User talk:MrDolomite

vn- 3This user talk page has been vandalized 3 times.

Click here to leave a message for MrDolomite in a new section on this talk page. Or click here to send him an offwiki email

Archive

• Grab a shovel, dig in

Re: Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

Thanks for your Wikipedia editing work. I've restored my edit in two steps, leaving my explanations for each. The first edit is because the quote refers to a book called "Social Statics" and the article wrongly had it is as "Statistics." The second edit is b/c, as interesting as the information on the Pakistani High Court was--and it was an interesting thought--it was a) unencyclopedic b)ungrammatical c)not at all relevant to an article about HOLMES, however relevant to an article about, e.g. South Asian jurisprudence.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.95.178.159 (talk • contribs)

Re:Talk:Henry Paulson

Thanks for the head's up, that was me who deleted the comments, I must not have been signed in when I did that. Since Mr. Paulson has made a public appearance, my comments were irrelevant, which is why I deleted them. Sorry for the confusion. Chaos Motor (talk) 01:10, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Today's RFD Nomintions

You nominated three pages for deletion at WP:RFD today. Unfortunately, each of these pages is a disambiguation page and not a redirect. WP:RFD is only for redirects. Disabmig pages are handled via WP:AFD. You may wish to renominate via the AFD process. Thanks. -- JLaTondre 13:14, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank You!

		The TomStar81 Spelling Award
		Be it known to all members of Wikipedia that MrDolomite has corrected my god-awful spelling on the page Iowa class battleship, and in doing so has made an important and very significant contribution to the Wikipedia community, thereby earning this TomStar81 Spelling Award and my deepest thanks. Keep up the good work! TomStar81 (Talk) 21:32, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

38.116.200.63 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) comments

ur gai. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.116.200.63 (talk • contribs)

Distinguishing between power and authority

Hi there. I've never before contributed to wikipedia except to add my article on power and authority, which now seems to have been marked for deletion. All i'd like to know is why. I'd be most grateful. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Blakemore e71 (talk • contribs) 23:42, 28 March 2007 (UTC).

Re : User:Mailer diablo/P

Thanks for the barnstar, I appreciate that! =) - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 13:04, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Dodge Ram incorrect vandalism warnings

MrDolomite, while I appreciate your zeal for protecting Wikipedia from vandalism, you had better check your facts before issuing anti-vandalism warnings against other users. As an anonymous contributor, I removed vandalism from the Dodge Ram page on 28 March 2007. Surely, a brief examination of this edit would have revealed that it was an entirely legitimate correction. For some reason, however, you posted the standard level-2 vandalism warning on my user talk page! Also targeted in the warning was IP address 65.10.105.158, whose only edit at that time was also a correction of vandalism. Could it be that you issued these warnings to everyone who made edits on that page around that time, without actually verifying that the edits were indeed malicious? As an apparently active contributor to Wikipedia, you owe the rest of the community a higher degree of caution and responsibility than this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.98.214.135 (talk) 22:29, 3 April 2007 (UTC).

• See my reply and apology on his talk page here — MrDolomite • Talk 23:14, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Template talk:Sort

Hi MrDolomite, there is a centralized discussion going on for all issues surrounding sortkeys for wikitables. Maybe you would like to give some input here: Template talk:Sort. --Van helsing 14:53, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Editing Taft

Wasn't me, Fucko. Stop sending me messages. 63.228.54.147 01:20, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

• See my reply here on User talk:63.228.54.147 — MrDolomite • Talk 11:19, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Talk:General of the Armies

• I just took a look at wikisource vs. wikicommons and it seems like a tough call as to where these images belong. One thing that's against commons is [1] where it says "By Type / Images / * Animations · Diagrams · Drawings · Maps (Atlas) · Paintings · Photos · Symbols." A scanned document does not seem to fit in that list. The Wikipedia page for Wikisource says "collects and stores in digital format previously published texts" though I don't know if a scanned image qualifies as "digital format." I uploaded the scans to provide background source material for s:Order 31-3 and in case there's ever a question about what the actual orders say. I need to run now but will look into this further as it's unclear to me at the moment why there are two separate sites (wikisource vs. wikicommons). Marc Kupper (talk) (contribs) 18:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Edit conflict

