Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history

Main pageDiscussionNews &
open tasksAcademyAssessmentA-Class
reviewContestAwardsMembers

Summary of Military history WikiProject open tasks watch · edit · full list News and announcements The July newsletter is now available. Editors are advised that Featured Articles promoted before 2016 are in need of review, if you had an article promoted to Featured status on or before 2016 please check and update your article before they are listed at FAR/C. Current discussions No major discussions are open at the moment Featured article candidates Jozo Tomasevich • Benjamin Jackson (sailor) • Battle of Tinian • Henry Macandrew • Brighton hotel bombing Featured article review Byzantine Empire • Battle of Red Cliffs • Edward I of England • Northrop YF-23 • Middle Ages Featured list candidates List of Eureka Stockade defenders Featured list removal candidates List of deaths at the Berlin Wall Featured picture candidates Thorsten Nordenfelt A-Class review Henry Biard • Fort Corcoran • Sihanouk Trail • Boot Monument • Miyoshi Nagayoshi • Ernest J. King • Tim Hughes (soldier) • British nuclear weapons and the Falklands War • Lockheed YF-22 Peer reviews Muckrach Castle • Regency of Algiers • Military logistics • Military dictatorship • Henry Clay Work • Galatian War Good article nominees Ava–Hanthawaddy War (1401–1403) • Aérospatiale SA 330 Puma • 1864 Washington Arsenal explosion • George II of Greece • Roswell incident • Maximiliano Hernández Martínez • Mohammad Shah Qajar • Gubir shootdown • Mariano R. Vázquez • Gotha WD.7 • Constantine II (emperor) • Japanese destroyer Natsuzuki • Battle of Lewisburg • Sentient (intelligence analysis system) • Eleanor of Castile • Charles Upham • The Motherland Calls • Soldiers' and Sailors' Arch • Monument to the uprising of the people of Kordun and Banija • Destruction of cultural heritage during the 2023–2024 Israeli invasion of Gaza • Amazon-class frigate (1795) • Northrop B-2 Spirit • Udagbedo • Battle of Ekiokpagha • Simon Stuart (general) • Black Hills National Cemetery • Ernie Pike • Duncan MacDougall (British Army officer) • 170th Rifle Division (Soviet Union) • Alfred Sully • Dabney Coleman • Benin Air Force • Battle of Mosul (2016–2017) • Crusading movement • Battle of Thorgo Good article reassessments Joe Rice • Gettysburg Cyclorama • Kowloon Walled City • 65th Infantry Regiment (United States) Articles that need... work on referencing and citation (147,793) • only work on referencing and citation (43,186) • work on coverage and accuracy (122,998) • only work on coverage and accuracy (19,761) • work on structure (31,821) • only work on structure (359) • work on grammar (8,171) • only work on grammar (46) • work on supporting materials (32,817) • only work on supporting materials (1,337) • assessment (1) • assessment as lists (4) • project tags fixed (11) • assessment checklists added (0) • assessment checklists completed (0) • task forces added (280) • attention to task force coverage (656)

Change to 96th Infantry page needed

@WP:MILHIST coordinators: @Fyrfly357: I have moved this from the co-ordinator talk page and changed the title from: change to 96th Infantry page? in order to give it move coverage. At first reading, I think some change is needed in these articles. Also, perhaps we might need to investigate other instances of this sort of thing in other articles connected to the blocked user. Donner60 (talk) 21:15, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I am on the board of the 96th Infantry Division Heritage Association and need some guidance regarding a modification of the Wiki history of the 96th Infantry Division (United States).

Our group is composed mainly of descendants and friends of members of the WWII 96th ID (US) dedicated to the preservation of the history of the 96th. We have been collecting information from the Army archives in St. Louis, MO. We also have contact with the Ft Douglas Museum in Salt Lake City, UT which is storing some of our material as well as records of the 96th successor reserve units. Our intention is to expand on the history of the 96th ID and also add to the information of the after war reserve units. While the reserves were not combat units, they did serve in several post-war conflicts.

In June of 2008 the original 96th ID Wiki page was renamed to 96th Sustainment Brigade, without discussion, by a “Dcfowler1” with the 96th ID page now being a redirect. We were not the only group affected and it seems his actions resulted in a temporary suspension of editing privileges.

