User talk:Noclador/Archive 5

Brazilian Army

An Orbat identical in its appearence to the one of the Argentine Army: http://www.saorbats.com.ar/ORBAT-ExercitoBrasileiro.htm

Alpini Arms

I've browsed around that gallery of arms you've made for the various italian regiments, and my attention was captured by the Alpini shields. Nearly each and every one of them sports a yellow trident on a blue field that is quasi-similar to the coat of arms of the Ukraine. Could you please explain the history of the use of that emblem with the Alpini and what it represents for them? Russoswiss 19:02, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Yep, it has. Quite an interesting custom it is. Russoswiss 22:07, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Ground and Coastal Defence Forces of the Baltic Fleet

Former 11th Guards Army; source brinkster.com and Kommersant-Vlast 2005; personnel strength figures are 2000-01, seven years old. Coastal Defence Units

• 7th Separate Motor Rifle Brigade, Kaliningrad, former 1st Guards Motor Rifle Division
• 152nd (Guards?) Rocket Brigade (Chernyakhovsk)(18 OTR-21 Tochka SSM, 187 men)
• 183rd Anti-Aircraft Rocket Brigade, Gvardeysk (Гвардейск), S-300
• 43rd Anti-Aircraft Rocket Brigade, (Zhamensk? - Знаменск), S-300
• 689th Multiple Rocket Launcher Regiment, Kaliningrad)(125, Vad; 36 9P140 Ураган)
• 46th Seperate Pontoon-Bridge Regiment (Gorodkovo)
• 1st Separate Communications Regiment, Kaliningrad
• 159 Separate Intelligence Regiment of Special Designation (Electronic Warfare?)(орп ОсН), Gvardeysk (Гвардейск)
• 196 Base for Storage of Weapons and Equipment, Sovetsk, 365 personnel (2000-1 figures), formerly 40th Tank Division- 204 Т-72, 72 БМП, 24 2С1 (Noclador, please list with 'XX' and list numbers of personnel; I will add a note to the Baltic Fleet page explaining what a BSWE is (Basically a 'C' Division)).
• 385 Base for Storage of Weapons and Equipment, Kaliningrad/Lugovoe, 365 men, former 1st Guards Tank Division - 207 T-72, 75 BМP, 24 2S3 'XX'
• 3598 Base for Storage of Weapons and Equipment, Kaliningrad, 144 men, formerly 671st and 672 Artillery Regiments of 149th Artillery Division- 72 2А36 "X", I guess.
• 6610th Base for Storage of Weapons and Equipment, Mamonovo, 123 men (motor rifle forces)
• Base for Storage of Weapons and Equipment/former 18th Guards MRD, Gusev, 200 men (figure circa 2001) - 155 Т-72,153 ББМ, 31 2С3, 30 2С1, 12 Grad ('XX')
• 609th Separate Training Motor Rifle Regt (Gvardeysk), 720 men, 50 T-72, 100 BTR, 24 БМП, 10 2С1, 1 2С3, D30. This is a training regiment that prepares servicemen for all coastal defence forces throughout Russia. It was transferred from the Ground Forces to the Navy in 2002.
• 25th Separate Coastal Rocket Regiment, Donskoe (equipped with ‘Rubezh’)
• Anti-Aircraft Rocket Regiment, Kaliningrad, S-300
• Rocket Battalion, Kronshtadt (Rubezh coastal defence missile)
• 218th Separate Electronic Warfare Regiment, Yantarny
• 302nd Separate Electronic Warfare Regiment, Gvardeysk, cadre
• 127th Separate Naval Engineer Battalion (омиб - minelaying(?)), Primorsk (Приморск)

Naval Infantry

• 336 Separate Brigade of Naval Infantry, Baltiysk, Мечниково, 877/878 Sep Naval Infantry Battalions, 879 Sep Air Assault Bn, 724 ордб
• 205 Separate Anti-underwater Diversionary forces Detachment, Baltiysk (50-60 men)
• 561 Separate Naval Reconnaissance Detachment

