Open main menu

I'll reply to your message here.

Administrators' newsletter – July 2019Edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2019).

  Administrator changes

  28bytesAd OrientemAnsh666BeeblebroxBoing! said ZebedeeBU Rob13Dennis BrownDeorDoRDFloquenbeam1Flyguy649Fram2GadfiumGB fanJonathunderKusmaLectonarMoinkMSGJNickOd MishehuRamaSpartazSyrthissTheDJWJBscribe
1Floquenbeam's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.
2Fram's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.

  Guideline and policy news

  • In a related matter, the account throttle has been restored to six creations per day as the mitigation activity completed.

  Technical news

  • The Wikimedia Foundation's Community health initiative plans to design and build a new user reporting system to make it easier for people experiencing harassment and other forms of abuse to provide accurate information to the appropriate channel for action to be taken. Community feedback is invited.


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:19, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

RAE WikiEdit

G'day Rupert,

I'm just looking to develop communications with the admin of the RAE page.

I'm currently a serving officer at the School of Military Engineering and have been tasked to update the Corps' Wiki.

You seem to have done the majority of the edits in the past, so I was just wondering if you would be interested in collaborating with us to update some information?

Kind Regards,

SME — Preceding unsigned comment added by School of Military Engineering (talkcontribs) 00:48, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

  • @School of Military Engineering: First off...Welcome to Wikipedia! Second, while it is admirable you are willing to work to update the page, you need to understand that you have a direct conflict of interest in working on this article. While you can make edits to it, it is difficult for a person with such a conflict of interest to do so. I encourage you to read this guideline regarding conflict of interest. Understand that whatever you wish to add/modify on the article needs to be done so from a neutral point of view and should be based on reliable sources, not what you personally know. If you need help, let me know. --Hammersoft (talk) 00:52, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
    • @School of Military Engineering: G'day, I'd be happy to help, although my time will be a bit limited until after July. I think the best way for you to contribute would be for you to post your comments, suggestions or sources on the talk page of the article (found here), and then we can discuss them. I, or someone else, can then try to update the article if the suggestions/sources meet the site's guidelines. This is probably best, noting what Hammersoft is saying above about your conflict of interest. Secondly, I think you need to change your username. Wikipedia accounts are not allowed to represent organisations, only individuals, as a group name implies shared use (which isn't allowed). As such, I'd suggest that you read the guidance here: Wikipedia:Changing username and then make a request here: Wikipedia:Changing username/Simple. Your new username should comply with the guidance here: Wikipedia:Username policy. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:25, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Congratulations from the Military History ProjectEdit

  The WikiChevrons
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the WikiChevrons for participating in 40 reviews between April and June 2019 Peacemaker67 (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 03:05, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Indeed, congratulations for your WikiChevrons. Thank you for your help in 40 reviews between those months and thank you for making Wikipedia a better place. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 10:11, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

June 2019 Milhist contestEdit

  The Writer's Barnstar
For being runner-up in the June 2019 Milhist article writing contest, on behalf of the coordinators I hereby award you the Writer's Barnstar. Well done! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:44, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

Motor brigadesEdit

G'day AR, I was just reviewing 23rd (Northumbrian) Division and noticed that there was an explanation of British Army doctrine at the beginning of WWII regarding "motor" formations that might be useful background for your articles on these various brigades that were "motor". If you look at Note b it provides the aforementioned doctrine, which I assume we adopted as well? Not sure where you would go to confirm that it also applied to Australia, but thought the similarities in names might indicate we were using the same ideas? Food for thought. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:45, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

G'day, thanks for this, from what I can tell we conceptualised mounted forces a bit differently from the British for quite some time -- we saw cavalry more as an offensive capability even into the late 1930s -- but I haven't found something that quite explains the role of the motor brigade/division in Australian doctrine. I'd hoped this ref might help, but it doesn't fully answer the question: [1]. Indeed, it seems some of the impetus for mechanisation was not so much the declining role of the horse in modern warfare, but the lack of availability of good horses...seems a bit muddled to me. Anyway, I will look at Bou, and see what he has to say. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:56, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

16th Air Land Regiment, Royal Australian ArtilleryEdit

G’day AustralianRupert, hope you have been well. Can you confirm that 16th Air Land Regiment, Royal Australian Artillery is now the 16th Regiment, Royal Australian Artillery? Regards Newm30 (talk) 23:08, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

