User talk:Loesorion

Please remove the template if you return to editing

Loesorion, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Loesorion! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Osarius (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:16, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Zastava M21, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page MTI (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:13, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

VTI - Military Technical Institute Belgrade

You my have fewer problems with your articles if you work them up in your sandbox. --evrik ^(talk) 06:35, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Category:TMG - Truck Mounted Gun

Hello, I saw the category you made, and I was wondering what the exact criteria were. Does it have to be a howitzer? If so, it should probably be Category:Truck-mounted howitzers. And if it's not just howitzers, does the Technical (vehicle) count? Or the Katyusha rocket launcher? Howicus (talk) 21:50, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

There is a description in category about criteria. TMG acronym is in use for more than a 2 decades in military and gun is in artillery reffed to howitzer or cannon. Somebody say howitzer and somebody say gun thinking on same kind of a weapon. Technical (vehicle) is more a commercial car(not truck) with manufacturer or improvised armour and weapons. Instead Technical vehicle which is broader term I would call it Car mounted gun vehicle. Usual's Tehnical vehicle terminology in military is some vehicle used as workshop or munition delivery vehicle or fuel cistern or something like that and that term should be argued.

Ok, I think I get what you mean, thanks. Howicus (talk) 00:49, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to MILHIST

Hello 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 are interested, or you can add it directly to your user page by copying the following: {{WPMILHIST Announcements}}.
• 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, detailed article and content review, writing contests, and article logistics.
• We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, periods, and conflicts.
• We've developed a set of guidelines that cover article structure and content, template use, categorization, and many other issues of interest.
• If you're looking for something to work on, there are many articles that need attention, as well as a number of review alerts.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask any of the project coordinators or any other experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome, and we are looking forward to seeing you around! Anotherclown (talk) 11:33, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Reliable sources

Hi and thanks for contributing. Regarding some of your recent edits, please understand that it is not enough to place YouTube links [1][2] or news footage (without sufficient written content) and pass them off as references. These do not qualify as reliable sources because they lack content and are open to misinterpretation. I have gone through your sources and some of them do provide good starting points but many still lack sufficient content to be able to verify there authenticity. Also, please note that when making new edits its not necessary (or polite) to change/remove previous reliable sources with your own. lastly, when placing references, take care not to add broken or moved links as this makes it more difficult to verify the source. Regards. Buttons (talk) 17:11, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

There's clearly a lot to address with you so I'll sum it up:

• 1. Polo M-83 - the main point of that section is on the weapon itself not the platform. If you read the source it clearly states it is used as a potable device, on the M80A IFV and on the BOV (M-83) series of vehicles.
• 2. Broken/dead/moved links that you have inserted as sources - [3][4][5][6]
• 3. References you have removed - (IISS 2010, pp. 190–191) International Institute for Strategic Studies; Hackett, James (ed.) (3 February 2010). The Military Balance 2010. London: Routledge. ISBN 1857435575. "The SIPRI Military Expenditure Database". Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. Retrieved 26 April 2013.
• 4. Your edit on the active reserve section is littered with grammatical errors and very difficult to understand. Why did you include information on a "passive reserve" when that section is only dedicated to an active reserve? If you want to use 20,000 as the official figure, fine but don't include other information on it.
• 4. Now I have my own question, why did you remove UNTSO, EUTM and EUNAVFOR from the peacekeeping list, when it is clearly cited in the source? Buttons (talk) 01:29, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

1.If you refer that I have added Polo M-83 to weapons list in equipment chapter of Serbian Army article you should understand following:

What is a platform and what is a weapon by your opinion? Polo M-83 is a weapon system for itself or you can call it standalone platform for engaging enemy's and have a crew that's operating him. If you consider your thinking's then we could say that for example Mig-29 is not a equipment and it couldn't be listed as weapon or equipment but missile R60 which is fired from platform Mig-29 is a weapon that should be listed. Same goes for example M84 tank why we list tank and not a projectile fired from barrel of tank. We could add projectile or missile but they are useless without a platform.

Mayutka-2T is missile system and nothing more and nothing less. It would be more accurate to write:

• Malyutka-2T with portable suitcase launcher (9P111) and 9M14-2T missile
• Polo M-83 with 9M14-2T missile

But Wikipedia is not that detailed in every segment if you look all articles about equipment, but it should make differences between two weapons system if there is as in this case.

