OJOM

OJOM, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi OJOM! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Jtmorgan (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 20:40, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

File permission

Thanks for uploading File:Kuwait 25th Commando Brigade.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:35, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

File permission

Thanks for uploading File:Sheikh Saud Nasser Al-Saud Al-Sabah.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:34, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

File permission

Thanks for uploading File:Badge of Kuwait 25th Commando Brigade.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:07, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, OJOM, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Mubarack Al-Abdullah Al-Jaber Al-Sabah, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Tea House, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• Starting an article
• Your first article
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! 220 of ^Borg 13:48, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Hi there. When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

 

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field. If you are adding a section, please do not just keep the previous section's header in the Edit summary field – please fill in your new section's name instead. Thank you. 220 of ^Borg 13:49, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Referencing

When you are reading an article and see a references section near the bottom populated by a series of numbered citations, you might think that if you edit the page, you will see those citations typed in that section and be able to edit them. However, normally what you will see is code similar to this:

     ==References==

   {{Reflist}} or <references/>

The text of citations is actually in the body of the article, directly next to statements or paragraphs the citations support, using <ref>(citation)</ref> tags, which display as footnotes (e.g.^[1][2]) when you are reading an article. The template code shown above in the references section collates and displays all of the citations within the article in a numbered list in which the numbers correspond to the footnote numbers in the text. By clicking on the ^ symbol next to a citation display, you can easily find exactly where in the body of the article the citation text appears in order to edit it. For more, please see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners. 220 of ^Borg 14:01, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Mubarack Al-Abdullah Al-Jaber Al-Sabah requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. 220 of ^Borg 14:15, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Possibly unfree

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Sheikh Mubarack Abdullah Al-Jaber Al-Sabah.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. SuperMarioMan 20:49, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Possibly unfree

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Mubarack Abdullah Al-Jaber Al-Sabah.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. SuperMarioMan 21:09, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

File permission

Thanks for uploading File:Insign of 25th Commando Brigade.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:04, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kuwait 25th Commando Brigade, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Unit, Executive and Order (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:06, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Possibly unfree

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Sheikh Abdullah Al-Jaber Abdullah II Al-Sabah.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. SuperMarioMan 23:03, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Better source request for some of your uploads

Thanks for your uploads to Wikipedia. There is an issue with some of them, specifically:

• File:Mubarack Abdullah Al-Jaber Al-Sabah.jpg
• File:Shiekh Mubarack Abdullah Al-Jaber Al-Sabah.jpg
• File:Sheikh Mubarack Abdullah Al-Jaber Al-Sabah is his early 20's.jpg
• File:Sheikh Mubarack Abdullah Al-Jaber Al-Sabah amongst Kuwaiti Commandos in Operation Vantage 1961.jpg
• File:Sheikh Mubarack Abdullah Al-Jaber Al-Sabah amongst Kuwaiti Commandos in 1961.jpg

You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the images because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact Web page where you found the images, rather than only giving the source domain or the URL of the image files themselves. Please update the image descriptions with URLs that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page or me at my talk page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 03:10, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

File permission

Thanks for uploading File:Sheikh Mubarack Abdullah Al-Jaber Al-Sabah is his early 20's.jpg, which you've attributed to Kuwaiti Publications. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:42, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a reliable source

You cannot use another Wikipedia article as a reference. By definition, Wikipedia itself is not a reliable source. 69.181.253.230 (talk) 18:44, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

File permission

Thanks for uploading File:Sheikh Mubarack Abdullah Al-Jaber Al-Sabah in Kuwaiti military uniform in his early 20's.jpg, which you've attributed to Kuwaiti Publication. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:55, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Kuwait 25th Commando Brigade (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to The Parachute Regiment

Mubarack Abdullah Al-Jaber Al-Sabah (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Kuwaiti

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Ongoing problem with references

You seem to have a long-term problem providing valid references. You cannot simply point to the first page of a huge website, be it the Kuwait website or one of their embassies, and expect people to be able to find and verify your citation. It simply can't be done. You need to either provide the exact page within that website or some other direct reference. 69.181.253.230 (talk) 20:44, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Non-going problem with references

Websites are in arabic and if not properly translated; the integrity of data can be misinterpreted. OJOM (talk) 22:00, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

http://www.mod.gov.kw/MOD/Arabic_P/index.jsp says nothing about Mubarack Abdullah Al-Jaber Al-Sabah. Nothing. Find a source that does include information about him. 69.181.253.230 (talk) 22:33, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Encyclopedic Facts about Mubarak is already included on the Arabic Wikipedia that was recently deleted from the English version. Should the Arabic wikipedia hold the same correct and referenced information; then, the english version should confirm data applicable. OJOM (talk) 23:05, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

You are using false equivalency standards. Just because it is on the Arabic Wikipedia does not mean it should automatically be part of the English Wikipedia, especially if the sources do not comply with the English Wikipedia policies. 69.181.253.230 (talk) 23:19, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

In light of authenticity with an Encyclopedia; all World Languages would be logically Universal as long as the facts are right and correct.OJOM (talk) 23:40, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale

Thank you for uploading File:Kuwait 25th Commando Brigade Emblem.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Cindy(talk) 05:32, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

* Cindy *

Thank you Cindy. OJOM (talk) 06:48, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

other related topic

Updated the file box with more valid reasoning and clarified permission status. Thank you.OJOM (talk) 07:17, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Image uploads – warning

You have received numerous talk page notices regarding your image uploads, nearly all of which have been lacking adequate information about their sourcing and licensing. Please consider the points below:

• From which book(s) or publication(s) have your uploads been copied? What is the copyright status of this/these book(s) or publication(s)?
• You must give as much detailed source, date and licensing information as possible. A brief citation, such as "Kuwaiti Publications", does not provide sufficient source information.
• Scanning and cropping an existing, copyrighted photograph, and then uploading it to Wikipedia, does not transfer the ownership of the copyright to you.
• Do not upload a particular image more than once. Unused duplicates are eligible for speedy deletion.

I have nominated your latest round of uploads at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files or tagged them for speedy deletion as being redundant copies.

Please do not upload any more scanned photographs of this type unless you are certain that the source is freely licensed or in the public domain.

SuperMarioMan 06:37, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

January 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Lebanese Civil War may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• |}}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:29, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mubarak Abdullah Al-Jaber Al-Sabah may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• ]]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 08:13, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to 1st Parachute Chasseur Regiment may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• *[[Tomb of the Unknown Soldier]] from [World War I], [World War II]], [[Korean War]] and [[Vietnam War]]; [[Arlington National Cemetery]]<ref>[http://www.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:53, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hélie de Saint Marc, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Legionnaires (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:04, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

2nd Foreign Infantry Regiment (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Unknown Soldier

Mubarak Abdullah Al-Jaber Al-Sabah (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Lest We Forget

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:07, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited House of Sabah, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Origin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 13:09, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

February 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to House of Sabah may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:15, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Military of Kuwait may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Security Forces was appointed under which Sheikh Abdullah Jaber Al-Abdullah II Al-Sabah (1898-1996)){{WIA}} operated until the Hamadh Battle in 1919.<ref>[http://www.mod.gov.kw/MOD/Arabic_P/index.jsp]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:56, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Military of Kuwait may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 11:21, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Military of Kuwait, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Britain (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:05, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Military of Kuwait (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Pilots, Squadron, Starburst, M109, Horsemen, BMP3, Horseman and Al-Ahmadi

Battle of Jahra (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Squadron, Horsemen and Horseman

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Military of Kuwait (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Marshall and Iraqi

House of Sabah (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Marshall

Kuwait–Najd War (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Squadron

Mubarak Abdullah Al-Jaber Al-Sabah (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Marshall

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

March 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mubarak Abdullah Al-Jaber Al-Sabah may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• assaulted post. Accordingly, Kuwaiti authorities refused this proposition and demanded from the [[Arab

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:41, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Mubarak Abdullah Al-Jaber Al-Sabah

You seem to be treating the Mubarak Abdullah Al-Jaber Al-Sabah article as a memorial page for him. Please explain why the article should include links to tombs of unknown soldiers and images of these tombs and of bravery medals, especially as he was not awarded these medals himself. Please also look at Prince William, Duke of Cambridge, Frederik, Crown Prince of Denmark, Hussein of Jordan, Farouk of Egypt, Nicholas II of Russia, Willem-Alexander of the Netherlands and Abdullah of Saudi Arabia. They all use "he" and they all generally use their honorific or name, but not both, after listing full titles and honours once at the top of the article. Please explain why this article should follow a different style to all the other articles. Please also do not put so many links to an article, in general there should only be one link to another topic in an article. Military of Kuwait had more than sixty links to Kuwaiti Armed Forces, which is a redirect back to Military of Kuwait anyway. Also, "Martyred" is a non-nutral term and is unsuitable for an encyclopaedia. I can also only repeat the comments of others above, posting a link to the home page of the Kuwaiti MOD as a reference is useless, even to someone speaking arabic. If there is a biography of Mubarak Abdullah Al-Jaber Al-Sabah, somewhere in that website, you should use the URL for that page as the source, not the Home page. The same goes for the other articles you have been editing - they all have the MOD website home page as sole reference, which is as I have said useless; it is like using http://aviation-safety.net/database/ as a reference for the Malaysia Airlines 370 article, instead of using http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20140308-0 YSSYguy (talk) 09:43, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Mubarak was awarded the Neck Order of the Legion of Merit in a " Commanders Degree" which is the only neck order equivalent to the Medal of Honor issued to foreigners only. Adding on, the " See Also" category on all Wikipedia articles refer to subjects not directly related to the article itself but of similar related content.

other topic

the term, martyred, is non-neutral but then so is the non neutrality of understanding bravery and courage that lead in general to merited acts.

other related topic

Linking or referencing a military officer with his armed force that belongs to the ministry is a logical task to perform. Linking the actions of an officer and environment to the concerned military institution grounds readers from not getting confused with other misleading sources. It would not be logical to assume that links and articles are more authentic than quality of institutions. There are over hundreds with the name of Mubarak Al-Abdullah. This author does however appreciate your concerns and remarks and would like to thank you for your assistance. (OJOM (talk) 14:57, 13 March 2014 (UTC)).

Thank you for responding. Your answers to the questions "Why" seem to be "because that's the way I want the article to look" and you seem to have missed the point completely. The See Also section is for links to "Wikipedia articles refer[ring] to subjects not directly related to the article itself but of similar related content" as you say. I put in links to articles about subjects related to the House of Sabah and the politics of Kuwait and you removed all of them. Having a link to Tomb of the Unknown Soldier means nothing in the context of Mubarak, Kuwaiti history or its politics or its foreign relations. It's the same as putting a link to the Smithsonian Institution in the See Also section because he visited Washington. With regard to the other articles about royal persons, the point is not that they should all be changed to match the Sheikh Mubarak Al-Abdullah article; it is that they are examples of following Wikipedia policy and the Sheikh Mubarak Al-Abdullah article does not conform to that policy - put another way, the article cannot have a layout that is not in accordance with policy just because you want it to. The fact that "There are over hundreds with the name of Mubarak Al-Abdullah", while true, doesn't matter, because the article is only about one of them, there is no need to use a longer term just to identify a particular Mubarak Al-Abdullah, we are already at the article about that particular Mubarak Al-Abdullah. There are millions of people called "William", but the article about Prince William is only about him.

You are quite right about "bravery" and "courage" - they are also non-neutral, and being killed in action does not automatically mean that a soldier was brave or courageous. If a soldier is awarded a medal for bravery, then a WP article can say that he was "awarded a medal for bravery as a result of his actions" - provided of course that it is properly referenced. The word "martyred" in unsuitable because it is not neutral, not becuase it's unpleasant - "killed" isn't pleasant either. "Martyr" has a religious connotation in English, someone who is murdered for refusing to renounce his faith is martyred. Someone who is killed during a border clash with soldier from another country is not martyred, he died defending his country - a noble thing in its own right - not his faith. To say "It is logical to link each act of Defense performed on is behalf to the Ministry of Defense and link each action on behalf of a Kuwaiti Officer to the Military of Kuwait and to the Ministry of Defense" is not relevant, an article should generally have only one link to another article in it, please read Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking. Maybe you have confused "linking" with "referencing", when I say "linking" I mean the red and blue links in the text. There is no need to link "Six Day War" every time it appears in an article, in fact policy is against this. As I said before "Kuwati Armed Forces" is a redirect to "Military of Kuwait", so clicking the "Kuwati Armed Forces" link takes a person to the "Military of Kuwait" article. Therefore linking "Kuwati Armed Forces" in the "Military of Kuwait" article is pointless, because it's just a circle; please read Wikipedia:Redirect. Thank you YSSYguy (talk) 00:08, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

The only point of view or "likes" in which an Encyclopaedia may be writen is Encyclopedic Fact. Thank you.(OJOM (talk) 23:07, 15 March 2014 (UTC)).

Disambiguation link notification for March 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mubarak Abdullah Al-Jaber Al-Sabah, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Units (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:08, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Many thanks for your clarification.(OJOM (talk) 07:44, 16 March 2014 (UTC)).

Disambiguation link notification for March 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Abdullah III Al-Salim Al-Sabah (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Supreme Commander

Jaber Al-Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Supreme Commander

Military of Kuwait (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Supreme Commander

Nawaf Al-Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Supreme Commander

Saad Al-Abdullah Al-Salim Al-Sabah (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Supreme Commander

Sabah Al-Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Supreme Commander

Sabah III Al-Salim Al-Sabah (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Supreme Commander

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:57, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kuwait-Iraq 1973 Sanita border skirmish, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Territories and State of war (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:53, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Military of Kuwait, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Marshall (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:55, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Military of Kuwait, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stateless (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:59, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Note

OJOM, I'm going all over the place rectifying things here and there. I've noted a few things that you do consistently, and unfortunately they are not correct. First of all, this "See also" business: those lists are way too long, and the entries way too far removed from the subject. Please trim them considerably. Second, you are fond of piping dates inside wikilinks (for various wars and such). There also, please refrain--that's not how we do things. Finally, and this is the bigger thing, there is too much non-neutral content. I just removed a huge chunk from Kuwaiti Army since the content you added sang the praises of that army, and that's not something we can do. Please see WP:NPOV. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 17:42, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

The only praised reference is Encyclopedic Fact. At least, get them right.(OJOM (talk) 19:05, 23 April 2014 (UTC)).

• That begs the question of how much historical fact is in the documents you cite, all supplied by the Kuwaiti government. I had to look elsewhere to learn that the Battle of Hamdh ended in a Kuwaiti defeat. Drmies (talk) 19:40, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

No one ever mentioned anything about a defeat or a win regarding the Battle of Hamdh. Your efforts to look and seek are admirable; however, let us not assume that individual books supersede in all ways known history. This author praises your efforts Sir. Thank you. (OJOM (talk) 20:02, 23 April 2014 (UTC)).