Noclador, when you're ready to do this; say the word; be keen to push on with the Russian Ground Forces units. Am also collecting the various Japanese infantry regiments. Cheers Buckshot06 02:00, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

If you're stressed out, don't worry about it.. I know you'll fix them up when you get the time. Cheers Buckshot06 20:41, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Swiss Air Squadrons

The armed forces went into even further confusion by having a new and separate website under the admin.ch category, which is, quite obviously, everything related to the government (including legislation, which means people like I spend their days and nights on admin.ch). Anyway, the Luftwaffle's German language page now apparently has the squadrons listed. Since it's in German, I can't confirm for sure, but as you speak the language, you should see quite quickly whether the information is of any use or not.

http://www.lw.admin.ch/internet/luftwaffe/de/home/verbaende/einsatz_lw/staffeln.html Here is the link. Russoswiss (talk) 19:27, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

http://www.lw.admin.ch/internet/luftwaffe/de/home/verbaende/einsatz_lw/staffeln.html

Structures

I will lost some of my time and correct some mistakes.

Polish Armed Forces are made of:

• Land Forces - 4 Divisions and independent units
• Air Force
• Navy
• Inspektorat Wsparcia Sił Zbrojnych - new structure created to support all armed forces types, among others it took over Military districts (but without Territorial Defense Brigades)
• SOF Command
• Military Police (separated from other armed forces) - made of local units and 3 special units (often mistaken with SOF)

The Territorial Defense (OT) Brigades were reduced to battalions and now are part of some regular brigades.

You must understand that Polish Armed Forces were preparing for global war and during war time most of the soldier would be conscripts - now Armed Forces are transforming to fully professional army. It has no point to post to detailed structures because they are morphing constantly to be close to new model - for example till 2010 all T-72 are going to be removed from service and that mens that there will be only 6 tank battalions wit 350 tanks. Other exemple - brigade medical units now are part of command battalion, and so on. And beliveme there are some well informed people outside of wiki project. --Corran.pl (talk) 12:33, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Maps

Hi Noclador, would it be possible for you to edit maps, therefore make battle maps if I provide you a model and all the informations? I can send you a model through email if you want.. Cheers, --Eurocopter (talk) 12:34, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Army National Guard divisions

Hi, reference your message on my talk page, I would be happy to help out where I can. You are quite correct that the transformation of the National Guard will make your task quite difficult. I am most familiar with the structures of the current 26th Infantry Brigade Combat Team (IBCT) and the 86th IBCT of the 42d Infantry Division. The 26th IBCT will as of 1 October transform into the 26th Maneuver Enhancement Brigade (MEB)and the units that you currently have listed under it will no longer be in that brigade. The MEB will be composed of all combat support units. The 86th IBCT will lose the 1-86 FA which is deactivating, and gain the 1-101st FA. Will provide more details as I get them. Hardnfast (talk) 10:49, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

US Army

Hi. First, I'd like to say that all you've done is great, keep it up! Then, is it technicly (if yes, would you consider) possible to do a chart of the whole of the US Army? It probably isn't, but you never know. Still, thanks again for all your work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by James5 (talk • contribs) 12:47, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Hellenic Army

Congratulations on your work, your graphics are extremely interesting! I have managed to find all the major formations of the Hellenic Army, here: Formations of the Hellenic Army, and I am wondering if you could create a graphic. I understand that you prefer to create them only if you have all the infos up to battalions, but it's very hard to find this kind of data in Greece, so if you have some time you could create it! Papastis (talk) 11:33, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I think you are right, it's better to have a more detailed graphic...I hope I can find more data, but anyway, thanks for your interest! Papastis (talk) 06:53, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Excuse me, for being annoying, but I have managed to make some serious progress: II Army Corps, 24th Armored Brigade, 3rd Mechanized Infantry Brigade I will inform you if I have more and supposing you are interested... Papastis (talk) 16:40, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

