| Revision as of 20:26, 5 October 2012 editEdwardsBot (talk | contribs)354,693 edits →The Bugle: Issue LXXVIII, September 2012: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 02:18, 24 October 2012 edit undoEdwardsBot (talk | contribs)354,693 edits →The Bugle: Issue LXXIX, October 2012: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 272: | Line 272: | ||
| </div> | </div> | ||
| <!-- EdwardsBot 0377 --> | <!-- EdwardsBot 0377 --> | ||
| == ''The Bugle'': Issue LXXIX, October 2012 == | |||
| {| style="width: 100%;" | |||
| | valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" | | |||
| {| | |||
| | ] | |||
| | width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; color: darkslategray;">'''Your Military History Newsletter'''</div> | |||
| <div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;"> | |||
| * Project news: '']'' | |||
| * Articles: '']'' | |||
| * Book reviews: '']'' | |||
| * Op-ed: '']'' | |||
| </div> | |||
| |- | |||
| |} | |||
| |} | |||
| <div style="font-size: 85%; margin:0 auto; text-align:center;"> | |||
| ''The Bugle'' is published by the ]. To receive it on your talk page, please ] or sign up ].<br/>If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from ]. Your editors, ] (]) and ] (]) 02:18, 24 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| </div> | |||
| <!-- EdwardsBot 0390 --> | |||
Revision as of 02:18, 24 October 2012
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)