment/A-Class criteria, it gives the instructions for starting an A Class Review and I have completed step number one for you. I added "A-Class=current" as instructed to the Military history WikiProject template. You can see what I did if you look at the edit history of the WAVES talk page. My edit will be the one: "add template". Next, look at the current view of the talk page and you will see "WikiProject Military history [show](Rated GA-Class)". Click on "show" and the template will open up to the next view. At the bottom of the "Military history WikiProject" box there is on the last line that says "additional information..." on the right-hand end of that line it says "[show]". Click on that. When the box expands you will see

"This article is currently undergoing an A-Class review." with the words "currently undergoing" as a red link. The next part is up to you. When you click on the red link it will create a new page titled "Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/WAVES". There will be instructions on the page telling you what to do next. You will need to put your nomination for the article into words and submit it.

I will follow your progress and if you need further help just ping me here. Keep up the good work, I'm proud of what you have accomplished with the WAVES article and proud of all of your improvements to Wikipedia. Cuprum17 (talk) 14:32, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

@Cuprum17: <> I’m with you on step number one! Then you say, next, look at the current view of the talk page and you will see WikiProject Military history [show](Rated GA-Class). <> I find no such phrase with the word SHOW?? Pendright (talk) 00:59, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

@Pendright: G'day, gentlemen, hope you don't mind, but I have created the review page for you now. It can be found here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/WAVES. Please add a nomination statement to that page, and then add it to your watchlist. Good luck with the review and thanks for your efforts with the article. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 02:29, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

@AustralianRupert and Cuprum17: Thanks so much for getting the job done in my stead. Can you walk me through it, again? Pendright (talk) 06:14, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

No worries. I've added some suggestions to the review. In terms of the nomination process it is a little difficult to understand, I agree. The first step is to go to the article's talk page (e.g. Talk:WAVES and click "edit this page". In edit mode, you should see the WPMILHIST template. Within that template, add "A-Class=current" and hit the "Publish changes" button. This will take you back to the view/read mode. In read mode, locate the MILHIST talk page banner. It may be in its collapsed state. If it is, you will need to find a blue link "show" button close to the right hand side of your screen. Clicking this once helps to expand the banner. There may then be a second "show" button next to "Additional information..." inside the MILHIST banner. Click this again. Once the banner is expanded, you should see a red "currently undergoing" link. Clicking this link takes you to the preloaded nomination template. On the WAVES talkpage the "currently undergoing" link is now blue, because the review page has now been created, but before I did this it would have been blue. Anyway, I hope that is clear. If not, I will try again. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 07:37, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

@Cuprum17: Good news, the WAVES article has managed to cross the ACR finish line. Thanks to you for greasing the skeeds. I hope spring is on the way in your neck of the woods. Pendright (talk) 05:40, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

April 2018 Milhist Backlog Drive

G'day all, please be advised that throughout April 2018 the Military history Wikiproject is running its annual backlog elimination drive. This will focus on several key areas:

• tagging and assessing articles that fall within the project's scope
• adding or improving listed resources on Milhist's task force pages
• updating the open tasks template on Milhist's task force pages
• creating articles that are listed as "requested" on the project's various 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 scope of military history will be considered eligible. This year, the Military history project would like to extend a specific welcome to members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red, and we would like to encourage all participants to consider working on helping to improve our coverage of women in the military. This is not the sole focus of the edit-a-thon, though, and there are aspects that hopefully will appeal to pretty much everyone.

The drive starts at 00:01 UTC on 1 April and runs until 23:59 UTC on 30 April 2018. Those interested in participating can sign up here.