Yeah, I got an edit conflict when I tried to upload the file, so I thought I would return the favor. Tbjablin 01:00, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Navigation Boxes

The reason I changed the navigation boxes back to their former state is because I thought it looked absolutly rediculous the way you had them with the seal on the left. What was wrong with the way they were. I have worked hard to make this site look decent and its always getting screwed up. I really don't get it. -The Mystery Man

Thanx

Major league thanx for the ribbon bar at Robin Olds. Using the tool you linked, I was able to recreate the same for Gabby Gabreski but have not the foggiest idea how to download it or even if I legally can. It's a cool tool and you are commended for the addition.--Buckboard 01:11, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:BelievePatch.jpg

This file may be deleted.

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

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 02:06, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Kevin C. Kiley

Hey Mr. D.--

Long User page. I'll have to come back to it one day and finish it. Anyway, I noted that you're the one who added the Current Event tag to the Kevin Kiley article (as well you should have, no doubt). However, he's left the Army and while the scandal is still fresh in military minds, it isn't as much in the public's mind anymore. And what is still fresh doesn't include Kiley. It just seems silly to have a Current Event tag on someone who hardly anybody remembers now. Would you agree that it's safe to take down the tag now, or how much longer does it need to stay up and to still be considered current? --ScreaminEagle 22:58, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Robert F. Willard.jpg

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:Robert F. Willard.jpg, by GrummelJS (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:Robert F. Willard.jpg fits the criteria for speedy deletion for the following reason:

hires Image available commons:Image:Robert F. Willard.jpg

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Image:Robert F. Willard.jpg, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 10:23, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators from a pool of fourteen candidates to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by August 28! Kirill 01:17, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

General of the Armies 2

Don't revert my edit again. General of the Army is not the only 5 star rank in the US army, as your edit implied. And I don't think General of the Army is a 5 star rank in all countries, as your edit implied. - Shaheenjim 15:25, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

The rank General of the Armies of the United States is also a five star rank. See the Six Star Rank? section of the General of the Armies article for information about that. I edited the page again to reflect that.

If you want people to assume good faith, then don't revert their edits without discussing it on the talk page first, unless you're sure you're right or they're clearly vandalism. - Shaheenjim 23:08, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

My interpretation is that the rank General of the Armies of the United States was a four star rank before they created the five star General of the Army rank in 1944. At that point, General of the Armies was raised from four stars to five, in order to keep it the highest possible rank in the US. Pershing kept wearing the four star insignia, but they said he was superior to General of the Army, so you can just assume it's a five star rank anyway. However, as the article says, it was not seen to be a six star rank. - Shaheenjim 02:10, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

What you've stumbled upon

The user you have encountered on the GENOFARMES article has had some significant difficulties working with others, the primary fault being a misunderstanding of Wikipedia:Ownership of articles. Specifically, the user fells that all changes to the article must be first discussed on the talk page, and personally approved by said user, before allowing them to remain in the article. If this is not done, the user will blanket revert all changes not his own. An added twist is that the user seems to have a deep respect for one single user and talks with him…and only him…about the validity of the article. All others are meet with suspicion and there have been a few violations of WP:CIV as well (“You’re edits make this article worse”). To top off the situation, we are dealing with someone who is not a United States citizen, I think, and doesn’t have an understanding of who George Washington really is or the importance he has in the military history of the United States. For instance, no military veteran alive or dead would say that John Pershing is an equal to George Washington, but that’s how the article is presently written. So, I tell you this not to bash to the other user but to give you an idea of what you’ve stumbled upon and ask that all of us try to be patient. I think this will eventually lead to a block on the user in question, for I am sure by the tone of the talk page that the user will eventually cross the line and either threaten someone or break 3RR. Until then, however, I guess it is best to work with him…or at least try. -OberRanks 15:59, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick reply to my concerns. A recent talk page entry by our friend at General of the Armies sounds like he plans to do some serious damage, talking about merging the article with General of the Army to reflect the existence of General of Armies in the Civil War which simply isn't true. Please keep an eye on this article. Thank you. -OberRanks 21:44, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Tourism in metropolitan Detroit