More XVI Mechanized Infantry Division Papastis (talk) 22:30, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Your graphics are fantastic! Now, about the Commands I will try to find out their units, but it's a big problem, the army is under a heavy reorganization plan (the 3rd in the last 10 years) and no one knows what exactly is going to happen. And when I say heavy I mean for example that all divisions will dissolve and 9 Armored/Mechanised Brigades will be renamed as Strike Brigades each composed of 2 tank Battalions and 2 Mech. Infantry Battalions, instead of 2/1 and 1/2, meaning among other thinks that two or three Brigades will close (propably the 34th and the 24th) but their tank/infantry/artillery units will just be transferred to the new Strike formations...It's a mess... Finally, you are right the Marines Armoured Squadron (3η ΙΜΑ) and the Marines Armor Company (ΙΜΑ) are the same the first being the correct. Papastis (talk) 21:01, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

OrBat diagrams

I'm curious... how exactly are you creating these? Do you have some kind of software, or are you drawing these diagrams by hand? Either way, keep up the good work. bahamut0013♠♣ 03:10, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

I'd appreciate that. How many do you have that aren't shown on APP-6A? You should be able to send me an email via Wikipedia, I'll reply, and then you can attach the graphics (I don't want to make my email address visible to other users). bahamut0013♠♣ 13:30, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, can you re-send it? I had my filters up and my email blocked it automatically. bahamut0013♠♣ 13:45, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

You asked me about USMC orbats... Image:4th US Marine Division.png has a discrepancy, probably because 4th Marine Division (United States) had one: The Force Reconnaissance companies fall under the command element of the Marine Forces Reserve, rather than the ground combat element (the 4th Division). In fact, all four MEF images (I MEF, II MEF, III MEF, and MFR) lack the MEF Headquarters Group units (intelligence battalions, communications battalions, radio (electronic warfare) battalions, ANGLICOs, Force Recon, Chemical Biological Incident Response Force and the civil affairs groups). bahamut0013♠♣ 16:33, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm told that the Civil Affairs groups are actually closer to battalion sized, and are organized more like an understrength battalion rather than an overstrength company. The articles don't provide a clear distinction, at least not to me. My advice is to go with a battalion-size symbol.

As far as the Force Recon unit... I'm really not sure. I talked to a friend real quick, and it seems they were converted into a subordinate of the division recon battalion... I would put them as a subordinate if I showed them at all. Cheers! bahamut0013♠♣ 11:39, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I thought I'd finally get around to some more in depth look at the Marine Aircraft charts, but Looper5920 beat me to it. He's right: some of the squadrons were named (ar at least abbreviated) wrong, as well as some of the assignments totally out of whack. Luckily, I have something to help you: Template:1stMAW Template:2ndMAW Template:3rdMAW Template:4thMAW I try to update those about once a month, because squadrons sometimes get shuffled within groups. bahamut0013♠♣ 03:19, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Looks great! One caveat: Image:4th US Marine Aircraft Wing.png, and specifically, Marine Air Control Group 48... 4th LAAD was deactivated (I dunno why it was still on the article's list, but I've fixed it), and VMU-4 is still many months away from being activated. I would remove it for now, until we get a more firm date for thier stand-up. I'm going to ask Looper to keep you in the loop (no pun intended) because he always seems to find out about USMC units activating, deactivating, and moving before I do. Hopefully, he can be a good asset for you. bahamut0013♠♣ 18:50, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure it was just an accident, but you put most of these squadrons as company-size instead of battalion-size. bahamut0013♠♣ 22:14, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I'm afraid that I'm going to have to insist on battlion-sized dymbols. They are organized as battalion-sized and treated as battalion-sized in every respect. The number of people is lower just due to the mission and equipment, but a single squadron of anywhere from five to a dozen aircraft projects as much power as a battalion of infantry or artillery, it just is projected by a dozen or so pilots instead of a hundred grunts.