• OJOM, I appreciate your quick and courteous response, but in the interest of economy, let me be clear: in no way will we accept "government sources" over published accounts in reliable sources. One wonders what glory tales the Saudis will be telling about this battle and given that a. it seems that they won and b. there's more of them then there are of you we need our editorial policies to be followed (see WP:RS, for instance), because if this becomes a battle between camps, you are not likely to win. And I'm sure you do not want the other side to write this article, do you? Drmies (talk) 22:47, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

In the context of " Battle between camps"; when you are finished reviewing all the tribes that constitute the chieftain of the Tribes of Arabia; you may then "camp" and "side" argument in the right article.(OJOM (talk) 15:09, 24 April 2014 (UTC)).

• You totally misunderstand "camp". It doesn't refer to a locale with a camp fire and tents; it refers to sides in an argument. It is obvious that your sources are pro-Kuwaiti (you haven't cited a single book or journal article--nothing but Kuwaiti government websites), and the language reflects that: you refer to the Ikhwan who "killed the innocent bedwins and looted their farms" (Battle of Al-Regeai, an article I just tagged as not-neutral), and your persistent insistence on including all honorifics of those from the House of Sabah is another indication that you are working on glorifying the past from a specific point of view, no matter what the present situation is between the countries. Now, you may sing the praises of Saudi-Kuwaiti unity right now, but the time period of those articles you wrote was one of warfare, and in your writing you have clearly picked a side. Drmies (talk) 18:39, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Encyclopedic facts are inputted. The government of a country is held responsible for the history of its existence and not books and journals.

• Sir (I suppose--don't know how you know I have a penis), you said "The government of a country is held responsible for the history of its existence and not books and journals." The moment when he hold a government responsible for the writing of its history will be the moment we can shut this encyclopedia down and replace all articles with a link to the "official" website. In the meantime, we are not going to defer the writing of those articles to those who (claim to) represent those governments, or who edit as if they do. You may feel free to reinstate whatever you like, but if you do so based on unreliable sources, if you remove valid sources, if you reinstate non-neutral language, if you edit against other guidelines and policies (not the least of which the WP:MOS, I will seek other means to redress the situation. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 14:18, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Encyclopedic Facts cares not for government representations nor seek deferements to respond to. This author respectfully agrees that the current policy and situation which you should seek to redress and straighten is your use of inappropriate language of "Sir (I suppose--don't know how you know I have a ""penis"")" as it is very Unlady and ungentleman like and does not fit the quality of an Encyclopedia. Thank you.(OJOM (talk) 21:37, 27 April 2014 (UTC)).

Referencing

I repeat, please provide URLs for the individual pages within the Kuwaiti government websites you are using as sources, not the URLs for the Home pages. As I have noted before, the way you source is like using http://www.defense.gov/ as a reference instead of a specific page that has information about Norman Schwarzkopf or Mike Mullen, for example; it's basically useless, even for someone who reads Arabic. YSSYguy (talk) 21:39, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

House of Sabah (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Chief and Dean of the House

Military of Kuwait (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Stateless

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kuwait Police, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Ministers and Marshall (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:54, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

July 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Battle of Al-Regeai may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• kw/MOD/Arabic_P/index.jsp], Kuwaiti Ministry of Defense,(Section Arabic Read الجيش الكويتي)</ref>]]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:23, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Possibly unfree

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Sheikh Abdullah Al-Jaber Abdullah II Al-Sabah bearing the forefront of his Cavalry in Battle of Regaei (1928).jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:21, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kuwait Police, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Order. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:21, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Fahad Al-Ahmed Al-Jaber Al-Sabah, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Iraqi and His Excellency. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:39, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Tomb of the Unknown Soldier

added a link pointing to Laurel

Tomb of the Unknown Soldier in Lebanon

added a link pointing to Laurel

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

October 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Military of Kuwait may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• * Kuwaiti National Guard <ref>[http://www.kng.gov.kw/]], Official website of the Kuwaiti National Guard, (Section Arabic Read)</ref>(Independent)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:52, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nawaf Al-Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Minister, Deputy and Chief. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

November 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Fahad Al-Ahmed Al-Jaber Al-Sabah may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "<>"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• May 29, 1967 to September 1, 1967 <ref> [http://www.kuwait-history.net/vb/showthread.php?t=9976<ref name="mod.gov.kw"/] Spread#5-Sheikh Fahad Al-Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah ( first from the left)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:03, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Bidoon (stateless) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• mainly known Kuwaiti [[Bedouin]] tribes and foreign [[Arab]] [[soldiers]] classified as "Bidoon" (({{lang-ar| origin word -" Min Doun "}}- meaning " Without"); however, most of the armed forces

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:03, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Military of Kuwait, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page British. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:17, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mubarak Abdullah Al-Jaber Al-Sabah, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chief of the General Staff. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 14:32, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Krak des Chevaliers, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Krak. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:29, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Bidoon (stateless)

added links pointing to British, French and Russian

Military of Kuwait

added links pointing to British, French and Russian

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Battle of Al-Regeai

added links pointing to Horsemen and His Excellency

Military of Kuwait

added a link pointing to His Excellency

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Abdullah II Al-Sabah, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Statesmen. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:34, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Battle of Jahra

added a link pointing to His Excellency

Fahad Al-Ahmed Al-Jaber Al-Sabah

added a link pointing to His Excellency

House of Sabah

added a link pointing to His Excellency

Kuwait 25th Commando Brigade

added a link pointing to His Excellency

Ministry of Interior (Kuwait)

added a link pointing to His Excellency

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

January 2015

Please do not put any redundant info to the page for the Kuwaiti ministry of defense. Those you put are about military posts, not related to the ministry directly. Thanks, Egeymi (talk) 15:34, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

referencing (again)

Once again, posting a link to the home page of the Kuwaiti MoD as a reference is useless, even to someone speaking Arabic. If there is a SPECIFIC page which is part of the MoD website that contains a SPECIFIC piece of information, then that is the URL you use as the source. DO NOT keep using the USELESS home page URL. What you do is the same as presenting www.thetimes.co.uk as a source when the actual source is a specific news story on that website - when someone else wants to read the actual source they can't find it.

Again, if you use one web page multiple times, you only need to list the URL once. The correct format is to write <ref name=(Name)>[(source URL)]</ref> and then <ref name="Name"/> by itself for every other instance of using the same source. The actual name can be anything you like. YSSYguy (talk) 04:16, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kuwaiti Army, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Captain and Private. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:37, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

See also sections

Gday. Such sections should really only include articles that are related to the topic. Pls see WP:SEEALSO. Anotherclown (talk) 11:00, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Response

Thank you for your notification. Respectfully.(OJOM (talk) 14:01, 11 April 2015 (UTC)).

February 2015

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to United States Marine Corps. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Mlpearc (open channel) 22:22, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Lebanese Armed Forces may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:31, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

February 2015

Which exactly unsourced confused content may you be referring to specifically regarding the The Corps and that may seem not to fit with the History of the United States Marine Corps (OJOM (talk) 23:07, 5 February 2015 (UTC)).

See also

See also sections should really only include articles that are related to the topic. Pls see WP:SEEALSO. You were warned about it before. --Egeymi (talk) 11:17, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Your input has been duly taken into consideration. Keep use of inappropriate language away "warned about it before". (OJOM (talk) 21:26, 13 February 2015 (UTC)).

Why do you keep adding this information in multiple pages where it doesn't belong? Please stop. Deunanknute (talk) 00:05, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

It is logical to link a War Memorial with the concerned Armed Forces at subject within the sequence of the respective historic event engagement series.(OJOM (talk) 00:13, 14 February 2015 (UTC)).

You are giving undue weight to the bombings/memorial in multiple pages. At best, a wikilink under "see also" would be enough, although there are probably better pages from which to link from. Deunanknute (talk) 00:27, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

In the sequence history of combat engagements of a Corps; a Company War Memorial belongs within the sequence of due engagements. (OJOM (talk) 00:38, 14 February 2015 (UTC)).

enough other topics

Please stop adding the same info, enough. Your references are repeated, you are not take care of spaces, please do not do that. Instead, please read the necessary guidelines. It is my last warn, please stop adding such unnecessary info. Military of Kuwait includes all this info. You cannot use wp as a platform to praise people and you cannot distort the format of the articles with your edits. --Egeymi (talk) 09:07, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

other topics

Data subject to review was inputted first rightly before being subject to category classfications of unfit status. Unnecessary info is a little overexagerating. "Military of Kuwait" inlcudes correct factual Enclopedic data. The purpsose of the wp used is referring to official government offices and not persons. Your concerns have been duly been noted. (OJOM (talk) 11:49, 15 February 2015 (UTC)).

You stated "Your concerns have been duly been noted", but you are still doing what you want. Please do not distort the format of the articles. I am sorry but I should say again, "enough". --Egeymi (talk) 12:16, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Incorrect statement. Simply following the format of address for government figures. Therefore, that is purpose of these wps "distorting" the format of the articles. Accordingly, your concerns are being duly noted far from " doing what you want". (OJOM (talk) 13:21, 15 February 2015 (UTC)).

The issue is that you are adding a lot of unnecessary material to articles without regards to formatting, due weight, or proper referencing. Your edits have been consistently reverted by many editors, including @Cuprum17:, @Drmies:, @Egeymi:, @YSSYguy:, myself, and many others. Please, listen to the advice you have been given, and try to follow Wikipedia's guidelines on proper addition of content. And when you respond on talk pages please try to use plain english, and address the specific information that is being brought up by others. Deunanknute (talk) 14:28, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Respectful individuals. Depending on Encyclopedic histories, this author is more knowledgeable (as far as portraying proper French military articles) than the cumulative knowledge (portraying proper French military articles) of all these respectful authors put together. This author is keen and interested to conserve the integrity of data on such an Esteemed Institution such as Wikipedia than to adhere to the limited procedures of referencing that does not always reflect fact and true history. Another author OJOM11 was keeping you under the impression that this author was distorting data.(OJOM (talk) 22:45, 15 February 2015 (UTC)).

You have been blocked before OJOM11, you are now asock puppet. Mlpearc (open channel) 14:41, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

OJOM 11 is a fabricated incorrect author on behalf of a third party pretending on behalf of author OJOM. (OJOM (talk) 14:56, 15 February 2015 (UTC)).

So, if you are "keen and interested to conserve the intergrity [sic] of the information on such an Esteemed Institution such as Wikipidia [sic] than to adhere to the limited procedures of referencing that does not always reflect fact and true history", is it your position that Wikipedia's requirements for proper referencing do not apply to your work? Should Wikipedia just accept that whatever you write is a fact, just because you wrote it and are "more experienced than the cumulative knowledge of all these repsectful [sic] authors put together"? YSSYguy (talk) 23:23, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

All Wikipedia's requirements should always apply to added value work of any contribution. However, the Encyclopedic facts are not always rightly portrayed by what is available.(OJOM (talk) 23:42, 15 February 2015 (UTC)).

Yes, you are saying, and showing through your edits, that you do not have to comply with Wikipedias established procedures for verifiability of information. Wikipedia is not a place for original research (per WP:OR). Your statements and edits show that you are unwilling to conform to Wikipedia's standards. Deunanknute (talk) 00:03, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

(Note: The above section has been properly re-edited).(OJOM (talk) 14:12, 22 November 2018 (UTC)).

Article talk page

OJOM, when you are reverted, you should discuss the changes you want to make on the article talk page. I have started a new section at Talk:1983 Beirut barracks bombing after being the latest editor to revert your changes there. Please go there and explain. It is possible that some of your changes should be reinstated; please give us your reasons. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:07, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

other topic

Leaving aside the issue of whether the French soldiers' name should be listed or not listed, and also leaving aside the use of the word "martyr" - which you have been told before you should not use and why - you shovelled a heap of information into the article without bothering to reference it. Now, you list the sources here on your talk page, but what good is that? Why did you not do what you are supposed to do with everything you add to an article, which is to ADD YOUR SOURCES? I can only assume it's one of the following reasons:

• it's too hard, or you don't know how to do it
• because you think it's beneath you
• because you can't be bothered
• because you don't think it matters
• because there are no sources that back up what you add

- YSSYguy (talk) 23:24, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Response

Since an administrator already determined that this author is not OJOM11, who was running shoveling data around articles edited by OJOM purposely undermining the intergrity of this author; then how come by minimum courtesy due; none of these authors bothered to ask first this author if OJOM11 was the same author. This author can only assume it's one of the following reasons :

• didn't think about the integrity of this author first and doing the simple minimum, of asking respectfully.
• because you think this author is beneath you
• because you can't be bothered to ask respectfully
• because you don't think it matters
• because you assume too much about knowledgable authors

With all due respect.(OJOM (talk) 23:40, 16 February 2015 (UTC)).

Well, unlike you, I will not dodge your question: I didn't know anything about OJOM11 until yesterday, but what he or she did was wrong and an Admin quite rightly took firm action. However OJOM11 didn't add unreferenced information to any article - he or she removed information; and OJOM11 did not edit 1983 Beirut barracks bombing at all and therefore did not shovel any unreferenced information into that article - you did. So my question still stands unanswered: why don't you reference properly? With all due respect YSSYguy (talk) 02:07, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Don't ask an author about referencing when you keep deleting correct Encyclopedic facts about victims and the injured. Our job as authors is to support each other first in the interest of this Encyclopedia and not remain unaware of identical users such as OJOM11 being created. Your unjustified behavior suggest " you don't think it matters".(OJOM (talk) 22:54, 17 February 2015 (UTC)).

So, is your answer to my earlier question that the information does not need referencing because they died violently? YSSYguy (talk) 05:35, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

I also apologise for failing in my job as an author and remaining unaware of imaginary identical users such as OJOM11 being created, and for any offence caused to you for that failure. YSSYguy (talk) 05:42, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

General Std Operating Procedure and Policy implementing in concern of referencing should not favor outcomes. However, number of casualties in wars, conflits and or incident would and should be referenced to differentiate mainly between those KIA, MIA, WIA, POW's and innocent civilians status count. In the event of known casualty identification, it is applicable not to require referencing as to per known casualty status. (OJOM (talk) 21:37, 18 February 2015 (UTC)).

February 2015 - First False/Incorrect Disruptive Block based on Invalid Justifications within Content Application of Language Facts

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article. Deunanknute (talk) 00:07, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of a week for repeatedly adding original research, unsourced content, and excess detail to articles despite requests to stop. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 11:55, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

OJOM (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Your block application is incorrect. The 1983 Beirut Barracks bombing doesn't only inlcude the 1st Parachute Chasseur Regiment 1^er RCP as listed in the Encyclopedic article but also the 9th Parachute Chasseur Regiment 9^e RCP which lost 3 paratroopers out 58.