For the Milhist co-ordinators, AustralianRupert and MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:53, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXLIIV, April 2018

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 review: Nick-D looks at the bombing of Darwin; recent books by female military historians Review essay: K.e.coffman on Wikipedia's representations of the Nazi German military Op-ed: TomStar81 on the Red Baron Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:55, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

SPARS

Greetings:

@Cuprum17: I’ve taken your suggestion to heart and have started to prepare the article SPARS for an ACR. As you may recall, there hasn’t been a lot of independent material written about them. While I used some independent sources other than the USCG, I did rely on them for a great deal of its on-line information. Now, when you click on those reference sources you get this: ‘You've been redirected to the new USCG website, hosted by the Defense Media Activity (DMA)’. So, you can see the problem this presents. I’ve tried, but have not been able to master navigating the new website. Would you consider taking a crack at it? Pendright (talk) 05:06, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

@Pendright:Well, I am in kind of the same boat there. I have written literally dozens of "B" class articles that are cited with the old CG website and now display the same message. My sole "A" class article I rummaged around the new site and was fortunate to find the material I needed for all but one citation. I managed to find an alternate source for that cite so I "saved" that article from a downgrade. I can try. Let me know the areas that are giving you problems and I will dig around and either find the material in the new site or find an alternate source. Thank you for your willingness to tackle this project...I am in awe of your abilities. Cuprum17 (talk) 12:24, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

@Cuprum17: Hey, I always appreciate your kind words and your willingness to help. Thanks! The one reference that presents the real problem and is key is the very first source under references: "A Preliminary Survey of the Development of the Women's Reserve of the United States Coast Guard" (PDF). The Coast Guard at War, Women's Reserve. US Coast Guard Historians Office. 1 April 1945. Retrieved 8 January2013.

Pendright (talk) 20:29, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

@Pendright: I will get to work on it and see what I can find under the new site. It is my experience that at least 90 percent of the material in the old site was transferred to the new site. I find it much more difficult to find material in the new site than the old. I will either get in touch with you or simply add the new site referencing to the SPARS article if I can find it. Give me a few days to nose around... Cuprum17 (talk) 11:57, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

@Cuprum17: No hurry, thanks again! Pendright (talk) 04:47, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

G'day, gentlemen, if you have the urls of the old pages you were using, you might be able to link to archived copies through the Web Archive, which can be found here: [1]. It might be easier than trying to find the new pages. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:35, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

@AustralianRupert: Many thanks! Pendright (talk) 03:00, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

@Pendright: Try this link: https://media.defense.gov/2017/Jul/02/2001772337/-1/-1/0/USCGATWAR-SPARS.PDF It took me a while to find it, but I think it has some useful information on the SPARS program. I hope it helps... Away from keyboard until Monday, 14 May.

@Cuprum17:Take a bow, this is the important CG source. Hope you had a good weekend! Pendright (talk) 03:21, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

@Pendright:I do not like the way things are organized on the new website...it is even hard to find the Historian's Office page there. Nothing like the old website. Weekend was good, got some fishing done; didn't catch much though...LOL! Cuprum17 (talk) 12:32, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

@Cuprum17: Thank you again! Pendright (talk) 20:12, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXLIV, May 2018

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 review: Hawkeye7 looks at coalitions and logistics in World War II, and Nick-D at Australia's frontier wars Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:00, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Richard H. Patterson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Boatswain's mate (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXLVI, June 2018

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 review: Recent external reviews Op-ed: TomStar81 on a supergun of World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 10:35, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

citation styles and citation formats

I'm sorry. You left a reply for me, at User_talk:Cuprum17/Archive2017#As_a_courtesy_to_other_contributors_could_we_explain_complicated_or_controversial_edits_on_the_talk_page_--_not_in_our_edit_summaries?, which I didn't see, and didn't respond to, when you left it.

I am not going to make a big deal about this, but I sticking with my interpretation of WP:CITEVAR. When it talks about "styles", and when the other wikidocuments talk about citation styles, they are distinguishing between the style almost universally used now, where references are enclosed between <ref></ref> pairs, and other very rarely used citation styles, like the Harvard style references.

The <ref></ref> style, which wikidocuments sometimes call "footnote style" really mustn't be mixed with the harvard style, as they are mutually incompatible, and render with multiple footnotes, with the same footnote number. It is a strong reason to not introduce a new style.