Please take a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tourism in metropolitan Detroit, you may want to have some input. Thanks Thomas Paine1776 21:58, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Ask for help

Would you mind add some references of the Inter-service decorations of the United States military?

Thank you.--东北虎(Manchurian Tiger) 04:32, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Fleet admiral image

I used an automated summary, so I wasn't able to change it. Anyways, the image was a copyright violation from http://www.uniforminsignia.net/index.php?p=show&id=65&sid=1288 and the source was lied about. I have uploaded a replacement image at Image:Fleet admiral shoulder rank.jpg. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 13:10, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of British and United States military ranks compared

An article that you have been involved in editing, British and United States military ranks compared, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/British and United States military ranks compared. Thank you. Caerwine Caer’s whines 22:06, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Bad situation

I cant recall how involved you were with this, but a bad situation is developing on General (United States). Please see Talk:General_(United_States)#Investigation_into_non-consensus_merger. Thank you very much. -OberRanks 03:16, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

This friend of ours is really getting out of control and has crossed the line with WP:OWN. He is now reverting any edit not his/her own on General of the Armies. Something needs to be done, but I'm not sure what. -OberRanks 15:24, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Good edits, thank you. Our pal reverted all of your changes. I restored it and one more and its breaking of WP:3RR. Maybe a block on SJ will stop the edit war. I hope. -OberRanks 17:07, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

As Please note that my personal focus, and talk, will be confined to the the General of the Armies page. I know the war continues on other fronts but I'm swamped in projects. Marc Kupper (talk) (contribs) 00:14, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

John Pershing

The article on General Pershing seems to be incorrect as to the dates of death regarding his parents, according to Vandiver's 2 volume biography Pershing's mother died during his initial service in the West, and his father's death is spelled out specifically as March 16, 1906, twenty years after the current entry claims. I attempted to edit the article to reflect that, but you have removed it due to a lack of citations. While I understand that, there is exactly one other thing in the entire article about Pershing that is cited. The books I am taking as sources are mentioned in the end as general references, but I don't know how to modify the in-article citations without changing the others as well. I could use some assistance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.76.235.22 (talk • contribs) in reference to Special:Contributions/72.45.129.35 in edits made here. Thanks for your help on that!

Template:Princes of Wales

Just to let you know, the header for the PW template is red because the title originates in England – whereas Duke of Edinburgh is British, hence the same purple as the British Monarchs box, because that purple is a blend of red, for England, and blue, for Scotland ^† DBD 01:59, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

First Edit

• FROM YOUR FRIEND:

--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:57, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Its no problem. Thanks for signing my autograph book. I really appreciate it. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:34, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

--Alisyn^talk 02:39, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

	HAPPY FIRST EDIT DAY!	from the BIRTHDAYCOMMITTEE
	Wishing MrDolomite a very Happy First Edit Day! Have a fantastic day! From the Wikipedia Birthday Committee

--SMS ^Talk 03:27, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day, MrDolomite, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! ~~~~

--Nadir D Steinmetz 19:06, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Indiana Jones

Indy fought in Belgium during World War I during the Young Indiana Jones Chronicles show. Video games and comics attest to him being a CIA agent during WW2, although he was eligible for the draft. But anyway, he was a WW1 soldier. Alientraveller (talk) 07:50, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

image rationales

Rationales on image pages need to be separate from one another. I fixed the change you made. [2]--Rockfang (talk) 17:35, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Dodge ram srt10 streetrecord.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Dodge ram srt10 streetrecord.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
• That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --02:06, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Category:Succession header templates

