Open main menu
G'day. If you have got something to say, pull up a pew and say it (but please be civil).


photograph of the editor as a young man
Informal portrait of the editor as a young man



Contents

The Bugle: Issue CLX, August 2019Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:41, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Can we cooperate?Edit

P, your comments here suggest that you don't understand me. So let's talk; privately if you prefer, by email. Also, please join the discussion Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Capital_letters#Revisiting_this_discussion_(Campaign_vs._campaign) and let me know if there are any articles where you think my downcasing was a mistake; thanks for your support on some of these. Dicklyon (talk) 04:50, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

G'day Dicklyon, I consider you are using ngrams to make mass changes without looking at the specific sources used in articles, which is how I consider such things should be determined. I see no evidence you have been looking at specific sources when proposing or making moves. I consider ngrams useless for the purpose of determining such matters, and believe it is tendentious behaviour to push a particular decapitalisation agenda based solely on ngrams. So frankly, I have more productive things to do than quibble over capitalisation on disparate articles I know nothing about. I'd rather write content or review the content created by others. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:59, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
I do look at both the cited sources and book-search sources in addition to n-grams. But it's a lot harder to post a link summarizing such looks; see some specific examples in the RM at Talk:Waterloo campaign. My editing is generally about moving toward conformance with our MOS, which is a lot more than capitalization. But please do let me know if you any place where the sources seem to be contrary to what I've done. And note that on the campaigns I've been working case-by-case, just as you suggested, not "mass" moves the way I did with some cases that were well settled and not source dependent, like the thousands of MOS:JR changes. Dicklyon (talk) 20:37, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
Don't get me wrong, I accept that there is a legitimate purpose involved here (although the MOS isn't always clear), but I am of the view that centralised discussion isn't the way to deal with it, as the sources may indicate a different answer for each article, and individual RMs are required. I am also only slightly interested in this capitalisation discussion, as I don't think it is really important to the encyclopaedia, so I'm not interested in digging into the individual article sources to inform the discussion unless it relates to an article on my watchlist. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:35, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

CrusadesEdit

Hi Peacemaker67

Many thanks for your in depath response to this FAC, I think I have finally covered your points so can you give it another look over please? Norfolkbigfish (talk) 12:28, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Sure, I'll try to get to it over the coming weekend. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:19, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Backlog BanzaiEdit

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

Return to the user page of "Peacemaker67".