User talk:Dogface

This user may have left Wikipedia. Dogface has not edited Wikipedia since 17 September 2022. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Here are some useful links in case you haven't already found them:

• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Tip: you can sign your name with ~~~~

Dori 16:06, Nov 21, 2003 (UTC)

Hi Dogface.

First, one of the Orthodox Church's primary objectives is to Preserve Traditions, not throw them away. Let me remind you that the concept of Tradition with a big or little "T" is pure Roman Catholic Vatican 2 mumbo jumbo and has nothing to do with Orthodoxy even if some modernists would like to adopt such language in order to justify their position.

Second, I realize that in this day and age people seem to have forgotten that the term Men is gender inclusive and refers to all mankind (and Womenkind) but please, couldn't you figure that out for yourself.

Phiddipus

Hi, may I call you "Dogface"? ;-) My name is Ed.

We renamed your article because we're mixed case junkies around here: Greek Old Calendarists (Redirected from GREEK OLD CALENDARISTS). --Uncle Ed 19:37, 21 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Nice rewrite of Energies of God! Cheers, Cyan 00:21, 22 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I'd been hoping someone knowledgable would improve the cigar article. I'm glad you did. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 22:55, 10 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I like the joke you contributed to the Celtic Christianity article -- it is so true. But I suggest you try to find an attributable quotation that states that passage, in case someone who does not share our sense of humor objects. -- llywrch 00:01, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Heya. The stuff about Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas that you added to Opus Dei: is there any mainstream report on this? Knowing Opus Dei, and knowing a bit about Thomas and Scalia's politics, I wouldn't be surprised, but some sort of confirmation would be great. --MIRV 20:12, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Just read the above remark, I think :) this user User:Asoane has said sth in the talk page.

(After seeing your edits at Sin). The last one is minor, but the others are not and we may get confused. Not that I care in this case, it is simply easier for the rest of us to treat a chain of edits as one and not mark the last one as minor. Pfortuny 21:53, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Hey, Dogface: you made some useful (and timely!) edits to the Cooking a turkey article. I liked your "moral turpitude" bit as well! --Sewing 18:16, 24 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Although DNA is protected, base pair isn't. Have a go at it. Cheers, Cyan 05:28, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Question - You've been here longer than I have, and have made many posts to enterys Catholic in nature. Rbushlow has been editing the Catholic page, first changing "mainstream Christians" to "Protestants" and now just added an unneccecary change. Not to be all uptight about things, but I feel that Rbushlow isn't trying to help or anything, I think he/she is just looking to screw with the Catholic page. What do you recommend I do? - Fission 12:45pm, 15 Jan 2004 (EST)

Also, just for the record, Rbushlow took a chunk out of the Apostolic Succession page and marked it as a minor change. But I cannot tell if the revision was in any way constructive, as I am not well educated about the matters in that page. Fission 17:55, 15 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Please watch what you say in edit comments. Things like "Corrected blatant anti-American ignorance." are not acceptable here. Our policy page about this is here: Wikipedia:Wikiquette. --mav 22:39, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Don't know if it's accurate to say they have no legal existence. They have a town council and some other governmental functions: http://www.town.rocky-ripple.in.us/index.htm

Looks to be similar for Wynnedale, Warren Park, Southport, Meridian Hills, Homecroft, Crow's Nest.

Here's relevant info from the Unigov handbook:

Excluded Cities and Towns. The three cities of Beech Grove, Lawrence, and Southport, and the town of Speedway were not annexed into the Consolidated City of Indianapolis. These municipalities are called excluded cities and towns. In addition to voting for the mayors and councils of their respective cities and towns, residents are also able to vote for the Mayor of Indianapolis, plus a City-County Council member, and the four at-large council members. This arrangement was passed because residents are obligated to pay many county-wide taxes and because the powers of the Mayor of Indianapolis extend to the entire county.

Included Towns. There are twelve included towns in Marion County of less than 5,000 population that elected to retain town status as defined by the state constitution. They are, however, included for government purposes in the Consolidated City of Indianapolis.

