Okkar

Military of Myanmar

Thank you for your contributions to this article. It is frowned upon, however, to remove the text or photographs of articles without discussion why you are doing so. I am reverting some of the changes you've made. Chris 20:43, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. Metros232 23:23, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I see that you have reverted even after Metros' warning. Following Wikipedia protocol, I am leaving a warning about WP:3RR on your talk page. This has gone on long enough. At your next unagreed upon deletion of material from Military of Myanmar, I will be reporting you for violation of the three revert rule.

So that this stops, I invite you to post your wishes at Wikipedia:WikiProject Burma/Myanmar, if other members agree, your edits can stay. Chris 23:33, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I have added WikiPedia noncompliant and POVchecks for the article since that is the only way to ensure no politically motivated unrelated information are added to the article. I have also posted to Wikipedia:WikiProject Burma/Myanmar for further request. Again I would like to point out that, we as contributors to Wikipedia must be neutral according to WP:NPOV.Okkar 00:29, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to the Military history WikiProject!

Hi, and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.

A few features that you might find helpful:

• Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
• The announcement and open task box is updated very frequently. You can watchlist it if you're interested; or, you can add it directly to your user page by including {{WPMILHIST Announcements}} there.
• Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
• The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, peer review, and project-wide collaboration.
• We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, periods, and conflicts.
• Our requests page has extensive lists of requested articles, images, maps, and translations.
• We've developed a variety of guidelines for article structure and content, template use, categorization, and other issues that you may find useful.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask one of the project coordinators, or any experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Kirill Lokshin 02:14, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Mediation for naming of Wikiproject Burma/Myanmar

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Wikipedia:WikiProject Burma/Myanmar, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible. --Hintha 06:35, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party has been accepted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Wikipedia:WikiProject Burma/Myanmar. For the Mediation Committee, Essjay (Talk) This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to open new mediation cases. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

This message delivered: 00:15, 8 January 2007 (UTC).

Chatroom

Is the chatroom you directed me to affiliated to the national government? It has the standard bearings of typical Burmese state-owned media, stating the following:

- **************************************************************** 
- *           Welcome to Myanmar Online IRC Network              * 
- *           -------------------------------------              * 
- *                 http://www.myanmaronline.org                 * 
- *                                                              * 
- * Our Three Main National causes:                              * 
- *  + Non-disintegration of the Union - Our casue               * 
- *  + Non-disintegration of national solidarity  - Our cause    * 
- *  + Perpetuation of national sovereignty - Our casue          * 
- *                                                              * 
- * Our Four political objectives                                * 
- *  + Stability of the State, community peace and tranquillity, * 
- *    prevalence of law and order.                              * 
- *  + National reconsolidation                                  * 
- *  + Emergence of a new enduring State Constitution            * 
- *  + Building of a new modern developed nation in accord with  * 
- *    the new State Constitution                                * 
- *                                                              * 
- * Our People Desires                                           * 
- *  + Oppose those relying on external elements,                * 
- *    acting as stooges, holding negative views.                * 
- *  + Oppose those trying to jeopardize stability of the State  * 
- *    and progress of the nation.                               * 
- *  + Oppose foreign nations interfering in internal affairs    * 
- *    of the State.                                             * 
- *  + Crush all the internal and external distructive elements  * 
- *    as the common enemies.                                    * 

And I can't seem to go in the ygnchat; it merely takes me back to the statements above. --Hintha 01:40, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

It is in no way affiliated to the government, however, in order not get blocked, we have to attached the MOTD as instructed. You have to register a nick name before you can join. This network has been around since 2003 and has been used by all internet users in Myanmar as this is their only way out when gtalk, Yahoo and MSN are banned. btw, you are welcome to Myanmar Online (initially it was called Burmese Online and had to rename it due to the blocking).

Okkar 01:53, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I've removed your POV check and NPOV tags from the discussion page, because those tags are for articles and not discussions, where you are supposed to voice your opinions. If you would like, you can add those tags to the main page. --Hintha 03:53, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I added it there because it shows the political orientation of the project coordinators and the discussion thread as whole, and it is important for anyone who is carry out checks to make the assestment based upon these discussion. It is very relevant. Okkar 04:00, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I find it extremely insulting that you would claim that I, along with the other respectable members of the Wikiproject, have political agendas. I have repeatedly reverted countless edits by anonymous users/vandals who change the capital from Naypyidaw to Yangon on the Myanmar article, until I was able to appease them by adding a note indicating some governments do not recognise the new capital. In addition, I have repeatedly opposed Myanmar article "moves" to Myanmar, arguing here (dated over one month ago), for instance, against the name change to Burma (check my user contributions to see all of the reverts I have had to do). Recently, there has been a surge of anonymous users adding POV material about Thandar Shwe on Than Shwe's article, but I, acting in good faith, removed them all. You should actually look at my user contributions. If the name of the country article were "Burma/Myanmar", I would clearly understand why you would have such objections, but it isn't. Purely political motivations are not the only reasons why "Burma" is still used. --Hintha 09:20, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

If there was no political agenda, why is it necessary for you to even "appease" the demands of the oppositions? we supposed to contribute the contents that are fair, netural, impartial and verifiable, not accomodating the poltical blackmails in the form of vandalism. Every controversial articles on Wikipedia have problems with vandalism and but adding contents simply to "appease" vandals isnt the way to resolve the issue. Further more, if the name of country article is simple "Myanmar", why would you still insists upon having the project name as "Burma/Myanmar", not only that it doesnt make sense, it is counterproductive in the sense of adding confusion over already complicated matters. The bottom line is .. "is the country name Burma or Myanmar", it's one or the other, not both. Even the scope of Wikiproject contradicts the project name as I have already pointed that out in the other thread. Needless to mention the fact that our country's project is the only project with "two" names in Wiki Country Project. While you are "appeasing" people with political agendas, we as a country paying the price for it. Please try to look things from a wider perspective, this isnt just a simple WikiProject, it is "our country's" wikiproject, have a little pride! Okkar 09:39, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Than Shwe

Thanks for your edit. You sparked me to make a minor copy-edit to the article, just trying to make it flow better. I don't think I changed your emphasis at all -- seemed fine to me -- but please check! Andrew Dalby 12:37, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

It's fine mate, I was rushing through it and i guess i left out some really odd sentences :-) Okkar 14:55, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Myanmar Wide Web

I moved your discussion to the article itself-that is the place to put it, as more people than just the Project would be interested to know that. Actually, the best way to get the article deleted or improved would be to put it up for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, then someone will verify and you can get the whole of Wikipedia to check it. Chris 16:08, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, I learn something new today :-) Okkar 16:19, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Removing honorifics

Please remove honorifics from the following articles (per Manual of Style conventions):

• Aung San Thuriya Saw Bayi
• Aung San Thuriya Hla Aung
• Aung San Thuriya Aye Cho
• Aung San Thuriya Taik Chun

Thank you. --Hintha 04:36, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Re Request for help

Hi, sorry its taken me a couple of days to get back to you.