2.First you need to say were I used links you written(what articles) as I don't remember that used them. Maybe it is someone else. I can say for myself that I don't use broken links or dead links for references except if any of my references did "died" in last few days without my knowledge. Maybe they have bee placed long ago by someone else especially janes.com links are in most articles in Wikipedia dead after year or two because janes.com is mostly paid services and removes news as time passes by and that old news are in their archives available to paid members. As I try to remember most things i am doing I am not a machine and I work on many articles in wiki and my job and private so you need to be more specific when you quote that I have done something with reference about article on wiki, day and time of insertion.

3.I remember that i have removed (IISS 2010, pp. 190–191) International Institute for Strategic Studies; Hackett, James (ed.) (3 February 2010). The Military Balance 2010. London: Routledge. ISBN 1857435575. for (IISS 2010, pp. 190–191) International Institute for Strategic Studies; Hackett, James (ed.) (3 February 2010). The Military Balance 2010. London: Routledge. ISBN 1857435575. reasons:

• It was reference about reserve personnel that I have changed and gave up-to date references.
• That reference is a book Military Balance 2010 and every data inside is from 2009 so i say again it is obsolete as new Law in Serbia parliament is passed in 2010 and cannot be considered as reference in current state
• That book is not publicly available as it is on sale so it is a problem for most people to have it or read it(I personally do have it but most people don't) so when it is available other public source that everybody can access it is only justified to that kind of source for references.

For other quoted deleted link i have not do it and again if you say opposite you need to tell me in what article I have removed other references you have listed and on what day time? I cannot address such a question without exact information.

4.Can you list grammatical errors and tell me what is hard to understand to clarify it? And where it is said that section is only about active reserve or it is your assumption? Maybe you are mixing fit for services and reserve personnel. Every country has it own system so it is specifically written text about Serbia reserve system.

5.You stated as 4 but I understand your question and I clearly remember it is that I haven't touched anything about peacekeeping missions in article about {{Serbian Armed Forces]] if you are referring to that article. Maybe it is done by error trough undo process but then it is not only my error because you have given a name to your edits as I quote:"Since these two conflict, we'll keep both for now" referring to reserves reference From headline of your edits tell me what do you conclude? And my advice is that we talk in articles concrete not in my page because it is our goal as editors to make improvement of articles and not talking to each other on this way.

By looking all your questions i have gone trough article Serbian Armed Forces and removed all dead links to improve quality of article as I agree that dead references is not good and also corrected peacekeeping force information by using current data. Loesorion (talk) 06:54, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 20:20, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Chemical Munitions RFC

Greetings, Loesorion! You are correct, chemical munitions were not found deployed in Iraq, nor were any such munitions interdicted on their way to Iraq as the text claims (without testable references being offered) so I responded to your RFC for the relavant Wiki entry. Damotclese (talk) 16:09, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

87 Orkan article has been fixed. Damotclese (talk) 15:36, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Update: If you would, visit the Orkan M-87 talk page and confirm that your suggestion is for the removal of the entire section "chemical weapons" on the article. The officiall-assigned RFC has commented, you may have noticed. Damotclese (talk) 15:38, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Technical Testing Center, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Testing (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Category:TMG - Truck Mounted Gun

Category:TMG - Truck Mounted Gun, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 05:59, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Category:Light armored vehicle

Category:Light armored vehicle, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 07:28, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Category:Light armoured fighting vehicle

Category:Light armoured fighting vehicle, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 07:29, 20 July 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! Kirill ^[talk] 18:23, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Opting in to VisualEditor

As you may know, VisualEditor ("Edit ^beta") is currently available on the English Wikipedia only for registered editors who choose to enable it. Since you have made 50 or more edits with VisualEditor this year, I want to make sure that you know that you can enable VisualEditor (if you haven't already done so) by going to your preferences and choosing the item, "MediaWiki:Visualeditor-preference-enable". This will give you the option of using VisualEditor on articles and userpages when you want to, and give you the opportunity to spot changes in the interface and suggest improvements. We value your feedback, whether positive or negative, about using VisualEditor, at Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Feedback. Thank you, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:14, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Sora 122mm

Hello Loesorion,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Sora 122mm for deletion, because it seems to be copied from another source.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to rewrite it in your own words, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Ironholds (talk) 00:37, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Loesorion, I'd really like you to address this problem, and also explain the sourcing standards you've used with other articles. It's fairly clear that the Sora 122mm article is simply a translated version of the VTI page; is this something you've been doing with your other created articles as well? Ironholds (talk) 00:43, 30 December 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]} 22:06, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history Wikiproject's Historian and Newcomer of the Year Awards are now open!

