Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikipedia talk:MIL)
Please add requests for MILHIST participation to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Requests for project input. This includes requests for comment, requested moves, articles for deletion, and more.
Main pageDiscussionNews &
open tasks
AcademyAssessmentA-Class
review
ContestAwardsMembers

    Requests for project input

    [edit]

    Please add requests for MILHIST participation to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Requests for project input. This includes requests for comment, requested moves, articles for deletion, and more.

    When there are only two beligerents. Cinderella157 (talk) 02:42, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Resolved. Cinderella157 (talk) 01:14, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    There is a requested move discussion at Talk:M982 Excalibur#Requested move 9 June 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 15:25, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    This article had been unsourced for some 14 years, and I'm working on it, but feel free to jump in. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Unreferenced articles/Backlog drives/June 2025 ends today. Bearian (talk) 04:24, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Good article reassessment for German submarine U-853

    [edit]

    German submarine U-853 has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 17:52, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Good article reassessment for Haapsalu Castle

    [edit]

    Haapsalu Castle has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 17:55, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    An editor has requested that Battle of Plymouth be moved to another page, which may be of interest to this WikiProject. You are invited to participate in the move discussion.

     You are invited to join the discussion at WT:JAPAN § Signatures in infoboxes of articles about Japanese Imperial Family members. -- Marchjuly (talk) 20:23, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Soviet–Afghan War, which is within the scope of this WikiProject. Remsense 🌈  23:50, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Good article reassessment for Philippe I, Duke of Orléans

    [edit]

    Philippe I, Duke of Orléans has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 01:11, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Good article reassessment for Satake clan

    [edit]

    Satake clan has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 01:13, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Good article reassessment for The Holocaust in Lithuania

    [edit]

    The Holocaust in Lithuania has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 01:18, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Wang Xiaolong (coast guard)#Requested move 20 June 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 13:44, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Good article reassessment for British Army during the First World War

    [edit]

    British Army during the First World War has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 16:05, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Not sure if this is the right place to ask. But I recently reverted some changes at Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 which claimed that the project is dead i.e. tenses were changed to the past tense. I have recently been reverted for this. From what I can tell the project is still largely up beyond the damage near Denmark i.e. the line itself is largely intact. Would appreciate some clarification. Gotitbro (talk) 18:32, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    While someone might answer here, I suggest you post your question at Wikipedia:WikiProject Energy, Wikipedia:WikiProject Russia and Wikipedia:WikiProject Business, if you have not done so already. Although there is some mention of military in the article, this project's banner is not on the article talk page. Perhaps it might be of interest to the project if more info comes to light or if someone wishes to look into assessing it but at this time I am not sure there is enough to bring the article within our scope. My guess is that whether the pipeline is up and running is a news, or business, or energy matter not likely to be within the expertise or research interest of members of this project, at least unless further info comes generally to light. Donner60 (talk) 23:10, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I will try at the RU project, thanks. Gotitbro (talk) 14:02, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]


    Royal Navy running out of admirals

    [edit]

    With today's news that Ben Key has had his commission terminated, and with Tony Radakin retiring later this year, that will leave the only Royal Navy admiral as Keith Blount. His tenure as DSACEUR should end in 2026. Assuming the replacement DSACEUR is not Royal Navy as well, this opens the possibility that by about July next year there will be no admirals in the Royal Navy. Has this ever happened before? Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 20:14, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    I don't have an answer to the question, but there are plenty of promotable flag officers. Ed [talk] [OMT] 20:50, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Agree that there are lots of senior officers who wouldn't mind that increase in pay, but I don't see an obvious way for them to get it. Gwyn Jenkins is FSL, removing the spot held by Key, and Radakin is being replaced by an RAF officer. My assumption is that VCDS won't be opening up for at least a few years either. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 20:58, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Presumably they'll just make 2SL a 4* or invent another position at Navy Command HQ. Presumably the last time there wasn't an admiral was during the Commonwealth, so 365 years ago (but I don't know enough about pre-Restoration navy to swear to it). —Simon Harley (Talk). 08:23, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I doubt the RN would want to do this, but it would likely be possible for the RN to source admirals from friendly navies. Until the 1950s the RAN and RAAF were generally commanded by British officers and the modern Australian Defence Force is notorious for having an absurd number of star-ranked officers - 238 of them as of 30 June 2024! This includes three 3 star admirals - the head of the RAN could be a potential contender if the RN needs another 4 star admiral, for instance. Nick-D (talk) 10:22, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Article creations on the military history on the continent of Africa

    [edit]

