Обсуждение пользователей: Инди-жук

Внимание [ править ]

Просто предупреждаю, что вы были упомянуты в wikipedia: Доска объявлений администраторов # Пользователь: Indy beetle Пользователь: Brigade Piron, поскольку я не вижу, что вы были уведомлены об ином. - Малькольмxl5 ( разговор ) 17:45, 2 января 2021 г. (UTC)

Обсуждение могло быть закрытым, но подобные оскорбления обычно не считаются хорошей идеей. Будет хорошо, если в будущем вы будете немного вежливее. Primefac ( разговорное ) 01:23, 3 января 2021 (UTC)

Поздравления от Военно-исторического проекта [ править ]

		Премия обозревателей военной истории
		От имени Военно-исторического проекта я с гордостью представляю рецензирующую награду The Milhist (1 полоса) за участие в 3 обзорах в период с октября по декабрь 2020 года. Peacemaker67  ( разговор ) через MilHistBot ( разговор ) 06:44, 10 января 2021 года ( UTC) Следите за предстоящими отзывами. Просто скопируйте и вставьте в свое пользовательское пространство{{WPMILHIST Review alerts}}

Ваш GA назначение Харви Cloyd Филпотт [ править ]

Привет, рад сообщить вам, что я начал рецензирование статьи Харви Клойда Филпотта, которую вы номинировали на статус GA в соответствии с критериями . Этот процесс может занять до 7 дней. Не стесняйтесь обращаться ко мне с любыми вопросами или комментариями, которые могут у вас возникнуть в этот период. Сообщение, доставленное Legobot от имени Элджит - Элджит ( разговор ) 23:20, 15 января 2021 г. (UTC)

Горн : выпуск CLXXVII, январь 2021 г. [ править ]

Книги и байты - выпуск 42 [ править ]

Отправлено службой доставки сообщений MediaWiki от имени команды Библиотеки Википедии - 14:00, 25 января 2021 г. (UTC)

Уведомление о ссылке на устранение неоднозначности от 26 января [ править ]

Автоматический процесс обнаружил, что когда вы недавно редактировали Саймона Кимбангу , вы добавили ссылку, указывающую на страницу значений неоднозначности Christian .

( Инструкции по отказу .) - DPL-бот ( разговор ) 06:22, 26 января 2021 г. (UTC)

Ваш GA назначение Харви Cloyd Филпотт [ править ]

Статья Харви Клойда Филпотта, которую вы назвали хорошей статьей , была приостановлена . Статья близка к тому, чтобы соответствовать критериям хорошей статьи , но есть некоторые незначительные изменения или уточнения, которые необходимо внести. Если они будут устранены в течение 7 дней, статья будет принята; в противном случае он может выйти из строя. См. Обсуждение: Харви Клойд Филпотт, чтобы узнать о проблемах, которые необходимо решить. Сообщение, доставленное Legobot от имени Элджит - Элджит ( разговор ) 02:41, 28 января 2021 г. (UTC)

Привет [ редактировать ]

Я заметил ваши недавние статьи об истории Югославии. Спасибо, они оценены. Я надеюсь, что вы хотели бы больше узнать об Александре I из Югославии , Петре II из Югославии и Александре из Югославии . На данный момент эти статьи не так уж далеки от статуса GA. ура, Sadkσ (разговоры дешевы) 10:07, 3 февраля 2021 (UTC)

Ваш GA назначение Харви Cloyd Филпотт [ править ]

Статья Харви Клойда Филпотта, которую вы назвали хорошей статьей , прошла ; см. Обсуждение: Харви Клойд Филпотт для комментариев к статье. Отличная работа! Если статья еще не появилась на главной странице в виде элемента «Знали ли вы» или выделенной жирным шрифтом ссылки в разделе «В новостях» или в разделе прозы «В этот день», вы можете номинировать ее в течение следующих семи дней до появления в DYK. Выделенные жирным шрифтом имена с датами, указанными внизу столбца «В этот день», не влияют на право участия в программе DYK. Сообщение, доставленное Legobot от имени Элджит - Элджит ( разговор ) 15:22, 6 февраля 2021 г. (UTC)

Hannibal Brumskine III[edit]

Yes, there sure were a lot of them. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Theaugustguy. It wasn't sockpuppetry, so the employer may have been paying a lot of meatpuppets from different ISPs or locations. I won't be surprised to see them at Deletion Review. Robert McClenon (talk) 07:22, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVIII, February 2021[edit]

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVIII, February 2021[edit]

Splitting off foreign involvement in the Uganda–Tanzania War[edit]