If you feel stringly about keeping them as company-sized symbols, I'd like to see the previous discussion. bahamut0013♠♣ 17:08, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

OK, when you find it, I'll throw the whole weight of my charm and intellect behind the discussion. When that meager effort doesn't work, maybe I'll upload a picture of me crying. Cheers! bahamut0013♠♣ 18:04, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Great. Let me know if anyone objects so we all can discuss it. bahamut0013♠♣ 23:07, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Not that I can think of, but I will let you know if I come up with anything later. Thanks for all that hard work! bahamut0013♠♣ 15:57, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

He fallado clase de español en la escuela secundaria ... Tengo que usar Google. bahamut0013♠♣ 16:27, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

The best joke is that my previous post means "I failed high school spanish class... used Google Translate." ;P bahamut0013♠♣ 23:01, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

November 2008

How are you doing? It's been a while since we last spoke. I have some new orbat changes for you: Image:2nd US Marine Aircraft Wing.png needs to have HMH-366 and HMLA-467, these new squadrons have stood up in the last month. Cheers! bahamut0013♠♣ 14:29, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Ciao

Ho visto che una volta facevi parte degli alpini. Il fatto mi rende felice perche durante il corso alla SMALP (1994) mi sono trovato deliziosamente all mio agio. Riservo, anche in questo distante momento, le impressioni migliori sugli alpini. Avrei bisongo del tua aiuto. Ultimamente, da quando abbiamo un po' "rifatto" le pagine sulle Forze Armate Albanesi, mi sono un po' "congedato", ritornando solo per qualche reinfresco in foto o qualche importante informazione. Ho notato pero', che qualcuno (molto probabilmente qualcuno che sta' nelle forze armate ma forse anche qualche serbo/qualche comunicazione in pessimo albanese me lo fa pensare) ha cancellato delle imagini. Siccome non mi definirei esperto in materia "report", alla fine dei conti Wikipedia per me e' un significato di transparenza ed informazine e non un lavoro di polizia, avrei bisogno di sapere come fare ad ripristinare le vechie imagini. E' posibile visto la tua esperienza? Ti ringrazio. Sinceramente Gerd —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gerd 72 (talk • contribs) 11:42, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

29th Combat Aviation Brigade

About your edits to that section of the 29th Infantry Division, you are using an outdated, pre-transformation structure (example: the 3-126th AVN is now in the 42nd Infantry Division, 1-158th Cav is not an Aviation unit anymore, the North Carolina attack battalion is in the 38th Division and is equipped with Apaches).

I am in the 29th Combat Aviation Brigade and can send you an unclassified slide showing the current structure of the 29th Combat Aviation Brigade.

-Agamemnon_b5. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Agamemnon b5 (talk • contribs) 00:51, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Danke schon. Thank you for your help. Best —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gerd 72 (talk • contribs) 07:02, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Learn something new everyday. Thanks for the info. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Agamemnon b5 (talk • contribs) 11:33, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Justin

He is on a wikibreak ATM after the Gibraltar stress. I'd suggest pointing it out to ANI or just mass reverting. The damage done to the article outweights the random addition of poorly cited sources. Narson (talk) 11:26, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Military history of Italy during World War II

Thanks for your thoughts on the above. I've responded on my Talk page. Stephen Kirrage ^{talk - contribs} 14:42, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Generalmesse returns

I'll have a look. Thanks for letting me know. Prob a new SSP case will be necessary. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 18:39, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

WP:AN/I

It doesn't appear that anyone has yet notified you that there is an entry concerning you at WP:ANI Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) ^{(talk / cont)} 07:03, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

My apologies. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) ^{(talk / cont)} 19:47, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I've made a rather large edit to the AN regarding your... scandal, I suppose is the correct word. I did not mention it there (didn't really notice until after I'd posted), but I would like to admonish against your so obviously accusing your accuser of sockpuppetry. While the accusation on its own merits seems reasonable, to accuse your accuser of wrongdoing smacks of character assassination, and could be simply dismissed on that basis. If you have any further thoughts on that, my advice is to be more discreet, possibly by handing the information off to another user and recusing yourself from further involvement. But that, of course, is up to you; I trust your judgement. bahamut0013♠♣ 22:53, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