@Newm30: G'day, I don't think so -- I certainly haven't heard anything about a rename -- but I will see what I can find out from sources and let you know. If there has been a rename, it would probably be in the Army Newspaper soonish: [2] Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 00:33, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
@Newm30: Ok, yes I can confirm that the regiment has been redesignated. It was announced in the 11 July 2019 edition of Army News. I will update the article and move it across. I have to think this causes some lineage issues, though, as I don't believe it will be the same lineage as the 16th Field Regiment, which existed previously. Can't confirm that yet, though. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 00:42, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Newm30 (talk) 01:49, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLIX, July 2019Edit

Your Military History Newsletter

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) 12:00, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Coord electionEdit

G'day AR, I'm wondering if you would consider returning to the coord team at this year's election? Many hands make light work and all that. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:14, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

G'day, PM, not sure if that's a good idea, I'm sorry. I will have to think about it and get back to you closer to September. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:51, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
Sure, but it is not the same without you on board. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:48, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
  • I would like to second this. AR, you are consistently active and it is necessary that we have a majority of coords who have a demonstrated record of being able handle long tasks like closing the contest at the end of each month and checking each contest entry. The unfortunate occurrences of last year should not outweigh your several previous terms as coord. Not only that, but you have consistently taken on the toughest GA reviews in the backlog, and I still remember your review of the NZ Div Cav article that encouraged me to take it to a higher assessment status three years ago. Kges1901 (talk) 11:53, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Belated thirds to this sentiment. Something I weighed in my decision as to whether to stand as a coordinator was whether I wanted to, knowing that you wouldn't be there for assistance and support. I note that you have volunteered support for other candidates and wonder if I could cheekily ask that if I were to be appointed that you could keep an occasional eye on how I am doing and let me know if you spot anything which I should or could be doing and aren't; which I am that I shouldn't; or am doing, but poorly, inadequately or inappropriately. Inappropriately assuming an outcome which has yet to materialise: if it were to, then I would feel happier knowing that you were occasionally glancing over my shoulder. Cheers. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:44, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
  • @Gog the Mild: G'day, Gog, I'd be most happy to help you out if you become a co-ord - the same goes for anyone standing. I'm sure you will do a great job, but if I can help in any way, please just ask. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 22:33, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
Thanks AR. I will. I am more concerned about the unknown unknowns; so if you happen to spot me doing anything in any way different from how you would, including deciding to do it in the first place, please bring it to my attention. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:42, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
No worries, will do -- but please don't think that my way is always right. ;-) Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 23:29, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you, but...Edit

Would you mind a post Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Project Excalibur/archive1 in the excalibur FAC ( I can't get the link to work)? Maury Markowitz (talk) 12:10, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

@Maury Markowitz: G'day, Maury, I have added some comments on the review page. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:47, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

User talk:LeafyprosEdit

You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 10:48, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

1st Armoured Brigade ACREdit

Hi, I'm afraid that I'm going to be out of town on holiday for the next week, and won't be able to monitor this ACR - sorry for any inconvenience this causes. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 11:14, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

No worries, Nick, enjoy your holiday! Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 11:18, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Happy 21st JulyEdit

Happy 21st July cannot wait for the firework have a nice day. :p Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 10:06, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

@CPA-5: Thank you, I hope that you enjoy the day, too. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:28, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Congratulations from the Military History ProjectEdit

  The Military history A-Class medal with swords
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the A-Class medal with Swords for Battle of Elands River (1900), Landing at Jacquinot Bay, and 1st Armoured Brigade (Australia) Peacemaker67 (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 00:30, 25 July 2019 (UTC)


Thanks for the ce; this is what happens when you let real life intrude on article writing. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 15:06, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

No worries, Keith, happy to help. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 23:13, 26 July 2019 (UTC)


Suboroboli12 is a vandalism-only account, I had to revert all of his/her contributions, wishing to have MassRollback installed. Indeff? — kashmīrī TALK 06:06, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