The Military history Wikiproject has opened nominations for the Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year. Nominations will be accepted until 13 December at 23:59 GMT, with voting to begin at 0:00 GMT 14 December. The voting will conclude on 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:41, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

This message was accidentally sent using an incorrect mailing list, therefore this message is being resent using the correct list. As a result, some users may get this message twice; if so please discard. We apologize for the inconvenience.

Voting for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year now open!

Nominations for the military historian of the year and military newcomer of the year have now closed, and voting for the candidates has officially opened. All project members are invited to cast there votes for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year candidates before the elections close at 23:59 December 21st. For the coordinators, TomStar81

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 15 December 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]} 05:20, 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) 17:01, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject historian and newcomer of the year awards now open!

On behalf of the Military history WikiProject's Coordinators, we would like to extend an invitation to nominate deserving editors for the 2015 Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards. The nomination period will run from 7 December to 23:59 13 December, with the election phase running from 14 December to 23:59 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:05, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway, and as a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 23 September. For the Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:01, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Loesorion. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Voting for the Military history WikiProject Historian and Newcomer of the Year is ending soon!

Time is running out to voting for the Military Historian and Newcomer of the year! If you have not yet cast a vote, please consider doing so soon. The voting will end on 31 December at 23:59 UTC, with the presentation of the awards to the winners and runners up to occur on 1 January 2017. For the Military history WikiProject Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:01, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

This message was sent as a courtesy reminder to all active members of the Military History WikiProject.

March Madness 2017

G'day all, please be advised that throughout March 2017 the Military history Wikiproject is running its March Madness drive. This is a backlog drive that is focused on several key areas:

• tagging and assessing articles that fall within the project's scope
• updating the project's currently listed A-class articles to ensure their ongoing compliance with the listed criteria
• creating articles that are listed as "requested" on the project's various task force pages or other lists of missing articles.

As with past Milhist drives, there are points awarded for working on articles in the targeted areas, with barnstars being awarded at the end for different levels of achievement.

The drive is open to all Wikipedians, not just members of the Military history project, although only work on articles that fall (broadly) within the military history scope will be considered eligible. More information can be found here for those that are interested, and members can sign up as participants at that page also.

The drive starts at 00:01 UTC on 1 March and runs until 23:59 UTC on 31 March 2017, so please sign up now.

For the Milhist co-ordinators. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) & MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:24, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

2017 Military history WikiProject Coordinator election

Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway. As a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 29 September. Thank you for your time. For the current tranche of Coordinators, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:39, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Loesorion. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

2017 Military Historian of the Year and Newcomer of the Year nominations and voting

As we approach the end of the year, the Military History project is looking to recognise editors who have made a real difference. Each year we do this by bestowing two awards: the Military Historian of the Year and the Military History Newcomer of the Year. The co-ordinators invite all project members to get involved by nominating any editor they feel merits recognition for their contributions to the project. Nominations for both awards are open between 00:01 on 2 December 2017 and 23:59 on 15 December 2017. After this, a 14-day voting period will follow commencing at 00:01 on 16 December 2017. Nominations and voting will take place on the main project talkpage: here and here. Thank you for your time. For the co-ordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:35, 8 December 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)

Would like your input in a discussion

Hi,

I would appreciate it if you could give your input regarding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_naval_ship_classes_in_service#Split_this_article_into_multiple_articles Thanks in advance Dragnadh (talk) 15:47, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to WikiProject History!

Welcome to WikiProject History! We are a group dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to history. Now that you're a member you might want to drop by one of our departments or join a task force. It is also recommended that you watchlist our talk page as well. Working Groups at WikiProject History: Assessment · Collaboration · Review · Outreach · Task forces

Chris Troutman (talk) 23:12, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Templating 842U

Are you sure this template was necessary? It looks like BRD to me. ☆ Bri (talk) 00:16, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes it was necessary as user 842U had deleted many times sourced parts of articles written by me and other editors and have not gone to Talk page or restricted himself from further edits after calls to go to talk page. He has gone to talk page after warning so it proves that was effective measure. How it looks to you does not change what he was doing in first place as per Wikipedia:Editing policy. Loesorion (talk) 00:25, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Well whatever. There's a long standing practice of not templating experienced editors. Wiki-etiquette says that leaving him a personal note would have been preferred. ☆ Bri (talk) 03:42, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

April 2018 Milhist Backlog Drive

G'day all, please be advised that throughout April 2018 the Military history Wikiproject is running its annual backlog elimination drive. This will focus on several key areas:

• tagging and assessing articles that fall within the project's scope
• adding or improving listed resources on Milhist's task force pages
• updating the open tasks template on Milhist's task force pages
• creating articles that are listed as "requested" on the project's various lists of missing articles.