36th Infantry Division

Currently, the 39th BCT, 36th Infantry Division is identified as being Arizona National Guard. It should be Arkansas National Guard. http://www.arguard.org/docs/unit_structure.pdf —Preceding unsigned comment added by Agamemnon b5 (talk • contribs) 01:06, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

New sockpuppet report on User:Generalmesse

Hello Noclador. Regarding your new sockpuppet report, there is not yet any evidence of actual abuse by the new editors. It's hard to block somebody just because they offer a point of view that defends the performance of the Italian forces. I see that there is some critique of including too much data about battalion-level actions. If it could be shown that the new editors are preventing agreement on a well-balanced account of this battle, that would give us more to work with. If you could get the agreement of User:Kirrages that these accounts are probably sockpuppets, that would make a difference. I see him as making a serious effort to create balance in the First battle of El Alamein article. EdJohnston (talk) 17:34, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Alpini ISAF.jpg

Are you certain these soldiers are with the ISAF (the Afghanistan force?) and not in Iraq or Lebanon? The writing on the wall is in Arabic (tr: I kiss 122mm) and not Pashto/Dari/etc. --NEMT (talk) 21:32, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

1st Armored Division (United States)

Hello. I noticed that you changed the SSI of the 1st Armored Division (United States) page, from the "Old Ironsides" patch to an emblem with "ready first." I think that you made a mistake in doing this, because "ready first" is the motto of 1st Brigade, 1st Armored Division and you may have unintentionally put its DUI on the page, because I can't find any sources stating that the division's patch has been changed. Just wanted to see if I am mistaken or not. -Ed!^(talk)_{(Hall of Fame)} 01:32, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Very nice job with the Images! Yeah, the other armored divisions actually don't have names...they're just the same triangle design with a different number. The only exception to this I believe is the 49th Armored Division (United States) which goes by "Lone * Star" -Ed!^(talk)_{(Hall of Fame)} 15:08, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Special Forces List

Hey dude. If you look on the talk page you'll see that there was a warning made some time ago for all un-referenced items to be referenced. I understand that people spend valuable time on here but all additions must be referenced and so, their deletion does constitute being labled as vandalism (Archangel1 (talk) 21:19, 17 August 2008 (UTC)).

No problem talk:Noclador but Wikipedia rules are that they to be referenced and a moderator will delete them if they see it. Happy editing (Archangel1 (talk) 21:28, 17 August 2008 (UTC)).

Stop adding items with no references. It is breech of Wiki policy. If you continue, you'll be reported to a moderator and blocked. Final Warning. (Archangel1 (talk) 12:41, 18 August 2008 (UTC)).

Outstanding Work!

		The WikiChevrons
		I, Ed!, award you, Noclador, your third award of Wikichevrons for your astounding image contributions, including what is now over 200 different coats of arms and SSI for various military units, as well as over 100 OrBat graphics. Ed!(talk)(Hall of Fame) 02:55, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Unrecognised State militaries - Abkhazia

I do wonder whether you also include unrecognised states' militaries into your work. Having skimmed through the Russian wiki, I came upon a more or less "elaborate" structural description of the Abkhazian Army. Thing is that I cannot certify that the information is fully correct, as the Abkhazians do not reveal their data in public. And also because Abkhazia is not recognised as a sovereign state. However, it does have an army, and according to the Russian Wikipedia and some Russian sources, here's what it consists of:

• 3 "motor rifle" brigades, each with 3-4 "motor rifle" battalions and one tank battalion
• 1 artillery regiment
• 1 engineer battalion
• 1 "mountain sharpshooters" battalion
• 1 "joint arms" training regiment
• Sukhum(i) military academy
• 3 Patrol boat units (part of the navy)

Then there is some disparity in between the Russian wiki article and the Russian sources. The Russian wikipedia article lists an additional: 1 reconaissance battalion, 2-3 air defence battalions. The Russian source lists an additional: 1 marine infantry battalion (part of the navy).