Your idea to create this category is so good that I wonder how I hadn't thought it myself before. :-D Thank you very much for your trouble, Mr Dolomite—you should know that it is very much appreciated. If you are interested in succession boxes in general, then there is the right place to offer your services; if not, it has been a pleasure to meet you and I hope to see you again some time. Waltham, The Duke of 06:24, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

(moved from User talk:The Duke of Waltham) Thank you for the note. Its nice to get a positive comment on ones talk page instead of a nasty bot warning of some sort :) I was being a bit WP:BOLD, but I figured if I was having trouble figuring out which ones were headers and which were other bits, other editors may be also. I haven't removed anything from Category:Succession templates though, I did not want to mess up any existing organization. — MrDolomite • Talk 06:34, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

I like to keep discussions whole. :-)

I think you've done well to keep the initial category whole; the templates are still succession templates, and it is probably best to keep them all together. There are grounds for removing them from the parent category, but then there would be too few representatives of the s- series left; if we get to (re)move the rest from there, it might be a more acceptable solution, I think. I haven't really thought about it, to be honest. Waltham, The Duke of 07:20, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

PS: I am not sure it is a good idea to use templates for section headings. I cannot link to it. Waltham, The Duke of 07:22, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Re:List of members of the Hockey Hall of Fame

The article used to contain such a list, but it was decided that it belonged more at the main article for the Hall of Fame, since it is for general information and the members list is just a list of members. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 21:37, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Don't understand your message

Hello MrDolomite:

I had a message from you regarding an edit at the Mildred Thompson page. Has something to do with a barnstar? I am new to all of this and really don't know what the barnstar is all about. I think it is a "good job" sort of message from the person who complimented my editing of Mildred Thompson. ```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by Glassnote (talk • contribs) 18:53, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Alexander Macomb (American general)

Dear MrDolomite: I'm glad you noticed the improvement. I can't get around to this for another week or so (Have to earn a living, and will be where internet is a real problem), but if you take a look at the two books and the two dispatches in the External links, these are tremendous sources. Nice job on you editing. Happy weekend. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 14:48, 25 July 2008 (UTC) Stan

Nowraplinks question for Template:Catholic Prayers

I have responded to your question at Template talk:Nowraplinks#Nowraplinks question for Template:Catholic Prayers. (And we do have a solution to that problem. :)

--David Göthberg (talk) 18:07, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

Thanks for the barnstar! Asher196 (talk) 01:47, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Fair-use Images...

That may be true... And I will give consideration to a possible change in strategy. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:29, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Speaking of which, care to do some updating of some links here : http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&offset=20070710103408&limit=500&contribs=user&target=ShakespeareFan00&namespace=6

Basicly attribution to Wizards of The Coast should ideally be updated to Wizards of the Coast (now Hasbro) to reflect the current status of WoC.. ?

Thanks Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:48, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Underscores in redirects

You updated Internet Speculative Fiction Database to change the redirect to use underscores instead of spaces. In looking at WP:R I'm not sure why you did this. Thanks for doing the edit though as I'd been wondering if redirects should use spaces or _ and your edit motivated me to go look at the manual where I see all of the examples use spaces.

I just looked at your home page and see that the General of the Armies topic is still active. That's a great find at http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/juris/j0210_67.sgml --Marc Kupper|talk 07:09, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

6 star rank

What appears to be a sockpuppet created 6 star rank and presumably the puppetmaster has taken over editing. My first inclination is AfD as it's a speculative rank but maybe you know something about this project that I've missed. --Marc Kupper|talk 00:27, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Nope, I have never seen any legitimate sources talking about 6 star rank. IMHO, that is all just WP:OR, so it can gladly go to AFD. But good catch. — MrDolomite • Talk 01:58, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

I found it's already proposed for AfD and was deleted. Could you please help me with the CsD as I've never done one before and the CsD help is not as clear. I believe I should