Since the 96th ID was the parent organization we would like to know if it would be possible to reverse this and return to the original configuration retaining the 96th SB page as a redirect. The majority of the article pertains to the WWII organization so we feel that this is not an unreasonable request. Alternatively, would it be possible to split the existing article and have separate pages for the 96th ID and 96th SB.

Is this something that falls in line with the goals of the WP:MilHist project? Since the 96th ID page already exists, it is my understanding that any changes of this sort would require the assistance of an administrator. We do not wish to cause any problems or disruption so any suggestions, advise, or guidance you could give would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you for your time and consideration. Fyrfly357 (talk) 17:47, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@Fyrfly357: Hi, might I suggest you place this query on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history instead? This page is for the coordination of the WikiProject rather than content matters relating to the wider topic. Thanks, Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 18:05, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I'm still kind of a newbie at all this. Fyrfly357 (talk) 14:45, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Donner60 (talk) 21:15, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Dear all, I am happy to take this on. The key issue is the official Center for Military History lineage of the 96th Sustainment Brigade. What is the connection, if any to the lineage of the 96th Infantry Division, as shown in the official Lineage and Honors certificate? Buckshot06 (talk) 06:04, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

OK. The data is available in the division article. The 96th Inf Div was disbanded in late 1965. The 96th Army Reserve Command (ARCOM) formed a few years later was a TDA not a TO&E formation and thus did not inherit the division's official lineage. I would propose to split the article, 96th Inf Div to 1965; now 96th Sustainment Brigade, descending from the 96th Army Reserve Command, from c1969. Any and all comments welcome. Buckshot06 (talk) 06:10, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

@Buckshot06 and Fyrfly357: Looks good to me. I am pinging Fyrfly357 who may wish to comment. Donner60 (talk) 06:04, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

@Buckshot06 and @Donner60: Wow! I had no idea that you guys would be able to handle this so quick. We obviously need to do some cleanup editing, but this looks good. Just have to get the rest of the group in to gear. Thanks again to both of you. Fyrfly357 (talk) 17:34, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

At Wiki#History you will see "wiki" means "quick." ;) Buckshot06 (talk) 12:14, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

War crimes in the Russian invasion of Ukraine has an RfC

War crimes in the Russian invasion of Ukraine has an RfC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. JDiala (talk) 21:29, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Seeking opinions at Talk:Howitzer

Part of the 20th-century subsection of this article is attributed to Modern Guns and Gunnery by H.A. Bethell, a pre-WWI book that you can read here. After skimming it, I found some significant inaccuracies in what the article claims about early 20-century usage of the term "howitzer". Feel free to double-check and chime in. Huntthetroll (talk) 23:41, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

American Civil War locations

Hello American Civil War friends! Just wanted to let you know that the Walter Johnson's River of Dark Dreams has prompted an interest in the pre-Civil War landscape of the lower Mississippi. Wanted to flag some recently developed articles on minor boat landings (all now washed away by the River) that could use your expertise on ACW military movements; additional categories, see also, links, and content very welcome!

• Skipwith's Landing, Mississippi
• Goodrich's Landing, Louisiana
• Milliken's Bend, Louisiana
• Columbia, Arkansas
• Gaines Landing, Arkansas

Thanks in advance for any further development! Best, jengod (talk) 04:27, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

See Battle of Goodrich's Landing and Battle of Milliken's Bend. The largest amphibious operation prior to D-Day was made at Bruinsburg, Mississippi by General Grant's forces leading to the Battle of Port Gibson and the Vicksburg campaign. The semi-retired, but still somewhat active, Hog Farm is the most knowledgeable editor whom I am aware of on the Western Theater and the Vicksburg campaign in particular. Donner60 (talk) 10:02, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Seeking Third Opinions on Sihang Warehouse

I opened a RfC regarding English sources on the participating Japanese forces during the Defense of Sihang Warehouse but have yet to hear any input. In short the Japanese order of battle in English sources is contradicted by Japanese sources, including official military histories, but an editor has been arguing in favor of keeping the evidently wrong claims from English sources in favor of using Japanese ones. I have also written up a summary of Japanese participating forces according to a variety of Japanese sources on the article's talk page. I would really appreciate any input on the matter, especially from those who can read Japanese. Adachi1939 (talk) 01:01, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

I would be surprised if you find many users who can read Japanese who are not listed on the page Wikipedia:Translators available#Japanese-to-English. Note that the Japanese list has sub-categories of years active but at least some of those listed for years after 2017 are still active. Perhaps there are others but I don't know if there is a way to find them if they have not listed themselves on the linked page. I suspect at least some of the limited number users who can read Japanese don't watch the noticeboard. For what it this is worth. Perhaps a few may read your post here, however. Donner60 (talk) 10:34, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Requested lowercasings of several military equipment articles...