Decline reason:

As you've already been told by several editors, edits like this one clearly violate WP:UNDUE and WP:MEMORIAL. Until you are ready to acknowledge those policies, you will not be unblocked. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 23:53, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Wikilinking other topics

Please stop linking part of the names of persons. In one case you linked part of the name of a female person and the link was to an article about a man. A link such as that is pointless, confusing and does nothing to help a reader find out more about the person. YSSYguy (talk) 12:59, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Which person may you be referring to exaclty around this Encyclopedia so that we may not confuse your understanding of gender status again? Kindly specify tasks required so that this author may reply accordingly to your specific ongoing gender confusions. Writing a general vague statement "Wikilinking" as suggested above is pointless "In one case" ( which case ? ), confusing "name of a female person" (which female?) and does nothing to help this author find out more about your specific edits and concerns around this Encyclopedia. (OJOM (talk) 07:34, 3 March 2015 (UTC)).

Don't fixate on one particular case, just stop linking to articles about rulers of Kuwait when the persons mentioned are or were not rulers of Kuwait. Ali Salem Al-Mubarak Al Sabah was not the same person as Mubarak Al Sabah, so don't link Mubarak Al Sabah. Mubarak Abdullah Al-Jaber Al-Sabah's mother Munira Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah was not Sheik Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah, so don't link Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah. Abdullah Jaber Al Abdullah II Al-Sabah was not the same person as Abdullah II Al-Sabah, so don't link Abdullah II Al-Sabah. Simple YSSYguy (talk) 12:11, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Don't argue about it, just don't do it. I can't be any clearer than that. YSSYguy (talk) 18:38, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

"just don't do it" is an unprofessional tone. Don't deliver unjustifiable lectures.(OJOM (talk) 06:37, 4 March 2015 (UTC)).

The "lecture", as you put it, is completely justified. The purpose of a wikilink is to deliver a reader to another article with more information about the wikilinked term. Let's say there is a sentence "the Kuwait Air Force is an arm of the Military of Kuwait"; a wikilink for Military of Kuwait allows a reader to go to that article and learn more about the Kuwaiti military. A wikilink for Military of Kuwait is of no assistance to the reader, because there is nothing about the Kuwaiti military forces in that article. What you have been doing is exactly the same - you have been in the habit of linking part of the names of people, to articles about different people, rulers of Kuwait; and those articles do not even mention people such as Munira Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah. In conclusion, the links are unhelpful, and such linking is against Wikipedia policy, so don't do it. YSSYguy (talk) 10:33, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to clarify policy.(OJOM (talk) 10:44, 4 March 2015 (UTC)).

Disambiguation link notification for March 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Salem Al-Ali Al-Sabah, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page His Excellency. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:10, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Kuwait), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page His Excellency. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:28, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Fahad Al-Ahmed Al-Jaber Al-Sabah

added links pointing to Captain and His

Kuwait National Guard

added a link pointing to Dean

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Fahad Al-Ahmed Al-Jaber Al-Sabah

Stop removing valid Failed Verification and Citation Needed tags in violation of Wikipedia policy. Stop adding unreferenced material in violation of Wikipedia policy. Stop adding spurious information to the infobox in violation of Infobox Militaryperson template instructions. Stop acting as if you own the article. YSSYguy (talk) 11:56, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Don't deliver lectures which factual verifiable experience knows little of like you previously did on other topics. This author is adding Encyclopedic facts as usual. (OJOM (talk) 12:00, 23 March 2015 (UTC)).

There is no lecture, just an instruction to adhere to policies. You say you write facts, but without reliable sources they are just wisps of smoke. In one edit I added a reliable source, which you then removed. Experience has nothing to do with it, except that your lack of such in terms of Wikipedia is leading you to make bad edits. YSSYguy (talk) 12:06, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

You are deleting facts this author is stating and calling it "instruction to adhere to policies". As far as " Experience has nothing to do with it"; agreed; however, this author is referring to the experience of verifiable sources. This author would have to respectfully decline about your suggested "lack of such".(OJOM (talk) 12:19, 23 March 2015 (UTC)).

It was impossible to know what you were referring to before, you wrote English words, but not a coherent sentence. No matter, the only thing that does matter is your mistaken belief that you do not have to adhere to Wikipedia policies. YSSYguy (talk) 12:51, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Knowledgeable authors don't quibble about writings. The only thing that does matter is your unjustifiable mass editing of articles that are Encyclopedic facts. Don't twist wills around policies and referencing miracling "wikipedia policy". This author's contributions are all Encyclopedic facts so don't twist wills with "mistaken belief that you do have to adhere to Wikipidia policies". Wikipdia is for the factual volunteers and certainly not the uneducated should a respectful educated gentleman such as yourself plan on insisting on unjustifiable acts and claims. Thank you(OJOM (talk) 13:09, 23 March 2015 (UTC)).

Sorry, but I do not understand what you are trying to say. YSSYguy (talk) 13:15, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Clearly. Don't address then conversations you can't handle or be responded to then, with all due respect to your lack of understanding of Enlgish.(OJOM (talk) 13:20, 23 March 2015 (UTC)).

I don't speak Enlgish, but English is my native language. Perhaps if you did not make up words such as "miracling"... YSSYguy (talk) 13:25, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Clearly, your concept ability of understanding is quite miracling. Perhaps if you do not make up words such as "don't speak English"...(OJOM (talk) 13:30, 23 March 2015 (UTC)).

Referencing (again)

If you use a source multiple times in an article, you only need to type the full text once. For example, in a recent edit you have used <ref name="mod.gov.kw">[http://www.mod.gov.kw/MOD/Arabic_P/index.jsp], Kuwaiti Ministry of Defense,(Section Arabic Read الجيش الكويتي)</ref> many times. You just use the full URL and description once, and for every other instance you just need to have <ref name="mod.gov.kw"/> - nothing else. YSSYguy (talk) 23:29, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Response

Thank you for your respectful conduct in clarifying procedures of referencing.(OJOM (talk) 10:41, 13 April 2015 (UTC)).

Disambiguation link notification for April 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Kuwait Air Force

added a link pointing to Crown

Kuwaiti Army

added a link pointing to Crown

Kuwaiti Navy

added a link pointing to Crown

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:09, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

The same problems (again)

You cannot provide another articles as main articles. You cannot delete verification needed templates without verifing it.--Egeymi (talk) 10:07, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

The same responses (again)

You may not conclude judgement without a debate. You may not judge unless proofing other more verifiable sources. (OJOM (talk) 11:04, 5 April 2015 (UTC)).

April 2015 - Second False/Incorrect Disruptive Block based on Invalid Justifications within Content Application of Language Facts

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for persistent disruptive editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason= incorrect block application. ~~~~}}.  5 albert square (talk) 01:55, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

OJOM (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Your block application is incorrect.

Decline reason:

I'm declining this request as your request for an unblock is somewhat unclear. I'm satisfied that you were making unexplained deletions, and that your editing was disruptive. PhilKnight (talk) 17:06, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

 Comment: Fixed malformed request. --L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 16:56, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 9th Parachute Chasseur Regiment, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Royal. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:49, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1st Parachute Chasseur Regiment, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Captain. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:40, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 11th Parachute Brigade (France), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Lorraine, Nancy and Pau. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 22:19, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Warrant Officer

Please see NATO Ranks under either Army or Navy Officer Ranks (the Army Officer Ranks section has a more detailed description) and you will see a separate category (WO) for US Warrant Officer ranks, as the US is the only nation to use WO's as a unique category of officers, subordinate to Officers (OF) but superior in rank to Enlisted Members/Other Ranks (OR). While Adjudant-Chef and Adjutant may translate to Chief Warrant Officer and Warrant Officer, respectively, they would be equivalent to British Commonwealth WOs (q.v.) or US E-9 and E-8 ranks, not W-x ranks. Also, the French "Major" (regardless of its English translation or linguistic equivalence) would in no way be equivalent to a CWO-5, again because US WOs/CWOs are officers vice Other Ranks (i.e., Enlisted Members). It would appear that the closest US equivalent rank to the French "Major" would be the US Army rank of "Command Sergeant Major" (CSM) or the USMC rank of "Sergeant Major" (SgtMaj) as both of these ranks are reserved for the Senior Enlisted Advisor to the Commanding Officer of a Battalion/Squadron ("Squadron" is used in USA Cavalry or USMC Aviation as battalion-equivalent units) or higher level commands. As such the CSM or SgtMaj is the most senior NCO in the organization, reporting directly to a Lieutenant Colonel or above, with the requisite authority, responsibility, prestige, respect, and status incumbant upon a soldier or Marine who has served with great distinction for over twenty years of honorable service. It would appear that the French Major would quite naturally fall within this rank equivalence. By the way of comparison, a CWO-5 would have, in addition to the above qualifiations, over twenty years of service as on officer leading troops, managing technical programs, training others, mentoring company-grade officers and other WOs, and advising senior officers with the combination of the technical skills of a master technician and the leadership skills of a field-grade officer. Truly special individuals and probably the rarest rank in the USA and USMC other than General and Lieutenant General.CobraDragoon (talk) 21:50, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Superior Rank

Thank you for your clarifications which are highly appreciated. Besides Lieutenant General, U.S. and U.S.M.C General, there is a point to be clarified regarding Chief Warrant Officer (CWO) and Warrant Officer (WO) in general. Indeed, the French rank of Major (MAJ/MJR) is simultaneously a Superior Officer and Sub-Officer (since 2009) and while higher than the French equivalent of Chief Warrant Officer (CWO) and Warrant Officer (WO), can also be considered similar to and different than a senior British Warrant Officer (WO) and U.S. Chief Warrant Officer (U.S.-CWO) and Warrant Officer (U.S.-WO).

Historically, armed forces using the term sub-officer have used it to refer to more senior non-commissioned ranks, typically from sergeant upwards, but often the term now covers all non-commissioned ranks. Similarly to the Canadian Superior Ranks (Rangs Supérieurs) in the Canadian Armed Forces (CF/CAF), the French designation for Chief Warrant Officer (CWO) is Adjudant-Chef (ADJUC) and Adjudant (ADJ/ADU) for Warrant Officer (WO), respectively.

However, the main point, is that the rank of French Major (MAJ/MJR) is still the highest Superior Officer/Sub-Officer rank. The Superior Officer rank holds the same Sub-Officer designation across the board of the ranks in the French Navy, ranks in the French Army, ranks in the French Air Force, ranks in the French National Gendarmerie and other French constituents. Therefore, the rank of French Major (MAJ/MJR) is actually a Superior Officer and as of 2009 can be considered the highest enlisted beyond a Chief Warrant Officer (CWO) rank commanding surely also the French equivalent of Warrant Officer (WO) being (Adjudant in French) or Chief Warrant Officers (CWO) being (Adjudant-Chef in French) within by the various fields of warrant military specialties or occupations across the French Armed Forces enlisted ranks.

On the other hand in the United States (U.S.), the highest U.S. enlisted ranks (SEAs/CSELs) have different term designations contrary to the Majors of the French Armed Forces in France, this time however, across the board of U.S. Armed Forces:

• Joint Chiefs of Staff, J.C.S - (Senior Enlisted Advisor to the Chairman - SEAC).
• United States Marine Corps, U.S.M.C - (Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps - SMMC).
• United States Navy, U.S.N - (Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy - MCPON).
• United States Army, U.S.A - (Sergeant Major of the Army - SMA).
• United States Air Force, U.S.A.F - (Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force - CMSAF).
• United States Coast Guard, U.S.C.G - (Master Chief Petty Officer of the Coast Guard - MCPOCG).
• National Guard of the United States, U.S.N.G - Air Guard ANG or Army Guard ANG - (Senior Enlisted Advisor for the National Guard Bureau - SEANGB).

Indeed, truly rare superior rank.(OJOM (talk) 07:50, 14 June 2015 (UTC)).

(Note: this section on "Superior Rank" has been properly re-edited.)(OJOM (talk) 14:12, 22 November 2018 (UTC)).

Disambiguation link notification for July 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kuwaiti Navy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Captain. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:49, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1st Parachute Hussar Regiment, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Macedonia. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:50, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Opération Daguet, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pilot. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:18, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Merci beaucoup pour commencer avec 6th Foreign Engineer Regiment. Il est bon d'avoir plus l'histoire militaire française sur En:Wiki. Buckshot06 (talk) 03:58, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

July 2015

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to French Foreign Legion may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• pavillion acquired following the [[Siege of Tuyên Quang]] in 1884, which should not have left [[Sidi Bel Abbès], and carried bringing back the wooden hand of [[Ranks in the French Army|captain]]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:17, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 6th Foreign Engineer Regiment, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Roman and Temple of Jupiter. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:53, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pierre Segrétain, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pau. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:39, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2nd Foreign Parachute Regiment, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Congo. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:02, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 1 September

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Communal Depot of the Foreign Regiments page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1st Foreign Regiment, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Roman. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:46, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Honneur et Fidélité, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Imperial. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:28, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2nd Foreign Parachute Regiment, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chevalier. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:10, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

31st Brigade (France)

added a link pointing to Bonifacio

Paul Arnaud de Foïard

added a link pointing to Calvi

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:02, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Foreign Legion Command, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kingdom. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:28, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1st Parachute Hussar Regiment, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hungarian. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:26, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

1st Parachute Hussar Regiment

added a link pointing to Comte

2nd Foreign Infantry Regiment

added a link pointing to Calvi

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:51, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

French Foreign Legion

added a link pointing to Marine

Military of Kuwait

added a link pointing to Marine

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:12, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Marching Regiment of the Foreign Legion

added links pointing to Saida, Saint-Raphaël and Allemant

Christian Piquemal

added links pointing to Cross-country and La Voix du Nord

Paul-Frédéric Rollet

added a link pointing to Nichan Iftikhar

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:41, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

6th Foreign Infantry Regiment

added a link pointing to Temple of Jupiter

Marching Regiment of the Foreign Legion

added a link pointing to Italian

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:52, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

17th Parachute Engineer Regiment

added a link pointing to Killed

1st Foreign Engineer Regiment

added a link pointing to Planetary

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:07, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2nd Foreign Infantry Regiment, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Killed. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:58, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

2nd Marching Regiment of the 2nd Foreign Regiment

added links pointing to Sillery, Thann and Chenay

3rd Marching Regiment of the 1st Foreign Regiment

added links pointing to Cappy, Morcourt and Santerre

2nd Marching Regiment of the 1st Foreign Regiment

added links pointing to Louvois and Killed

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:56, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1st Moroccan Division (1939), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Brest and Escaut. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:55, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

French typo

Hi !

Thank you for your awesome work on French military troops ! I just would like to remind you the abbreviation of some French words :

• premier : 1^er
• première : 1^re (and NOT 1^ère)
• deuxième : 2^e (and NOT 2^ème)
• troisième : 3^e (and NOT 3^ème)
• etc.

Also, don't forget to create the language (inter-wiki) links !

Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Circenses (talk • contribs) 09:07, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

1st Marine Infantry Parachute Regiment

added a link pointing to Ringway

2nd Parachute Chasseur Regiment

added a link pointing to Bretagne

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:32, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of French paratrooper units, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Temple of Jupiter. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:57, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Moroccan Goumier, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Turkish. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:42, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Marcel Bigeard

added a link pointing to Lexy

Marcel Letestu

added a link pointing to Croix du combattant volontaire

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:53, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

• Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:48, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2nd Marine Infantry Regiment, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bomarsund. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:43, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 6th Engineer Regiment (France), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Congo. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:58, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 4th Tunisian Tirailleurs Regiment, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nichan Iftikhar. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:43, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

Thank you for your recent edits to military units from WWI. Has anyone asked you to join a WikiProject? Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history is very active and runs contests for its editors. At Wikipedia:GLAM/Pritzker, we are currently focusing on WWI, especially biographies and music. TeriEmbrey (talk) 16:12, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

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

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Jupiter

Hi. The Jupiter article does not need text or images dealing with Olympian Zeus, even if those images are misidentified as "Olympian Jupiter". Jupiter and Zeus were not regarded as identical deities until very late in Classical theology; that's why we have separate articles on Zeus and Jupiter. Many Roman images of Jupiter, produced during the late Roman Republic, are thought to have been copies or near-copies of Phideas' chryselephantine Statue of Olympian Zeus. But the picture you've inserted is intended as reconstruction of Phideas' original, which was of Zeus, not Jupiter. The presumption that Zeus and Jupiter were identical in most if not all respects belongs to the 19th century, not to modern scholarship. Thanks for reading this. Haploidavey (talk) 16:09, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Georges Cabanier, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rubis. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:44, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Georges Cabanier, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Congo. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:43, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Interlanguage linking

Hi there. When adding interlanguage links (like for example links to French articles) where English-language Wikipedia does not yet have an article (adding interlanguage links where there are already English-language articles is unnecessary), then please use Template:Interlanguage link. That way the English name of the article is redlinked, so that people can see that it is missing, and some day create it. Manxruler (talk) 13:40, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

About 1500 tons-class submarine (1931)

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give 1500 tons-class submarine (1931) a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:14, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 13th Demi-Brigade of Foreign Legion, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Roman. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:56, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gabriel Bablon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nichan Iftikhar. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:16, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Louis-Antoine Gaultier

Hi, I am a co-ordinator at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history. As part of my duties, I have been reviewing recently created articles and found that this article was recently created on en.wikipedia by you. The article appears to be a google translation (or similar) of the French Wiki article. Such translations are often literal and fail to capture the nuances of language - hence the phrase, "lost in translation." It takes a fair bit of work to capture an article from another wiki language and make it into one in English that is both accurate and makes sense. I have made a few edits (as have some others) but it still needs more work. You appear to have an interest in French subjects and perhaps, some fluency? I have essentially none, past "one, two, three and yes". I hope you will be able to spend more time to improve the article. Have you seen Wikipedia:Translation and particularly the bit on avoiding machine translations. They are an aid but not a substitution for human translation. Could I suggest that in future, you work-up a translated article in your sandbox or the draft space a bit more before bringing it into the mainspace per the guidance at Wikipedia:Translation. Thankyou for your contributions. Regards, Cinderella157 (talk) 10:00, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Marching Regiment, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ukrainian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:07, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

See also sections

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia. You've been asked at least 4 times before not to add irrelevant links to See also sections. Continuing with the same behavior despite multiple requests to stop is disruptive. DrKay (talk) 07:08, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

See also sections

This author is continuing to add various contributions and articles to Wikipedia that are beneficiary. Thank you.(OJOM (talk) 11:08, 9 November 2017 (UTC)).

Verifiability

Hello. I wanted to confirm with you that your source for Gustave Fourreau is this. If yes, why don't you link to that website in the article? It would really help when it comes to WP:Verifiability. Thanks and regards, Biwom (talk) 11:11, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Verifiability

Thank you for your comment.(OJOM (talk) 11:30, 28 November 2017 (UTC)).

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, OJOM. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Ways to improve 2nd Foreign Legion (2LE)

Hi, I'm Cwmhiraeth. OJOM, thanks for creating 2nd Foreign Legion (2LE)!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Please can you add some citations to your new article 2nd Foreign Legion (2LE) which does not currently have any sources. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:34, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Disambiguation link notification for December 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kuwait Military Forces, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Italian Marines (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) 10:03, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

A page you started (Marching regiment) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Marching regiment, OJOM!

Wikipedia editor Cwmhiraeth just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Could you try to sort out the errors in the "World War I" section. You may find clicking on "help" useful. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:02, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

To reply, leave a comment on Cwmhiraeth's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

French Naval Avation

Please do not add uncited information, like you did at French Naval Aviation. Garuda28 (talk) 01:19, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

French Naval Aviation is a part component of the French Navy. The cited information are already included in the main article. Thank you.(OJOM (talk) 12:47, 31 December 2017 (UTC)).

Then directly cite the information inline as is required. Garuda28 (talk) 15:12, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

@Garuda28:, you are wasting your time, OJOM refuses to reference things he adds and has been doing so for years. YSSYguy (talk) 09:31, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

YSSYguy, don't employ words that are incorrect ("refuses") on behalf of this author. You don't speak on my behalf, so don't place incorrect words and actions on my behalf. Such is incorrect behavior. Understand the below written section first (written in English language just for you). Giving your history of claiming to blame this author for ("years"), you probably won't understand the content of what this author has written below (Content : French Maritime Force of Naval Aeronautics) from a first read. Given your statement above, it's obvious that it is taking you years and you still don't understand. It's alright. So read the below again (in English language : French Maritime Force of Naval Aeronautics) at least until content actually sinks and make some normal sense. You will feel apologetic, sorry, this author should not portray what you accept or don't accept to "refuse"; I don't speak on your behalf, so don't speak on mine. While you are at it, don't judge what you don't know. For what counts, this author does agree that you, by all means, and the other gentleman are respectful individuals, so show some good faith, camaraderie and good spirit and reword your choice of English grammar ("refuses" this author doen't refuse anything within what's logical, it's about hard work) in a more subtle, respectful and correct manner.(OJOM (talk) 09:15, 2 January 2018 (UTC)).

French Maritime Force of Naval Aeronautics

First off, it is not called French Naval Aviation as per the stated article; it's officially known as French Maritime Force of Naval Aeronautics (French: Force maritime de l'aéronautique navale) and this author did correct the logo of that unit, along with dates and certain insignias.

These proper references in French are already included in the main article of the French Navy under the following Missions of the French Navy including French Naval Aviation, Ministère de la Défense. This main reference, already includes the missions of the French Maritime Force of Naval Aeronautics which are included in that reference in the French language (if you can't understand the content of a foreign language, then don't blame an author for trying top help portraying correct content) in a minor part within the stated global mission of the French Navy. Indeed, this author is aware that this is English Wikipedia, and accordingly, proper French references and tone meaning should be portrayed correctly to English. This author has been editing the Encyclopedia but mainly also created many useful and contributing articles (several articles created) over the past years.

Adding on and in relation to references, this author did add an entire portrayed section for French Maritime Force of Naval Aeronautics (French: Force maritime de l'aéronautique navale), a section on History from 1910-1914, which was deleted for invalid unknown reason.

Let me remind you that the added section is already included in the main French official military article of French Maritime Force of Naval Aeronautics (French: Force maritime de l'aéronautique navale), which is already cited in the French language (If a language has its own citation, then there is really no need to justify it's citation in another language; that would be improper in so many ways) and which was properly portrayed down to each punctuation (including the meaning of each sentence, which is very important so that the history involved doesn't get misinterpreted) and which you will not find an English article referencing such history since this article is not even directly related to English History.

Accordingly, this author is continuing to contribute accurate Encyclopedic History, Articles and Contributions to the Encyclopedia. As far as portraying French military articles correctly and looking up other French sources to make sure content is written in accordance with French tone, punctuation and meaning; if either of you can do it better or seem to think you can portray French articles properly or better than this author, then by all means go ahead and show us the example of a properly portrayed French military article created.

Otherwise this nonsense about deviating and dodging from the main topic at hand (proper portrayal of French military articles, which this author has portrayed, created and contributed in the dozens) should be not be confused and simply labeled with improper referencing (including former incorrect blocks or attempts to edit block this author's hard work on proper portrayal of French military articles on the English Encyclopedia).

The topic/issue at hand is not referencing. If you can't do the job (Proper creation, sentence meaning explanation and portrayal of already existing French military articles), or you don't care of doing the job, or don't speak another language, or you can't do it better (proper portrayal and sentence meaning explanation within context of French military articles); that's fine, it's not your fault nor problem. But then, don't blame hard working authors for trying to help in proper portrayals of other languages, specially when you can't portray the actual meaning content of another language yourself.

With the upmost due respect of course and always. Thank you Gentlemen.

You may follow this author's various major contributions, sentence meaning and proper portrayal of the French Air Force on the Encyclopedia.(OJOM (talk) 08:37, 2 January 2018 (UTC)).

Disambiguation link notification for December 31

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited French Air Force, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Escadre (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 11:09, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 7

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Escadron de Chasse 2/30 Normandie-Niemen (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Escadron

French Air Force (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Escadron

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:20, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 16

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Escadron de Chasse 1/4 Gascogne, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chinese (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Ways to improve 3e Escadre de Chasse

Hi, I'm SamHolt6. OJOM, thanks for creating 3e Escadre de Chasse!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Well structured articles, but needs more sources and accompanying footnotes. Still, passes review

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

SamHolt6 (talk) 14:14, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your Comment SamHolt6. Indeed, now that proper structure is available, let us hope that these claimed linguistic specialists can culminate their combined knowledge and consolidate additional reliable sources to authenticate the veracity of the updated status on these historic encyclopedic articles.(OJOM (talk) 14:46, 17 January 2018 (UTC)).

WP:UE

I very much appreciate your literally months of hard work translating things from fr:wikipedia. However, in the process, you destroyed the meaning of Strategic Air Forces Command through translations from French that don't properly convey the military/armed forces meanings in English. I have been working on proper translations of EC 3/3 Ardennes and EC 3 as a whole. Please use "Fighter Wing" for Escadre de Chasse and "Fighter Group" (or Squadron") for the Escadrilles. Otherwise people who know nothing of French military terminology will have a hard time understanding the article. Also "formation" = training, conversion-to-type training in the case of the Spitfire re-equipment of EC 3. Please use English; this is the English wikipedia, and not all people from all around the world will be aware of how literal French is translated in English. Please feel free to reach out to me for any help. Kind regards and bonne année, Buckshot06 (talk) 20:27, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

@Buckshot06: This user has a long history of collaboration issues. - FlightTime (open channel) 03:51, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Excuse me Sir, but the user is creating French military articles, so unless you are expert in that collaborative language, then "collaborating" issues are not even applicable. With all due to respect. A user that has "collaborative issues" would not contribute to a Wikipedia in the first place (OJOM (talk) 04:23, 20 January 2018 (UTC)).

Exclusive Translation from official correspondent French Encyclopedic Article Only and Not from any Fakely Insinuated Suggested Website

Thank you for your Comment. As far as "destroying" the meaning of Strategic Air Forces (FAS); (Command being a totally different entity); the written English translations depict exact meaning of the French article (French: Forces Aériennes Stratégiques), as former content did not reflect proper French writings in accordance with the French article (French: Forces Aériennes Stratégiques). Surely, the official French writer on the French Wikipedia would not want content of that article to be translated incorrectly, and that to any other language. Their existence on the French Wikipedia in the open is an understanding that anyone with an understanding of French can translate to English or any other language. Since, it was translated wrong to start with, this author is sure that amended French translations are quite correct. If you feel that content is improper and does not reflect the official writing on the French article, then by all means do change whatever you may deem proper and inform the official French writer that you are planning on portraying his official information in another way, but do not issue incorrect statements : "don't properly convey the military/armed forces meanings in English".

However, make sure though to understand that this author is not creating fictional content, simply reflecting already existing accurate content and portrayal of a French article and continuing to add various contributions and articles to Wikipedia American English/British/French/etc... that are beneficiary. In addition, make sure you also understand that Military Articles created in favor by this author are beneficiary to American English/British/French/etc... platforms, and are not the "destroying" nature. So "destroying" doesn't fit the description here. Incorrect choice of wording and situation. As far as French military articles are concerned, they should really be in line with French tone and official French description.

On another hand, and as far as 03.003 Fighter Squadron "Ardennes" is concerned, all the sections of that article added by this author are from the French article 03.003 Fighter Squadron "Ardennes" (French: Escadron de chasse 3/3 Ardennes) and not from the website you are referring to (this author never used a website without citing that website). You are also working 03.003 Fighter Squadron "Ardennes" based on how the French Article is divided (French: Escadron de chasse 3/3 Ardennes) (it's obvious from the titles of each header). The English article is an exact organization of the French article, that is why this author always leaves the correspondent French article right next to the English title, when appropriate (the first sentence) so that any French official speaker can know that the portrayed article in English is an exact depiction/portrayal of the French article, hence, kindly refrain from accusing this author to copy from a website (All content in the English article is from the French article, and not all content in the French article is cited either, however the veracity is correct on content based on the official writer of that French article). This author has never used any French website to write content on the English Wikipedia (and make sure to understand the difference between being knowledgeable and educated on numerous topics and finding similar content on a website). For instance, this author just added 4 entire sections on the Patrouille de France based exactly on the 4 sections of the French article (French: Patrouille de France). Additional content also cites American, British, Italian, etc... that don't need a citation.

In summary and to be clear, this author does not create content (before trying to "destroy" content as you incorrectly suggested) in an article and never has without reliable sources. If no sources are available in the French article, but proper information needs to be portrayed correctly, then this author is sure to do the job properly (proper portrayal so that content is not misunderstood or undermined). This author recognizes that all French military articles on the French Wikipedia have an authority behind them (official French military writings in case of French military articles to make sure authenticity is accurate) and content on the French article should be identical, even if the official French writer is not present (French meaning, format, punctuation, history, sequence, etc...) to that on the English version of that article. This author is simply portraying French content professionally on the English Wikipedia based on the official written French version which was not created by this author. To repeat, this author is not creating any sort of content or showcasing content and never has from any website, all content of existing French military articles are portrayed accurately and correctly on the English Wikipedia from the French article itself or created based on sound educational knowledge (So don't be surprised if you find a French website that has similar/identical information, that doesn't mean that the author copied data from that website, much as the website is aware of a knowledgeable author). This author is simply mirroring (as in portraying) French to English content only based on skills and professionalism.