First of all, don't worry about the suspected sock puppet report. That page has a backlog to almost the point of collapse. I just don't see it getting anywhere and I wouldn't worry.

I see now that the formal mediation has been accepted. Though it tends to take a couple of weeks, hopefully that should solve things. --Robdurbar 10:11, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Is Wikipedia the mouth piece of NCGUB? (Military of Myanmar)

Why was it necessary for you to remove Military of Myanmar from Myanmar category? was it not represent the country's armed forces or was it because you think it would offend those parties that you are associated with? What are you trying to prove? that Wikiproject Burma/Myanmar only paddle articles that are sanctioned and blessed by NCGUB? is that what you are trying to show? I thought you said you found it insulting to have been accused of having political agendas, but it seems your actions betrayed your words entirely. How can you be free of political motivation and agendas, when you deliberately removed Military of Myanmar out of Myanmar category? It just goes to show how you and your friends are exploiting Wikipedia as a mouthpiece of NCGUB to paddle their political stance towards the country. Okkar 17:39, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

You shouldn't aggressively accuse others of being biased without prior knowledge. If you actually took a look at Category:Myanmar, you would find that there are very few articles that exist in that category, because more specific categories have been created, which in the case of "Military of Myanmar" is the category of that same name. For this same reason, articles like "Economy of Myanmar", "Culture of Myanmar", "History of Myanmar", "Politics of Myanmar", "Communication in Myanmar", "Education in Myanmar", just to name a few, appear only in those specific categories and not the general "Myanmar" category, which is mainly for uncategorised articles and the "Myanmar" article. Next time, before you accuse me of trying to "paddle articles that [have been] sanctioned and blessed by NCGUB", you should see how Wikipedia categories work and check out other country cats (e.g. Category:Singapore, Category:Australia) just to name a few). And don't warn me for vandalism without providing a more reasonable explanation. (This is a response to the following 3 posts: 1, 2, 3) --Hintha 23:02, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Removed rank titles

I have taken the liberty of removing the military rank titles from the article names of the following:

• Hla Thaung
• Aye Cho
• Taik Chun

As per Manual of Style conventions, Wikipedia articles leave out honorifics and titles from article titles (for example, check out Category:Chinese military personnel, in which no articles contain "Private", "General", etc.) If you are ever unsure of something, just refer to that excellent resource. --Hintha 23:24, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Zarni AfD

Hi there! I've completed the deletion nomination for this article - you can see it here. It's probably a good idea for you to edit the discussion and explain why you think the article should be deleted. Tevildo 21:21, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Images

I noticed you tagged a lot of images such as Image:Mm-northern-rmc.jpg as {{pd-self}}. What program have you been using to create these? Metros232 21:28, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Adobe Illustrator.. want to see my artwork in original form to prove that this is my work? Okkar 01:25, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Myanmar Armed Forces

Maybe the reason some users don't reply to what you say is because they're afraid of being accused of having political leanings, and being aggressively attacked for what they think. I support splitting up the articles as long as summaries are left in the main article. But, I suggest the article be moved back to "Military of Myanmar", to keep it standardized (like other country-military articles, which are named "Military of ...", while redirects link back to those articles. --Hintha 08:59, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

It is neither aggressive nor to be consider as attacks, when you stand up and make a point. If they have done nothing wrong, why would they be afraid of speaking up for what they believed in? I thought democracy promote the freedom of speech?? As for moving the article, I did not move the article but it seems appropiate to have moved, as other countries, such as Britain have it as "British Armed Forces". We should try to be consistent. Okkar 09:26, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

What vandalism is

Please read WP:VANDAL to find out what vandalism really is. Vandalism is not defined as "other users interesting information you disagree with" as seems to be your definition per your reverts of SimonBillenness (talk · contribs). That's not vandalism, that's a content dispute. Please try to engage in conversation on talk pages rather than reverting each other constantly. Metros232 16:18, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing in Myanmar. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. Kusma (討論) 16:20, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Military of Myanmar. For the Mediation Committee, Essjay (Talk) This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

This message delivered: 00:15, 13 January 2007 (UTC).

Image:TaikChun.jpg listed for deletion

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as Image:TaikChun.jpg has been listed for speedy deletion because you selected a copyright license type implying some type of restricted use, such as for non-commercial use only, or for educational use only or for use on Wikipedia by permission. While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, a non-profit website, this is in fact not the case. Please do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them, because content on Wikipedia needs to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License, which allows anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial.

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{GFDL-self}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If you have any questions please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you. NawlinWiki 13:09, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

NawlinWiki 13:09, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Tin Tun

I have referenced and sourced all that is in the article-the reference section at the bottom has been there since the article was created, those are the sources-everything in there is verified. Chris 20:26, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Myanmar

Please see Talk:Myanmar#Removal_of_cited_information_and_ISBN_numbers. --Hintha 01:47, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

consultation

Okkar hello. I'm contacting you and some other members of wikipedia for a personal reason. I'm an Italian National about to leave for Myanmar. I've already been in the Golden Land managing business for a private italian company some years ago. This time I'd like to make a life experience there, stay longer and find a job. Mission impossible? It would be helpful and interesting to exchange some opinion with you and have a clearer vision of what I will find. PS. If possible answer to my email address ik4fmy@yahoo.it —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Clape (talk • contribs) 14:07, 17 January 2007 (UTC).

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XI - January 2007

The January 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 21:14, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

WP:MILHIST Coordinator Elections

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect seven coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 11!