As with past Milhist drives, there are points awarded for working on articles in the targeted areas, with barnstars being awarded at the end for different levels of achievement.

The drive is open to all Wikipedians, not just members of the Military history project, although only work on articles that fall (broadly) within the scope of military history will be considered eligible. This year, the Military history project would like to extend a specific welcome to members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red, and we would like to encourage all participants to consider working on helping to improve our coverage of women in the military. This is not the sole focus of the edit-a-thon, though, and there are aspects that hopefully will appeal to pretty much everyone.

The drive starts at 00:01 UTC on 1 April and runs until 23:59 UTC on 30 April 2018. Those interested in participating can sign up here.

For the Milhist co-ordinators, AustralianRupert and MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:53, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Award

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For your excellent conributions in military-related I award you this barnstar. Best regards! FkpCascais (talk) 17:32, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Trebali bi da napravimo jedan template poput Template:Zastava firearms ali za proizvode i projekte VTI-ja. FkpCascais (talk) 17:41, 5 April 2018 (UTC) Thanks, I will look at templates and think how to make something similar for VTI, best regards. Loesorion (talk) 17:53, 5 April 2018 (UTC) I have created template for VTI feel free to use it and expand it. Loesorion (talk) 21:05, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Many thanks! The template is great! FkpCascais (talk) 18:30, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Military Technical Institute Belgrade, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page MOS (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of 120 mm A7 long-range Mortar

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on 120 mm A7 long-range Mortar, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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 "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 deleted 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Atlantic306 (talk) 19:52, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Cheers, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:53, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Milhist coordinator election voting has commenced

G'day everyone, voting for the 2018 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:35, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Milhist coordinator election voting has commenced

G'day everyone, voting for the 2018 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:22, 15 September 2018 (UTC) Note: the previous version omitted a link to the election page, therefore you are receiving this follow up message with a link to the election page to correct the previous version. We apologies for any inconvenience that this may have caused.

Have your say!

Hi everyone, just a quick reminder that voting for the WikiProject Military history coordinator election closes soon. You only have a day or so left to have your say about who should make up the coordination team for the next year. If you have already voted, thanks for participating! If you haven't and would like to, vote here before 23:59 UTC on 28 September. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:29, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Panacomp.net as a source

Hi Loesorion . I noticed that you used panacomp.net as a source for information in Mount Athos [7]. I am unable to find any evidence or discussion indicating that it meets reliable sourcing criteria for the inclusion of personal information in such articles. It appears self-published and promotional. If you disagree, let's discuss it. Thanks.--Ronz (talk) 23:12, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Loesorion. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Nominations now open for "Military historian of the year" and "Military history newcomer of the year" awards

Nominations for our annual Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards are open until 23:59 (GMT) on 15 December 2018. Why don't you nominate the editors who you believe have made a real difference to the project in 2018? MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:26, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Voting now open for "Military historian of the year" and "Military history newcomer of the year" awards

Voting for our annual Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards is open until 23:59 (GMT) on 30 December 2018. Why don't you vote for the editors who you believe have made a real difference to Wikipedia's coverage of military history in 2018? MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:17, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Backlog Banzai

In the month of September, Wikiproject Military history is running a project-wide edit-a-thon, Backlog Banzai. There are heaps of different areas you can work on, for which you claim points, and at the end of the month all sorts of whiz-bang awards will be handed out. Every player wins a prize! There is even a bit of friendly competition built in for those that like that sort of thing. Sign up now at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/September 2019 Backlog Banzai to take part. For the coordinators, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:18, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:38, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Milhist coordinator election voting has commenced

G'day everyone, voting for the 2019 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:37, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election half-way mark

G'day everyone, the voting for the XIX Coordinator Tranche is at the halfway mark. The candidates have answered various questions, and you can check them out to see why they are running and decide whether you support them. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:36, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:16, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

March Madness 2020

G'day all, March Madness 2020 is about to get underway, and there is bling aplenty for those who want to get stuck into the backlog by way of tagging, assessing, updating, adding or improving resources and creating articles. If you haven't already signed up to participate, why not? The more the merrier! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:19, 29 February 2020 (UTC) for the coord team

Disambiguation link notification for April 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited M-84, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sever (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:33, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Sources

Zdravo, I would suggest using better WP:RS on Yugoslav colonization of Kosovo and engaging more on the TP. Thank you, Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 22:19, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Exactly. You have good intentions, but when there is disagreement among the editors, no one should unilaterally make changes before the consensus on the talk page. It is best to use books and peer-reviewed journals in articles for historical events.--WEBDuB (talk) 19:45, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:05, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Milhist coordinator election voting has commenced

