| Revision as of 13:49, 5 August 2008 editNoclador (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users66,407 edits →Cassino← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:35, 5 August 2008 edit undoKirrages (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users15,271 edits →Military history of Italy during World War II: responseNext edit → | ||
| Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
| Hi Stephen<br> | Hi Stephen<br> | ||
| about a month ago there was a sock circus trying to manipulate the various articles about Italy in WWII with glorifying revisionism - sometimes citing sources as Nazi-Radio Berlin or the Italian Army's own bulletins as "proof" how marvellously the fascist Armies performed... I spotted the sock circus and together with ] and ] had them all blocked see ] From the edits to ] and ] I assume that the users ] & ] are new incarnations of the well known sock circus... especially as the two registered users use Paolo Caccia Dominioni de Sillavengo book ''Alamein 1933-1962: An Italian Story'' as source, which by "chance" was a favourite source for Generalmesse & Co. ITALONY and the IP are also pretty obviously the same person: and . BTW: the source he uses is a British Egyptian ] societies homepage and Edmund Hall (the writer of the material used as a source) an collector of Egyptian stamps! not a historian qualified in any way to judge the WWII events of North Africa... If you are willing to go ahead an clean the articles in question, you have my full backing - but personally I'm for a full revert. --] (]) 13:49, 5 August 2008 (UTC) | about a month ago there was a sock circus trying to manipulate the various articles about Italy in WWII with glorifying revisionism - sometimes citing sources as Nazi-Radio Berlin or the Italian Army's own bulletins as "proof" how marvellously the fascist Armies performed... I spotted the sock circus and together with ] and ] had them all blocked see ] From the edits to ] and ] I assume that the users ] & ] are new incarnations of the well known sock circus... especially as the two registered users use Paolo Caccia Dominioni de Sillavengo book ''Alamein 1933-1962: An Italian Story'' as source, which by "chance" was a favourite source for Generalmesse & Co. ITALONY and the IP are also pretty obviously the same person: and . BTW: the source he uses is a British Egyptian ] societies homepage and Edmund Hall (the writer of the material used as a source) an collector of Egyptian stamps! not a historian qualified in any way to judge the WWII events of North Africa... If you are willing to go ahead an clean the articles in question, you have my full backing - but personally I'm for a full revert. --] (]) 13:49, 5 August 2008 (UTC) | ||
| :Hmm. I was wondering if they had returned. The stamp site is as good a reference as an unreferenced Misplaced Pages article - ie you can make up what you like. I agree, take it down. ]<sup> ] - ]</sup> 14:35, 5 August 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 14:35, 5 August 2008
Click here to add a new message |
|---|
| 24 December 2024 |
|
Misplaced Pages vandalism information
(abuse log)
Low to moderate level of vandalism
2.95 RPM according to EnterpriseyBot 11:10, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
 Archives |
|
RE: Moro & Ortona.
no problem, I can probably take a look at ortona today.
Yeah, you are correct that my sources are fairly Canadian-centric. The Moro River Campaign doesn't get a lot of attention in WWII history (especially the Canadian involvement), so the Canadian-written books I have tend to focus entirely on the Canadian Perspective ("The Canadian Military History Atlas", "the Maple Leaf against the Axis", "Marching as to war, Canada in conflict from 1899 - 1954", even the titles give it away). Feel free to add the non-Canadian stuff afterwards (oh yeah, and add your name to the Maintenance list on the talk-page). Cheers! Cam (Chat) 23:13, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
- Canadian-Centric source?!?! I didn't know such a thing existed! I've got this one "authoritative & excellent summary" of all of World War II that doesn't even mention that Canada was there, much less that it fielded the 3rd biggest navy, 4th biggest airforce, 4th largest army among the allies! Oh well. Hopefully we'll be able to get both Ortona & The Moro to at least B-Class before the end of June. Cheers! Cam (Chat) 01:54, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
- Hey, thanks for adding that stuff concerning NZ & India to the article. I'll get back to work on The Gully once I finish the FAC I'm in the middle of (although I might do a bit of editing between now & then). Cam (Chat) 07:00, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
- No probs. It's coming along nicely. Stephen Kirrage 13:51, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
- I'm done all of the sections with the Gully. Feel free to copyedit and/or add non-Canadian stuff to it. Cam (Chat) 03:36, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
- No probs. It's coming along nicely. Stephen Kirrage 13:51, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
- Hey, thanks for adding that stuff concerning NZ & India to the article. I'll get back to work on The Gully once I finish the FAC I'm in the middle of (although I might do a bit of editing between now & then). Cam (Chat) 07:00, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
- Canadian-Centric source?!?! I didn't know such a thing existed! I've got this one "authoritative & excellent summary" of all of World War II that doesn't even mention that Canada was there, much less that it fielded the 3rd biggest navy, 4th biggest airforce, 4th largest army among the allies! Oh well. Hopefully we'll be able to get both Ortona & The Moro to at least B-Class before the end of June. Cheers! Cam (Chat) 01:54, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
On to Ortona. I'm almost done the ACR for Operation Tractable (another two days). When I complete that, I'll be ready to both write the section on Ortona in the MRC, and then get to work on the actual Battle of Ortona article (B-Class by June 30). Cam (Chat) 06:52, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
- Hey, before I nominate The Moro River Campaign for GA, would you be able to do a quick copyedit check. Cam (Chat) 04:23, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
- Okay. But I may not be able to do it today! Stephen Kirrage 08:56, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Operation Husky order of battle
I'm not sure we should use that Osprey book (part of the men at arms series) as a source in that article, particularly for the Coastal Divisions. Sometime last year I tried to sort this out and found great differences between the theoretical organisation of these units given in some sources and the actual organisation on the terrain. From that information I could not piece together the attachments of most of these regiments. The current listing in the article looks good, but is likely to be incorrect, while I like the Osprey books on other time periods I've never found them useful for WWII. Though I haven't read this particular one (I probably have a copy somewhere and will take a look if you think I should).--Caranorn (talk) 11:50, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
- I have placed this and a response on the Operation Husky OOB talk page to encourage more participation to improve the quality of the information. Stephen Kirrage 12:06, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
User:Generalmesse and others: nationalistic pro-Italian POV pushing
Maybe you want to chip in your thoughts: Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#sock master User:Generalmesse, --noclador (talk) 14:26, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
East African Campaign
I think we must have different copies because it says exactly what yours does, but just on a different page.