Delivered by grafikbot 11:22, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Deleting images from Myanmar_Armed_Forces article

Please see that the images were deleted and are on the article as red links, as such they are of no use anymore. Thanks, feydey 21:43, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Accusatory remarks

Okkar, before you go around accusing yet another Wikipedia user of vandalism, please check to see whether the edits were made in good faith (Wikipedia:Assume good faith). Feydey was only cleaning up the article (rv - no reasons were giving for removing the images - vandalism??), because two of the images ([1], [2]) had been deleted for not having been properly sourced. Hence, they were not there, and as you see, those two images are missing now, because an administrator had deleted them ([3]). Thank you. --Hintha 22:26, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

What are you? remark police? I made the point for not leaving proper reasoning! If he had left the reasons with his delete, I would not have to make any remarks! please stop sucking up to foriegners! you are only emberassing yourself. Okkar 08:48, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

When you make undiscussed, repeated edits against the way the project itself is set up, that is vandalism, and saying so is not a personal attack. If you want to change the way the membership list is set up, discuss it first. I will continue to revert your changes until you do. Chris 19:26, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Violations of WP:AGF, WP:CIVIL, and WP:NPA

As a member of the Wikipedia community, you have agreed to follow the guidelines and policies here. The following comment by you is a violation of several of these policies:

Finally, the common sense has prevailed and triumphed over destructive mindset of opposition groups and their minions who are using this project as a political propaganda tool. It is a victory over those who seek out to degrade our country by insisting to use the old colonial name of the country as the name of the project and the axe handles who colluded with foreigners with mob mentality to remove anyone who don’t support or share their politically biased views from this project by any means necessary, even if it means they have to cheat or lied.

If you are not willing to follow Wikipedia's rules, please stop editing. If you want to continue to edit, you must stop attacking other editors and focus on improving the content of articles. -- John Broughton (☎☎) 19:13, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Please cite exactly which part of my comments broke these policies instead of wholesale asscusation of the violation, point by point - if you dont mind. I followed Wikipedia's rules and stated the obivious, I have not made personal attack to any particular person by name - WP:NPA is out of the question here, as for WP:AGF and WP:CIVIL, neither applies to my comments since it was not an uncivilised comments although it may have been a rather brute assestment of the reality. so if you truly believed that I have broken these policies, please educate me where and how precisely. Okkar 22:10, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Personal attacks are defined by Wikipedia as attacks on a person's character. In your comments above, you label people as "minions" and make assumptions about their motives. In other discussions, you have personally attacked Hintha by saying she is "sucking up to foreigners." If you confine yourself to criticism of contributions to Wikipedia, rather than contributors to Wikipedia, you would make a large step towards meeting the Wikipedia standards of civility. SimonBillenness 14:09, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

This may be your view simply, doesnt necessarily mean it is the truth. "Sucking up to foreigners" doesnt mean it is a personal attack - only people who are insecure about themselves would consider that. I have made more contribution than most people, especially my contributions are factual and correct. Okkar 14:57, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to take your response as agreement that you are, like other editors, required to follow Wikipedia rules. And I agree that specifics are important here.

Assume good faith

Let's start with WP:AGF, which states There will be people on Wikipedia with whom you disagree. Even if they're wrong, that doesn't mean they're trying to wreck the project. There will be some people with whom you find it hard to work. That doesn't mean they're trying to wreck the project either.

Contrast that with your words:

• destructive mindset of opposition groups
• using this project as a political propaganda tool
• those who seek out to degrade our country
• colluded with foreigners
• politically biased views
• by any means necessary, even if it means they have to cheat or lied.

All of those involve assumptions by you about the intentions of others; all of those assumptions are negative, and therefore lacking in good faith.

Civility

You said, regarding your comment, it may have been a rather brute assestment of the reality. But the nutshell portion of WP:CIVIL includes the following: be careful to avoid offending people unintentionally. It's clear that your remarks have offended other people; I'm assuming that was unintentional on your part, since intentionally offending people, is, of course, totally inappropriate.

In addition, the policy says incivility is roughly defined as personally targeted behavior that causes an atmosphere of greater conflict and stress. The "personally targeted" means "targeted at other editors", as opposed to a discussion of content. I would hope it is clear from the comments of other editors that there indeed is greater conflict and stress here than would be the case if you had simply said something like "I'm glad the arbitration is over, I'm happy with the results; I hope we can all work together to make a better encyclopedia."

No personal attacks

WP:NPA says This page in a nutshell: Comment on content, not on the contributor. I see very little, if anything, in the comment at the top of the section, which you made, that comments on content; rather, you are discussing contributors. (Negative) comments about the behavior of other contributors, except when that the behavior is believed to have not followed Wikipedia policy or guidelines, does not help improve articles; and it does not encourage others to work cooperatively (or even to remain as contributors at all).

I also want to discuss your comment that I have not made personal attack to any particular person by name. This seems to say that you believe that personal attacks against a group of editors, not specified by name, is acceptable. Is that what you're saying? I want to be clear here that you're saying that your words were attacks, but that you believe that WP:NPA doesn't apply because you didn't mention anyone by name. (I don't agree with that position, but rather than explain why, I'd like you to confirm that is your position, and then we can discuss it further.) -- John Broughton (☎☎) 16:49, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Okkar

This case has been closed; while it is clear that the accounts in question, if not sockpuppets, were meatpuppets of you. Canvassing for others to come to Wikipedia to support your disagreements is absolutely not allowed. Since they have not edited since their brief contributions to the discussion, however, I am choosing not to place any blocks for now. Be aware, however, that if you continue in this manner, blocks will certainly be appropriate. -- Natalya 13:38, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Military History elections

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting seven coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by February 25!

Delivered by grafikbot 14:38, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Use of Reversions

Please refrain from simply reverting others' edits, particularly when the result is the reincorporation of poor grammar and incorrect spelling.

Here are some of the guidelines around reversions.

Do's

Reverting is a decision which should be taken seriously.

Reverting is used primarily for fighting vandalism, or anything very similar to the effects of vandalism.

If you are not sure whether a revert is appropriate, discuss it first rather than immediately reverting or deleting it.

If you feel the edit is unsatisfactory, improve it rather than simply reverting or deleting it.

Dont's

Do not simply revert changes that are made as part of a dispute. Be respectful to other editors, their contributions and their points of view.

Do not revert good faith edits. In other words, try to consider the editor "on the other end." If what one is attempting is a positive contribution to Wikipedia, a revert of those contributions is inappropriate unless, and only unless, you as an editor possess firm, substantive, and objective proof to the contrary. Mere disagreement is not such proof. See also Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith.

Generally there are misconceptions that problematic sections of an article or recent changes are the reasons for reverting or deletion. If they contain valid information, these texts should simply be edited and improved accordingly. Reverting is not a decision which should be taken lightly.