Hello Indy! After reading the comments on the length of the Uganda–Tanzania War in the A-Class review, and witnessing your attempts to trim the article a bit, I had an idea. How about we split off a new article, titled perhaps "Foreign support of Uganda in the Uganda–Tanzania War" (the title is modelled after Foreign support of Finland in the Winter War). As it stands, the involvement of foreign powers on Amin's side sits awkwardly in the "Border clashes and Battle of Mutukula" section, somewhat stopping the text's flow and expanding the already big article. In the new article, we could put all the details and rumours we have found on foreign support, removing most of the excess stuff from the main article (like notes on Zaire and Morocco) and condensing the less notable involvement (for example the in-line stuff about Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and the Soviet Union) into a few sentences, such as "Several foreign actors reportedly also supported Amin, including Saudi Arabia and Pakistan." The new article could also provide space to give more details on the Libyan and PLO involvement. What do you think? Applodion (talk) 21:56, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

@Applodion: I sympathize with your concerns, but I feel that the foreign involvement on Uganda's behalf is still too sparse to warrant its own article. The exception is the Libyan/PLO intervention, which is key to understanding the war (particularly the Libyan actions) and fits right into the main narrative. If we created a seperate article there would be a lot of redundancy in this regard. Of course this could change if we find more about, say, what Pakistan was up to. -Indy beetle (talk) 14:29, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

As a matter of fact, we already know more than what is currently included in the main article. For example, it is not really clear whether the Soviet advisors actually stopped supporting Amin during the war. The Guardian reported in March 1979 that the Soviets still aided the UA. The turn-around of the Soviet stance in regard to Amin seen for example here are also not covered. In Social Disorganisation in Uganda: Before, during, and after Amin (p. 629) it is also stated that the "Soviet Union continued to supply Amin with arms" during the war. Interestingly, this article claims that Soviet and Chinese advisors were seen in the open in Tanzania, supporting the TPDF during the Invasion of Kagera, while noting that the Soviets "arm both Tanzania and Uganda". This article argues that the Soviets offered aid to Amin that was turned down by the Ugandans. There are also details not yet mentioned in the main article which might be noteworthy in regards in the Libyans and PLO: This article mentions that the Libyans were unpopular in Liyba due to their indiscipline, with a least one violent clash between Libyan and Ugandan soldiers taking place in Kampala. In regards to the Pakistanis, this article notes that Libya often used "Pakistani instructors" to support its allies.
Then there are cases of individual weapon salesmen such as Frank Terpil (See here, and here) who provided Amin with equipment until the fall of Kampala. Another case is George Gregary Korkala who also sold weapons to Amin during the war. This article also mentions that at least some East Germans aided Amin until his downfall. This article in German also provides extra information on how badly the Ugandan intervention was received in Libya, where the intelligence service even feared a coup and Libyans covertly protested against Amin's presence with graffiti after the war. It's these kinds of details I would put into an "foreign support" article. Applodion (talk) 15:52, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

@Applodion: Interesting. I am certainly skeptical of some of those articles, but I suppose they do merit some discussion. If you want to lay out an article you have my support, but I can't be of much help right now as I'm feeling ill (currently hoping its not COVID). -Indy beetle (talk) 18:34, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Oh no! I hope you get better soon! In regards to the article, I will start working on a draft; and the fact that the newspapers contradict each other indeed makes it important to look at them with scrutiny. IMO, that's exactly something which could be done in a seperate article. I will see how much useable information I can collect. Applodion (talk) 22:11, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

PragerU[edit]

As the editor who made this change [[1]], do you have opinions on the recent move away from it? [[2]] Springee (talk) 22:06, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 42[edit]

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:28, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXIX, March 2021[edit]

Irene Zoppi[edit]

Now that Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Irene M. Zoppi has closed, I'm hoping you realize that your preachy condescending comment was completely unnecessary. Have a nice day - wolf 19:46, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

@Thewolfchild: Please can the snark, I don't make a habit of running to people's user talk to throw jabs at them over a closed discussion. I apologize for offending you, my intention was not to condescend. My main regret is not at first noticing your clever pun about women generals. I improperly indented my comment, which made it seem I was commenting only on what you said, whereas I meant it to be applied more...generally to all participants in the discussion. I generally feel compelled to remind people that "subject is in undercovered area" should not be respected as a keep argument when I see it, though we can celebrate the happy coincidence when notability is established. The alternative is stuff like this where we have PAID SPA's declaring that if we don't keep their client's article (a Nigerian businessman) we "silence minority voices" and are showing "racial bias" and the like. Or here where we have a long time well-established editor who almost always votes delete instead voting keep on a pet subject of theirs and telling us that a deletion "would just add to the systemic bias excluding articles on things in Africa", which coming from them sounded incredibly dubious. I don't intend to see this become an acceptable practice. -Indy beetle (talk) 20:38, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Fair enough. You're still welcome to my scotch. - wolf 20:46, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Apologies[edit]