G'day everyone, voting for the 2020 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2020. Thanks from the outgoing coord team, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:18, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Warning

Please do not edit war as you are on Airbus A220, your addition was challenged and you do not have a consensus so the polite think would be to revert until you get agreement on the talk page, note you may get blocked from editing, thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 17:19, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

You deleted my edits for sake of "elegance" not for facts or some other valid reason, and while topic existed on Talk page of Airbus A220 article you again reverted my edit without even talking about it. So maybe you should be warned for engaging in editors war, and just because you don't like my edits done in good faith and in accordance with sources does not make you right to give me warning for something you are doing with edits obviously intentionally and without any proper reason. Wikipedia should be about facts and pages on Wikipedia are open for edits to everyone not just you and me. Using such cliche you are giving for my edits in this occasion any editor could be prevented to make any change on Wikipedia, so think again before you go with such steps, because same cliche could be also applied to every edit you do. Loesorion (talk) 17:36, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Airbus A220 shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. - Ahunt (talk) 18:00, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

So you are warning fellow editor who before you have even started to be included in discussion about A220 warned other editor(not knowing he is administrator - later that becomes a mistake) not to engage in potential editors war. So it seems according to you that the one who warned others about possible editors war (wishing to avoid such situation) is not aware of 3R rule? How nice. And all that because I have tried to correct airbus A220 page to be in accordance with already given sources. Or because as you stated in your comment I have warned administrator and as you suggested in your comment I should be ready for consequences because of my warning to administrator when he is conducting tasks of editor. I cite user Ahunt from Talk page Airbus A220 :

• User:Loesorion you may also want to refrain from edit warring against an admin as you have been doing. That is not the way to get your own way here and will likely end badly

Nice to know how some editors thinks how Wikipedia should be functioning. I will read this warning every time I come here just to remind myself of such conduct of fellow editors.

And as a personal note and reminder here on my Talk page i will notice that I was not trying to get my way here - Airbus A220 - but to edit Wikipedia in accordance with sources. I tough that Wikipedia:Ownership of content is a rule of tumb, but clearly that is not a case with Airbus A220 page because when there I tried to edit that page I was practically given warning ""before we give you consensus on Talk page you cannot edit anything in this article"" Loesorion (talk) 11:44, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:34, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Nominations for the 2020 Military history WikiProject Newcomer and Historian of the Year awards now open

G'day all, the nominations for the 2020 Military history WikiProject newcomer and Historian of the Year are open, all editors are encouraged to nominate candidates for the awards before until 23:59 (GMT) on 15 December 2020, after which voting will occur for 14 days. There is not much time left to nominate worthy recipients, so get to it! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:45, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Voting for "Military Historian of the Year" and "Military history newcomer of the year" closing

G'day all, voting for the WikiProject Military history "Military Historian of the Year" and "Military history newcomer of the year" is about to close, so if you haven't already, click on the links and have your say before 23:59 (GMT) on 30 December! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:35, 28 December 2020 (UTC) for the coord team

Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in the Balkans or Eastern Europe. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

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) 17:25, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Slatersteven (talk) 14:16, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Also wp:editwar.Slatersteven (talk) 14:16, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

So try not to engage in edit war. Discuss it in article Talk page where I started new section and do not remove edits with clear sources. Try to be polite to fellow editor and do not engage first in activities you accuse other without even reading sources prior that. Loesorion (talk) 19:04, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Indent

Please read wp:indent, its makes conversations easier.Slatersteven (talk) 14:35, 11 April 2021 (UTC) Pleas do not misuse my Talk page, you can post all relevant things in Talk page where I have started discussion and then polite ask me there to use indent if you need it, but I am not required to use it. Loesorion (talk) 19:02, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

August 2021

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Ashraf Ghani. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. ― Tartan357 ^Talk 23:25, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at Amrullah Saleh, you may be blocked from editing. ― Tartan357 ^Talk 22:10, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Amrullah Saleh. ― Tartan357 ^Talk 22:29, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

You are doing this intentionally without proper reason, you delete my sourced edits in article Amrullah Saleh that are done within no original research policy rules as they stipulates. You should learn that WP:PRIMARYNOTBAD. And my usage of primary source is supported with secondary. Per WP:OR "Primary sources that have been reputably published may be used in Wikipedia, but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them"

Stop spamming here about rules you do not follow yourself. Loesorion (talk) 11:41, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Important Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

― Tartan357 ^Talk 23:26, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

You have my notes and replies in details in Talk page Talk:Ashraf Ghani, you have engaged in editors wars in that article with me and you have given me notice here for no reason and in same time you have added in article inappropriate function to one man declaring him a government in exile without any source to support that claim and in same time deleted my sourced contributions to that article. How about you respect Wikipedia policies first before requesting from others do so. Loesorion (talk) 11:55, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

President of Afghanistan.