Bkonrad | Talk 21:37, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Hello. Just in case you haven't found out in the intervening months: your editing of Oriental Orthodoxy inspires this tip. You don't need to write [[Saint|Saints]], since [[Saint]]s has the same effect. Since the latter form is also instructive to newcomers, I changed it in that article. Michael Hardy 21:24, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

... for the great work you've been doing on the Romanian Orthodox Church article. Really much appreciated! - irismeister 09:26, 2004 Oct 13 (UTC)

The Moderate Greek Old Calendarists are not schismatic nor do they belong in any way with Old Believers or other breakaway groups. They freely co-celebrate with the Russian Church outside of Russia and commune each other’s faithful. They have numerous parishes, monasteries and convents worldwide. They function fully within the church, not outside it. This is not propaganda, as you put it, but a very real and imminently important witness to what the church is here to provide; a link with the traditions of the church. You don't have to agree, but your insistence on exclusion or misrepresentation is an obvious bias on your part.

Hi dogface, I would like to help with revision of the page on skepticism. As a new user, im not sure how you usually go about this. Should we agree on a method (revising the whole thing from top to bottom?) or should I just do what seems right to me? Keep up the good work! --Sextus 17:06, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

• Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
• Multi-Licensing Guide
• Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Please don't add dumb jokes to articles, it's vandalism (and annoying). --Cuchullain 22:59, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you entirely on this. However, there seem to be several Greek editors who consider (completely unhistorically) that the ethnic meaning of 'Hellene' is eternal and unchangeable. There was a small discussion of this on the Talk page which you might want to join. --Macrakis 21:46, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It is undisputed that "Hellene" in some contexts at least came to mean "pagan" as opposed to "Christian". The question is whether this is a "distortion". It is only a 'distortion' if you believe words have (or should have) inherent meanings, and perhaps that ethnic identity is (or should be) stable and unchanging across time and space.

I don't know anything about Erasmian pronunciation being used for Liturgical Greek. Are you saying that there exist denominations (English Orthodox???) which use a Greek liturgy but with an Erasmian pronunciation? I've never heard of such a thing, and don't know who that would be. --Macrakis 19:40, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. As one of the participants in the Saints WikiProject could you perhaps take a look at Saint Metrophanes. There are contradictions on the page and I haven't been able to find a good solid source to base a factual article on in my admittedly rather quick web search. I have no special knowledge of this subject and only came to the article in order to fix a dead external link but had to stay around to clear up some of the mess. Can you help? --Spondoolicks 12:26, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I understand from the article on this controversy that you feel strongly about this issue. So do I, and we probably agree with each other on this issue. But it is essential that we maintain a neutral point of view. It is unnecessary and irrelevant to mention what didn't happen in other cases which is happening now. This adds an irrelevant point of view to the articles. If you feel this strongly about it, I suggest you write a blog entry about the controversy (perhaps you already have), but I would like to ask you to be as rational as possible when it comes to this controversy, and not to add the references you have added several times today. Yours, Aecis ^{Mr. Mojo risin'} 13:33, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see where you stand, but I disagree with you on the consequences, motivations and implications behind not mentioning the lack of response of others in similar cases. I think your view would be akin to mentioning the number of victims in the Gulag in an article about the Holocaust to show that the Nazis weren't the only mass murderers in that particular timeframe in European history. You seem to believe that not mentioning the response of other groups would create an air of moral equivalency of "the excessive, intolerant, and narrowmindedness of Muslim response." This contrasts/conflicts with the neutral point of view. It is not up to an encyclopedia to talk of excessiveness, intolerance or narrowmindedness. An encyclopedia article about this controversy should contain facts about related events, but it should not come to a moral conclusion by comparison. Aecis ^{Mr. Mojo risin'} 16:05, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Calm down, Dogface, please. I never said anything like that. I said that it doesn't belong in an article that is not about those events. It is a fact that George W. Bush is the current president of the United States, but that fact in itself doesn't belong in an article about George Washington (only in a template listing all the presidents). Please don't put words into my mouth. Aecis ^{Mr. Mojo risin'} 16:27, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Now you're being absurd. You have again been putting words into my mouth. If you decide to reply to this post in an equally absurd way, I consider this discussion closed. I will explain it once more, and I hope that you won't look for ulterior motives. An article about an event should only contain verifiable facts directly related to that events. The response of other people or other groups in other places at other moments in time to other stimuli (I can't think of a better word than stimuli at the moment) is irrelevant, and the way you wrote it in the article is unencyclopedic. You made it clear that you wanted to juxtapose the current response in the muslim world to earlier responses by jewish groups and individuals. That may be up to a blog or an op-ed to decide, but not to an encyclopedia. An encyclopedia should remain as neutral and objective as possible, and not think in terms of excessiveness, intolerance and narrowmindedness. If you want to discuss this civilly and maturely, then you are more then welcome. If you want to continue your inane rhetoric, then don't bother. Aecis ^{Mr. Mojo risin'} 19:51, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dogface. Nobody doubts the sources are real. It's just that a simgle opinion of a single protester somwhere doesn't qualify as important enough to make it into the first paragraph, which tries hard to remain short. I think your link is also already in the timeline. Pls. Remove the comments, if you can agree to this Azate 21:43, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As I indicated on the talk page for Category:Scottish Regiments, I thought that Highland Regiments were different from Scottish Regiments, the latter being synonymous with Lowland Scots units, wearing trews. Highlanders wore the kilt, recruited in the Highlands (or patterned themselves after units that were). There was a divide between Highlanders and Lowlanders in the Scottish Division before the recent amalgamations; I stil have my Highland tie - in green - purchased at the Infantry Depot of the Scottish Div in 1990; Lowlanders had blue. So I'm not at all positive "Scottish regiments" is apt, especially since most of them are Canadian in nationality. Perhaps "Highland" would be better.Michael Dorosh 19:03, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I noticed you cut and pasted the content of The Gordon Highlanders to the redirect page at Gordon Highlanders. Cut and paste moves are strongly frowned upon, as it loses the history of previous edits. For information on how to move pages, please see Wikipedia:Moving pages and Wikipedia:Requested moves. Thanks. SoLando (Talk) 19:02, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your latest edits to Aztlán: The article reads much better. However, one of your edit summaries read "Converted first section from gibberish to something closer to actual English." I just wanted to ask you to be a little more sensitive because many of the editors here, especially on topics outside the English-speaking world, do not speak English as a first language and rely on us native speakers to refine their verbiage. We just don't want to be rude and discourage people who make positive contributions. Thanks again for your efforts, --Rockero 16:44, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As a contributor to the page CreationWiki, I feel it fair to warn you that it has been nominated for deletion. Please make your opinion known. PrometheusX303 21:09, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There has been some additions to the John Bosco page saying he was a closest homosexual or pederast. This is not NPOV.