...which, if passed, might expand to many more. See Talk:All-purpose Lightweight Individual Carrying Equipment#Requested move 24 July 2024. Randy Kryn (talk) 08:56, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

IP editor re-writing Operation Market Garden

An IP-editor is making assertions about the reliability of a source at Operation Market Garden and is re-writing the article to suit this assertion. Given that he/she hasn't shown any proof of this, I have ask the IP not to edit the article but discuss on the talk page. It would be really helpful if someone more experience with WW2 matters than me could take a look and intervene. Happy to be told I'm wrong if that's the case. 10mmsocket (talk) 15:09, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

There were references in his edits, yet you decided to revert his changes.

You didn’t “ask the IP not to edit”, you canned them snd closed the page temporarily.

Op MG is surrounded by multiple myths instigated by Cornelius Ryan, that even his own publicly accessible archive proves were incorrect.

You even attacked me in the past for saying similar things on the talk pages, claiming that Ryan is an acceptable source, and was it you who said the same to me about Ambrose?

At some point I will significantly alter the article with the accurate information our team has built up, all suitably referenced. Enderwigginau (talk) 06:20, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

And the reference to "our team" would indicate you may be attempting to assert some kind of ownership over the article. That's not acceptable behavior, either. Intothatdarkness 16:01, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Incorrect, the reference to “our team” refers to a number of researchers specifically working on MG outside Wikipedia.

IWM and others are slowly revising their information due to what we are providing.

So, no, I don’t “own” anything, but defending those attacking the introduction of a more correct and accurate article says a lot.

Considering the references included in the edits were Pollussen and Wilmot, there is simply no reason to remove them when they were adequately referenced and factually accurate.

Gatekeeping an article implies believing ownership exists. Enderwigginau (talk) 00:15, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Casting aspersions does little to advance your case. I was commenting on your tone, which feels rather aggressive to an observer and not especially collaborative, and have no stake in this article at all. And from my vantage point it feels rather like you simply want to switch gatekeepers (assuming one exists in the first place). But as this behavior seems par for the course these days, please do carry on. Intothatdarkness 13:20, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Gatekeeping of articles

I have noticed over the last twelve months a number of instances of gatekeeping on military history articles, with certain editors reverting changes even when suitably referenced, removing comments from talk pages, blocking and submitting users for review, and temporarily closing edits. What is the view of those here regarding this type of behaviour? Enderwigginau (talk) 06:14, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

@Enderwigginau Ditto. I noticed this exact same behavior. Have you noticed it to be one repeated offender or many different people? Alexysun (talk) 07:15, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

I have a fair few articles on watch but I haven't noticed any chicanery. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 08:33, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Multiple but some multiple times.

Not outing anyone at this point. Enderwigginau (talk) 08:37, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Please retract your threat of WP:outing. There is no place for harrassment here.Nigel Ish (talk) 08:44, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

You are deliberately stirring the pot now, Nigel Ish. No-one threatened to WP:OUT anyone in the WP sense, Enderwigginay clearly meant 'not going to name names at this point. ——Serial Number 54129 10:31, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Discussion unwatched - clearly I am not welcome at this discussion.Nigel Ish (talk) 11:39, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

I presume you are referring to my recent actions at Operation Market Garden and your subsequent allegations on the article's talk page? I'll repeat what I just posted there, which is "As for your allegations of "gatekeeping", what has happened is nothing like the unacceptable behaviour set out in WP:OWN. Instead it has been about reverting damage to the article caused by a block-evading sockpuppet. Nobody else's contributions have been challenged, so I fail to see how that is "gatekeeping" or ownership behaviour. I would encourage you to read WP:AGF before making further comment." 10mmsocket (talk) 11:54, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Western Front tactics, 1917

Western Front tactics, 1917 Anyone mind me removing the banner? Regards Keith-264 (talk) 14:37, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for 65th Infantry Regiment (United States)

65th Infantry Regiment (United States) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 22:41, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

De-capitalisation of all terms and article names

Yet again, over at Talk:All-purpose Lightweight Individual Carrying Equipment this time. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:13, 29 July 2024 (UTC)