Ghani is still according to the constitution of The Islamic Republic of Afghanistan (de facto government in exile) president. Fleeing does does not equal resignation, especially since The IRoA is still recognized as the de jure Afghan government. Real jtizzle (talk) 19:45, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

No he is not according to constitution and multiple sources he is ex or former president. There is no government in exile as one man does not form government and Government in exile to have any formal status for start must be accepted by host country and for any international legality such government must be formed under foreign invasion - origin country must be partly or totally occupied - which is clearly now not a case here. Please stop spamming my talk page about this as there is relevant discussion in related articles Talk pages. Loesorion (talk) 19:50, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:58, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nomination period closing soon

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are still open, but not for long. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! No further nominations will be accepted after that time. Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:43, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator election voting has commenced

Hey y'all, voting for the 2021 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2021. Voting will be conducted at the 2021 tranche page itself. Appropriate questions for the candidates can also be asked. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:39, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election voting period closing soon

Hey y'all, voting for the 2021 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche will be closing soon. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2021. Voting will be conducted at the 2021 tranche page itself. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:32, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:39, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Survey about History on Wikipedia (If you reside in the United States)

I am Petros Apostolopoulos, a Ph.D. candidate in Public History at North Carolina State University. My Ph.D. project examines how historical knowledge is produced on Wikipedia. You must be 18 years of age or older, reside in the United States to participate in this study. If you are interested in participating in my research study by offering your own experience of writing about history on Wikipedia, you can click on this link https://ncsu.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9z4wmR1cIp0qBH8. There are minimal risks involved in this research.

If you have any questions, please let me know. Petros Apostolopoulos, [email protected] Apolo1991 (talk) 15:25, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Calling vandalism on edits

Hi, just a little heads up: I noticed that you're going back and forth with another editor on S-300. Their edits don't seem like vandalism, so please be careful not to call it that, even if they're misguided in the way you described. Eik Corell (talk) 15:31, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Then how to tell someone that what he is doing is very wrong and that wrong amounts to vandalism of Wikipedia page. One or more editors behind one IP in this example are multiple time resurrecting material without proper source on a page and by doing so not complying with Wikipedia:Verifiability and without any regard to Wikipedia core content policies.

In same time they are not engaged in properly open section in Talk page of article - while trough edits on page IP editors calls for one and in later revert even asks that I provide a source in order to not delete such material?

Nothing harsh in calling blue sky a blue sky so I have written "Stop vandalizing this page" that is not wrong because they are putting again on a page material without verifiable source.

That was not a personal attack but a warning in good faith. Misguided or not I don't know but I do not see a good faith there because he is not engaging I Talk page section and calls for one and resurrects deleted multiple time. So at end he is unregistered user that do not engage in talk page and in same time is doing reverts so what type of warning he can get because per [[8]] he has to have Talk page in order for me to left a note there and if that IP is shared and seems to me it according to research I have done it is shared and belongs to Vodafone then who actually will read warning on shared IP address. And you are also saying "Their edits" - plural - so you know that there is more then one editor behind that IP address or you just guessing? Loesorion (talk) 21:53, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

The problem is with the source: I've spent some time poking around trying to find out if this source is reliable or not, and what I discovered was that there was no clear consensus. Some of the discussions I found: 1, 2, and 3. What I noticed is that all of these discussions have been hit by sockpuppet accounts, i.e #3 has dozens of socks saying it's unreliable. I've seen the source used elsewhere, supposedly as a reliable source, why I'm hesitant to call someone re-instating it vandalism. The Avia.pro article presents a bigger problem in that there's even less information on whether it is a reliable source. It would be nice to have more people have a look at this, but first step would probably just be to make sure they've seen your entry on the talk page, so I'll ping them there. Eik Corell (talk) 15:35, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Consensus there or not in this example this is clearly fake news as we all can read original source and trace a story to original publisher and that is Avia.pro and in there there is no mention of claims that middleeastmonitor.com is talking about in their story. In same time no official source exists to support a story they write about - they could not do so they used other unofficial source as cover for their fake story - stories like that brings click on internet and they use fake content in order to get public to visit them. I do not need to check other articles of same middleeastmonitor.com source to see this one is fake story - not based on real story. And yes that would be also a reason to have them on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard and declare them unreliable but in same time that does not change that fake story was used on S-300 article and editor that objected my deletion and resurrected again that story was even asking me to provide new source for false claims after I deleted such claims from article. Avia.pro did not provide in their story false claims in a way as middleeastmonitor.com has - huge difference the way Avia.pro presented their story. Loesorion (talk) 22:01, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