• Saint John Bosco

Do you agree?evrik 23:24, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• I was trying to give a head's up as to the LGBT activities on a saint page. It appears the poster has an agenda. evrik 15:41, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Something new ...

This user is a member of the Saints WikiProject.

--evrik

It was the established operation of the WikiProject Saints to have a section in the info box on a sample prayer. Some editors have been recently been attacking this in the individual articles.

It is my belief that prayers in a literary or historic context are NPOV. I can understand that some may consider the inclusion of a prayer to be hagiographic, but freedom of religion is not freedom from religion.

There is a 3RR about to happen on a number of these articles. I am trying to be philosophical about this, but don’t want to yield the point when what is happening goes against the consensus and borders on vandalism.

It is my understanding that if an editing disagreement occurs that the status quo, in this case leaving the prayers in place, holds until it is resolved. I encourage you to comment on this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Saints. I have posted my thoughts at the village pump.

--evrik 15:40, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I noticed that you appeared in the edit history of the justification (theology) article. I recently made major changes to the article in an effort to move it to NPOV. If you have any suggestions for improvement (style, content, whatever), please leave a comment on the talk page for that article. The goal is to get the article to the point that the POV and cleanup templates can be removed.

Thanks, --jrcagle 20:18, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I kept your placement and tried to give historical perspective at the top. See if it works. Thanks, jrcagle 05:01, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your attempts to improve Wikipedia. However, I would like to remind you that Wikipedia is not censored for minors, not even for profanity or pornography. You are welcome to remove clearly offensive material or inappropriate obscenities, but please do not remove/censor profanities or remove/disclaim sexually explicit material or links that are relevant to the article. In the meantime, please be bold and continue contributing to Wikipedia. Thank you! Lag 22:39, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've given up on that particular article, which seems to exist only to push the POV of groups that now use a Quartodeciman observance. (I think that would be Seventh Day Adventists and a few others.) I pointed out the problem with Schaff in that particular passage a while ago on the talk page, but there's no getting through to them. TCC (talk) (contribs) 21:00, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Invitatious 23:19, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I've noticed that you've edited articles pertaining to the Eastern Orthodox Church. I wanted to extend an invitation to you to join the WikiProject dedicated to organizing and improving articles on the subject, which can be found at: WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy. This WikiProject was begun because a need was perceived to raise the level of quality of articles on Wikipedia which deal with the Eastern Orthodox Church.