G'day, as far as I can tell all of their edits have already been reverted, so mass rollback doesn't seem necessary. I've blocked for 36 hours. If they return to vandalism, let me know and I will indef. However, I am reticent to indef based on a single warning. If another admin chooses to indef, then I'm fine with that, but I feel it best to at least give them a chance to come back and contribute meaningfully. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 06:11, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
If there are edits that haven't been reverted, please let me know and I will revert them for you. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 06:15, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. I reverted them all as not a single one was constructive (or non-vandalism). Had his Contributions page open, kept refreshing and rollbacking. Will keep an eye tomorrow night, although in my reading the person is definitely NOTHERE. Best, — kashmīrī TALK 06:20, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Question regarding deleted editsEdit

Hi, Rupert. I'm back editing Wikipedia in a limited fashion. (Still having a few problems with the hand that I'd injured a few months ago.) I've been working on cleaning up some articles for one of the U.S. state wikiprojects because that particular wikiproject had been labeled as semi-active and has a number of articles about key historical figures which needed/need serious attention. I happened to check my online stats the other day just to see how many edits I've done (out of sheer curiosity), and was surprised to find that I now have four deleted edits. (In my first three years, I'd had no edits deleted whatsoever.) I've never received notice on my Watchlist that one of my edits had been deleted (let alone four), and no Wikipedia editor has ever reached out to me beforehand to suggest that I change something. So, I was curious to see what those edits might have been (to see if I could learn anything about what I might have done wrong, or if I hadn't, determine whether or not those deleted edits might have been incorrectly deleted). But when I clicked on the number four under the deleted edits column, I received a "Permission error" message which stated that permission to view those deleted edits was available only to Administrators, Oversighters, Researchers, and Checkusers. I remembered today that you're an Administrator; so I wanted to reach out to see if you could check the edits that were deleted and tell me why and which Wikipedia editor(s) was(were) responsible for the deletions? Any help that you can provide would be most appreciated as always. Hope all is well with you. Kind Regards. 47thPennVols (talk) 19:58, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

@47thPennVols: G'day, great to hear that you are back to editing; sorry the hand is still giving you trouble. Regarding your deleted edits -- don't worry too much about this. It happens to everyone. In your case, the four edits that were deleted were talk page edits where you assessed an article. In three cases, the article itself was subsequently deleted (in two cases via AfD, and one as a copyright vio) and in the fourth case two duplicate page histories were merged, resulting in one page being deleted. As a result, the talkpages were deleted per CSD G8. Your tagging of the article talk pages/assessment was fine, the edits were just simply collateral damage, I'm afraid. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 07:31, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
@AustralianRupert: That's great news, Rupert! Many thanks for checking and for providing such a great explanation (and for the kind welcome back). I learned something new today, thanks to you, and am okay with the "collateral damage". (I just wanted to make sure I hadn't done anything utterly heinous.) :-) Have a great weekend! 47thPennVols (talk) 17:31, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2019Edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2019).

  Guideline and policy news



  • Following a research project on masking IP addresses, the Foundation is starting a new project to improve the privacy of IP editors. The result of this project may significantly change administrative and counter-vandalism workflows. The project is in the very early stages of discussions and there is no concrete plan yet. Admins and the broader community are encouraged to leave feedback on the talk page.
  • The new page reviewer right is bundled with the admin tool set. Many admins regularly help out at Special:NewPagesFeed, but they may not be aware of improvements, changes, and new tools for the Curation system. Stay up to date by subscribing here to the NPP newsletter that appears every two months, and/or putting the reviewers' talk page on your watchlist.

    Since the introduction of temporary user rights, it is becoming more usual to accord the New Page Reviewer right on a probationary period of 3 to 6 months in the first instance. This avoids rights removal for inactivity at a later stage and enables a review of their work before according the right on a permanent basis.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:23, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLX, August 2019Edit

Your Military History Newsletter

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) 09:40, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLX, August 2019Edit

Your Military History Newsletter

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) 09:41, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

8th Field Survey SquadronEdit

G’day AustralianRupert, I was wondering if you could review or cast your eye over 8th Field Survey Squadron if you haven’t already. Very in depth article on subject matter. Regards Newm30 (talk) 10:43, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

G'day, @Newm30: clearly a lot of work has been put into the article. I am a little concerned that it may be perceived as too detailed, though, and potentially that there is original research being used (e.g. "personal notes" as references) and uncited, or seemingly partially cited information. I don't mean to discourage, though, as it could be developed into quite a tidy article, but it would probably need quite a bit a reduction and further sourcing to achieve this. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:50, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
My thoughts exactly but didn’t want to just be my opinion only. Maybe a friendly introduction and mentoring of the editor could be warranted. We don’t want to lose enthusiastic editors as we seem to do well at. Just wanted to flag with you as a valued and esteemed Australian editor who may be able to assist editor more than I could ever do. Regards Newm30 (talk) 13:10, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Backlog BanzaiEdit

