| Revision as of 00:04, 17 December 2013 editEdwardsBot (talk | contribs)354,693 edits →The Bugle: Issue XCIII, December 2013: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 07:13, 25 December 2013 edit undoNick-D (talk | contribs)Administrators106,154 edits →Merry Christmas!: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 679: | Line 679: | ||
| </div> | </div> | ||
| <!-- EdwardsBot 0680 --> | <!-- EdwardsBot 0680 --> | ||
| == Merry Christmas! == | |||
| ] ] (]) 07:13, 25 December 2013 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 07:13, 25 December 2013
Welcome to Misplaced Pages!!!
|
Book review
Hello Bomzibar, thanks for your book review! On the whole, your English is quite good; I'll need to go through it for a few tenses and plurals, but that's about it. I've taken the liberty of subscribing you to the newsletter, so it will be delivered to this talk page every month. If you do not want it, feel free to remove your name from that page.
On a related note, would there be any interest from German-language military history editors in a global newsletter, with contributors from both wikis? We'd have to work out certain issues, like translating English->German and German->English, but I feel like this could form relationships that could be beneficial to both sides. Ed 05:17, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
- Hello Ed, thank you for the Revision! In my opinion it is quite difficult to form a partnership between the military historical sections of the english and the german Misplaced Pages since there is no real military history project or portal in the german one. We only have a Portal:Military and that is not really active. This is because in the german Misplaced Pages the casual conversation is quite aggressive and you can allow you more lapses in this way than you could here. This is, for example, the reason why User:MisterBee1966 nearly exclusively writes in en:Wiki despite the fact he is from Germany. But I will make a request in the Portals for History and Military, maybe there are some people interested. --Bomzibar (talk) 06:29, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
- Looks like Nick and Ian got to it before me! I confess that I did not look at the German Misplaced Pages's setup before asking. I see that there are a few other WikiProjects on there, particularly an Imperialism and World Wars project (de:Misplaced Pages:WikiProjekt Imperialismus und Weltkriege) – why not start one? We could have cross-wiki collaborations to share sources and the like, but a central page for that on each wiki would be necessary. Just throwing my thoughts out there; if they're not feasible it's fine. :-) Ed 19:01, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
- Most of this projects are actually or close to dead and the whole area would need a restructuring for which, I fear, there are not enough interested users in de:Wiki. But I will make the request for possible collaboration tomorrow so we will see.
- Looks like Nick and Ian got to it before me! I confess that I did not look at the German Misplaced Pages's setup before asking. I see that there are a few other WikiProjects on there, particularly an Imperialism and World Wars project (de:Misplaced Pages:WikiProjekt Imperialismus und Weltkriege) – why not start one? We could have cross-wiki collaborations to share sources and the like, but a central page for that on each wiki would be necessary. Just throwing my thoughts out there; if they're not feasible it's fine. :-) Ed 19:01, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
- For the newsletter: Have you ever thought about presenting external contents in the newsletter which could also be an advantage in collaboration of Misplaced Pages and Historians? I´ve thought about that someone could ask the editors of the American Historical Review how they think about donate one Review of their quarterly magazine for the review section of the newsletter. As you came with the idea of an international newsletter I already thought about building a connection with the German Armed Forces Military History Research Office if they could donate some articles out of their quarterly military history magazine for such a newsletter. How do you think about this? --Bomzibar (talk) 21:06, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
- That's understandable. We're one of the few truly active projects on this site. I've probably just been too hopeful that the de.wiki was different. :-)
- I actually haven't, but that's a really good idea. I wonder if the American NH&HC would be willing to share some of their content... when I get time (probably this weekend), I'll send out a few emails and see what kind of response I get. Ed 08:22, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