You can find information on the project page about the WikiProject, as well as how to join and how to indicate that you are a member of the project. Additionally, you may be interested in helping out with our collaboration of the month. I hope you'll consider joining and thank you for your contributions thus far! —A.S. Damick ^{talk contribs} 03:04, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to a Wikipedia rule of thumb: 1) if something is in See also, try to incorporate it into main body 2) if something is in main body, it should not be in see also and therefore 3) good articles have no See also sections. --Loremaster 20:56, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of putting all the asides into the body of the article, why not just change the name of the "References" section to "References and notes"? — Walloon 16:36, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I checked back on that page, and I noticed you removed Zetaboards. I just wanted to know why you removed it, because it is a vaporware ;) Alan 23:18, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.

A few features that you might find helpful:

• Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
• The announcement and open task box is updated very frequently. You can watchlist it if you're interested; or, you can add it directly to your user page by including {{WPMILHIST Announcements}} there.
• Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
• The project has a monthly newsletter; it will normally be delivered as a link, but several other formats are available.

There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—and wherever—you'd like:

• Starting some new articles? Our article structure guidelines outline some things to include.
• Interested in working on a more complete article? The military history peer review and collaboration departments would welcome your help!
• Working on featured-level articles? We have some advice for nominators, and an A-Class review process to help check high-quality articles.
• Want to help with specific requests for assistance? Our requests page has extensive lists of requested articles, images, maps, and translations.
• Interested in a particular area of military history? We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, or periods.
• Want to know how good our articles are? The assessment department is working on rating the quality of every military history article in Wikipedia.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask one of the project coordinators, or any experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Kirill Lokshin 05:36, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The November 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 22:14, 26 November 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Template:TemplateName has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. --John Reaves 09:26, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Academy Plus, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is notable, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. —Pilotguy (ptt) 21:31, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The January 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 20:30, 23 January 2007 (UTC) [reply]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect seven coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 11!

Delivered by grafikbot 10:24, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting seven coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by February 25!

Delivered by grafikbot 13:54, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dogface. I just wanted to point out to you that Wikipedia has a large set of vandalism warning templates to be used for warning editors about vandalism. We're trying to use these to create a more standardized system to make enforcing our rules much easier. Thanks! Hersfold ^(talk|work) 00:06, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the recent edit you made to Matthew Webb has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks – Qxz 15:00, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, wrong page. Something got mixed up there. What I was actually referring to is this edit to Orgy, in which you removed most of the article without explanation. Thanks – Qxz 19:01, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Either delete the first paragraph of the Orgy page or move the group sex material to the Group sex page. As it stands, "Orgy" and "group sex" are far too redundant to deserve separate pages. I was being helpful by increasing the uniqueness of each page.Dogface 19:03, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine. Feel free to reinstate the edit, but this time provide an edit summary, so that people understand your intentions. Removing most of the article without a summary makes the edit look like vandalism; explaining things is particularly important with large edits. Thanks – Qxz 19:05, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The February 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 14:59, 1 March 2007 (UTC) [reply]

It has been suggested that the above named project be renamed Wikipedia:WikiProject Christian saints. Please express your opinion on this proposed renaming, and the accompanying re-definition of the scope of the project, here. John Carter 17:05, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The March 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 18:51, 30 March 2007 (UTC) [reply]

The April 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 13:49, 6 May 2007 (UTC) [reply]

The May 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 14:41, 9 June 2007 (UTC) [reply]

The June 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 13:40, 8 July 2007 (UTC) [reply]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by August 14! Kirill 02:55, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators from a pool of fourteen candidates to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by August 28! Kirill 01:04, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The August 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 09:18, 5 September 2007 (UTC) [reply]

The September 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 09:20, 8 October 2007 (UTC) [reply]

The October 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 13:49, 3 November 2007 (UTC) [reply]