In the month of September, Wikiproject Military history is running a project-wide edit-a-thon, Backlog Banzai. There are heaps of different areas you can work on, for which you claim points, and at the end of the month all sorts of whiz-bang awards will be handed out. Every player wins a prize! There is even a bit of friendly competition built in for those that like that sort of thing. Sign up now at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/September 2019 Backlog Banzai to take part. For the coordinators, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:18, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Surinder AmarnathEdit

Hello there , I can see you have written some content about Surinder Amarnath - Former Test Cricketer based on the figures and numbers which themselves are available on ESPNCRICINFO.

Wikipedia is suppose to provide information about a Cricketer or a personality. It seems you are unaware of the cricketing scenario in india in the 1970”s and therefore are going on editing Surinder Amarnath”s content without actually knowing what happened in the country at that time. I have newspaper cuttings to prove what I have written but I think according to you only Australians can be great .. is it ? You have conveniently locked the page on the pretext of preventing vandalism whereas writing what you want and then locking the page is vandalism . Habibcricket (talk) 13:38, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello ?? Reply please Habibcricket (talk) 04:40, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

If you wish to engage in a civil conversation with me, I will be happy to communicate with you. However, your tone currently is not civil -- I have expressed no such comment about "only Australians can be great". These are your words and are obviously not true if you follow cricket these days. Besides that, I have not "conveniently" locked the page. Nor have I written what I want and then locked it. I have contributed no content to the article. I have protected it from disruptive editing due to editors consistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced information against the current consensus on the article. If you wish to change the content of the article, gain consensus for your change on the article's talk page, providing the details of the sources you wish to use. Continuing to add the same material in this manner is disruptive and against site policy. If you wish to request unprotection before the time has expired, you may do so in the usual fashion (post a comment at WP:RFUP), but accusing the protecting admin of vandalism is not the way to make such a request. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 08:33, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

I agree with you but I have been following the Amarnath family especially the Amarnath brothers “ Surinder & Mohinder” . Till today people who saw them play speak about Surinder”s immense talent .. there are paper cuttings of the 1970”s and 80s where many journalists have written about him being one of the best and one of the most unluckiest as well due to the way he was treated by the selectors. I can share the same with you or with anyone but just show me where do send you the screenshots of the same. Mr Shashi Tharoor , a keen lover of the game also wrote about Surinder as one of the most talented of his time . The way Surinder Amarnath played was admired by so many and most of them and there was a general sentiment that he being one of the best in the side with his aggressive style of batting , should have played more tests for india. Many commentators while commenting in a test match talk about his immense talent. Even , ex chairman of selectors and former teammate of Surinder , Kris Srikanth echoed the same sentiments when he was asked to describe Surinder Amarnath . Writer Pratap Ramchand also wrote “ Surinder was a treat to watch when would get going and could destroy the best of attacks when in full flow “ . He proved it by scoring a strokeful 63 against john levers England when the rest of them were failing.

Hence considering all of this request you to kindly allow me to edit the content as there is nothing false or illegal about speaking highly of Surinder . Thanks . Habibcricket (talk) 17:35, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

G'day, you should post the details of your sources (e.g, author, date, title, newspaper name, page numbers, url (if you have website links) etc) on the talk page of the article, with an outline of what you want to add to the article. This will allow editors interested in the article to engage with you about what you are seeking to add. At this stage I do not wish to get involved with the content of the article, so there is no need for you to send me screen shots. If you offer this on the talk page of the article, though, interested editors will let you know if they wish to receive these for you, though. You will need to be careful to keep the tone of your additions to the article neutral, though, rather than being too laudatory or otherwise. Opinions of journalists should also be attributed with limited quotes and citations in text, rather than being reported in Wikipedia's voice. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 08:54, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Tried everything but no one is seeing the talk page .. I guess you should unlock the page and allow me to write a description which was mainly public view of Surinder Amarnath. It has been printed in newspapers and echoed by former greats of the game as well . Habibcricket (talk) 22:22, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