    Hello. I have been working on drafting an article about Russia-Africa relations, given Russia/Wagner's increasing intervention there. Perhaps this is too ambitious of a project, or it has already been done and I just haven't found it, but I was wondering if we might create some articles about the military history over the entire continent of Africa. For example, we could have "African participation in WW2", "American military intervention in Africa", France, Russia, Germany, Britain, etc. Too much? Hopefully this is the right place, I wasn't sure where to go. Thank you for any responses. -IslaAntilia IslaAntilia (talk) 15:56, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Your in the right place, and you are certainly welcome to proceed with the article creation. If you need help or desire feedback, leave a link here and someone will read through the article(s) and let you know what they think. TomStar81 (Talk) 17:16, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    African participation in WW2 might be a little broad considering how much of WWII took place in Africa... But in terms of overarching articles for military intervention you will likely be able to find suitable sourcing. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:19, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    France is covered by Françafrique. CMD (talk) 02:27, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    FWIW: Françafrique is about a later time period. If users search for "World War II in Africa", they will be redirected to North African campaign. However, perhaps African participation in World War II is a broader topic which would include any participation of African troops anywhere in the world in World War II as well as any other African military events or military leaders outside the North African campaign. I would assume that campaign would be discussed briefly and would include a "for further information see..." direction to the North African article in any new general article.
    I do not have the time, and probably do not have enough sources at hand, to be much help in adding new material on the topic. So I will comment that the topic would be a good addition if verifiable information exists but the expanded topic is not covered in Wikipedia.
    Assuming a lack of coverage or lack of complete coverage, writing or expanding any articles on recent Russian intervention in Africa appears to me to be worthwhile. As TomStar81 notes, this would be the place to ask coordinators or experienced users for feedback. Donner60 (talk) 05:15, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you, Donner60! That's exactly what I was going for. I appreciate the mention of Francafrique, but indeed, it simply has a list of times France has intervened in the modern era, plus a paragraph for every president of France, and their impact on France's colonial interests in Africa. It's not just about military intervention. (I've worked on the article myself!)
    I think what I have proposed is, indeed, a very BIG project, so I don't know how much like I will have with it, and maybe I should simply start by making first a list of pages of military interventions in Africa by France, America, or whoever else, and then a brief description of each. But I definitely did want to focus on troops from African countries in WW2. Maybe I could narrow the focus to just that. IslaAntilia (talk) 12:05, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Some scrutiny of the edit frenzy please. Keith-264 (talk) 15:52, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    I've protected the page while discussion continues. Cheers to Ifly6, who has already jumped into that discussion. Ed [talk] [OMT] 18:42, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks Keith-264 (talk) 21:36, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Can somebody please (1) add reliable sources, and (2) translate the lead into civilian-ese? Bearian (talk) 22:42, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    I suspect that this doesn't meet WP:N, and the article looks to have been copied and pasted from a US military website. I've just nominated the article for Prod deletion. Nick-D (talk) 10:12, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    What is maritime culture?

    [edit]

    Hi everyone, I wondered if maritime historians might be able to help me a bit. I stumbled upon Category:Maritime culture and was puzzled by what it was supposed to be about, especially because there is no main article maritime culture. There is one in German Wikipedia, de:Seemannskultur, which autotranslates as "seafaring culture". As that article puts it, Seafaring culture refers to the historically developed cultural characteristics established in seafaring . They arose primarily from the sailors' tendency to fill an environment experienced as unpredictable and limitless with myths and customs. This way, they could fill the vast, unknown, and frightening—as the "foreign element," the sea, was experienced—with familiarity, thus reducing the fear of it. What follows is a range of beliefs and practices of (mostly European) seafarers over the course of centuries, both real and imagined (e.g. belief in sea monsters, but also walking the plank was apparently barely if ever a maritime practice), symbols, (in)discipline, food, health and survival, safety measures, and so on. Is this also what you would understand as "maritime culture", or not really? Because it seems to me that the current Category:Maritime culture is much broader than that, a catch-all for anything maritime-related, which is probably not helpful for navigation (pun intended). NLeeuw (talk) 09:55, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    The use of that kind of term in Australia tends to be broader, with commentators noting that it refers to public awareness of the importance of maritime industries and the navy. It's often argued that the Australian public under-appreciates this - e.g. [1] Nick-D (talk) 10:11, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Operation Mosaic

    [edit]

    I have Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Operation Mosaic/archive1 at FAC, but it needs some more reviewers, or is liable to be closed in the next few days. It is about a British nuclear test series in Australia. If someone could drop by with a few words, that would be greatly appreciated. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:58, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Naming scheme for articles about munitions

    [edit]

    Munitions often have the same name as other things. That means that the name is disambiguated and a description is added in parentheses. In the M982 Excalibur RM we discovered that standardised article naming conventions and disambiguation descriptions don't exist. We have Full Metal Jacket (ammunition), Shell (projectile), Tomahawk missile, R-360 Neptune, M982 Excalibur, and so on.

    Is it time to standardise the naming scheme?

    @The ed17, 65.93.183.249, and Cinderella157: Pinging editors that showed an interest in this. TurboSuperA+(connect) 21:35, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Noting wrong with these names per WP:CRITERIA except that Full Metal Jacket should be lowecase (see [2]). Cinderella157 (talk) 02:11, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]