On another note, going from good spirit and the essentials of team work, this author does take into consideration requests from respectful individuals such as yourself and will study your request in terms of creating future French Air Force articles under English colloquial; however, keep in mind that all content is in English (on the created article) and only the unit names are in French, and giving that the mission of an Encyclopedia is to educate first, this author arguably could favor keeping French made articles unit designations, out of respect to their official French designations as these are official French echelons (Escadre, Escadron, Escadrille). Indeed, it is the English Wikipedia, but the Wikipedia is first a universal educational Encyclopedia.

On a separate note in relation to integrity. On July 29 2015, you posted and awarded a Barnstar on this Author's Talk Page. That means you recognized quality work on behalf of an author based on your sound ability to judge quality content. Good Quality doesn't change "Buckshot06" and this author does certainly not accept such improper behavior under any circumstances. Do not award quality and then attempt to "destroy/handicap" the Talk Page integrity of an author. This sort of juxtaposition is unacceptable. Make sure you also understand that this author has been blocked twice before incorrectly and improperly for your reference of French military history.

On another more subtle and good spirited note, indeed Buckshot06, because and even if everyone in the world is not aware of how literal French articles are portrayed in English (American, British, Australian, etc...) that does not mean that a respectful author would compromise the authenticity of his portrayals/knowledge capabilities/integrity or the integrity of readers when it comes down to the authenticity and integrity of an Encyclopedia (English or not), whose main goal is to EDUCATE FIRST.

In your final coherent conscious sentences, this author does appreciate your courtesy and reaching out and your gesture is highly appreciated. Respectfully the same.

(OJOM (talk) 21:08, 19 January 2018 (UTC)).

Your grasp of military English is seriously inadequate - the wordings you're using frequently don't make sense. Any belief by you that the French Wikipedia article should be the model of the En:wiki article is simply not based in any WP rule I've ever heard of. authority behind them (official French military writings in case of French military articles) and content on the French article should be identical. This is simply not correct. Wikipedia is here to accurate document, in line with our WP:PILLARS, and especially WP:V, the article subject. The official French description may have, in some cases, major distortions (this is more frequently the case on U.S. military articles, and pales with the propaganda sometimes present on unit/formation pages on Ru:wiki), but accurate descriptions better follow our WP:PILLARS.

Sure you favour keeping the French terms: understand, it's what you know. But the English wikipedia uses "wing", "squadron", and, for escadrille = basically equals Flight (military unit), not "wing". En:wiki has a responsibility to educate in English, and if the professional military terminology is wrong, education is hindered.

I will say again: the EC 3/3 article is a copyvio-though-translation of the page I've now linked. The very fact that you've remove the link to the original page (http://groupeaeronefs.free.fr/even26.htm) does not fill me with confidence. The authors of "Ne recule ni ne dévie" spent what might have been thousands of hours on their work. You did not have permission to copy that material, unlike the permission given to groupaeronefs.free.fr - which is also copyrighted. For that reason, I've have escalated the issue to a degree, marked the page as a copyright violation, and started the process of discussion over its deletion.

Your record here, as depicted in the page history of this talk page, and the notes also still present, does not encourage me to believe that you are too worried about copyright, nor the conventions and rules of the English wikipedia. One barnstar doesn't change that. If you make an effort to make sure your articles are in properly understandable English, including military English, are based on solid WP:RELIABLE sources, and accurately cover not just the high points of a military unit/armed service, but the low points (see for example Armed Forces of the Democratic Republic of the Congo or Armed Forces of Liberia, or the crime and corruption section of Russian Ground Forces), I would be more likely to treat you with the respect you're asking for.

As it is, I'm seriously considering running Earwig's bot over a wide variety of your previous work.

Finally, none of this changes the fact that you've translated and made wiki-accessible massive chunks of French units' history. 31st Brigade (France) fills a gap that otherwise I would have only scant notes in old references works for. But it means that much of your content may have significant problems. (For example, "Interarm" in French = effectively "combined arms" in English.)

I would encourage you to consider continuing to reply to my comments. Kind regards Buckshot06 (talk) 01:25, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

January 2018 - Fake Accusation & False Insinuating Claim

Speedy deletion nomination of 03.003 Fighter Squadron "Ardennes"

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on 03.003 Fighter Squadron "Ardennes" requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a translated copy from http://groupeaeronefs.free.fr/even26.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Buckshot06 (talk) 01:34, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

List of French Air Force Articles created based on the Official correspondent French Encyclopedic Article & Not Any Website as Fakely Insinuated

Buckshot06, To be clear, this author did not create the English Wikipedia Article 03.003 Fighter Squadron "Ardennes" nor the official French correspondent version of the article on the French Wikipedia (French: Escadron de Chasse 3/3 Ardennes).

To be even more clearer, this author (as far as French military units are concerned) only creates Articles (identical/mirror) on the English Wikipedia based on the existing official correspondent French Wikipedia Article . This author has created the following articles:

• List of active Squadrons of the French Air Force based on the French Wikipedia Article (French: Liste des Escadrons Actifs de l'Armée de l'Air Française). This author has also created each active squadron based on the official correspondent French Wikipedia Article which is listed in the main list as well. The listing of the French Wikipedia Article is for the proper Fluent French authority to authenticate the content of what this author has added. Such cannot be done by an individual who barely speaks a language.

• List of dissolved Squadrons of the French Air Force based on the French Wikipedia Article (French: Liste des Escadrons Dissous de l'Armée de l'Air Française). This author has also created each dissolved squadron based on the official correspondent French Wikipedia Article which is listed in the main list as well.

• List of Escadres of the French Air Force based on the French Wikipedia Article (French: Les Escadres de l'Armée de l'Air Française). This author has also created each Escadre ( which has no official translation to English) based on the official correspondent French Wikipedia Article which is listed in the main list as well.

This author has created French articles based on their official correspondent French Wikipedia Article.

Contributions to Escadron de Chasse "Ardennes"

This author has contributed only the addition following sections in 03.003 Fighter Squadron "Ardennes" based on the correspondent section in the French Wikipedia Article (French: Escadron de Chasse 3/3 Ardennes), and these include (not based on any website and the history of the article can be checked specifically to authenticate what this author has added):

• Translation of the motto to English (the motto of the squadron was not added by this author).
• Wikipedia File pictures under Gallery exported from the official correspondent French Wikipedia Article (French: Escadron de Chasse 3/3 Ardennes), section Photographies in the correspondent French article.
• The first section on The creation of the group translated from the official correspondent French Wikipedia Article (French: Escadron de Chasse 3/3 Ardennes), section La Naissance du Groupe in the correspondent French article.
• The section on Operational beginings translated from the official correspondent French Wikipedia Article (French: Escadron de Chasse 3/3 Ardennes), section Les Débuts Opérationnels in the correspondent French article.
• The section on Mascot translated from the French Wikipedia Article (French: Escadron de Chasse 3/3 Ardennes), section La mascotte: Aldo in the French article.

This author had the intention to develop the article based on the official correspondent French Wikipedia Article (French: Escadron de Chasse 3/3 Ardennes) exclusively and not from any claimed/suggested website.

This author does not create a French military article on the French Air Force on the English Wikipedia unless the article has a correspondent (identical) official French Wikipedia Article in order to authentic content. These are military articles which activity are the responsibility of Governments of these countries. This author is simply correcting content so that the English version of these articles match the official French Wikipedia article. Outside this claim, it is clear that any action suggested on this author would be incorrect and not related to the clearly stated above.(OJOM (talk) 03:28, 20 January 2018 (UTC)).

WP:PILLARS says "We strive for articles that document and explain major points of view, giving due weight with respect to their prominence in an impartial tone. We avoid advocacy and we characterize information and issues rather than debate them. In some areas there may be just one well-recognized point of view; in others, we describe multiple points of view, presenting each accurately and in context rather than as "the truth" or "the best view". All articles must strive for verifiable accuracy, citing reliable, authoritative sources, especially when the topic is controversial or is on living persons. Editors' personal experiences, interpretations, or opinions do not belong."

French official sources are not "the truth". Your articles *must* "strive for verifiable accuracy, citing reliable, authoritative sources, especially when the topic is controversial or is on living persons. Editors' personal experiences, interpretations, or opinions do not belong." I urge you to read and re-consider WP:PILLARS. Buckshot06 (talk) 03:39, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

The sections "History" and "Operational beginnings" are almost certainly copyright violations - very close paraphrasing, including a mistake about the identity of "No. 338 Wing USAAF" - from the aeroneufs site and thus the wing's semi-official history, translated into English. You inserted that material partially by [1] No, you didn't create it, you rewrote it, translating the text and infringing the copyright in the process. The article is likely to be deleted (because otherwise the copyright violation will remain in the page history, and Wikipedia could be sued by the authors of the semi-official history). Buckshot06 (talk) 03:39, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Do not wholescale try to translate French articles into English!! In doing so, the readability of the resulting article in English decreased by a great degree.Buckshot06 (talk) 03:44, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

French Air Force articles

This author has just made it very clear for you what/how are articles being created. This author will reiterate again to you that articles being created are done based on official correspondent French Wikipedia Articles ( you can check each French sentence to authenticate validity on this French article (French: Escadron de Chasse 3/3 Ardennes)) and dozens of others. Accordingly, if there is anything else you would like to add that is of importance in relation to hard work in creating French military articles, this author would be glad to hear your comments, assist you if needed and back-up any inquiry you may have. Thank you. (OJOM (talk) 03:56, 20 January 2018 (UTC)).

This author has been focused in creating accurate French military articles and has clearly stated the way work is being done. Accordingly, unless any of you have a long history with that, your arguments are very invalid when talking about language collaborating issues. This author has joined the Encyclopedia to educate readers on other languages and various histories that are note worthy, and mainly to add value. Accordingly, if you don't appreciate these contributions, don't mistake the will to help and clarify with the need to be here. If you feel the need to delete all the hard work on behalf of this author then by all means, go ahead as well; however quit listing your quibbles on this author's talk page specially when you haven't developed or added any constructive language material in relation to all this author's contributions. Thank you. (OJOM (talk) 04:23, 20 January 2018 (UTC)).

Thank you for your response to my concerns. You do not appear to believe in Wikipedia's fundamental rules about collaboration, copyright, WP:RELIABLE sources, nor concerns over your unsteady grasp of military English. These concerns are very long term, dating back to 2015 and earlier. As a result, I am now considering administrator action. I would urge you to consider changing your editing practices. Kind regards Buckshot06 (talk) 20:54, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Like this author mentioned to another author earlier; don't put words and actions on this author's behalf when you don't speak on my behalf. Wikipedia, the Encyclopedia first is volunteer writings based on legal and sound policies. Sure. However, It is obvious when other authors are only limited to one or two languages, they seem to assume that whatever applies to one language (English), would apply to the others. Well this is not applicable and is definitely inappropriate. Indeed, this is the English Wikipedia, however you are still tackling these articles based on one side. As explained earlier on French Maritime Force of Naval Aeronautics (French: Force maritime de l'aéronautique navale), which this author did add an entire REFERENCED section from (1910-1914) which was deleted incorrectly, so why don't you also consider investigating that delete on behalf of the other author which deleted an entire section. As explained earlier as well, these are French military articles that are referenced in French only, since just like the English language has exclusive references that don't exist in another language. Often also references in the French language are not available because it is common known history that wouldn't require a reference. However, this concept appears to be misunderstood by only English speaker, that tend to judge incorrectly what they are limited to understand. In addition, "Verifiability/Veracity" or (fr:Wikipédia:Vérifiabilité) would not apply to appropriate language portrayals translations. "Verifying" is the act of confirming a statement which has yet to be determined factual (Verifiability is the confirmation of a statement, in the case of an Encyclopedia, this would revolve around WP-Veracity Facts); portraying language content reciprocation is not related to the concept of "Verifiability/Veracity" WP-V (as in data portrayed is actually correct outside the usual normal fault typing intricacies). As explained also previously, when a French Wikipidia Article has only French references, the exact appropriate verifiable references are being added by this author to the English article if main content facts are correct, and when there are no references on French Encyclopedic Wikipedia, this is usually due (not on behalf of this author) to common knowledge around that Encyclopedic language's history.(OJOM (talk) 14:48, 19 February 2018 (UTC)).

(Note: the above paragraph starting with "Like...ending with...language's history" part of the talk page of this author has been re-edited twice during a block, the first time appropriately and the second time in response to another's author addition. First re-edit was to add tildes only without any sort of editing compromising contents; second re-edit was in response to additional "topic subject (fr:Wikipédia:Vérifiabilité)" added by another author in an inappropriate content section (could be unintentional on behalf of other author)).

Your articles are not accurate in English. They are a mix of English, French, and French terms translated literally into English, which makes them quite hard to read for people who do not understand French. I've given you two examples - formation and interarm - and there's also the repeated use of "Hunter" when WP:RELIABLE sources invariably translate 'Chasse' in this context as 'Fighter'. You also seem to be ignoring our WP:INTERWIKI arrangements. Referencing? The articles need to be properly referenced in English, and, also, on the French wikipedia (fr:Wikipédia:Vérifiabilité). The general standard is WP:BURDEN - the editor who inserts the text needs to be able to reference it. Now you've already been warned about WP:CONSENSUS and you seem not to be interested; and you've shrugged off a potential copyright violation. My sense is that you are WP:NOTHERE to better the encyclopedia, and, thus, I would again urge you to consider changing the way you edit (looking at some reliable English language sources on this kind of thing, Air International, Air Forces Monthly etc would show you how the French Air Force terms are portrayed in English). Now, I am trying to remain courteous and patient, but your insistence on ignoring a number of wikipedia rules is testing that. You need to give me a clear indication that you will, at the very least, seriously consider changing the way you edit. Regards Buckshot06 (talk) 08:37, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Addition

(Note: the section "Addition" has been added during the block because the other author is adding material later to former discussions which could attempt to compromise integrity of contents).

This author is confident that the French Encyclopedic Wikipedia has French experts properly editing there. In relation to the Enlgish Encyclopedic Wikipedia, and while it's normal to reminisce on a point, any point of view additions such as your "topic addition :(fr:Wikipédia:Vérifiabilité)" in former discussion sections should be added separately outside a previous former discussion in order not to compromise integrity of original contents. This author has re-edited the above section twice. The first time was to add tildes appropriately (not editing). In response, you added a section "topic addition :(fr:Wikipédia:Vérifiabilité)", accordingly, this author added a response to your inappropriate addition in the same section. Accordingly, kindly do not add additional arguments in former section discussion that could seem to compromise contents integrity. While on main topic, this author is adding verifiable facts in various Languages, so unless there are pertinent major factual "disruptive/false" data to adhere to, additional unnecessary cluster jargon types needs to quit.(OJOM (talk) 08:05, 21 February 2018 (UTC)).