There's sometimes trouble determining whether some claim is true or useful, particularly when there are few people "on board" who are knowledgeable about the topic. In such a case, it's a good idea to raise objections on a talk page; if one has some reason to believe that the author of what appears to be biased material will not be induced to change it, editors have sometimes taken the step of transferring the text in question to the talk page itself, thus not deleting it entirely. This action should be taken more or less as a last resort, never as a way of punishing people who have written something biased. See also Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/FAQ

Do not revert changes simply because someone makes an edit you consider problematic, biased, or inaccurate. Improve the edit, rather than reverting it. SimonBillenness 23:59, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XII - February 2007

The February 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 16:13, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Deletion of General San Yu picture`

You deleted the above picture but left no details apart from "incompatible license". Can you please explain exactly which part of the license is incompatible? Okkar 13:56, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

• Image:General San Yu.jpg
• Okkar (talk · contribs)

Hello Okkar. The image did not have source or license information. In order to use the photo, Wikipedia needs to know where the image came from, and if its copyright holder allows its use. See Wikipedia:Uploading images for more. Where did you get the image? That would be a good start. Feel free to ask me further questions. --Fang Aili ^talk 14:42, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Dear Fang, The photo came from the archive of "Defence Services Historical Records" archives and these archives are maintained by Defense Service Museum in Yangon, Myanmar. The copy right holder of the image is Defense Service Museum and I can furnish you with authorisation letter of the commanding officer from Defense Service Museum allowing me to use the image for wikipedia. Please provide me with your postal address and I would be happy to send you the original authorisation letter for your persual. By the way... It would have been nice if you'd ask the questions before you delete the image though... Okkar 17:20, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately Wikipedia cannot accept images that can only be used on Wikipedia, or "for non-commercial use only". (See WP:CSD - Images - criteria #3.) About asking questions--we get literally hundreds of image uploads every day, and it would be impractical to personally ask about every one of them. I know it's not a perfect system, but the admins here try to keep up the best we can. Thanks, Fang Aili ^talk 19:50, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Re. Flag of Myanmar (2006 proposal)

The fact that the proposed flag has not been adopted does not mean that is it unworthy of mention. See Flag of Iraq and Flag of Bosnia and Herzegovina for examples of flags that were not adopted but still included in the articles. Kelvinc 00:58, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, If we have to include every single proposed and unadopted flags, we would have over 200 flags. Please let me know if you think we should start including all the proposed flags since 1948 independance? There have been over 200 flags which were never adopted. Okkar 09:21, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

My feeling is that we can have it there as long as it's under proposal and it can be deleted if the formal constitutional process rejects it. This is not merely some guy in a basement posting an idea on the Internet. This is the formal opinion of the committee of the current constitutional convention that has been tasked to look into this matter, a convention organized by the current government, so it stands a good chance of being accepted. I'd rank this proposal higher in official attention than the Australian flag debate (which never reached the point of a proposal to be considered by the government) and closer to the Great Flag Debate. Kelvinc 09:45, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I am not in anyway disputing the fact, I just dont want to start a feeding frenzy to those politically motivated editors, who are itching to include flags of NLD and 1001 other flags of opposition groups. If we started including unofficial flags, granted that it has been proposed but not yet formally adopted, then we would open the flood gate to these vandals are who are rubbing their paws to include their party's flags. I hope you understand my point. Okkar 10:35, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Okkar, I would caution you yet again against attacking other editors by labeling them as "politically motivated." Please keep discussion and debate confined to the contribution, not the contributor.

In any case, I believe that you have your facts wrong. After you removed the NLD flag in the Myanmar article, I simply replaced it since the NLD was noted in the article. It was you who then started adding flags of other groups despite their lack of relevance to the article. I don't know of any other editor, other than you, who has recently tried to include other party's flags.SimonBillenness 17:22, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I included all the flags that are relevant to the article, seeing as NLD flags was included, i see no reasons why we should discriminate against other opposition groups. For example, Burmese Communists Party flag has as much relevance in Myanmar history as NLD flag. After all, we cant have one rule for NLD, and one rule for the rest just to suit your political "leanings". If you wish to include NLD flag in Myanmar article simply to fufil your organisation's committment for lobbying on behalf of NLD, you have to expect that people would begin to question your motives. That said, it is no longer the case of focusing on "contribution" alone, because the said "contribution" was made with motives other than simple "contribution" to Wikipedia.

It is not attacking to "suggest" that some of the edits made by particular editors are politically motivated. For example, you are the director of "US Campaign for Burma", how does one ensure that your contributions are not biased towards opposition groups, particularly NLD and NCGUB, both of which are heavily lobbied by "US Campaign for Burma" and you just happens to be the Director of this group. I kept the discussions and debates strictly confined to the contribution, however the contribution in question just happens to be "policatlly motiviated", therefore it is not attacking nor accusing anyone in particular for questioning their political motivation. Secondly, it is hard for anyone to assume "good faith" when they come acorss articles that are writing in such a way to support lobbying of particular political party or opposition groups, one cant help but wondering if Wikipedia is being used as a lobbying platform? Your affliation and the position you hold in these lobby groups does raise questions about your motives. Surely you must realise that what you are doing is entirely contradictory to what Wikipedia stands for, not to mention breaching a number of it's core policies. Okkar 21:12, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Okkar, your claims that the flag proposal would serve as a Trojan Horse to include other flags is not borne out by the facts: the Flag of Myanmar article has been around for three years and the only edit that I think you would possibly consider as "politically motivated" is the addition of a line stating the use of the old five-star flag by the NCGUB. And that's not even adding a new flag, but stating a contemporary use of a flag that was indeed the de facto flag of the country for decades. If there are as many politically biased editors as you claim, flags for the NLD and other opposition groups would've appeared on that article ages ago, and that simply isn't the case.

Based on the history of the article, I just don't see how adding the flag proposal would create some sort of edit war. I'm restoring the proposed flag. If you feel otherwise, you can delete it and I'll take it up with the WikiProject for consensus, or better yet leave it and take it up with the WikiProject. Kelvinc 22:16, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree, in order to save the edit war, i think it would be best to take this up with WikiProject and ask for mediation. Please let me know if you are agreement and I shall request for the mediation. As for the politically biased editors, perhaps you should take a good look around in WikiProject Myanmar/Burma, you will no doubt realise how biased it gets. I suggest you start with Myanmar article to see how these politically motivated editors are using Wikipedia for lobbying purpose. If not, why else do you think the Director of "US Campaign for Burma" lobby group is extremely vocal about having NLD flag in Myanmar article? I hope you understand where I am coming from, as a native myanmar, I am sick and tired of seeing people exploiting "facts" about our country to serve political purposes through Wikipedia. Okkar 22:38, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay, let's just cool our heels for a while and let this one go for now. This article really hasn't been an ideological battleground, the way that other Myanmar-related articles may have become. Take a look at the history for the flag of the Republic of China article: now that is controversial. We're nowhere near that situation. If we start seeing edits to include proposed flags by bodies other than the SPDC-recognized or NCGUB-recognized institutions, then we'd be having a problem on our hands. However, right now in the article there are only the two de facto flags used in Myanmar since 1948, and a recent proposed flag that stands a good chance of adoption. That's pretty NPOV.