G'day, the article protection will expire shortly (1 Sep). In the meantime, I have added a comment on the article's talk page in response to your comment - to reiterate what I said above, please list the details of the sources you will cite and the words you wish to use, so that people can comment and you can establish consensus for your proposed changes. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:11, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Please stop this ... The views I have written have been published 4 decades back and are not my creation. I’m case you want to control content please Delete the Amarnath family from Wikipedia ... We don’t need it Habibcricket (talk) 06:19, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

I have no desire to control the article, however, I do have a desire to ensure that site policies about sourcing and neutral tone are maintained. If you wish to continue to contribute to it you need to abide by Wikipedia's policies in this regard. You can do so by providing citations to reliable sources; I have linked the templates that you can use to do this on the talk page earlier in our discussion. You will also need to stop reverting and start trying to build consensus for your changes. If you do not wish to do this, please stop editing the article. If you wish for the article to be deleted, you are entitled to nominate it for deletion at articles for deletion. However, you will need to have solid policy based reasons for requesting deletion. Finally, your use of the term "we" when referring to the family indicates you may have a conflict of interest. If this is the case, I strongly advise you to read the relevant guidelines and abide by Wikipedia's policies in this regard. AustralianRupert (talk) 06:48, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Request for HelpEdit

I have created a draft:, it is pretty much of a stub, but I think it is a good article and qualifies for moving to mainspace. However if I move it I risk speedy deletion. I would like to know if it meets criteria for movement to mainspace and how do I insert a submit for review template. I already used the template "{{user draft}} but the template doesn't show. What did I do wrong. Thanks in advance for your help. PS I made a statement on the article talk page as to why I believe he is notable.Oldperson (talk) 20:49, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Apologies. After writing the above I found a template. (I have trouble working my way around the help pages). I inserted the template, but not sure if it is working as when I submitted the article for review I receive some puzzling templates Not sure what is going on. I respect, sans caveat, your judgement especially on military related articles Thanks in advance.Oldperson (talk) 21:14, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
@Oldperson: G'day, no worries, I will take a look at the draft and send you an email. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:26, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Precious anniversaryEdit

Seven years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:04, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank YouEdit

Thank you for your helpful edits to Alcide "Bull" Benini. I hope someday to become an experienced editor. As regards sources other than thsn those already cited, I know ofnone, but am going to try some contacts to see if they know of any. Doubtful as the organization was sub rosa and quiet until the WOT. There is this book, but it is privately published and probably doesn't meet the standards for RS There are at least five books about CCT but of there is a mention of Bull Benini it is only in passing. Other than his role in founding Combat Control and formulating early standards and procedures, and other than surviving the Bataan Death March and his captivity, you might say that his life was not exceptional, unlike his professional heir John A. Chapman who does have a book written about him Is there anyway we can move this to mainspace and take our chances?. I will look for RS inthe meantime.Oldperson (talk) 16:29, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

@Oldperson: G'day, while I'd like to be positive about the article's chances, I think with its current level of sourcing, it would not survive long in mainspace before being nominated for deletion. As such, I would advise against publishing it at this time. Have you tried looking at [3]? That might have an article on him. Beyond that, though, potentially there might be some other publication that might allow you to publish the article without having concerns about notability guidelines. For instance, this magazine might be a possibility: [4]. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:04, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

{ping|AustralianRupert#top}} Thanks, Do you think that these links will do? Also these two USAF interviews. I understand that youtube is fround upon, but the interviews are with the USAF part 2 of same interview, then there is this: requires a subscription. They offer a 7 day free trial, after I give them my credit card, and I have had bad luck with this gambit, thre is this: As an aside. During the 1965 India Pakistan war Combat Controllers were assisting both sides. At night the teams would communicate with each other over HF, that is until the Indians found out. On second thought I will add these references to the article. I hope that the Youtube link meets WP standards.Oldperson (talk) 17:38, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

@Oldperson: G'day, I have added a suggestion to draft talk page. Your point above about the US combat controllers assisting both sides in 1965 is quite interesting. Must have been some concerns about hurting their own people, surely, as well as uncertainty about what the mission actually was. Anyway, I believe a few British advisors were in the same situation in the Indo-Pakistani War of 1947–1948. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 11:58, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
How does it look now?Oldperson (talk) 16:43, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
  • @Oldperson: If you don't mind? I worked here and there on the draft to restore the little errors and typos. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 18:28, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
@CPA-5: I don't mind at all in fact I am extremely grateful for your help. I feel embarassed though for letting such simple and stupid errors get by.