Language translations of military units

This Author's numerous Content Articles language is clear and accurate as can be. Indeed, a lot of English/French colloquial are identical. Formation in English is the same writing and pronunciation in French, which is (French: Formation). Inter-arm in English (French: Interarmes). The French word "Chasse" is Hunter in English, the word "Fighter" in English is "Combatant" in French. The French Air Force officially designate their squadrons as "Escadron de Chasse" which translates to (Hunter Squadron) and not "Escadron Combatant" (which translates to Fighter Squadron) or Esacdron de Combat (more proper French). There must be a valid historical French reason for that which is in line with French history facts; in addition this author created squadrons of the French Air Force under List of Squadrons in English and not under List of Escadrons. Unit squadrons however are listed in the list under French designation "Escadron de Chasse" and while also some are included under "Fighter Squadron" (we (The we here is referring to editors on an article and not an authority) can consider this "Fighter Squadron" designation or mix of both French and English as an educational purpose so that readers can learn about the histories of the of these units and record their actual French designation of "Escadron de Chasse").

• However, the main point of this and sticking to official French Air Force echelons designation in the French language (Escadre, Escadron, Escadrille) along with their language respective unit designation as Escadron de Chasse or "Fighter Squadrons of the French Air Force" are concerned is the following : In a Joint Cultural War Memorial Heritage, while description and actions of another country's military unit can be described in the designated language of the respective country, the unit name designation is surely listed under the local unit language designation. For instance, if a La Fayette Escadrille Memorial Arch (by the way, "Lafayette" is a composite word and should be listed as "La Fayette") was to be enacted in an English speaking country, you would not translate that unit name to that country's language. La Fayette Escadrille is still designated as La Fayette Escadrille and not squad or flight Lafayette as you would like it to be translated. In addition, if An American military unit has a memorial in Europe, in France for instance, you may find the actions of that U.S. unit translated to the French language (possible or unlikely); but NOT the unit name or unit acronyms, the later will still read US.... Since your French is elementary, allow this author to enlighten your French knowledge in respect to official echelons of the French Air Force. All Escadres, active and dissolved Squadrons/Escadrons, Escadrille of the French Air Force have been formed and reformed several times across their history. During the course of that history, these units have their respective memorial heritages and these unit designations are in the French language under French designations, no matter where they are, similarly to what has been explained to you in this paragraph above.

(Note: the above section has been properly re-edited.)(OJOM (talk) 09:55, 22 March 2018 (UTC)).

To come back to your concerns. You are deviating from the main topic, as long as the Content of the Article is accurate with official French history, assumptions are secondary chapters. If you don't understand a language better than another author, there is really no need to argue offensively, simply take a seat and listen. You are not the only author that can remain courteous, respectful, patient and correct; those are the qualities of good respectful individuals (which this author absolutely agrees that you are a culturally respectful individual), but this author's insistence is on inter-language content portrayal and not necessary words and policy. The only clear consideration you will get from this author is to be correct vis-à-vis of a Culturally Educational Encyclopedia and respectful of others. Otherwise, these cluster allegations and jargons need to quit. Kindly, read the below carefully and make sure to understand that the Content in the Articles created by this Author are Accurate and in line with Encyclopedic Facts. Respectfully and Thank you. (OJOM (talk) 09:16, 21 January 2018 (UTC)).

Wikipedia is not an international war memorial, indeed we have a specific rule which says we are not a memorial WP:NOTMEMORIAL. We are also not required to comply with official terminology, instead we go with the common term in use, primarily in English WP:COMMONNAME. You yourself, as I've quoted from WP:PILLARS above, are not the authority: we go with the WP:RELIABLE sources in English.

I've just demonstrated this with the Space News link I've added to Joint Space Command: interviewed in English by a reputable media organisation, the French commander allowed the use of 'Joint Space Command' to go forward. As I know from previous experience, French military organisations usually decide on a authorised translation for their organisation in English; this is an example.

Policies are standards that all users should normally follow. The exception, WP:IAR, doesn't really apply in this case. Buckshot06 (talk) 18:41, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a Universal (All Languages) Cultural Educational Encyclopedia

Let's tackle your statements one at a time in a logical manner. Indeed, Wikipedia is not an International War Memorial, but Wikipedia is surely a Universal (All languages) Cultural Educational Encyclopedia that educates all forms of contributions. This author does agree that you are a cultivated individual. So accordingly, this author believes that you are worth the effort to be cordial with. Accordingly, and within a cultural aspect, War memorials can also be National Historic Sites of countries in other countries. For instance, such is the case of the Canadian National Vimy Memorial, which is actually located in France and is considered part of the National Historic Sites of Canada. That is an example of a Joint Cultural War Memorial Heritage site.(OJOM (talk) 09:12, 22 January 2018 (UTC)).

Distinguishing between an authority and an author within Language Articles and Content Application

To be clear, this author is not the authority on French military articles; however, this author has created and added Articles on French military units on the English Wikipedia, whose correct Content, which is in line with French history, can be authenticated by the respective authorities in concern.(OJOM (talk) 09:12, 22 January 2018 (UTC)).

The difference between Joint and Inter-arm

In the French language, the French word "Interarmes" (French: Interarmes) can be assimilated within content to Joint but depending on the topic. The proper translation of "Joint" is actually in French "Mixte". When you refer to a "Joint Operation", the constituents members of that operation (militarily speaking that is) could be part of the same military or different militaries working together in the same goal. The French word "Interarmes" can be used as Joint; however, "Interarmes" usually refers to internal units (as "Inter" short for "Interne" which means Internal - and arm); accordingly in the French language, "Interarmes" actually designates internal units which are part of the same organization working together in the same goal with an inter-operable capacity but has no reference of different militaries working together, as in "Joint". This is just for your proper reference of language; and good for them.(OJOM (talk) 09:12, 22 January 2018 (UTC)).

Air unit designations in French and English

To be also clear, this author does not disagree with you when referring to the echelons of the French Air Force (Escadre, Escadron, Escadrille or Wing, Squadron, Flight). They are both the same. Indeed, this is the English Wikipedia and a Fighter Squadron is the correct designation; however, this author is simply implying that if it was designated as an "Escadron de Chasse" (air unit), it is not wrong either from an inter-language perspective(OJOM (talk) 09:12, 22 January 2018 (UTC)).

In summary, this author thanks you for your diverse cultural understanding awareness. Respectfully (OJOM (talk) 09:12, 22 January 2018 (UTC)).

You need to give me a *clear indication* that you are seriously considering changing your editing practices. I've quoted WP:PILLARS to you about your personal views not being particularly relevant; as regards translation of technical military French, as I now say for about the fourth time, it depends on WP:RELIABLE sources, first of all in English. Your personal opinions about how to translate military French simply do not override the RELIABLE sources in English, especially when those sources are official French military statements or documents that show the way French military officials translate terms, unit titles, etc, in dealing with English-speaking armed forces, often the Americans.

I've received from both the copyright expert and another administrator general acquiescence with my approach to you, so be warned: further attempts to continue your French-lish translation practices into English, like I had to clean up after you at French Army, will result in administrator action. Do me a favour, stop editing for a while, and consider your position. Read some English sources, like Air Forces Monthly, Air International etc etc, that cover such French military issues. Not RAIDS, which starts from French anyway. You've done amazing and significant work on French military units, but if you persist in stopping people clearing up your translations, or making more of them, I will have to block you!! Buckshot06 (talk) 00:49, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Response to False/Incorrect Block & Fake Accusation within Content Application of Language Facts

Reference your limited comprehensive Administrator Encyclopedic Language status capacity and distorted judging vetting ability, that this author's English, is by far much more superior than your elementary French. Accordingly, be advised and warned, not to incorrectly lecture or block an Encyclopedic author for adding over a hundred Language based Encyclopedic Articles, specially when you didn't even create/add any of the Language based Encyclopedic Articles, nor command a better grammatical Encyclopedic Language (the facts) understanding and typing, let alone miracle back referencing, and disruptive editing as a reason for any sort of nonsense block, and that specially when your Linguistic elementary means are vetted within a limited to non-existent judging capacity. Simultaneously, this also applies as well to numerous other Encyclopedic Article Contributions on already existing Language based Encyclopedic Articles, which were not created/added by this author, and are as significant as the numerous Encyclopedic Article based Contributions created/added by this author. Judging limited singularities in a Language based Encyclopedic Article is simply not properly judging all forms of Language based Encyclopedic Article contributions. Accordingly, the topic at hand is not even closely related to the "translated versions of Encyclopedic military articles"; it is related to formed Language based Encyclopedic Articles, most of which, your seemingly distorted comprehensive Administrator status is under no able means to properly judge within limited applicable Encyclopedic Language references.

As a result, your distorted nonsense request of a "*clear in indication*" and your 30 day disruptive block are way out of line, bordering indications of *not applicable and very incorrect*.

(Note: the above section "Incorrect block" on behalf of this author has been added separately outside the main discussion later, due to primarily an incorrect block for the third time.)(OJOM (talk) 13:20, 21 February 2018 (UTC)).

(Note: The above section has been properly re-edited).(OJOM (talk) 09:40, 16 February 2020 (UTC)).

Clear Logical Statement with content Application of Language Facts

Check though the logic of the juxtapositions of your last statement sentence. You may do what you deem seen fit around your understanding and register of the "English/French" arena. However, each author has a respectful authority (could also be morals) and boundaries (could also be values), within which the author helps the Encyclopedia and constituents at the appropriate applicable capable paste, but don't even assume that they can be mixed under inappropriate clauses. Respectfully (OJOM (talk) 07:48, 23 January 2018 (UTC)).

Distorted Nonsense Reply to Statement on behalf of other author

Vous écrivez très mauvais anglais. Vous ne coopérez pas avec d'autres éditeurs. Vous ne semblez pas vouloir suivre les règles de Wikipédia. C'est ce que WP:NOTHERE signifie. N'utilisez pas de traductions littérales. Rien sur Wikipédia n'est "officiel". Arrêtez d'écrire ici jusqu'à ce que vous amélioriez votre anglais, s'il vous plaît. Pardon my imperfect French, please; we don't seem to be communicating properly in English. Buckshot06 (talk) 00:19, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

I've asked you, several times, to stop using garbled English. You've just done so again with this [2] diff: "Commandements" is simply NOT english. "Commandements" n'est pas correct anglais. Votre pauvre anglais a endommagé beaucoup de pages. Vous arrêtez fréquemment d'autres Wikipédiens réparant les dégâts. Faites-le une fois de plus et vous voulez être bloqué.

Your poor English has damaged many pages, impeding Wikipedia's efforts to educate. You revert attempts by others to fix these changes (adding WP:OWN to other problems, such as copyright infringement). Do this once more and you will be blocked. Buckshot06 (talk) 06:08, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

I told you to fix your English before you continued. You instead created an entirely new article, Maurice Schmitt, which had included within it a tense error about who was replaced in 1991 - Schmitt did not replace Admiral Lanxade, but was replaced by him. I now have no option but to block you for again damaging the encyclopedia. Regards Buckshot06 (talk) 04:58, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

I have blocked you for one month. You may appeal here, on this talkpage, to me or to another administrator should you wish. Kind regards Buckshot06 (talk) 05:01, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

January 2018 - Response to Third False/Incorrect Disruptive Block based on Invalid Justifications within Content Application of Language Facts

Response to Third False/Incorrect Block within Content Application of Language Facts

First of all, go fix your Cultural capacity and distorted judging ability. Be warned that the integrity of this Talk page and this author are not subject of an incorrect appeal in application within false blocks and fake accusations, specially when your Administrator status revolves around limited Language Facts capabilities.

Adding on, your request to appeal for this Third Incorrect Block (the third inappropriate block on this Talk page) which compromised the integrity of this Talk page and this author, is way out of line and border line disrespectful within content application of Language Facts, specially when your Linguistic Elementary means are vetted within a limited judging capacity.

This Talk page is not your property within incorrect blocks and fake accusations. Since your French language is elementary, this author won't even bother with translating your distorted French. However, be advised with all possible clarity, and make sure to understand again that this author's English, is by far much more superior than your elementary French for a Fact.

Now, on a separate note, this author will repeat for you:

Again, reference your comprehensive Administrator Language status capacity and judging ability, that this author's English language (regardless of the perception) is by far much more superior than your elementary French Language, so don't comment, lecture, or block the creator of a French based Encyclopedic Language Article when you did not create the Language Articles, nor command a better grammatical Language understanding and typing, let alone miracle back referencing, and disruptive editing as a reason for a block. Accordingly, your request of a "*clear in indication*" is way out of line, bordering indications of *not applicable, fake, incorrect and a block which has no valid justification within content*. (OJOM (talk) 12:44, 21 February 2018 (UTC)).

(Note: the above section "Response to Third False/Incorrect Block" on behalf of this author has been added separately outside the main discussion later, due to primarily an incorrect block for the third time.)(OJOM (talk) 13:20, 21 February 2018 (UTC)).

(Note: The above section has been properly re-edited).(OJOM (talk) 09:40, 16 February 2020 (UTC)).

Response to further Fake Disruptive Claims in relation to Third False/Incorrect Block Description within Content Application of Language Facts

Keep it going with Fake Disruptive Claims and Inappropriate Disrespectful Actions. This author's integrity is not subject to reasoning within Fake False Claims, nor does the English language of this author require evaluation. You want to block a respectful author because you seem to can; that 's fine (blocking an author for portraying correct (honest) French content on the English Wikipedia is far from being "a tense error"); nevertheless, be advised :

DO NOT MAKE FALSE AND FAKE CLAIMS ABOUT THIS AUTHOR'S INTENTION ON YOUR REASONS OF BLOCK APPLICATION LEADING TO THE COMPROMISE OF THIS AUHTOR'S INTEGRITY:

FALSE AND FAKE CLAIM

<"Disruptive" editing: "refusal" to improve "Franglish articles", refusal to cooperate with other editors">

let's tackle your False, Fake and Incorrect Description Statement which resulted in a third false/incorrect block application, one sentence at a time. Refusing to improve Franglish articles, This author has created dozens of French content articles on the English Wikipedia, so refusing to improve an article that this author has created in the first place is an understatement (a contradictory juxtaposition) in terms of refusing to improve "Franglish articles". An author cannot refuse to improve "Franglish" content in an article, when the same author is the one that created the article in the first place based on official correspondent Wikipedia Encyclopedic Articles, for those that are applicable. "Refusal to cooperate with other editors", this author doesn't refuse anything within what's logical, since this author has created numerous content French articles, that were not created by experienced English Linguistic editors previously, this author cannot cooperate with other Language Limited Authors, which is normal and it's not their fault as this author has never blocked an author before in an inappropriate manner. Now as far as your respectful Administrator authority is concerned, this author agrees that you are a respectful individual, with that, you went on blaming this author of copyrighting violation material from a website on an Encyclopedic Article (Escadron de Chasse 3/3 "Ardennes" or 03.003 Fighter Squadron "Ardennes") which has been unjustifiably deleted, when this author Clearly stated to you the intentions of how the English Encyclopedic Article was being developed and that based ONLY on the official correspondent French Encyclopedic Article (French: Escadron de Chasse 3/3 Ardennes) (NOT ANY WEBSITE), in this case, as you claimed incorrectly. With that, this author also asserted to you that you are a cultivated person (this author is not being sarcastic) based on your sound quality ability to judge quality; accordingly, you awarded an Original Barnstar to this author on July 29 2015 - User_talk:OJOM#A barnstar for you! - (barnstar award), nevertheless, with that and after all the above clearly stated, you still as an Administrator proceeded with inappropriately and incorrectly blocking this author for the time period.