I don't know why it doesn't add up. It could be reinforcements as the campaign progressed but that is a good point. I didn't notice that before. Red4tribe (talk) 23:54, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
- No, it still has those mistakes. I have seen the 3,100 casualties for the British before, but the Italian casualties were difficult to find. I noticed there is no source for the strength, could that possibly be the answer? Red4tribe (talk) 12:42, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
re First Battle of El Alamein
Thanks for your message on my talkpage. Unfortunately there was an edit war on the pages of the above article, and when the main protagonist was blocked they activated a number of sock/meatpuppets. This resulted in a complaint to WP:AN/I#Generalmesse. To avoid a further edit/sock war I protected the article for a few days, in the hope that such an action will persuade editors to edit consensually when it expires. Was there an edit that you wanted to make? You can request admin assistance on the article talkpage, or let me know. Cheers LessHeard vanU (talk) 14:48, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
Italian invasion of Egypt
Do you have any idea which Italian divisions actually took part in the Italian invasion of Egypt in September of 1940? It does appear that the XXIII Corps, the XXI Corps, and the "Libyan Corps" were involved or at least they were near the border. But the one Italian reference I have only shows the pre-war distribution of the divisions ( ... the Fifth Army is still the bigger of the two and there is no "Libyan Corps" indicated at all). Anyway, I have several conflicting "modern, light-weight" references ... and they all show something different. Do you have a copy of Hunt's book? Does it detail which divisions were in which corps in September? Thought I would ask. Best Wishes! Mkpumphrey (talk) 16:27, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Cassino
Władysław Anders was important person and leader in last attack in Monte Cassino. If not he and his soulders aliants cant win in Monte Cassino. You dont know history so going read books! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.146.235.1 (talk) 14:36, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
- Don't know who you are because you didn't sign your comment. But I will respond all the same: I would not deny that Anders was an important commander. However, the brave contribution of the Polish Corps should be seen in context. First of all, the article covers four battles during which there were (by my quick count) seven "important" Allied Corps commanders involved. To put all the Corps commanders plus army commanders in the info box would be ridiculous. To try to differentiate as to who was more important of the Corps commanders would be unfair (and POV). To say that the Allies would not have won at Cassino without the Polish contribution is meaningless: their contribution was no more or less than the French Corps (which broke through in the Aurunci Mountains) or XIII Corps (which took the brunt of the German resistance in the Liri valley) etc etc.. Stephen Kirrage 14:52, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Military history of Italy during World War II
Hi Stephen
about a month ago there was a sock circus trying to manipulate the various articles about Italy in WWII with glorifying revisionism - sometimes citing sources as Nazi-Radio Berlin or the Italian Army's own bulletins as "proof" how marvellously the fascist Armies performed... I spotted the sock circus and together with User:Justin A Kuntz and User:AlasdairGreen27 had them all blocked see Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Giovanni Giove From the edits to Military history of Italy during World War II and First Battle of El Alamein I assume that the users User:Bendiksen63 & User:ITALONY are new incarnations of the well known sock circus... especially as the two registered users use Paolo Caccia Dominioni de Sillavengo book Alamein 1933-1962: An Italian Story as source, which by "chance" was a favourite source for Generalmesse & Co. ITALONY and the IP 24.20.169.90 are also pretty obviously the same person: ITALONY edit and the IP addition. BTW: the source he uses is a British Egyptian Philately societies homepage and Edmund Hall (the writer of the material used as a source) an collector of Egyptian stamps! not a historian qualified in any way to judge the WWII events of North Africa... If you are willing to go ahead an clean the articles in question, you have my full backing - but personally I'm for a full revert. --noclador (talk) 13:49, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
- Hmm. I was wondering if they had returned. The stamp site is as good a reference as an unreferenced Misplaced Pages article - ie you can make up what you like. I agree, take it down. Stephen Kirrage 14:35, 5 August 2008 (UTC)