I think the article is now ready for mainspace. I can't see what else can be done to improveOldperson (talk) 18:50, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

@Oldperson and CPA-5: G'day, I've added another suggestion on the article's talk page, sorry. I am a little concerned that the image licence might also have an issue. Currently, the description pages says "permission pending"; who have you contacted to provide permission? They will probably have to provide this through OTRS via the Wikipedia:Volunteer Response Team. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:53, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
{ping|AustralianRupert}}Good day to you too sir. I am aware of the QTRS requirment for a permission slip. I've used the process before. I tried to send a request (permission slip) to Combat Control School Heritage Foundation ( but there is a glitch on their website,so I have asked a retired Combat Controller who owns his own CCT website ( to assist me, and sent him the QTRS permissions slip. I hope it goes through. I don't think that it is really necessary though as ccshf is affiliated with the USAF and a sponsor of the Bull Benini Heritage Museum. If the picture is nominated for deletion I will argue my case, and resubmit when I get permission.Oldperson (talk) 14:25, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations openEdit

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, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:37, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

cum laudeEdit

In case you just hovered, saw gerund, and oh I get it ...

@Brogo13: Sorry, I still don't agree with your change, and your post here doesn't seem to offer a clear idea of your reasoning behind it. Given that I reverted your change, I would have preferred you discuss it first before you reverted to reinsert your change as per the guidance at WP:BRD. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:21, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
I thought this settled the grammatical issue, but I'm dropping it (re this article anyway; please feel free to swat that pesky apostrophe again). Meanwhile, sincerest apologies for myahem undoing an[yone's] undo without asking.--Brogo13 (talk) 16:19, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
If you wish to discuss the matter, I'm more than happy to listen, but you will need to explain your point of view clearly rather than providing a link without clarification or explanation. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 08:53, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2019Edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2019).

  Administrator changes

  DESiegelJake WartenbergRjanagTopbanana

  CheckUser changes


  Oversight changes

  CallaneccFoxHJ MitchellLFaraoneThere'sNoTime

  Technical news

  • Editors using the mobile website on Wikipedia can opt-in to new advanced features via your settings page. This will give access to more interface links, special pages, and tools.
  • The advanced version of the edit review pages (recent changes, watchlist, and related changes) now includes two new filters. These filters are for "All contents" and "All discussions". They will filter the view to just those namespaces.



Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:36, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

2/1st Anti-Tank Regiment (Australia)Edit

Hello; feel free to tell me to wind my neck in with this. The quote is below;

The regiment remained in New Guinea until October 1943, returning by sea to Cairns, Queensland. Throughout 1943–1944, the regiment remained in Australia as there was no real role for them in offensives being fought by the Australians

Would the last line sound better if it was ...there was no real role for them in any offensive action being fought by...

Just a thought. Loved the article, though. Regards. The joy of all things (talk) 11:54, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

G'day, thanks for taking a look. I have reworked it a little now to clarify which offensives. Thanks for your time. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 12:24, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Affect vs effectEdit

I remembered you couldn't figure out when you'd to use it. I've got an answer for you. Think about the word RAVEN (Remember Affect is a Verb, Effect is a Noun). I found this trick on the internet and I thought "Maybe I have to say this to AR because he struggles to use them". However, affect can be a verb too so do effect be a noun. These exceptions are usually used to "effect" as a verb before the words "change" or "solutions" (with other words "to bring about") and "affect" as a noun only if feelings, emotions, or specific emotional responses are in the sentence. I hope you understand the trick I just found on the internet. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 12:34, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, CPA. I will try to remember that one. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 21:33, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Milhist coordinator election voting has commencedEdit

G'day everyone, voting for the 2019 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, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:37, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXI, September 2019Edit

Your Military History Newsletter

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) 09:17, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Moroccan Division at 2nd Villers-BretonneuxEdit