The November 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot 01:20, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter Issue XXII (December 2007)
Project news The Intelligence task force has been created. The contest department has completed its ninth month of competition. The top scorer this month is Blnguyen, with 22 points, followed by Dreamafter, with 8 points, and Redmarkviolinist, with 6 points. Blnguyen also remains the overall leader, with 162 points in total. All project members are encouraged to submit the articles they're working on as entries. Help with converting deprecated infoboxes is needed; any assistance is welcome! {{WPMILHIST}} now supports an explicit tag (class=DAB) for marking disambiguation pages.	Articles of note New featured articles: Battle of Albuera Battle of Dyrrhachium (1081) Battle of the Gebora Constantine II of Scotland Francis Harvey Vasa (ship) Wulfhere of Mercia New A-Class articles: 1962 South Vietnamese Presidential Palace bombing Evacuation of East Prussia
Current proposals and discussions A discussion about minimizing terminological ambiguity has begun.
Awards and honors Blnguyen has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his efforts in improving the quality of articles related to Vietnamese military history, including the creation of numerous A-Class articles. Woodym555 has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his outstanding work on topics related to the Victoria Cross, notably including the creation of featured articles, featured lists, and a featured topic. For their outstanding efforts as part of Tag & Assess 2007, Bedford, TomStar81, and Parsival74 have been awarded the gold, silver, and bronze Wikis, respectively.
Tag & Assess 2007 Tag & Assess 2007 is now officially over, with slightly under 68,000 articles processed. The top twenty scores are as follows: 1. Bedford — 7,600 2. TomStar81 — 5,500 3. Parsival74 — 5,200 4. FayssalF — 3,500 5. Roger Davies — 3,000 6. Ouro — 2600 7. Kateshortforbob — 2250 8. Cromdog — 2,200 9. BrokenSphere — 2000 9. Jacksinterweb — 2,000 9. Maralia — 2,000 12. MBK004 — 1,340 13. JKBrooks85 — 1,250 14. Sniperz11 — 1100 15. Burzmali — 1000 15. Cplakidas — 1000 15. Gimme danger — 1000 15. Raoulduke471000 15. TicketMan — 1000 15. Welsh — 1000 15. Blnguyen — 1000 Although the drive is officially closed, existing participants can continue tagging until January 31 if they wish, with the extra tags counting towards their tally for barnstar purposes. We'd like to see what lessons can be learned from this drive, so we've set up a feedback workshop. Comments and feedback from participants and non-participants alike are very welcome and appreciated.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

Note: This newsletter was automatically delivered. Regards from the automated, Anibot (talk) 23:15, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 14! TomStar81 (Talk) 02:47, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The January 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:39, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The February 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fifteen candidates. Please vote here by February 28! --Eurocopter tigre (talk) 12:06, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Camerontart.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 03:10, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The February 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 04:22, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The March 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:02, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Dogface!

You are cordially invited to participate in WikiProject Christianity The goal of WikiProject Christianity is to improve the quality and quantity of information about Christianity available on Wikipedia. WP:X as a group does not prefer any particular tradition or denominination of Christianity, but prefers that all Christian traditions are fairly and accurately represented.

You are receiving this invitation because you are a member of one of the related Christianity Projects and I thought that you might be interested in this project also - Tinucherian (talk) 17:21, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The April 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:37, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The May 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:25, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The June 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:26, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
I need your help. I am working on a research project at Boston College, studying creation of medical information on Wikipedia. You are being contacted, because you have been identified as an important contributor to one or more articles.

Would you will be willing to answer a few questions about your experience? We've done considerable background research, but we would also like to gather the insight of the actual editors. Details about the project can be found at the user page of the project leader, geraldckane. Survey questions can be found at geraldckane/medsurvey. Your privacy and confidentiality will be strictly protected!

The questions should only take a few minutes. I hope you will be willing to complete the survey, as we do value your insight. Please do not hesitate to contact me or Professor Kane if you have any questions.

Thank You, Sam4bc (talk) 22:45, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The July 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:00, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on September 14!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:57, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The August 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:52, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The September 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fourteen candidates. Please vote here by September 30!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:44, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The September 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fourteen candidates. Please vote here by September 30!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:45, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The September 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:21, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The October 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:45, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The November 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 16:15, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The December 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:40, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The January 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:35, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The February 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:02, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 13 March!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:37, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. We will be selecting coordinators from a pool of eighteen to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on Saturday, 28 March! Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:40, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The March 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:23, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The April 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:53, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The May 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:35, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The June 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:56, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The July 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:21, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 12 September!
Many thanks,  Roger Davies ^talk 04:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The August 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:38, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Voting in the Military history WikiProject coordinator election has now started. The aim is to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on 26 September!
For the coordinators,  Roger Davies ^talk 22:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)