And if something does come up, let's just chat in the WikiProject first: we don't have to get all official and mediate everything. Kelvinc 02:03, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Okkar, I have made it abundantly clear on several occasions that it is perfectly reasonable to include the flag/emblem of a political party cited in an article.

Once again, you attack me by suggesting bias on my part. Please quit the constant and tiresome innuendo and provide edits of mine that exhibit bias. I'd be surprised if you find any. You are attacking people personally if you provide no evidence of biased editing.

I keep my politics separate from my Wikipedia editing. I would suggest that you do the same. Your comments above do, I believe, constitute a personal attack on me and so I will report them. Your abuse of Wikipedia standards needs to stop. SimonBillenness 04:37, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

The edit of your that exhibit bias is your insistance to include NLD flag in Myanmar article, where no other country have included flags of political party, it is plain to see what you were trying to achieve even though you use various pretext to cover the facts. Please do not threaten me with reporting to Wikipedia authority. If you feel the need, please do so and I shall be ready to defend myself with "facts" and i would be more than happy to expose how you have been using Wikipedia as a lobbying platform. Please remember Wikipedia is not owned by "US Campaign for Burma" Okkar 08:31, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XIII - March 2007

The March 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 19:49, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Mm-navy.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Mm-navy.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Fritz S. (Talk) 12:39, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Mm-airborne.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Mm-airborne.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Fritz S. (Talk) 12:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

OKKAR if you are ignorant or blinded with racism and try to vandalize without searching for the truth is your problem. I had seen your uncalled for behaviour with the quarrel with other Wiki editors. If you are the true Okkar writting notoriously in Burmese mainstream media, you could be even guilty with the crimes of Genocide at ICC.Darz kkg 01:08, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Lid22.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Lid22.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Fritz S. (Talk) 12:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide

[[4]] Approved and proposed for signature and ratification or accession by General Assembly resolution 260 A (III) of 9 December 1948 entry into force 12 January 1951, in accordance with article XIII

Article 1 The Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish.

Article 3

The following acts shall be punishable: (a) Genocide; (b) Conspiracy to commit genocide; (c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide; (d ) Attempt to commit genocide; (e) Complicity in genocide.

Article 4 Persons committing genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III shall be punished, whether they are constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals.

Article 9

Disputes between the Contracting Parties relating to the interpretation, application or fulfilment of the present Convention, including those relating to the responsibility of a State for genocide or for any of the other acts enumerated in article III, shall be submitted to the International Court of Justice at the request of any of the parties to the dispute.

Eight Stages of Genocide [[5]]

Stage 2. Symbolization.

Characteristics = "When combined with hatred, symbols may be forced upon unwilling members of pariah groups..." NLD, Opposition, Rebels, Ethnic Minorities as Non Barmans, Muslims, Christians, Chinese, even Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and Kha Maut is symbolized for hatred and annihilation.

Stage 4. Organization Characteristics = Organization "Genocide is always organized, usually by the state, though sometimes informally. Special army units or militias are often trained and armed..." or by terrorist groups. Special army units or militias are often trained and armed. Plans are made for genocidal killings.

Stage 5. Polarization "Hate groups broadcast polarizing propaganda..." SPDC’s bill boards around the country, SPDC various media, pamphlets speeches are full with this hate propaganda. Extremists drive the groups apart. Laws may forbid intermarriage or social interaction. Extremist terrorism targets moderates, intimidating and silencing the center

Stage 6.

Identification "Victims are identified and separated out because of their ethnic or religious identity..." This is very obvious with the SPDC, even no need to elaborate further. Death lists are drawn up. Members of victim groups are forced to wear identifying symbols. They are often segregated into ghettoes, forced into concentration camps, or confined to a famine-struck region and starved. "At this stage, a Genocide Alert must be called...

“Journalists like Okkar, who supported the Myanmar Military leaders with their writtings joining the propaganda warfare to discriminate, to do ethnic cleansing are also guilty and punishable at ICC. Be careful Okkar.

Rohingya

Hello, I noticed that you removed the Rohingya from the List of ethnic groups in Myanmar. If they are an ethnic group in Myanmar (even if not recognized by the government there), I'm curious why you would do that? We do include unrecognized ethnic groups for China and other countries as well, in the articles about the ethnic groups in those nations. Badagnani 23:57, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Rohingya ethnicity in Myanmar is currently disputed and therefore we cannot include in Wikipedia in order to stop refering as "Wikipedia recognised Rohingya as ethnic group in Myanmar". Okkar 06:28, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Your answer is so vague as to be suspicious to me. Disputed by whom? How can an ethnic group be disputed? Either they live in Myanmar or they don't. You'll need to be more specific about this. There is a Wikipedia article about this ethnic group. A Web search shows this page: http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGASA160052004 where the group Amnesty International discusses the situation of this ethnic group. Did this major international human rights group develop a campaign to provide assistance an ethnic group that doesn't exist? You'll have to explain yourself in a more thorough fashion. Badagnani 08:22, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I will not be drawn into any political debate here. I am simply following Wikipedia NPOV policy guidelines. I have already made it clear to you that it is not acceptable to use wikipedia to push particular POV, in this case legitimisation of rohingya as ethnic group in Myanmar. The ethnic grouping of Rohingya has been disputed by successive governments in Burma since the day of it's independance. Both democractic and military governments of Burma does not recognise Rohingya as genuine ethnic group of Burma. There has been claims and counter claims from both sides, for example: burmese government claimed that they are illegal immigrants from Bangladesh arrived by crossing the pourous border in Arakhan region, Rohingyas claimed that they are the true natives of Arakan and descendant of arab sailors who visited that region in ancient times. However, there have been no historical evidence to support their claims, as a result the authenticity of Rohingya as minority ethnic group in Burma is seriously contested by successive government of Burma, be it Democractic or Military, as well as the native Rakhine people (recognised ethnic group) of Arakhan state. So you see it is a highly volitile issue and as long as this dispute exists, it would be factually wrong to include Rohnigya as List of ethnic groups in Myanmar because it could be seen as Wikipedia's endorsement to Rohingyas claims, which ofcourse is entirely againt unbias policy of Wikipedia. Such inclusion would lead to quoting by many reference articles and reports as "Wikipedia recognised Rohingya as ethnic group in Burma" or "Wikipedia's list of ethnic groups in Myanmar listed Rohingya as legitimate ethnic group". This could potray Wikipedia as though Wikipedia is supporting particular POV claims and being bias. You have been with Wikipedia to know what Wikipedia stands for and that POV pushing is against it's policy.