February 2022

Hello, I'm RenatUK. I noticed that you recently removed content from ANNA News without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Renat 16:51, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in Eastern Europe or the Balkans. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Renat 16:54, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at ANNA News, you may be blocked from editing. Renat 17:47, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

What is neutral point of view? Mentioned page lacks NPOW. But Ok if you mind true and you often love propaganda then it is best to stop me from editing. Loesorion (talk) 17:37, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

April 2022

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use talk pages for inappropriate discussion, you may be blocked from editing. Jeppiz (talk) 18:45, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

What editing, what article have I edited? I have used talk page in order to improve article and gave best possible source to prove my talking point as other sources used in article clearly engage in propaganda war with goal to smear one side, source have videos that nobody denies and show actual story. You can declare every discussion as forum per se. That does not make you right on contrary. You are preventing discussion on Talk page of article. You do not seek better sources but ways to remove discussions about a topic that proves editing on article page is wrong. Loesorion (talk) 20:14, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations opening soon

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are opening in a few hours (00:01 UTC on 1 September). A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:51, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election voting opening soon!

Voting for the upcoming project coordinator election opens in a few hours (00:01 UTC on 15 September) and will last through 23:59 on 28 September. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. Voting is conducted using simple approval voting and questions for the candidates are welcome. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:26, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Correction to previous election announcement

Just a quick correction to the prior message about the 2022 MILHIST coordinator election! I (Hog Farm) didn't proofread the message well enough and left out a link to the election page itself in this message. The voting will occur here; sorry about the need for a second message and the inadvertent omission from the prior one. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:41, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election voting closing soon

Voting for the upcoming project coordinator election closes soon, at 23:59 on 28 September. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. Voting is conducted using simple approval voting and questions for the candidates are welcome. The voting itself is occurring here If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:13, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

You have been pruned from a list

Hi Loesorion! You're receiving this notification because you were previously listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject History/Outreach/Participants, but you haven't made any edits to the English Wikipedia in over 6 months.

Because of your inactivity, you have been removed from the list. If you would like to resubscribe, you can do so at any time by visiting Wikipedia:WikiProject History/Outreach/Participants.

Thank you! Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:01, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

November 2024

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Oreshnik (missile), it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Please make sure that all claims are being *directly* sourced to a reliable source that is relevant to the claim being addressed. The NASA source you provided makes no claims that the Oreshnik missile is "rare". Please make sure you're discussing and gaining consensus for these proposed changes on the talk page, particularly if other editors are identifying problems with your edits. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 17:11, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Please cite original research you are referring, do not engage in unnecessary edits wars because your personal standpoints and matter you do not understand the best. Loesorion (talk) 17:16, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

I've literally already explained it to you -- your claims that the missile is "rare" are not substantiated by the NASA source you provided, which makes no reference to the Oreshnik missile or it's rarity. Per Wikipedia's policies, all contested claims must be directly supported by a reliable source. Your edits contained original research that does not meet that barrier for inclusion. You are quite literally edit warring to insert a grammatically mangled sentence that contains unsupported original research in a contentious topic area -- to then go on and accuse me of "engaging in unnecessary edits wars because your personal standpoints and matter you do not understand" indicates an astonishing failure to assume good faith and a demonstrated lack of competency with regard to understanding of our policies. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 17:36, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

"NASA is not using it in reference to ballistic missiles" - it is related to definition of speeds be it airplane or missile does not matter. Loesorion (talk) 17:20, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

It matters here. Sources need to directly support the claims being made. That is Wikipedia policy, which I'd advise you to spend some time becoming more familiar with before choosing to edit in a contentious topic area.⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 17:36, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Sources claims speed above mach 11 and it is common knowledge that it is High-supersonic and not just hypersonic speed. Wikipedia policies also allow edits to be made with using language to describe what is in source if it is verifiable in source as it is case here. Loesorion (talk) 18:08, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