There are no structural descriptions for the air force. Russoswiss (talk) 00:34, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I've put the table into the Military of Abkhazia article, both English and Russian language articles. Russoswiss (talk) 13:11, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Another Graphic...

Hello again. I just saw another image that you could assist with. The insignia of the I Armored Corps is the same as the ones that you created before, except that it has an "I" instead of a number. I figured it would be easiest for you to do since you made the other ones, any way. Could you make this one? Thanks, -Ed!^(talk)_{(Hall of Fame)} 03:02, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Bruno

Hi buddy, while looking for something else, I stumbled across the edit history for Greco-Italian War, which I see you have edited quite a bit. Just FYI, I can tell you that the following "editors" from that article are all definitely our friend Bruno:

• User:Kemal2
• Special:Contributions/209.215.160.115
• Special:Contributions/209.215.160.113
• Special:Contributions/209.215.160.106
• Special:Contributions/216.77.23.98
• Special:Contributions/209.215.160.103
• Special:Contributions/4.231.205.76
• Special:Contributions/4.231.201.42
• Special:Contributions/4.231.205.93
• Special:Contributions/4.231.202.78

The first group are Bruno on his travels (he goes to Atlanta regularly as we know). The 4.231 addresses are Bruno at home. I doubt he'll reactivate Kemal2; if he does, I'll start an SSP case. I was a bit shocked to find this whole pile. All the above are Bruno for sure. Best, AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 22:01, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Response from RekonDog

This is referring to your question to User:Bahamut0013 about 5th Force Recon Company. Since 3rd Recon Bn is not largely manpowered as the other Recon Battalions, 5th FORECON supports that Recon Battalion when needed. It is mainly due because that the 31st MEU is the only MEU in support of the III MEF. Although 5th FORECON is already a Company that has 'Deep Recon' missions as well as Direct Action. They will embark their Deep Recon Platoons, or DRPs (which are the 5th and 6th Plts-which we Force Recon Operators call the "Drips") to help support the MEU as well - even though they support the MEU already. It just helps the 31st MEU establish their Special Operations Capability certification that the Fleet Marine Force requires of the forward deployed Marines. But recently, they had totally dissolved in the 3rd Force Recon Battalion, to create their DRP Platoon. So moreorless, being 'folded' is obsolete on terminology. They practically made 5th FORECON still in existence but somewhat a 'ghost' Company that is "also" Bravo Company within 3rd Recon Battalion. The Marine Corps is a fully forward deployed organiztion so it is very hard to follow when it comes to their heirarchy, especially nowadays. All of the Force Recon Companies were/are directly subordinated under the Fleet Marine Force, hence the word "Force" in their namesake. They operate in the boundaries of the FMF-level missions that are attachable at the joint-Navy/Marines' expense. It may sound confusing...

If you have any other questions that pertain to the Marines' Recon Battalions and Force Recon Companies, go ahead and forward any inquiries to me...I am to blame for confusing you on that article-from which I am the one that submitted all of the opening paragraphs, Mission, History and Training. Once a while back I had the organization page all inscribed on that article but I had to delete it because I was having disputes in creating tables! But Bahamut0013 is my wiki mentor, and my only contact that I use besides one other wikipedian!
----User:RekonDog 18:41, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The September 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fourteen candidates. Please vote here by September 30!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:03, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Argentine Army

Another Link from saorbats.ar.com about the Order of battle of the Argentine Army: http://www.saorbats.com.ar/EA_orbat.htm It is quite complicated and confusing and I don't know how up to date it is, but if you need any help in translating it, I would be glad to help you.