Thank you for citing Amnesty International web page, however, I would like to counter cite What Wikipedia is NOT page so that you can understand unbias and neutral policy of Wikipedia. As I have stated before, regardless of whatever human rights dispute that rohingyas have with burmese government, we cannot allow the use of Wikipedia as a spring borad to support their claims, use it as a reference for raising awareness or any other politically motivated activities. I hope you understand. You should not be suspicious about everyone who is acting out in good faith unless you can prove otherwise. Any further such suggestion can and will be interpreted as personal attacks. Okkar 11:53, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

What is the political debate you are referring to? If there is any political attack going on here, it is your implication that I am trying to draw you into one. We operate by facts here, so there is no need for any kind of defensive reply. As with the Undistinguished ethnic groups in China article, we make clear that the People's Republic of China government has a list of 56 ethnic groups, but that other ethnic groups exist (differentiated by language and self-definition); some are subsumed into one of the other 56 and others are ignored altogether. Yet we do mention them. It seems that the same may be the case in Myanmar. My further research shows that the Rohingya are claimed by the government of Myanmar to be essentially Muslim Bengalis from India who have been squatting in northern Myanmar for a period of 100+ years. If that is the case (as seems verifiable from the Myanmar government's publicly stated position on the matter, then we must mention that. It's either an ethnic group in Myanmar or it isn't (keep in mind that the article is "List of ethnic groups in Myanmar, which includes "illegal" or "foreign" groups--as for example we do for other countries--the ethnic groups in Thailand includes several minority groups that came as refugees, sometimes decades ago, yet are long-time residents, and thus considered ethnic groups in Thailand), and if a major international organization such as Amnesty International states that it is a distinct ethnic group then I would doubt they would make a mistake in providing assistance to an ethnic group that does not exist. Let's not purge articles of verifiable content, for whatever reason. If there's a controversy, then let's state there's a controversy rather than wiping the article clean of all mention of this ethnic group. Badagnani 18:00, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I believe you seems to be confusing the policy of Amensty International and Wikipedia here. Amnesty International is a human right organisation, as such it is their mandate to represent those who feel that their human rights have been violated. Wikipedia on the other hand is an online encyclopedia, people refer to the information present in Wikipedia as fact. Therefore it is important for us, contributors to ensure that Wikipedia maintain it's unbias and neutral policy. Thus said, it cannot be seen supporting one side of the arguement over the others. Just because Amnesty International is representing Rohingya cause (I am not saying Amnesty made a mistake), that doesn't mean Wikipedia have to support the claims and include them in articles that are inappropiate. Amnesty International's decisions should not have any influences on Wikipedia's unbias policy just as no other country's government has any influences on what wikipedia publishes in it's article. Thats what makes Wikipedia what it is today and that is main focus here. We must not forget what wikipedia stands for. If we have to write every articles according to Amnesty International's representation then 80% of country articles currently on Wikipedia will have to include bias and POV facts, starting from United States. This would negate the whole existance of Wikipedia as unbias encyclopedia. We must not confuse between "online encyclopedia" and "human rights" organisation. There is a clear distinction between the two.

As for your second argument regard rohingya being in burma for over +100 years, therefore they can be consider as distinctive ethic group, then the same could be said about african who were settled in UK as distinctive ethnic group, however, we dont have "AngloAfrican" ethnic grouping in United Kingdom now do we nor are we likely to be endorsing one here just because Amnesty International suddenly decided to take up the issue?

I am not sure about what is included in Undistinguished ethnic groups in China or ethnic groups in Thailand, that is the issue the relevant project and it's members needs to deal with and also, I am not expert in Thailand or China's history so I will not be commenting or editing them since I could end up making mistakes. However, as far as List of ethnic groups in Myanmar concern, it is part of WikiProject Myanmar/Burma, which I am a member of and I am also a member of WikiProject Neutral, therefore i am going to ensure that articles within the project are strictly in accordance with Wikipedia's unbias policy. I know it's not a very easy job, but someone has to do it and I am not the type of person who quake when bombarded with political correctness, threatened with ICC for genocide or being branded racist. I did what I have to do to ensure that articles within the project adhere to Wikipedia policy and I made no exception on that front. If we dont, theres a danger that information regarding my country in Wikipedia will be tainted with politically bias information to support claims and counter claims from both side.

I am not erasing any facts from the article, but simply removing inapproate contents that were included to support for POV pushing. The content in question would be more appropiate to include in the "dispute between Rohingya and Burmese government" section of Rohingya article instead. Including rohingya in List of ethnic groups in Myanmar and turning it into legitimate fact would not only potray Wikipedia as bias medium but also tarnish it's "Encyclopedia" status. I hope you understand. Okkar 19:25, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

No, your "explanation" doesn't make sense or even address the issue at hand, and your needless defensiveness about my insistence that factual information not be blanked is quite perplexing. The only reason for citing Amnesty International is because they have an article giving the history of this ethnic group in Myanmar. I don't believe they would be doing this for an ethnic group that doesn't exist. You state that you are "not erasing facts" from the List of ethnic groups in Myanmar article but you did that. Comparable to ethnic groups in China and Thailand who have come to those countries years ago as refugees but who never left, we do include them, even if they are unrecognized by those governments (though we note this in the articles). My further research shows that the Rohingya language is a distinct Indic language further bolsters the fact that this is an ethnic group in Myanmar (though not recognized by the current Myanmar government as citizens of that nation). Regarding your idea of whether there are Africans in the UK, of course there are. The UK colonized Africa and consequently many Africans settled in England and other nations in the British Isles. They are certifiably "African British," a distinct and recognized ethnic group in the UK. But, then, the UK has large numbers of people living there who immigrated from most other parts of the world, unlike Myanmar, which has fewer. So your example was a bad one. Badagnani 21:01, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