But improving a reference in the footnote style, by changing it from using bareurls to using a {{cite}} template, for instance, is not discourage by CITEVARS, or any other wikidocument. Geo Swan (talk) 01:19, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

• The wiki markup, that may be at the bottom of your editor page, includes {{#tag:ref||group="nb"|name=""}} -- an example of an incompatible reference style. Geo Swan (talk) 01:22, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

A random act of kindness

	Burger
	To commemorate the Independence Day of the United States, and Republic Day of the Philippines, and to thank you for your many years of honorable service to our nation, I share with you this image of an In-N-Out Burger Double-Double. May it make you hunger for continued improvement of content on Wikipedia. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 04:21, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXLVII, July 2018

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 review: This month's external reviews Op-ed: TomStar81 on the murder of the Romanovs Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:12, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Buddy Ebsen

That first word was supposed to be "In". Keyboard mistake. As to a reference, maybe the death dates in their respective articles are incorrect? As to trivia, that's a matter of opinion. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:17, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

It is not referenced in the article "Buddy Ebsen", and therefore the information should be removed until it is referenced within the article "Buddy Ebsen". In my opinion it is just trivia and nothing more. Cuprum17 (talk) 18:52, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXLVIII, August 2018

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 review: Nick-D looks at a classic US official history Op-ed: TomStar81 on belated declarations of war in 1916–18 Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 08:35, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next 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 coord team. Cheers, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:53, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXLIX, September 2018

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 review: Indy Beetle and Nick-D on the Katangese Gendarmes and India during World War II Op-ed: TomStar81 looks at two important treaties of World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:19, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Milhist coordinator election voting has commenced

G'day everyone, voting for the 2018 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:35, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Milhist coordinator election voting has commenced

G'day everyone, voting for the 2018 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:22, 15 September 2018 (UTC) Note: the previous version omitted a link to the election page, therefore you are receiving this follow up message with a link to the election page to correct the previous version. We apologies for any inconvenience that this may have caused.

Have your say!

Hi everyone, just a quick reminder that voting for the WikiProject Military history coordinator election closes soon. You only have a day or so left to have your say about who should make up the coordination team for the next year. If you have already voted, thanks for participating! If you haven't and would like to, vote here before 23:59 UTC on 28 September. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:29, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CL, October 2018

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 review: Nick-D looks at the use of so-called "substandard" manpower in armies Interview: On the Bugle turning 150 (issues that is!) Op-ed: TomStar81 on the collapse of empires at the close of World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 07:00, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLI, November 2018

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 review: Peacemaker67 looks at the Sydney Wars Op-ed: TomStar81 on the end of World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:39, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Help!

@Cuprum17: I’m back again with another problem, so I hope you’re in a generous mood to help. It’s about footnotes, expressly about the various steps in the process. I’ve read the Wikipedia instructions on footnotes and looked at the one you created for the SPARS article, but haven’t grasped the basic mechanics yet. Do you suppose you could walk me through the process, step by step? I have the Note prepared along with the appropriate cites. Just one note! It’s about the WAVES article, which is undergoing an FAR. I hope you can bail me out again! I’m doing well and hope you are too. Pendright (talk) 01:04, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

@Pendright: Greetings, Old Friend! Glad everything is well with you...all good here except that I am in the middle of a project for my local VFW Post. I can tackle your request after Tuesday as I should complete the work at the V Tuesday morning. I noticed recently that the WAVES article was going through FAR. I will be glad to assist with the footnotes if I'm not too rusty. I had don't do much article writing anymore and limit my participation to minor edits and vandalism corrections. We will get it right though! Cuprum17 (talk) 17:59, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

@Cuprum17: Sucess with yur project, a great organization that counts me as a member too. Look forward to hearing from you when you are free. Pendright (talk) 19:20, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

@Pendright: I did notice that the Author name "Ebbert" is misspelled in many citations as "Ebert". This was just a quick glance at the article before I headed out the door. If you don't have time to correct, I can do that Tuesday. Cuprum17 (talk) 20:19, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

@Cuprum17: Yes, I know, In the process of changing now. Thanks! Pendright (talk) 20:34, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

@Cuprum17: I've fixed a few, but with some I foul up the citation when I add the b. Look forward to your help! Pendright (talk) 00:49, 20 November 2018 (UTC

@Cuprum17:: WAVES - Background section - first paragraph:

“In May 1941, Representative Edith Nourse Rogers of Massachusetts introduced a bill in the U.S. Congress to establish a Women's Army Auxiliary Corps (WAAC). As the word auxiliary suggests, women would serve not in the Army, but with it, and would be denied the benefits of their male counterparts.” (insert the following Note after counterparts)

• In May 1942, the U.S. Congress authorized the Women’s Army Axillary Corps (WAAC), but chose not to install it as a branch of the U.S. Army. Instead, created it as an auxiliary unit, where the members were with the Army, but not in it. Consequently, the WAAC members did not have full military status, and were denied such benefits as pensions, disability protection, and other rights granted to the male members of the Army. ( Cite Yellin, P. 113) However, in July 1943 the Congress refashioned the WAAC into the Women's Army Corps (WAC), providing its members with the same benefits and rights as the male members of the U.S. Army. (Cite Ebbert and Hall, P. 27)

I hope I've made this clear, if I haven't please ping me. Thanks so much! Pendright (talk) 06:11, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

@Pendright:Ok, look over what I have done and see if that is what you had in mind. Hope that helped, but if it didn't let me know and I will attempt to fix it. Cuprum17 (talk) 18:16, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

@Cuprum17: The Footnote looks good (great job), but we still need a citation (Ebert and Hall, P. 27) after the last word in the last sentence, U.S. Army. And thanks for fixing Ebbert too. How did your VFW project turn out? Happy Thanksgiving to you and your family! Pendright (talk) 21:07, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

@Cuprum17: I was able to fix, and in doing so learned something about crafting footnotes. Thanks again for your help. Pendright (talk) 00:54, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

@Pendright:Sorry I kind of left you hanging, I didn't realize there were other things that needed attention. I left town Friday for Thanksgiving with relatives and didn't get back until late Saturday. Blizzard in Kansas, so I stayed by the fire all day Sunday! I'm glad you got things figured out but feel bad that I didn't "get" to help. Hope your Thanksgiving went well. All is well here, and if you need help on the FAR, just let me know and I will come running. I will try to watch this extra during your FAR. Cuprum17 (talk) 19:09, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

@Cuprum17: Sorry for the lateness of my reply, but I’ve been busier than a cat on a tin roof. Footnotes turned out just fine and thanks for that. FAR is a struggle, but I’m still in the game. You can bet I’ll call down the road. I know something about blizzards too, having lived in Montana. Moved to Hawaii four years ago, the tempeture today at 200pm is 84 degrees, great for old bones. It sounds like your holiday was full; mine was too. Thanks again! Pendright (talk) 00:40, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

@Cuprum17: A Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you and your family. And thanks again for all the help you provided me this past year. Pendright (talk) 21:19, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

@Pendright:I was out of town over Christmas but I hope you had a merry one! For me it would be kind of hard to celebrate Christmas without some good old fashioned cold Kansas weather so celebrating in Hawaii must be different I guess. I did manage to celebrate Christmas in 1966 and 1967 in Vietnam and watch Bob Hope perform live at USO shows both Christmas days. Hot both days and no snow... I got out of the Army just before Christmas 1968 and was back in Kansas. Much more to my liking! I spent Christmas of 2001 in Port Arthur, Texas serving with the Coast Guard after 9/11 providing waterside security for the refineries located in Port Arthur and the Port of Beaumont. Hope the new year finds you healthy and prosperous. Cuprum17 (talk) 20:45, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

@Cuprum17: Good to hear from you - glad all is well. I hope 2019 treats yoy well! Pendright (talk) 21:05, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Cuprum17. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Nominations now open for "Military historian of the year" and "Military history newcomer of the year" awards

Nominations for our annual Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards are open until 23:59 (GMT) on 15 December 2018. Why don't you nominate the editors who you believe have made a real difference to the project in 2018? MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:26, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLII, December 2018

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 review: Recent external reviews Op-ed: Indy beetle looks at military newspapers in East Africa

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 10:34, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Voting now open for "Military historian of the year" and "Military history newcomer of the year" awards

Voting for our annual Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards is open until 23:59 (GMT) on 30 December 2018. Why don't you vote for the editors who you believe have made a real difference to Wikipedia's coverage of military history in 2018? MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:16, 16 December 2018 (UTC)