- For the newsletter: Have you ever thought about presenting external contents in the newsletter which could also be an advantage in collaboration of Misplaced Pages and Historians? I´ve thought about that someone could ask the editors of the American Historical Review how they think about donate one Review of their quarterly magazine for the review section of the newsletter. As you came with the idea of an international newsletter I already thought about building a connection with the German Armed Forces Military History Research Office if they could donate some articles out of their quarterly military history magazine for such a newsletter. How do you think about this? --Bomzibar (talk) 21:06, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Battle of Guam map
Hi Bomzibar. In reply to most of your questions I'm afraid that's not always possible to explain all US miltary conventions in a map, because that would require a lot of extra detail added to each of thousands of images. I will however look at making some small changes, because making it more friendly to people like me who don't know US terminology is a personal aim, and I moved ahead between this map and the one it replaced. For users whose native language isn't English, the SVG can be translated. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 14:31, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
- Some of the questions I had were for making it more clear because I plan to translate it into german. Thank you for your reply. --Bomzibar (talk) 15:18, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 18:37, 21 April 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
The Bugle: Issue LXXIII, April 2012
|
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 Ed 23:52, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXIV, May 2012
|
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 Ed 14:25, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
GOCE July 2012 Copy Edit Drive
|
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 Ed 18:41, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
Op-ed
Hi Bomzibar, would you like me to copy-edit User:Bomzibar/Op-ed? The Bugle has a 'review essay' page which is occasionally used for longer reviews such as this one, and I think that it would work really well. this article I wrote last year is an example. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 08:49, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Yes that would be great, as I wrote copyediting from whoever has time to do it is explicitly wished. --Bomzibar (talk) 08:52, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- OK, I'll add it to my to-do list :) Nick-D (talk) 08:55, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you for that. And don't be mad at me, I think the critique in the text sounds more harsh than it is meant. :-) --Bomzibar (talk) 09:00, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- That's fine - I welcome the critique, and I think that it's very reasonable. I was certainly struck by the differences in how military history is presented in German museums when I visited your country last year. The Japanese museums I saw which covered this topic when I visited the country in 2009 tended to stick to a very factual-type approach, and didn't go into much detail (other than the Hiroshima Museum Memorial, of course). Out of interest, if limits on the availability of sources were no barrier, what material do you think should be added to the article? Regards, Nick-D (talk) 10:00, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you for that. And don't be mad at me, I think the critique in the text sounds more harsh than it is meant. :-) --Bomzibar (talk) 09:00, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- OK, I'll add it to my to-do list :) Nick-D (talk) 08:55, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
First of all: Quotes. Not from authors who later researched the attacks but from people who experiences them. Out of diaries from japanese civilians, american bomber pilots and the responsible leaders on both sides. (I'm not sure but I think that there are many surviving personal documents from prime minister Konoe Fumimaro, for example.) As a second, it needs a different structure where not ~90% are about pure military statistics and overhwelming details (I am pretty sure that some will mention it is too detailed to count every single B-29 attack). A good example for what I mean is de:Luftangriffe auf Dresden. It has six main sections:
- Background and Aims
- Dresden in the War
- Attacks
- Aftermath
- Reception
- Remembrance
As you can see, only half of the sections, which is also about half of the text, is about the attacks itself. The Air raids on Japan article has good aftermath and reception sections but could have some more in it. What I miss is a section about the remembrance. How do the japanese remember the attacks nowadays? Has something changed in how they remember it in comparision to earlier decades? Are there differences how leftist and rightist groups remember it? Do some of this groups like the ultra nationalists use them for extremist purposes as it happens in Dresden? Another thing I missed is the reception in films and novels.