My explanation makes perfect sense - Wikipedia is not a human rights news bulletin, it is an encyclopedia. You have been with Wikipedia long enough to know the difference. My point is plain and simple: dont include bias information as long as there is a dispute and controversy. If you do your research properly, you will find that not just current myanmar government, successive government since the day of independance has never recognise Rohingya as ethnic tribe of Burma and they have severly contested the rohingya claims citing lack of historical information to support that they are actually natives of Burma - that my friend is a fact! As for your example regarding China and Thailand, they are articles from seperate project entirely and it is down to relevant member of the project they belongs to take action, also these tribes have not been severly disputed by any of their government. I have tried to explained to you reasonably, however, you kept citing Amnesty International and insist to include the information in order to support the rohingya's claims. We do not have to support bias claims just because Amnesty does. Wikipedia is not owned by Amnesty International nor will it serve as propaganda platform to legitimise any claims from any groups. This clearly is against Wikipedia policy. Whether my example is good or bad is of little relevance here since it's your POV against mine, but it appears that you seems to be having conflict of interest. For your information, there is no such thing as "British African" in UK, nor any other african recognise as ethnic groups - they are simply recognised as "British". Dont just read Amnesty reports and blindly insist on including certain information to support bias views. If you would like to further dispute then you need to look for independant mediation, otherwise, I will no longer entertain this pointless discussion as you clear does not seem to have any appericiation regarding what Wikipedia stands for and insisting to include bias information to support rohingya cause simply because they are "muslims". I am sorry but we cannot include information that are "bias" in support for the people who share the same religious belief with some of us - Wikipedia is not a religious propaganda website. That would constitue pure POV pushing. Okkar 02:00, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

April 2007

Please do not replace Wikipedia pages with blank content, as you did to Myanmar Muslims. Blank pages are harmful to Wikipedia because they have a tendency to confuse readers. If it is a duplicate article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If the page has been vandalised, please revert it to the last legitimate version. If you feel that the content of a page is inappropriate, please edit the page and replace it with appropriate content. If you believe there is no hope for the page, please see the deletion policy for how to proceed. Badagnani 02:25, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Please read the article's history and remarks for my edits. It is not blanking. Please stop making up stories. Okkar 09:02, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XIV (April 2007)

The April 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 14:38, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Army-flag.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Army-flag.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 22:02, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Why was it necessary for you to remove photos from Myanmar army?

Why was it necessary for you to remove photos from Myanmar Army article? There is nothing wrong with the photos but you deleted several times. Why did u do so? Are you a member of Myanmar Army? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.81.66.17 (talk) 06:22, 13 May 2007 (UTC).

Non-free use disputed for Image:Airforce-flag.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Airforce-flag.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 19:23, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XV (May 2007)

The May 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 15:37, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XVI (June 2007)

The June 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 14:33, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

SVGs of Myanmar flags

Hello, I see that you uploaded many flags of Myanmar's military. http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Myanmar_Army Do you happen to have the originals of these, before they were made into JPGs? It would benefit the article if they were turned into SVGs, but I thought I'd ask before I re-drew them. Darius 08:52, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator selection

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by August 14! Wandalstouring 09:49, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators from a pool of fourteen candidates to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by August 28! Kirill 01:21, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XVIII (August 2007)

The August 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 10:01, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use disputed for Image:Tatmadaw-flag.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Tatmadaw-flag.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:25, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XIX (September 2007)

The September 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 10:13, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XX (October 2007)

The October 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 14:40, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Neutrality Project

Hi, I'm trying to ensure that the Neutrality Project has not become inactive. If you would still like to participate in it, please re-add your name to the Review Team list. _Jame§^ugrono 07:48, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Council roll call

Hi there. You are receiveing this message because your name appears on the WikiProject Council participants list. The WikiProject Council is currently having a roll-call; if you are still interested in participating in the inter-project discussion forum that WT:COUNCIL has become, or you are interested in continuing to develop and maintain the WikiProject Guide or Directory, please visit Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Participants and remove the asterisk (*) from your name on the list of participants. If you are no longer interested in the Council, you need take no action: your name will be removed from the participants list on April 30 2008.

Melon‑Bot (STOP!) 22:25, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Files listed for deletion

Some of your images or media files have been listed for deletion. Please see Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2009 January 11 if you are interested in preserving them. Thank you. DavidDCM (talk) 12:21, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Navy-flag.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Navy-flag.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --ZooFari 04:19, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Mm-yangon-rmc.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Mm-yangon-rmc.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 20:55, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LVI, October 2010

Your Military history Newsletter Project News: Editors for the newsletter, GAN backlog reduction drive Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: EyeSerene sums up our "Five years of military history"

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:36, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LVII, November 2010

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors, "Military Historian of the Year", New Incubator, Black Project Report Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: bahamut guides us through "Nominating military biographies for deletion"

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:03, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:Kyawhtin.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Kyawhtin.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the file under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged files may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the file will be deleted 48 hours after 03:53, 11 December 2010 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 03:53, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LVIII, December 2010

Your military history newsletter – Volume LVIII, December 2010 From the editors • "Military Historian of the Year" • Discussions • The month's new featured and A-class content • Review awards Contest results • A-class medal recipients • bahamut teaches us proper usage of "Jargon and acronyms" To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here. BrownBot (talk) 21:26, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Mm-northern-rmc.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Mm-northern-rmc.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 03:30, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Armored Operations . jpg

Hi , I think there is some difference in your art and the article. the armored reconnaissance battalion is not a part of TOC but is under direct control of the division —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.81.67.182 (talk) 05:19, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I will update it. Okkar (talk) 08:45, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Mm-dsma2.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Mm-dsma2.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 15:13, 10 March 2011 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Armbrust ^{WrestleMania XXVII} _{Undertaker 19–0} 15:13, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Mm-dsma2.jpg

I have put a proper information box in the page for you. By source we do not mean "raw code" - if you created the image from memory, then that's the source, if you copied a book - the book is the source, if you scanned in a page - that's the source, if you took a web picture and tidied it up and maybe recoloured it, or used in in another layer then deleted that layer - then the web page is the source. Hope that makes some sense. So there is now a nice "source=" line for you to complete.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:23, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

May Sweet

If you keep making unsourced POV statements, I will report you. Hybernator (talk) 12:45, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on May Sweet. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively.

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

1. Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:38, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

I've reported you to editwarring notice board. I've opened up a talk page. Make your points. Or we can seek dispute resolution. Hybernator (talk) 01:43, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Something weird about Soewinhan...

OK, I'm in kind of a weird situation here and didn't know exactly what to do, but I noticed you've been commenting in User:Soewinhan's ANI, and this relates to him.

A little bit of backstory: today I've been doing some work with removing/commenting out non-free images outside of article space, per WP:NFCC. Some of the pages I came across was User:Hybernator/test and User:Hybernator/test2, a user I've never before come in contact with. Shortly after (less than an hour later), I got this message on my talk page from Soewinhan, asking me to review Prehistory of Burma. As I've never come in contact with him before and have never edited any articles relating to either Burma or prehistory at all, I was quite confused. At first I thought Soewinhan might have accidentally posted on my talk page instead of someone else's, but as I dug around I happened to come across the ANI... where I discovered mentions of Hybernator.