An updated version of the Argentine Army Orbat (as of January 2008) can be found at that same site: [1]. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.235.90.117 (talk) 04:16, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Generalmesse is back

I see he appears to be using an IP sockpuppet [2], worth a sock puppet report? The IP resolves to Australia but not to a particular city. Justin talk 08:33, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

38th Infantry Division

Greetings.

After a glance at the 38th Combat Aviation Brigade I've noticed a few inaccuracies with it. I have no idea how to do graphics or edit a page with sources so I'll tell someone who knows what they are doing.

Current structure:

HHC 38th CAB - Indiana National Guard 1st Battalion (Attack), 130th Aviaiton Regiment - North Carolina National Guard 2nd Battalion (S&S), 151st Aviaition Regiment - South Carolina/Virginia/Florida/North Carolina/Georgia/Alabama National Guard 1st Battalion (Assault) 137th Aviation Regiment - Ohio/Indiana National Guard 3rd Battalion (GSAB), 238th Aviation Regiment - Michigan/Deleware/Ohio/New Hampshire/Indiana National Guard 638th Aviation Support Battalion - Indiana/Ohio/North Carolina/Indiana/Massachusetts National Guard

As for sources: This is from the second of three slides detailing the National Guard's Aviation Transformation. It is unclassified (but from a password protected site so I can't link to it). Can I send you the various things I have directly? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Agamemnon b5 (talk • contribs) 16:14, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Possible sockpuppet?

Cheers! It's been a while since we last spoke. I need some advice based on your experience with sockpuppetry, specifically, whether you think this user is a potential problem or not.

I've come across a user that for some reason, piqued my curiosity. I can't honestly say what it was, but I was a bit suspicious... and then I checked his contributions. He created an account and made one edit in 2006, a few more a year later, some more many months later, and all of the sudden a bunch of edits in the last week. That alone doesn't make me suspicious, but then I looked closer at those edits: they don't seem like a typical beginner edits. He's making good use of piped links, talk pages, created and developed a user page, uses Friendly, and has a very strong grasp of Wikipedia's internal processes: enough to successfly get pages deleted, vote on featured articles, and tag articles for cleanup. I dunno bout you, but I didn't learn all of that in a hundred edits over a week. This makes me think that this was a sleeper account recently "awaken".

What do you think? bahamut0013♠♣ 19:39, 24 October 2008

Alpini

Vedo ti interessi di alpini. da qualche giorno sto inserendo qualche voce in IT, mi chiedevo come mai non esiste un portale, io lo farei anche ma non so bene come fare, inoltre non so come dovrebbe essere gestita la cosa. Poi volevo creare la pagina di COLMAP, ma ho visto è stata cancellata in IT, forse tu sai qual'è il motivo?--Lingtft (talk) 03:30, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Ancora io scusa se ti disturbo, :), potresti tradurre la voce dall'italiano Maria Plozner Mentil?, quando hai tempo voglia? l'ho appena mancata, le è intitolata una caserma del terzo reggimento artiglieria da montagna, appena creato.

1st Armored Division, United States Army, Current Structure

Please see my comments on Talk:1st_Armored_Division_(United_States) regarding my recent edit and your revert. Your input requested. Thanks.

SirValentine (talk) 07:34, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Brazilian Army

Hey Noclador, great work on the Brazilian military commands. But there are no sources whatsoever! We can't really have the info without any sources. Could you list the sources either here or on one of the pages? Cheers Buckshot06(prof) 17:29, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Noclador; just noticed your additions to the 7th Coastal Defense Brigade - good work for the update. Would you mind adding your source from wherever you got it? Thanks and best holiday wishes, Buckshot06(prof) 17:47, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

OK. When you do add information that's source-able, please do so, and in the case of things like the Polish Army reorganisation, please add it when it becomes public. At the moment some rules nazi might conceivably be able to remove all the information saying it does not comply with WP:V. Cheers Buckshot06(prof) 23:08, 29 December 2008 (UTC)