This are things I miss. I also have two things that could maybe added to the article on the short run: How about adding the proposed number sof casualties on both sides the us determined for Operation Downfall to the section about the morality of the use of nuclear weapons? I am sure that the authors which defend this argued with this numbers to show that it saved lifes. The second is, you mention a clash between B-29s and Soviet Fighters over Korea. As you don't mention the air raids on Chosen and Manchukuo earlier, this has to be deleted from the article of you have to include at least the air raids on Chosen and Taiwan as both were party of Japan itself. --Bomzibar (talk) 10:46, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot for those suggestions - they're excellent. I'll also add them to my to-do list! Regards, Nick-D (talk) 11:27, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
For you
|
The Content Review Medal of Merit | |
| By order of the Military History WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted work on the WikiProject's Peer, A-Class and Featured Article Candidate reviews for the second quarter of 2012, I am delighted to award you this Content Review Medal. - Dank (push to talk) 19:03, 5 July 2012 (UTC) |
Op-ed copy editing
Hi Bomzibar, I've just copy-edited your op-ed (User:Bomzibar/Op-ed), and I found it to be a really interesting and thought-provoking article. Can you please check that my changes are OK? By the way, The German Reich and the Second World War is currently being translated into English. I haven't read any of the books (mainly as they're very long!), but it appears to be a very high quality series. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 08:08, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
- Hello Nick, the copy-editing you made was great, thank you for that!
- Yes, The German Reich and the Second World War is a very high quality series but as it is, its also very long and the single issues are quite expensive which is the reason why I dont own them be myself but used public libraries (Im pretty sure every public library in Germany has the books in stock) when I read them. If you want to give the series a try Volume VII could be the most interesting for you as it handles the war in Asia: The German Reich in the defensive - Strategic Air War in Europe, War in the West and in East Asia 1943 to 1944/45. (Das Deutsche Reich in der Defensive – Strategischer Luftkrieg in Europa, Krieg im Westen und in Ostasien 1943 bis 1944/45.) --Bomzibar (talk) 10:08, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for that recommendation - I'll see if I can find a copy. I looked into buying one of the early volumes from Amazon.com, but they wanted over $200 for it! Regards, Nick-D (talk) 11:20, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
- Hi there, I've copyedited and scheduled your op-ed for this month's issue -- pls just check here that it all reads well to you. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:14, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
- Hello Ian, I checked it the day you did the copyediting and all was fine, thank you for that. I will probably make another Op-Ed for the September or October issue of the Bugle as I attend the 53. Internationale Tagung Militärgeschichte (53 International Conference of Military History) of the MGFA and the in the Conference Krieg, Militär und Mobilität von der Antike bis zur Gegenwart (War, Military and Mobility from the ancient world until the present) of the University of Osnabrück mid of September. I think especially the MGFA-Conference will be of interest for the project as there will be international contributors and the topic is Sonderfall Bundeswehr? Streitkräfte in nationalen Perspektiven und im internationalen Vergleich (Special case Bundeswehr? Armed Forces in national perspectives and international comparison). What do you think, shall I compare both conferences in one op-ed or focus on one of them? --Bomzibar (talk) 14:57, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
- Hi there, I've copyedited and scheduled your op-ed for this month's issue -- pls just check here that it all reads well to you. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:14, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for that recommendation - I'll see if I can find a copy. I looked into buying one of the early volumes from Amazon.com, but they wanted over $200 for it! Regards, Nick-D (talk) 11:20, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXVI, July 2012
|
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 Ed 09:07, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXVII, August 2012
|
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 Ed 00:40, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
Your free 1-year Questia online library account is approved ready
Good news! You are approved for access to 77,000 full-text books and 4 million journal, magazine, newspaper articles, and encyclopedia entries. Check your Misplaced Pages email!
- Go to https://www.questia.com/specialoffer
- Input your unique Offer ID and Promotional code. Click Continue. (Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive).
- Create your account by entering the requested information. (This is private and no one from Misplaced Pages will see it).
- You'll then see the welcome page with your Login ID. (The account is now active for 1 year).
If you need help, please first ask Ocaasi at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com and, second, email QuestiaHelp@cengage.com along with your Offer ID and Promotional Code (subject: Misplaced Pages).
- A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a Questia article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free Questia pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:Questia/Citations.
- Questia would love to hear feedback at WP:Questia/Experiences
- Show off your Questia access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/Questia_userbox}} on your userpage
- When the 1-year period is up, check the applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.