Hi Rupert - this is a bit of a touchy one. We have communicated previously about the 52nd Battalion AIF. In the WP article on 2nd Villers-Bretonneux someone (can't tell who) has included statements from the French historian Romain Fathi that the Moroccan Divison "rescued" the 51st and 52nd Australian battalions. This is not correct and even Fathi now agrees and uses the correct word "relieved". The issue came about because Fathi when he researched the French side failed to return to the Australian sources to validate what the French officers had recorded i.e he only properly researched the French side of the story - interestingly a criticism he makes of Australian historians. Importantly, Fathi did not look at the Australian historian Charles Bean's War Diaries. I have confirmed this with him and actually provided the sources. In his Diary Bean comments that the French and Australians undertook "relief" of the Front Line in completely different ways (page 38) at <ref><ref>. Commenting that "The French don't relieve as we do. They simply formulate a barrage line & form up behind it & go forward. Our line was in front of this barrage but we had to clear it by a stated hour". The French interpreted the Australian clearing of the battlefield as leaving the battlefield empty. This was not the case. It is worth notingg that on the morning of 26 April 1918 the two armies were co-operating for the first time ever on the Western Front. The Australians had to abandon the battlefield or be shelled. Are Bean's Diaries (reference and page number above) a suitable WP source? We have previously discussed use of primary sources. Otherwise I have an article coming out in December which corrects Fathi's position.


Harpoooner1830Harpooner1830 (talk) 02:37, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

@Harpooner1830: G'day, good to hear from you. I hope you are well. Regarding your query, the war diaries can be used as references, but for Wikipedia purposes there are some limitations. WP:PRIMARY provides the guidance here -- basically, cite them for bare, simple facts, but use secondary sources for interpretation of those sources. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:22, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi Rupert - I think I'll wait and use the Original source supported by my interpretation after my article is published in December. Thanks for you advice. (talk) 22:10, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

No worries, that is probably the best course of action. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:53, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

2/10th BattalionEdit

G'day AR, I've finally had a look at this article, made a few minor c/e-type changes, and reckon it is good to go for ACR. What do you reckon? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:04, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

@Peacemaker67: G'day, PM, thanks for going through the article -- I have created the nomination page, now. It can be found here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/2/10th Battalion (Australia). Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:53, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank youEdit

  You are a Ray of Sunshine!
It says here "The Ray of Sunshine is bestowed on that person who, when you see their name at the top of your watchlist, you know that all is right with the world and that you can relax. May be awarded to any person who consistently brightens your day." So here you go. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:49, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

I was about to leave a message for you when I thought of this award. It seemed so wholly appropriate that I just had to give it to you. It occurred to me that you may be a bit past appreciating this sort of nonsense, but I decided that I don't care: I feel better for having expressed the sentiment. Long may you continue to shine beneficently. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:19, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election half-way markEdit

G'day everyone, the voting for the XIX Coordinator Tranche is at the halfway mark. The candidates have answered various questions, and you can check them out to see why they are running and decide whether you support them. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:36, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

USS Blue Ridge / INTERFETEdit

On the INTERFET WIKI there is a USS Blue Ridge missing from the vessel list, it was there as I visited it. Manybthanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 11:54, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

G'day, do you have a reliable source for its participation, and the dates it was deployed? If you can provide me with the details (e.g. author, title of the work, page numbers etc), I can probably add it for you. I note, though, that it isn't included in the list on p. 14 of this source: [5]. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:11, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

AfroCine: Join the Months of African Cinema this October!Edit


After a successful first iteration of the “Months of African Cinema” last year, we are happy to announce that it will be happening again this year, starting from October 1! In the 2018 edition of the contest, about 600 Wikipedia articles were created in at least 8 languages. There were also contributions to Wikidata and Wikimedia commons, which brought the total number of wikimedia pages created during the contest to over 1,000.

The AfroCine Project welcomes you to October, the first out of the two months which have been dedicated to creating and improving content that centre around the cinema of Africa, the Caribbean, and the diaspora. Join us in this global edit-a-thon, by helping to create or expand articles which are connected to this scope. Also remember to list your name under the participants section.

On English Wikipedia, we would be recognizing participants in the following manner:

  • Overall winner (1st, 2nd, 3rd places)
  • Diversity winner
  • Gender-gap fillers
For further information about the contest, the recognition categories and how to participate, please visit the contest page here. For further inquiries, please leave comments on the contest talkpage or on the main project talkpage. See you around :).--Jamie Tubers (talk) 00:50, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you!Edit

  The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
For scoring 1,222 points in the WikiProject Military history September 2019 edit-a-thon Backlog Banzai, I hereby award you The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar. Well done! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:48, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, PM. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 08:43, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2019Edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2019).