That's not how it works, nor is your description of what is the case here accurate. "It is common knowledge" is not an acceptable grounds for sourcing on Wikipedia. Before you continue to reiterate misstatements of our policies and guidelines, I would strongly suggest you actually review what those policies and guidelines say. They are very explicit: On Wikipedia, original research means material—such as facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published source exists. This includes any analysis or synthesis of published material that reaches or implies a conclusion not stated by the sources. To demonstrate that you are not adding original research, you must be able to cite reliable, published sources that are directly related to the topic of the article and directly support the material being presented. A source "directly supports" a given piece of material if the information is present explicitly in the source, so that using this source to support the material is not a violation of Wikipedia:No original research.. "It's common sense" does not meet that bar. As mentioned, the source provided does not directly support the claim that the missile is rare; nor does it directly support the claim that "high-hypersonic" -- a term not commonly used in the missile community -- is applicable in this context. Further, WP:LEDE states that the lede of an article should not contain information that is not present and sourced in the body of the article, as is the case here. So what you'd need for that is a reliable source that says "Oreshnik is a rare, high-hypersonic missile" -- but that's not what your sources say, nor has anyone provided a reliable source that says this. This means your edit was definitionally synthesis that is disallowed by policy, e.g.: Do not combine material from multiple sources to state or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 19:16, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

If it is our policies then it is not your or mine, you use parts of policies of Wikipedia to lecture me and in same time you do not use policies that is on editors to do their best to interpret sourced material in order to present it to readers and not to rewrite source word for word. So try Wikipedia:Avoid instruction creep and do not abuse my Talk page for lecturing me about Wikipedia policies you use in partial way so it only suit your stance and view on editing. Try to learn about Wikipedia:Editing policy and learn about "paraphrase". I have added source that missile is above 11 mach written that its speed is High-hypersonic - term already used in other Wikipedia articles - to clarify for readers in my summary edit - all based on reliable sources and you are lecturing me about "No original research".

Again I have summarized ideas in the source using my own words and written edit in article - all within Wikipedia policies.

You deleted my edit about high-hypersonic speed and I already gave meaning of high-hypersonic on article Talk page but you judge me here based on your narrow interpretation of Wikipedia policies.

So stop your Wikipedia:Disruptive editing. Loesorion (talk) 21:56, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Once again, that's not how it works -- user talk pages are for collaboration and discussion, and as an administrator on this project, I'm here to make you aware of the policies that you were insistently violating. The only person editing disruptively here is you. Your failure to listen to the advice you're being given is approaching blockable levels of lack of competence and competence is required on this project. If you continue to behave disruptively and tendentiously, you're going to be blocked from editing -- that includes making personal attacks by casting aspersions at other editors or making unsubstantiated, unsupported, uncivil claims. Knock it off. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 22:04, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Dear Wikipedia colleague are you using your administrator privilege to leverage me here on My Talk page and for what? To me now it seems if I am not wrong only violation of mine is my "daring" to edit a page so you took that against me. You attack me, your fellow editor using uncivil claims and language because you are angry on me or for some other reason?

I cannot comprehend why are you acting here on such way, I was polite and citing Wikipedia policies, and I was not writing any words on your talk page it was vice versa.

"Knock it off" feels to me as personal attack on me in order to stop my edits or writing on Wikipedia, so dear fellow editor please do not use such harsh words and naming your administration privileges to threaten me in order to resolve my edits on one article. You as administrator(I do not know if you are - it is your writing) should not take on personal level my warnings about your behavior towards my edits - look what are you writing to me and put yourselves in my position if someone else written same to you from administrative privilege position.

Instead of having resolved all differences trough Talk page of article - you come here. There will not be better article on Wikipedia if people is always engaged in so many levels like you here with me hiding behind policies instead of resolving differences with arguments on article Talk page - again not here.

All I have done was in good fate on page about Oreshnik missile where I edited few words based on source in a way to my best knowledge, then you started deleting my edits and later cited numerous policies that I to my knowledge (and I a have read them all long time ago) have not broken, so I warned you to not engage in Disruptive way towards me for no reason, also I have quoted your words on article Talk page in order to reply to you and concluded it is good to give you some links because of your writing about a topic is not the best to my knowledge and provided all that with links in order to have better understand of matter and now look what you are writing here to me after my reply there.

I have started to feel harassed from you here on my talk page - it seems to me you are doing all that in order to prevent me from editing and I feel very unpleasant now.

I will log out now from Wikipedia if that is making you happy so please do not attack me more with so many words that I cannot comprehend what is going on with you towards me and I feel now very intimidated by yours such behavior. Loesorion (talk) 01:05, 23 November 2024 (UTC)