Allow this author to confirm to you with all due respect and with the confirmation that you are a cultivated individual (since this author has already determined that you are), that no self-respected author (this author) that believes in integrity would agree to cooperate with such juxtapositions nor would agree to have his integrity handicapped or compromised by false and incorrect statements.

Blocking is an entire different entity all together but DO NOT IMPLICATE FALSE STATEMENTS ATTEMPTING TO COMPROMISE INTEGRITY. You want to block, go ahead, however; mention your own reasons (and you will find none within facts except your own interests and designs, so inciting WP:OWN is not applicable nor justified within rightly exporting just causalities (as in disruptive/"dishonest" claims : "dishonest" is not applicable to language grammar fault intricacies , punctuation, normal typing errors, etc...), based on correct claims.

To cooperate the following language register. Not all authors are respectful, let alone, not all authors have self-respect either for themselves or others. So if you have blocked other authors before and have a history of doing that properly and logically with authors that have no self-respect for themselves nor any respect for you; this doesn't mean and don't even assume that a self-respected author that has respect for you will allow you to compromise integrity with false statements.

This author is not an Administrator, nor does this author have the authority to block anyone, and make sure to register your Administrative authority, that if this author had a blocking authority, this author would NEVER use the block application on anyone (as long as honest facts are being stated that is). In addition, make sure to understand, that this author is a firm believer in fair respectful reciprocation responses, as long as it's justified. However, you are a respectful Administrator who this author respects. However, ASIDE THE BLOCK, you are not allowed, nor does your Administrative authority have the right to handicap the integrity of an author or the nature of content contributions, which are Educational, Beneficiary and Correct (honest), specially when you do not speak on behalf of this author, let alone fabricate false and fake disruptive incorrect statements as reasons for a block.

More importantly within language translations, your block application (the third one on this Talk Page), just like the previous two false/incorrect ones (not on your behalf of course while you were too busy awarding an Original Barnstar accompanied by a grammatically wrong French) are still false, fake and incorrect. With all due respect to your Administrator status which this author respects. Block all you want with your respective authority and boundaries, but don't even assume they can be mixed with integrity clauses. Respectfully and Kind Regards.(OJOM (talk) 07:16, 25 January 2018 (UTC)).

You have complained above that I should not "lecture or block the creator of a French based article when you did not create the article nor command a better grammatical language understanding and typing". This is the *English* wikipedia. You are writing distorted, partially comprehensible English that is not grammatical in many places, and is filled with direct literal translations from French to English that distort the ability of English-speakers to understand. Other wikipedians have to follow you around and correct these passages!! An example is your sentence 'mixed with integrity clauses' above. I think you may mean that I am inappropriately insulting your integrity, but I cannot be sure!!

A French wikipedia article can have literally nothing to do with an En:wiki article, except as a source of WP:References. An article's creator has no special rights - read WP:OWN.

Your block expires in about four days. I expect you to carefully go and fix your partially comprehensible English, not add over-complimentary descriptions of the Légion étrangère, not to link French articles directly in the text of English wikipedia articles (use the WP:INTERWIKI links only), add WP:REFERENCEs, and to follow all the rules and policies. Buckshot06 (talk) 18:10, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your subtle response and comment. This author is adding Factual Encyclopedic Data, which are comprehensible to Language Facts in several Languages. Each author can mind his own contributions based on capability. This author has already determined that you are a cultivated author that is worth the effort, so accordingly, this author cannot consider that you are insulting integrity. However, in light of integrity, there are limits. This author is only interested in portraying Encyclopedic Facts, and Factual Data are irrespective of a Language:Wiki. This author's English is sound enough to be very comprehensible. This author's intentions on this Encyclopedia has not changed and you can expect, regardless of Language concept ability comprehension, that this author will continue to assume good faith, assume a rightly correct fair conduct behavior, and portray sound Encyclopedic Facts as usual. Respectfully and King Regards.(OJOM (talk) 19:39, 21 February 2018 (UTC)).

You may not fully understand. You must comply with wikipedia's WP:POLICY, including WP:ARTICLE and WP:OWN, as well as all the others, including adherence to U.S. copyright law. The factual data *must* follow the rules of the site it is hosted upon. WP:POV representations, including favourable depictions of French military units, are not what we are here for. Comply with these policies, and things will be fine. Otherwise administrator action will follow. Buckshot06 (talk) 01:39, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

This author is clear as can be and does follow the rules fully. This author will reiterate and repeat: this author's English language is far more advanced than your elementary French language, including your elementary capability of sourcing, verifying and inputting correct French data based on policies WP:POLICY, WP:ARTICLE and WP:OWN, as in Encyclopedic Facts (Wikipedia). "Each author can mind his own contributions based on capability", meaning that this author does not own any Wikipedia article. However, be advised again with all possible clarity, that the contributions of French Encyclopedic Facts which are created by this author's "own will", are based on Cultural Languages Capacities, so make sure to understand the ENGLISH written here. It is not even closely related to any WP policy violations. It seems that when proper work is done by an author whose English Linguistic capabilities is far more superior than an other author's French language in this case, instead of being grateful for contributions and remaining thankful and cordial for these contributions, the fake false/incorrect responses come in as "You must comply with wikipedia's WP:POLICY, including WP:ARTICLE and WP:OWN"; when the subject matter concept here is not even related to any WP violation. You and the other two incorrect authors that have blocked this page twice incorrectly before, label this author's contributions as violating policy because you seem to can as administrators, but that does not mean that you are right in your action or even closely justified with your administrative authority; specially when topics involve a Language which you do not completely understand in full nor speak.

Now, make sure you understand the below clearly in your "own contributing" Cultural Language capability capacity :

These unjustified, fake and false/incorrect block allegations need to stop and should be undone. This author is mindful of your French speaking and has determined that you are a cultivated individual, so proper efforts are being exerted to be Correct, Polite and Fair with your Administrative authority, but that does not mean that this author still agrees with your disruptive blocks (which has violated this author's integrity in full) and accordingly respectfully, this author cannot completely agree with you after such inappropriate action by principle, specially when you did not even apologize and you probably won't since you still "cannot be sure !!".

However, make sure to cooperate this Language Reference Register: this author is mindful and will not to mix still your improper actions (incorrect block) with how culturally you are perceived as an educated and respectful individual. Accordingly, next time, when your Administrator authority deletes Encyclopedic Languages Facts which will be contributed and created by this author, at least have the proper reciprocal courtesy behavior to delete historical factual contributions while this author is not blocked; by doing so, you also violated the integrity of this author for a second time after your false/incorrect block. Such conduct is unacceptable, specially when it comes from a respectful administrator, who would not do that.

This author will repeat : Not all authors are respectful, let alone, not all authors have self-respect either for themselves or others. So if you have blocked other authors before and have a history of doing that properly and logically with authors that have no self-respect for themselves nor any respect for you; this doesn't mean and don't even assume that a self-respected author that has respect for you will allow you to compromise integrity with false statements. A respectful author is always mindful of all applicable policies and laws first, specially when dealing with respectful encyclopedic contributors.(OJOM (talk) 08:14, 22 February 2018 (UTC)).

Hi OJOM. You do not appear to have listen to me or any of the other editors who have attempted to reason with you on your talkpage. If the last twelve hours, you've not only added near-incomprehensible French to several pages but have created new pages - even with incorrect English in the *title* (1st Strategic Missiles Groupment). Vaguely correct English for this unit would be more like 1st Strategic Missile Group. You show no comprehension that you are not writing correct English, and have no seeming interest in dialogue or WP's rules. I had considered blocking you for a year, but on second thought, I am about to block you indefinitely for damaging the encyclopedia and WP:DISRUPTIVE editing. You may appeal on this talkpage, for a couple of months or so, or if another admin sees fit to restore your right to edit elsewhere. Buckshot06 (talk) 20:04, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

(Note: The above section has been properly re-edited).(OJOM (talk) 09:40, 16 February 2020 (UTC)).

February 2018 - Response to Fourth False/Incorrect Disruptive Block & Fake Accusations based on Invalid Justifications within Content Application of Language Facts

Thank you for your subtle and polite response.

When attempting to compromise integrity with Fake and False Accusation Statements, take notice of Fair Responses. Encyclopedic Languages Facts are not the subject disposition of amusement. Your statements including this last one :

<"Disruptive editing; edit warring, refusal to cooperate with other editors who try to improve his FRanglish. Repeated creation of barely comprehensible articles"> are Fake, Unjustified and False/Incorrect within Content Application.

Mind your Language Translations - the "Title" is a very correct English, apparently your elementary French and inappropriate English needs rectifying and straightening:

• Be advised, a "Groupment" (French: Groupement) by definition in both the English and French languages is a cluster group/s arrangement of various groups (plural) or a group (singular) in form of a sequential series. Accordingly, in reference referral to "Arrangement" (French: Arrangement), spelled the same in both the English and French languages, your classification of "vague" and suggestion of "Group" exclusively is not correct nor even applicable.

In addition and more importantly, while sticking to the facts at hand, concluding judgment based on false claims of appropriation is simply not correct. To be clear, this author is not inputting facts that are not sourced. Instead, this author is inputting facts based on already cultural existing Language facts.

There is a fine distinct line here which seems to confuse your capability of judging properly. Adding Languages Facts that are not sourced is simply not inputting already existing sourced Language Facts in other Languages.

Accordingly, your statement assumptions are all False/Incorrect, Fake and Unjustified, border line compromising integrity.

This author is inputting already existing sourced facts of other Languages, some Languages which you do not speak and others where your stance is elementary. Accordingly, your are applying Administrative authority (claiming "disruptive" - topic not applicable, claiming "damaging the encyclopedia" - this author contributes Fact to the Encyclopedia - claiming "WP:DISRUPTIVE editing" - topic not applicable) on work (Facts) which you have not portrayed, developed nor even contributed to, let alone comprehend within an elementary stance.

Such assumptions are very incorrect and unjustified. This is not your talk page, so your statement "you may appeal", specially when you are false/incorrect and insinuating fake accusations, does not apply. Do not implicate the integrity and lack of Languages (not their fault of course) of other Respectful Administrators in unjustifiable, fake and false incorrect blocks. You may block all you want while attempting to mislead with fake accusations, but that does not mean you are right or are even close to be correct or justified, let alone have the right to compromise integrity with false claims as a reason for a further disruptive block. Respectfully and Kind Regards.(OJOM (talk) 15:16, 26 February 2018 (UTC)).

(Note: The above section has been properly re-edited).(OJOM (talk) 09:40, 16 February 2020 (UTC)).

2018 Encyclopedic Straightening of an Elementary 2015 Request Appreciation Award within Content Application of Language Facts

This author would like to thank you for your gesture in 2015 User_talk:OJOM#A barnstar for you! (barnstar award) in relation to this author's contributions of French military history Encyclopedic Articles. However, just out of integrity on this talk page (this is one page) and this author while being correct, this author does not appreciate being incorrectly blocked for 30 days on January 25 2018 (for the third time), then incorrectly re-blocked again on February 25 2018 (for a fourth time), resulting in a further disruptive indefinite block, all based on False and Fake Claims. Going from "Thank you very much in 2015" (with an exclamation mark), then after three years of contributions and all of a sudden for Unknown, Invalid, Fake and False reasons and accusations, adopting and claiming "disruptive claims/blocks/ false reasons of blocks" is not proper. In addition, this is the English Wikipedia, so next time you award this author a barnstar, state your next award statement in the English language so that English Speakers (including Respectful Administrators) don't get confused on how well this author did cooperate with your "FRanglish" appreciation request since 2015 in terms of Encyclopedic Articles contributed (sticking with the Facts).(OJOM (talk) 14:17, 3 March 2018 (UTC)).

This author will still not decline your barnstar, since this author has determined that your are a cultivated individual that is worth the effort (this author is very mindful not to incorrectly judge and mix inappropriate chapters). However, on a more subtle note, next time you award a barnstar to this author, and for your proper reference of French language (in your second statement after the "." your grammar and content spelling was content disruptive, except the "Thank you very much" part which was part of the your first statement and was missing a "le"); accordingly, stick with your own Language and be authentic in your contribution thanking gesture award next time.(OJOM (talk) 14:17, 3 March 2018 (UTC)).

Accordingly, next time you award a barnstar, either write your statement all in the English language or write your statement all in the French language. Don't improperly mix them up like you did in this so called ("FRanglish").(OJOM (talk) 14:17, 3 March 2018 (UTC)).

Your full statement in French:

"Merci beaucoup pour commencer avec 6th Foreign Engineer Regiment. Il est bon d'avoir plus l'histoire militaire française sur En:Wiki"; translation of your full "FRanglish" statement into English:

"Thank you very much for starting with 6th Foreign Engineer Regiment. It is good have more french military history on English Wikipedia (En:Wiki)".(OJOM (talk) 14:17, 3 March 2018 (UTC)).

In the first part of your French statement while thanking very much this author; you are missing:

a "le" (refers to "the"), it should read "le" 6th Foreign Engineer Regiment, but then when evoking "le", you should spell the regiment in French, and accordingly it would read "le 6^e Régiment Étranger de Génie".(OJOM (talk) 14:17, 3 March 2018 (UTC)).

In the second part of your French statement after you thanked this author very much; it is not:

"Il est ("est" means "is" referring to the present, wrong grammar, should be "serait" as invoking future creations) bon d'avoir plus l'histoire militaire française". In proper French:

"Il serait ("serait" would invoke "would be", as in future created French military based) bon d'avoir plus d' histoire (accompanied with a "d' apostrophe " and not an "l'" apostrophe) militaire Française sur les différentes armes de la France").(OJOM (talk) 14:17, 3 March 2018 (UTC)).

"française" (should be spelled with a capital "F" as in "Française".(OJOM (talk) 14:17, 3 March 2018 (UTC)).

The proper (English language translation for this statement for your proper English reference is: "It would be good to have more French military history on the various and different arms of France").(OJOM (talk) 14:17, 3 March 2018 (UTC)).

So accordingly, next time, and in the English language along with the proper French acronyms (not FRanglish as mixed in your statement) on the Encyclopedia, your corrected award statement should read in full in the English language ("not FRanglish") :

"Thank you very much for starting with the 6th Foreign Engineer Regiment 6^e REG. It would be good to have more French military history on the various and different arms of France". Otherwise, write it all in the French language properly and it would read this : "Merci beaucoup pour commencer avec "le" 6^e Régiment Étranger de Génie 6^e REG. Il "serait" bon d'avoir plus "d" histoire militaire Française sur les différentes armes de la France".(OJOM (talk) 14:17, 3 March 2018 (UTC)).