Now you tell me, what are the odds that this is all just a coincidence? I'm not sure if this proves anything (it's certainly not conclusive evidence that Hybernator and Soewinhan are connected) so I didn't want to post it in the ANI, but... I feel like someone involved should know about it. (EDIT: cross-posted to User talk: The Blade of the Northern Lights) Fletch the Mighty (talk) 17:15, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm not happy with just leaving it, so I've started an SPI - You may wish to elaborate at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Hybernator  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 20:47, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Have you seen User_talk:Soewinhan recently? Seems to have retired.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:18, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes he put up "Retired" message on the same day, the SPI clerk has endorsed CheckUser. Since then User:Hybernator has been active. Okkar (talk) 22:34, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

And then the checkuser said "No Match" - maybe it was a meatpuppet after all - the clerk match looked like it - maybe a son, it does say he's 17 years old.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:45, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Quite possible, perhaps a nephew or a student, Burmese people tend to feel the obligation to support relatives and teachers out of respect. Okkar (talk) 03:36, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LX, February 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: Ed talks about real-world collaborations and how you can help

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:27, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Reply - Myanmar Army

Hello, Okkar. You have new messages at Jonathon A H's talk page.
Message added 21:15, 20 March 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The Bugle: Issue LXI, March 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: Dank helps you see what article writers want from reviewers

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 04:21, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXII, April 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: Buggie111 discusses neutral point of view

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:20, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIII, May 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors – Contest results, A-class medal recipients Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Editorial: Hawkeye's thoughts on the article writing process

To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:15, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIV, June 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Finland and Spitfires Op-ed: Fifelfoo and hunting for plagiarism

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 23:41, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXV, July 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Zeebrugee and Afghanistan Op-ed: WereSpielChequers examines RfA

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 22:48, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Military Historian of the Year

Nominations for the "Military Historian of the Year" for 2011 are now open. If you would like to nominate an editor for this award, please do so here. Voting will open on 22 January and run for seven days. Thanks! On behalf of the coordinators, Nick-D (talk) and Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 23:59, 15 January 2012 (UTC) You were sent this message because you are a listed as a member of the Military history WikiProject.

File:Mm-central.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Mm-central.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 01:48, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:MM-Armyflag.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:MM-Armyflag.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.  thesimsmania  16:06, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Mm-aoc.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Mm-aoc.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 02:46, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Mm-roc.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Mm-roc.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 02:54, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Mm-aroc.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Mm-aroc.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 02:54, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Mm-battalion.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Mm-battalion.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 02:55, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Mm-lidmoc.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Mm-lidmoc.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 02:55, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Military history coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject has started its 2012 project coordinator election process, where we will select a team of coordinators to organize the project over the coming year. If you would like to be considered as a candidate, please submit your nomination by 14 September. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact one of the current coordinators on their talk page. This message was delivered here because you are a member of the Military history WikiProject. – Military history coordinators (about the project • what coordinators do) 09:38, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Mm-artillery-flag.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Mm-artillery-flag.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:57, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Mm-armour2.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Mm-armour2.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Ninja Dianna (Talk) 21:16, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator election

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 22:15, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator election

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 29 September. Yours, Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 05:22, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

RC Patrol-related Proposals in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey

Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

1. Adjust number of entries and days at Last unpatrolled
2. Editor-focused central editing dashboard
3. "Hide trusted users" checkbox option on watchlists and related/recent changes (RC) pages
4. Real-Time Recent Changes App for Android
5. Shortcut for patrollers to last changes list

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{User wikipedia/RC Patrol}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 01:12, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Mm-central-rmc.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Mm-central-rmc.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Jon Kolbert (talk) 03:02, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Files listed for discussion

Some of your images or media files have been listed for discussion. Please see Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2017 November 7 if you are interested in preserving their usage.

Thank you. Jon Kolbert (talk) 03:17, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

User group for Military Historians

Greetings,

"Military history" is one of the most important subjects when speak of sum of all human knowledge. To support contributors interested in the area over various language Wikipedias, we intend to form a user group. It also provides a platform to share the best practices between military historians, and various military related projects on Wikipedias. An initial discussion was has been done between the coordinators and members of WikiProject Military History on English Wikipedia. Now this discussion has been taken to Meta-Wiki. Contributors intrested in the area of military history are requested to share their feedback and give suggestions at Talk:Discussion to incubate a user group for Wikipedia Military Historians.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:29, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

ESEAP Conference 2018

Hello Okkar,

I’m Irvin from PhilWiki Community, a member of the Communication Committee of the ESEAP Conference. ESEAP Conference 2018 is a regional conference for Wikimedia communities throughout the ESEAP region: ESEAP stands for East, Southeast Asia, and Pacific. Taking place in Bali, Indonesia on 5–6 May 2018, this is the first regional conference for these Wikimedia communities.

East and Southeast Asia and the Pacific are the most under-represented regions within the Wikimedia community. There is a significant number of Wikimedia contributors in our regions, yet we continue to struggle in establishing a well-managed community. This conference will bring participants from various ESEAP communities together in order to better understand the issues and to look for solutions. It also aims to connect people of the Wikimedia movement within ESEAP regions, to share ideas, and to build regional collaborations that are impossible to achieve through online communication.

We’ve got a lot of participation from several countries, but we’re lacking from your country. As we need more participants from your country, we believe that your contribution and participation would be a valuable asset to the success of this event. If you would like to participate in the conference, please do fill the form as soon as possible (by April 5, 2018) and we’ll inform you if you get selected for the conference.

Thank you and we hope to see you soon. --Filipinayzd 05:28, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

April 2021 WikiProject Military History Reviewing Drive

Hey y'all, the April 2021 WikiProject Military History Reviewing Drive begins at 00:01 UTC on April 1, 2021 and runs through 23:59 UTC on April 31, 2021. Points can be earned through reviewing articles on the AutoCheck report, reviewing articles listed at WP:MILHIST/ASSESS, reviewing MILHIST-tagged articles at WP:GAN or WP:FAC, and reviewing articles submitted at WP:MILHIST/ACR. Service awards and barnstars are given for set points thresholds, and the top three finishers will receive further awards. To participate, sign up at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_History/April 2021 Reviewing Drive#Participants and create a worklist at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/April 2021 Reviewing Drive/Worklists (examples are given). Further details can be found at the drive page. Questions can be asked at the drive talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:23, 31 March 2021 (UTC)