Thanks for helping make Misplaced Pages better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi EdwardsBot (talk) 05:02, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXVIII, September 2012
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project and/or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Nick-D (talk) and Ed 20:26, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXIX, October 2012
|
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, Nick-D (talk) and Ian Rose (talk) 02:18, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
Op-ed for the upcoming Bugle
Hi Bomzibar, are you still planning on submitting an op-ed for the upcoming edition of The Bugle? If so, do you have an estimate of when it will be ready? By the way, I've started work on an article on Japanese air defences at User:Nick-D/Drafts5 in line with your suggestion. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 00:00, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, Im still planning for this but due to longer work stays abroad I am not as far as I wanted it to be. Just started. I will keep you informed when Im close to finish it, maybe I can do it until tomorrow.
- Thats a great start for this really important article so far. It surely will help reduce the criticism that military history in en:wiki is too much anglocentric. If it is finished, the article will be a must translate for me. --Bomzibar (talk) 09:22, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
- OK, excellent on both counts :) Nick-D (talk) 10:03, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi Bomzibar, as Ian Rose and I need to publish this edition of the Bugle in the next few days, I've posted an op-ed of my own. However, we'd really like to run your op-ed next month if it's ready. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 10:56, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
- Hi again, I'm guessing your latest op-ed would't be ready in the next couple of days but pls let Nick or me know ASAP if you'll in fact be completing it. Tks/cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 06:05, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXX, November 2012
|
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) 01:28, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXI, December 2012
|
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) 09:08, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXII, January 2013
|
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) 13:04, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXIII, February 2013
|
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) 07:19, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXIV, March 2013
|
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) 03:50, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXV, April 2013
|
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) 15:14, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXVI, May 2013
|
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) 13:08, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
German Navy
Thanks for your comment. I had thought of the term "war navy" or "German War Navy" as a way to differentiate the World War II navy from other German navies, but rejected it because of possible confusion with that other German 'war navy' — the one that met its final fate at Scapa Flow in 1919.
Further, "war navy" is not a term or phrase generally used in English. Consequently (from the point of view of an ex-journalist), it violates the "sounds funny" rule.
Keine Angst, ich habe deinen deutsch ganz verstanden. Sca (talk) 16:09, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
- The 1918 navy was a war navy but not called as such but simple Kaiserliche Marine i.e. Imperial Navy or German Imperial Navy. In de:Wiki sind wir kürzlich überein gekommen aufgrund von Übersetzungsungenauigkeiten grundsätzlich in Militärartikeln die Originalbezeichnung und dahinter in Klammern eine Übersetzung zu verwenden. This would be deutsche Kriegsmarine (German War Navy). --Bomzibar (talk) 16:35, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
- Ja, daß ist alles selbstverständlich auf deutsch. What I have been trying to undo is a pronounced POV tendancy on the part of the some, I think mainly British, WP eds to label the German Navy in WWII as wholly "Nazi." See ] Sca (talk) 18:29, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
- PS: ... in den meisten Fällen ist aber der Begriff Heer gemeint. Verstanden. It's a common misconception among Engish-speaking readers that Wehrmacht means only the German Army. I tried to point out in the above-referenced discussion that Wehrmacht refers to all three branches, plus the Abwehr. Most English readers aren't familiar with Heer, even if they know there was something called OKH.
- PPS: One is, quite absurdly, reminded of the Christmas carol that goes, ... ja ein ganzes Kriegesheer möcht ich gerne haben. Haha. Sca (talk) 23:47, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Revisionism
To reply (belatedly!) to your note: My apologies, I am not clear what you are telling me here.
Are you saying I do not need to fear a flood of revisionist edits, because of all the Wehrmacht/WaffenSS/Knights Cross articles we already have, and because they all accurately present information about massacres and war crimes, etc;
Or are you saying there is a lack of information in those articles about such things, which shows we already have a flood of revisionist editing going on?