So, next time, when French military based Encyclopedic Articles are being created in accordance with your "FRanglish" appreciation request, don't lecture or even comment this author about writings or references (let alone mention disruptive as a reasons for inappropriate blocks), when you can't even put together two basic simple French sentences, which consisted in both of your statement of 3 grammar faults along with very disruptive meaning of content. As stated, this author's English language may not be perfect, but it is good enough to input the facts and is far more superior than your French language for a fact. Your referral of "cleaning up" on French military articles after this author is actually the last easy work on articles contributed by this author. Out of just fairness, not to say that your "cleaning up" (work) efforts of French military articles are not appreciated, but that's after the main work was added on behalf of this author. Respectfully and Kind Regards.(OJOM (talk) 14:17, 3 March 2018 (UTC)).

(Section Note 1): the Encyclopedic Article 6th Foreign Engineer Regiment 6^e REG (French: 6^e Régiment Étranger de Génie), an Encyclopedic Article not any different than all the French military history Encyclopedic Articles contributions added on behalf of this author. Respectfully and Kind Regards.(OJOM (talk) 14:17, 3 March 2018 (UTC)).)

(Section Note 2): Within the same category of French military history encyclopedic contributions, this author has added the History of the 2nd Foreign Regiment, and that based on the correspondent French Encyclopedic Article (French: Histoire du 2^e Régiment Étranger), an Encyclopedic Article which your administrator status deleted under false pretext assumption of : "History of the 2nd Foreign Regiment (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement: Partial copyvio via translation of French page www.legionetrangere.fr/index.php/component/content/article/79-infos-fsale/808-histoire-decembre-1959-bataille-du-djebel-beni-smir?Itemid=531", "pretext assumptions" being not applicable, incorrect and false. As clearly stated, the Encyclopedic Article of "History of the 2nd Foreign Regiment", which was added by this author; and was deleted incorrectly by your administrator status; has for reference the following Encyclopedic Article, French Encyclopedic Article (French: Histoire du 2^e Régiment Etranger). Accordingly, unlike this author, if you cannot translate a French Encyclopedic Article in full and correctly without any grammar mistakes from the French Encyclopedic Article due to elementary reasons, at least and just like the above, remain thankful for contributions; however, do not delete translated articles under the pretext of incorrect assumptions while claiming "copyright infringement/incorrect claims" and referral to incorrect "copyvio via translation of French page/incorrect claim" simply because of the obvious elementary reasons. It is proper translation of official correspondent French Encyclopedic Language Article (when applicable). These section notes are being duly added out of fair reciprocation responses.(OJOM (talk) 08:11, 25 March 2018 (UTC)).)

(Note: The above section has been properly re-edited).(OJOM (talk) 09:40, 16 February 2020 (UTC)).

Concluding proper Judgment exclusively within Content Application and based on Encyclopedic Language Facts

In a first phase, make sure to reference your limited comprehensive Administrator Encyclopedic Language status capacity and distorted judging ability, that this author is not interested to be unblocked for inappropriate fake accusations and blocks compromising integrity. In a second phase, and in light of compromising the integrity of this author, while your Administrative status hasn't even apologized and probably won't, because your elementary Language stance still cannot be sure, make sure to take notice of fair responses, as this author believes in firm fair acts of reciprocation as long as it's justified. In a third phase, this author has created at least 134 Language based Encyclopedic Articles (including also numerous other contributions on already existing Language Articles) over several years. Out of the 134 (spelled one hundred and thirty-four in the English language for your reference) and numerous other contributions on already existing Language based Encyclopedic Articles :

• (1) Encyclopedic Language Article, the 6th Foreign Engineer Regiment, an Encyclopedic Language Article which was created and developed based on the correspondent French Encyclopedic Article (French: 6^e Régiment Étranger de Génie), part of the 134 Language Articles contributed by this author, was awarded a User_talk:OJOM#A barnstar for you! (barnstar award) by your Administrative status. In the process, your Administrative status thanked this author very much and requested to have more Language Articles be created and developed.

• (1) Encyclopedic Language Article, the EC 3/3 Ardennes, an Encyclopedic Language Article which was developed (not created) based on the correspondent French Encyclopedic Article (French: Escadron de Chasse 3/3 Ardennes), not part of the 134 Language Articles (this author had not created the Article on the English Wikipedia), was deleted by your Administrator status as this author was developing the undeveloped Language Article based also again and normally on the French Encyclopedic Article. For a fact, in the process, your Administrative status wrongly accused this author of copying material from a website which was not the case, since the Language Article was being developed based exclusively on the official correspondent French Encyclopedic Article. In addition, for a Fact also, your Administrator status applied falsely speedy deletion nomination to a Language Article that was being developed correctly based on how your Administrator status capability was able to award earlier a (barnstar award) in 2015, on a similar context created Language Article, based exclusively on the official correspondent French Encyclopedic Article. Accordingly, awarding and thanking very much (1) Language Article and falsely deleting another Language Article is clear evidence of a conflicting, two sided, juxtaposition behavior, which mainly insinuated unclear motives.

• (1) Encyclopedic Language Article, the History of the 2nd Foreign Regiment, an Encyclopedic Language Article which was created and developed based on the correspondent French Encyclopedic Article (French: Histoire du 2^e Régiment Étranger), should have been part of the 134 Language Articles making it 135 Language Articles contributed by this author. In the process after the Language Article was fully created and developed by this author; your Administrator status deleted the entire Language Article based on Fake and False accusations insinuating again copying material from a website which was not the case again since the Language Article was being created and developed based exclusively on the official correspondent French Encyclopedic Article. Similarly, awarding and thanking very much (1) Language Article and falsely deleting another Language Article is clear evidence of a conflicting, two sided, juxtaposition behavior, which mainly insinuated unclear motives.

• For a Fact in application with the case at hand, your Administrator status on this case application is that of the English language on the Encyclopedia accompanied by an elementary French language capability. Your Administrator status (even if your Administrator status has a repertory of other Languages) can apply only in this case, administrative procedure to fully exclusively created English Language Articles while maybe, and really only rightly commenting elementarily on translated works revolving around Language Articles. However, under no circumstance is your Administrator status in line to handle the authenticity and capacity of judging fully translated Language Articles when you can't even put together the basics, and that as far as Languages where your Administrator status is elementary and other Languages where your status is non-existent. Similarly and more seriously, another major indication of your incapacity to judge correctly is your lack of understanding between: "unreferenced exclusively created English Language Articles and mostly referenced Language Articles which are created and developed based on sourced facts in the respective applicable Language, some which your stance is elementary and others which you don't speak, let alone have the vetting authority to administer judging within a limited and incapacitated mean".

• For a Fact, in the process of the above clear line of work, your Administrative status blocked this author's contributions for 30 days on January 25 2018 (for the third time on this talk page), then incorrectly re-blocked again on February 25 2018 (for a fourth time), resulting in a further disruptive indefinite block. All your nonsense Administrative blocks, within applicable means, are distorted and based on False and Fake accusations. Such is clear evidence of absolute inconsideration to respectful contributions and is another indication of unclear motives.

• For a Fact, your Administrator status didn't even consider fairly judging, All Article Contributions - (Judging singularities in a Language Article is simply NOT properly Judging All Forms of Language Article Contributions), as in all the initial Article Contributions added by this author, and also all the other Article Contributions not initially added by this author, which are as significant as the Language Articles added by this author. Such is clear evidence of absolute inconsideration to respectful contributions and is another indication of unclear motives.

• For a Fact, your Administrator status didn't even consider fairly judging, the numerous contributions on existing Encyclopedic Language Articles (which were also not created by this author) as well, that are as significant as the various Language Articles created/added by this author. Such is clear evidence of absolute inconsideration to respectful contributions and is another indication of unclear motives.

• For a Fact, your Administrator status didn't even consider fairly judging, the right of this author to retain at minimum the editing rights to edit at least the 134 Language Articles added by this author (assuming you were right, which you are not) before incorrectly administering two false blocks and fake accusations, specially that your Administrator status is governed by a limited to non-existent version of applicable Language capacities. Such is another clear evidence of absolute inconsideration to respectful contributions and is another indication of unclear motives.

Given the Content Application of Language Facts and clear evidences at hand, this author while rightly preserving integrity, firmly believes after being indefinitely blocked for the time period, that the distorted judging ability and elementary handling capacity of your Administrative Status and that of third parties, colluding similar nonsense behavior, are the nature of Disruptive, Fake and False/Incorrect means. Accordingly, your Administrator status (including colluding third parties) may retain whatever applicable policy and authority that is deemed seen fit around your limited arena; however:

Be advised, that this Talk page and this author are not the subject of an appeal nor is the above an appeal. Be warned, with all possible clarity, that the above is a statement to not Add Incorrect, Inappropriate, Unjustifiable and Fake Comments/Accusations, as your response/s (including colluding third parties) on this Talk page and to this author, will not be welcomed anymore within a cordial stance, all due to your limited disruptive handling of a clear Encyclopedic Factual Case, until straightening your attitude and apologizing, which you probably won't, since you still cannot be sure within limited Encyclopedic Linguistic means and further distorted judging vetting abilities and capacities. Again, in light of compromising the integrity of a respectful and correct Encyclopedic author, take clear notice of fair response acts of reciprocation.(OJOM (talk) 13:26, 19 November 2018 (UTC)).

(Note: The above section has been properly re-edited).(OJOM (talk) 09:40, 16 February 2020 (UTC)).

Separate Distorted Nonsense Reply Responses within Content Application of a Fourth False/Incorrect Indefinite Block & Fake Accusations

• Sorry, but Buckshot06's comments about your English are in fact correct. If you wish to be unblocked, please see Wikipedia:Appealing a block. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 15:19, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Going from ("Thank you very much") in 2015 to ("blocks for disruptive claim/fake claims/lack of cooperation in contributions") in 2018 is not related to English, specially when coming from an Administrator. So don't mix chapters and twist subjects. This is just to be fair in replying to your comment and do not get involved in a logical topic discussion which you are not part of either. In addition, this author does not agree with your Incorrect statement, let alone wish to be unblocked for inappropriate fake accusations assumed by others attempting to compromise integrity. As long as Incorrect/False blocks and Fake accusations will persist, and out of integrity for this Talk page and this author, do not add Incorrect, Inappropriate and Unjustifiable Comments. Thank you.(OJOM (talk) 15:41, 26 February 2018 (UTC)).

• Well, this block is indefinite. And I knew I remembered your name and your style; the section above titled User_talk:OJOM#Note is evidence that nothing has changed in four years: I say this for the benefit of any admin who is asked to come here to evaluate a possible unblock request. Drmies (talk) 17:39, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Again, this author does not agree with your Incorrect statement, let alone wish to be unblocked for Unjustifiable, Fake and False accusations assumed attempting to compromise integrity. As long as Incorrect/False blocks and Fake accusations will persist, and out of integrity for this Talk page and this author, do not add Incorrect, Inappropriate and Unjustifiable Comments.(OJOM (talk) 07:23, 27 February 2018 (UTC)).

It's ironic that you claim integrity for this page OJOM, considering you have been sanitising it for years. YSSYguy (talk) 23:01, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Contributing Encyclopedic Facts are not the subject of mocking sanitizations. This talk page and this author's integrity are also not subject to inappropriate, incorrect and unjustifiable comments. Don't mix chapters and twist subjects. This block is not related to you so don't comment, reply or sugar coat topics which do not concern your respectful status or get involved in hampering the logic of the above discussion. This author doesn't have any issue with any of the authors on the Encyclopedia, since this author would not rightfully assume or judge any respectful author based on contributing facts on the Encyclopedia (sticking mainly and on point with the facts); but under no circumstance, will this author accept to be judged incorrectly based on any improper behavior on behalf of any author. Accordingly, your statement above is not ironic and make sure to understand that this author is not interested to be unblocked for Unjustifiable, False and Fake blocks and accusations. Hence, stop adding Incorrect comments based on Unjustified behavior. Thank you.(OJOM (talk) 09:50, 28 February 2018 (UTC)).

(Note: The above section has been properly re-edited).(OJOM (talk) 09:40, 16 February 2020 (UTC)).

Languages & Cultural Themes

Mistranslated Encyclopedic Articles needing Attention

The following articles were created by OJOM (talk · contribs) and are likely all machine translations that should be tagged {{rough translation}} and examined for how best to proceed with them. Mathglot (talk) 03:04, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Content moved to Wikipedia:Pages needing translation into English/Articles by user/OJOM. Mathglot (talk) 06:25, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

(Section Note 1: this author has also developed extensive work content (Language Facts) on numerous existing Encyclopedic Language Articles (which were also not created by this author) as well, that are as significant as the various Encyclopedic Articles articles created/added by this author).(OJOM (talk) 09:00, 15 November 2018 (UTC)).

(Note: The above section has been properly re-edited).(OJOM (talk) 09:40, 16 February 2020 (UTC)).

Proper Cultural Languages translations of Encyclopedic Articles based on Factual Applicability

Mathglot, thank you for your comment. Most French Language based Encyclopedic Articles created/added by this author on the English Wikipedia, have correspondent French Encyclopedic Language Articles on the French Wikipedia, as you correctly stated for the most part in labeling "the initial language of this Encyclopedic Article was French" in your classification of PNT-style list of articles created by User:OJOM in alpha order. However, not all Encyclopedic Articles created by this author were based on the French language only, or even have another Encyclopedic Language correspondent Article; therefore, stating "are likely all" and labeling "the initial Language of this Encyclopedic Language Article was French on all PNT-style list of articles created by User:OJOM in alpha order is not correct nor even applicable. As a matter of fact, these pages do not need any work or translation to the English language, as they have already been properly worked to fit a factual appropriate English (along with the respective correct facts) from various other Languages. Thank you.(OJOM (talk) 10:29, 24 May 2018 (UTC)).

Thanks for your reply (although please see WP:TALK and WP:THREAD about how to respond to talk page comments). Labeling them all as "initial language was French" was simply an initial, default position, since I hadn't examined every one of them. Wikipedia being a wiki, they can be updated to make them more accurate, and I would be happy to do so. If you can list the ones that are not from French below, and what language they are translated from, I will be happy to update the project page.

Should you wish to reply, please add your comments in this section rather than a new one, applying WP:THREAD and WP:INDENT. If the list is very long, feel free to collapse it. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 11:39, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Many thanks for your prompt clarifications, which are highly appreciated. In general, world languages are usually in line with their respective cultural countries. Nevertheless, this author would like to thank you very much for such a respectful, professional and courteous reply. Thank you and Kind Regards.(OJOM (talk) 12:46, 24 May 2018 (UTC)).