  Guideline and policy news

  • Following a discussion, a new criterion for speedy category renaming was added: C2F: One eponymous article, which applies if the category contains only an eponymous article or media file, provided that the category has not otherwise been emptied shortly before the nomination. The default outcome is an upmerge to the parent categories.

  Technical news

  • As previously noted, tighter password requirements for Administrators were put in place last year. Wikipedia should now alert you if your password is less than 10 characters long and thus too short.



  • The Community Tech team has been working on a system for temporarily watching pages, and welcomes feedback.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:54, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Congratulations from the Military History ProjectEdit

  The WikiChevrons
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the WikiChevrons for participating in 37 reviews between July and September 2019. Peacemaker67 (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 00:33, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, PM. AustralianRupert (talk) 01:33, 5 October 2019 (UTC)


G'day to you. When you have a moment would you look Con Thien. When I first read the article it was obvious to me that the POV was not neutral as the Special Forces and Seabees were omitted. The article talked about the Marine Corps as if they had been there by themselves. Since the Special Forces and Seabees were there I added them. An editor removed all of it except they left a reference to the Special Forces. The cited reason was the source. I went back and added references that show the Seabees were there and the same editor has removed all of it again citing "self promotion". So could you take your neutral POV and review the deletion. Thank youMcb133aco (talk)mcb133acoMcb133aco (talk)

G'day, in disputes such as this you need to be careful not to be seen to WP:CANVAS only editors who you believe will specifically support your point of view. In this regard, the best way to avoid being accused of this, is to post your concerns on the article's talk page, and then post a neutrally worded request at WT:MILHIST or a similar widely viewed noticeboard, inviting all editors to post an opinion to assist with determining consensus. Before doing this, though, have you discussed the matter directly with Mztourist? If not, I'd suggest doing this as quite often such issues can be resolved relatively simply by discussion one-on-one, followed by compromise. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 08:02, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Well, this Wikipedia world is completely Greek to me. I brought the edit to you as I know that you are involved in the Military History Project and are Commonwealth so I would/should expect a neutral POV concerning the U.S. military. In fact that is exactly what I requested of you. The only other Wikipedia editor with whom I have communicated with I think has passed away. This "canvassing" aspect you enlightened me of I expect people do. I regret to say it reflects the "social media" character I think is prevalent amongst Wikipedia editors. There seems to be a great deal of subjectivity and bias in this editing process in my opinion. The editor at question has the opinion that the content posted is self promotion (Seabees? Me? Navy?) when it came out of the Army's Historical Center. How that correlation is objectively argued escapes me. The editor states my edit was self promotion (because my talk page says I am ex-Navy or maybe my ID) and then completely deleted the Seabees but allowed the Special Forces to remain. That reflects a bias. They do not state that there is a POV problem with the content posted. They have a subjective problem with the facts stated because they believe I have a bias when they very obviously have one. Had I stated all of this to begin with anyone could argue that I wanted a biased opinion or support from you. As I did not, it was offensive to read the "warning" you gave me to "be careful" when I was requesting and unbiased opinion. Your suggestion of editing by committee is nonsense, either Wikipedia has a standard to met or it does not. No where in my email did I request your support. I thought it was a request for a professional Military History Project review. Thank you for the reply. Mcb133aco (talk)mcb133acoMcb133aco (talk)

G'day, it wasn't my intent to offend, but rather to help you navigate the site's dispute resolution and consensus building processes so that you can resolve the situation without experiencing more frustration. That said, evidently my advice did cause more frustration, so in that regard, I'm sorry that you took it that way. Anyway, all the best. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:34, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXII, October 2019Edit

Your Military History Newsletter

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) 12:40, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

10th BattalionEdit

G'day AR, just a note about the 10th Battalion. I am thinking that for FAC, it probably needs some more granular detail regarding its movements throughout, in terms of frontline, support and reserve positions, rear area duties etc during WWI. What do you think about that? I'd be happy to add the relevant info from Lock as I have a copy. Thoughts? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:04, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

G'day, yes, I think you are right -- probably needs a bit more for FAC. To be honest, I've never really been keen for FAC as a process, but I don't want to stifle improvement so if you are keen I will try to help out if I can. I will try to order Lock, Limb and Kearney from the library. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:37, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "AustralianRupert".