Also, you mentioned that books on these subjects were not allowed in de:WP; are you suggesting that this WP is being used as a back channel for subjects that would not be permitted on the German WP? I don’t like the sound of that! Xyl 54 (talk) 11:17, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
- I tried to say that the danger of revisionist thoughts is more likely to enter Misplaced Pages through bad sources used on articles (especially featured articles about Knights Cross and Waffen-SS personnel often use sources that are blacklisted in de:Wiki) than through revisionist edits. You dont have to be afraid about such edits only because Nazi is no longer used. The Wikiproject MilHist has so many good contributors that revisionist edits surely will be deleted soon after being made. --Bomzibar (talk) 14:08, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Helmuth Raithel
G'day Bomzibar, I am interested in whether you managed to uncover anything new from Neulen, Kaltenegger (1994) or Rochas (2007) that might be relevant for the Helmuth Raithel article? I have been going over everything I looked at when developing the article (and even asked my cousin who is fluent in German to hunt around), but haven't come up with anything extra. He tells me that Kaltenegger (2008) doesn't have anything new to add to the article, which is consistent with my (crap) German translation. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 13:18, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
PimboliDD
Thanks for the heads up. MisterBee1966 (talk) 06:45, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
Book review
Hi Bomzibar, Ian and I will be aiming to get the Bugle out over the next few days. Are you likely to finish the book review you started at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Military history/News/June 2013/Book reviews this weekend? If not, we'll need to remove it. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 10:10, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, I will finish it until tomorrow. --Bomzibar (talk) 10:19, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
- OK, excellent (and thanks for the quick response!). Regards, Nick-D (talk) 10:23, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
I finished the review but Im pretty sure it needs a whole lot of copy-editing. It that is done it can be moved from here to The Bugle. --Bomzibar (talk) 11:52, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks, I'll copy edit it tomorrow, then move it across. It looks like an interesting book. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 11:59, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
- It really is and for an MGFA book really cheap. The only problem: it is difficult to purchase overseas and the MGFA does not publish e-books until now. (I talked with them about that a few months ago and nobody there could tell me why they have not e-books.) --Bomzibar (talk) 12:06, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
- I've just copy-edited your review, and posted it at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Military history/News/June 2013/Book reviews. Please feel free to modify it, and let me know if any of my changes misinterpreted your material. Thanks again for contributing this review. Nick-D (talk) 05:34, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
- It really is and for an MGFA book really cheap. The only problem: it is difficult to purchase overseas and the MGFA does not publish e-books until now. (I talked with them about that a few months ago and nobody there could tell me why they have not e-books.) --Bomzibar (talk) 12:06, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXVII, June 2013
|
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) 08:44, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXVIII, July 2013
|
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) 15:20, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
Apr to Jun 2013 Milhist content reviewing
|
Military history reviewers' award | |
| By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your good work helping with the WikiProject's Peer, A-Class and Featured Article reviews for the period Apr-Jun 2013, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject Reviewers' award. AustralianRupert (talk) 11:00, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste |
Belgian Task Force WP:MILHIST
Hello Bomzibar,
Thank you for your interest on the Belgian Military History taskforce. I'm very keen to find more people so, if the topic interests you, would you be interested in joining? All the best, Brigade Piron (talk) 16:26, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you for your trust but I fear I lack the needed knowledge of the Belgian armed forces/military history. But I would be willing to change this, do you recommend some books to get a good overview of the topic? Englisch or German language would be great, Dutch is possible, would be a nice reason to refresh my language skills. --Bomzibar (talk) 17:55, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXIX, August 2013
|
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) 23:55, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXXX, September 2013
|
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) 23:38, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue XCI, October 2013
|
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) 22:25, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Books and Bytes: The Misplaced Pages Library Newsletter
Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013
Greetings Misplaced Pages Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Misplaced Pages Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...
New positions: Sign up to be a Misplaced Pages Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Misplaced Pages Librarian
Misplaced Pages Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.
New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??
New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges
News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY
Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions
New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration
Read the full newsletter
Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 19:57, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue XCII, November 2013
|
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) 05:26, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
The Misplaced Pages Library Survey
As a subscriber to one of The Misplaced Pages Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi 14:49, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue XCIII, December 2013
|
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) 00:04, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Merry Christmas!
de:Benutzer:Bomzibar Nick-D (talk) 07:13, 25 December 2013 (UTC)