I should self-trout for reverting your edit based on the edit summary alone, and without looking more closely. I had been deep in the plaktow of trying to massively revise the article, and had been a bit startled to see the changes you made. Anyway, my apologies, I will slow down in the future. Beccaynr (talk) 02:31, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

@Beccaynr: No harm done, I could've handled myself better too. Your concerns were legitimate, and your phrasing has indeed reduced COPYVIO concerns. -Indy beetle (talk) 02:38, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Cheers, and for whatever it's worth, I've been doing the frequent citation thing because I'm preparing the article for ARS, because some members have Newspapers.com subscriptions, and I plan to ask them to try to fill in the article with additional references, so it's both a habit from how I initially build out articles and an attempt to keep track of where information is sourced from, and in this instance, with a hope that more citations and information will be added. Beccaynr (talk) 02:44, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Calvin E. Lightner[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Calvin E. Lightner you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of LM150 -- LM150 (talk) 16:41, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Calvin E. Lightner[edit]

The article Calvin E. Lightner you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Calvin E. Lightner for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of LM150 -- LM150 (talk) 18:21, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GAR Nomination of Idi Amin[edit]

I was looking at the talk page history for this article and found your request for Good Article Reassessment. I will proceed with this and put it under your name; hope this is OK with your good self. --Whiteguru (talk) 00:07, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Photos for cropping[edit]

• [3]
• [4]

Thanks! -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 00:54, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Abdallah Nasur[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Abdallah Nasur you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of DiplomatTesterMan -- DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 02:41, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXX, April 2021[edit]

Alec Sutherland[edit]

You put a neutrality tag on this article. I don't personally see the problem. But I recognize YMMV, and you may be right. If there is one, please fix it and remove the tag. I moved the language you cited at the article talk page to a note. This is getting in the way of the DYK nomination. Template:Did you know nominations/Alec Sutherland Thanks. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 12:08, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

ref = harv[edit]

As a note, you do not need to set |ref=harv in citation templates any longer for automatic linking from a shortened footnote template. If you are doing so based on a template page, please let me know what that page is so it can be removed. Izno (talk) 17:34, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

• @Izno: My understanding was that the change only applied to cite books. Does it work for all cite templates? -Indy beetle (talk) 17:39, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

  Yes, the change was for all citation templates in the CS1 or CS2 families. Izno (talk) 18:52, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Katangese ranks[edit]

You seem like a person in the know! Do you have any sources for the rank structure/insignia for the Katangese Gendarmerie? I would like to make a rank page for it but I'm struggling finding sources.

Lankyant (talk) 22:31, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

@Lankyant: That will be difficult to find. When it was created the gendarmerie based its organization almost entirely off of the former-Force Publique regulations, so the rank structure is probably very similar. Contrary to what you may expect, The Katangese Gendarmes And War in Central Africa by Erik Kennes and Miles Larmer does not have information of this sort. If I were you, I'd look into some of Helion and Company's Africa@War series books here. In my experience they're more likely to include something like that. You're best bets are probably Congo Unravelled: Military Operations from Independence to the Mercenary Revolt 1960-68 by Andrew Hudson or Ripe For Rebellion : Political and Military Insurgency in the Congo, 1946-1964 by Stephen Rookes. -Indy beetle (talk) 23:51, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Cheers boss, I will. I've managed to garner a few things through going through Gendarmerie related photos and I had assumed it would have been based on the Force Publique but it's a shame because it's clear it has its own insignia but it's scattered all over the place.

But thanks for the pointers I'll have a look.

Lankyant (talk) 23:56, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 6[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ikiza, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bantu.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Unokat[edit]

I totally missed you had a Unokat draft and it's brilliant. I'm happy to use yours if you wanna change it.

Lankyant (talk) 13:10, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

@Lankyant: No worries, I think we can work out some ways to integrate the content. I haven't worked on that draft in a long time and its quite incomplete, anyhow. Hoskyns has a pretty good timeline of Unokat that I'll consult in the near future, though fair warning my final exams don't rap up until Monday evening. -Indy beetle (talk) 13:14, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

No worries mate, good luck!