• Add the following to 6 star rank

{{csd|Previously [[Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/6_star_rank|deleted]] for [[WP:OR]] and no [[WP:RS]] has come up that supports recreating the page}}

with the comment

CsD: Nominated for deletion; see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/6 star rank

I suspect I need to add a tag, {{csd2}} comes to mind but that's not it, on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/6 star rank or is there an AfD log of the day thing? You can reply here and I'll spot it. Thank you. --Marc Kupper|talk 03:19, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

I installed Twinkle which did the work. --Marc Kupper|talk 05:57, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

FWIW - the 6 star rank article was resurrected and at present is "substantially different" than the deleted version meaning the CsD was nullified but the article is also still a work in progress. You may be interested in Talk:6 star rank#Lieutenant-General as a "six star" rank as I ran across a book titled The Life of Ulysses S. Grant - General of the Armies of the United States (1868). The parsing of that title though turns out to be "General" of "the Armies of the United States" and the publication itself uses "the Armies of the United States" several times implying this may have been common usage during the period preceding Pershing's reputed commission as General of the Armies of the Unites States.

I started this hunt as I ran across a 1961 book about Pershing[3] that states he's was first General of the Armies of the United States since Washington (p. 23, 343) (use search inside this book for "General of the Armies"). The book seems well researched/sourced but so far I've not found why that claim was used though suspect as the book was written/published in the same period that MacArthur was being considered for the title that news articles of the time may have made references to G.W. though it's not clear if it's as the rank "General of the Armies" or the role "General" of "the Armies". If it's the role then they missed General Grant. --Marc Kupper|talk 20:18, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I just realized that if Pershing was never commissioned as a "General of the Armies of the United States" but rather held a "General" of "the Armies of the United States" then that would also explain something I'd been wondering about in that Washington's appointment seems to be establishing a new rank titled "General of the Armies of the United States"^{(PL 94-479)}. --Marc Kupper|talk 20:31, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

First Edit Day

Happy First Edit Day, MrDolomite, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day!

Versus22 _talk 05:18, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:2012frozenfour.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:2012frozenfour.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:05, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

• Readded image to the 2012 NCAA Division I Men's Ice Hockey Tournament article and removed the {{di-orphaned fair use}} from the image page. — MrDolomite • Talk 11:56, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced tags

While your suggestion about proper sourcing of the articles on the list is something that absolutely should be done. The way that lists work is that they also need proper references, even if the content is self-evident because of the references from the articles (the verifiability policy does not have an exception). Plus, unlike articles where the lead does not need to be cited, on lists it does. -MBK₀₀₄ 05:59, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:NHL 2009 All-Star Game Logo.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:NHL 2009 All-Star Game Logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Kalel2007 (talk) 23:25, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

• Image was replaced by File:2009 NHL All-Star.svg so it is fine to delete the .jpg version. — MrDolomite • Talk 01:14, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:QUEUE

Wikipedia:QUEUE, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:QUEUE and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:QUEUE during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Many otters • One hammer • HELP)} 22:12, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

RfD nomination of Wikipedia:QUEUE

I have nominated Wikipedia:QUEUE (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Many otters • One hammer • HELP)} 22:13, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

VA Template

Hello,

Sorry if this is late but I have replyed to your message at Template_talk:USSecVA. Thanks again for the kudos! - Thanks, Hoshie 21:43, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Eisenhower citation

I noticed that the information about Eisenhower's MOH needed a citation. One respected source for that citation could be D' Este's biography, Eisenhower: A Soldier's Life. p.372-373. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.197.241.135 (talk) 15:35, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

My General of the Army (United States) Edits

My apologies for not providing my explanation for the edits. I have made my edits again with explanation, which I will repeat here for your consideration. If you disagree, fine. Revert them again. Your contributions to the article are appreciated.

I changed this: "In the 1990s, the U.S. Department of Defense gave indication that the office of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff would possibly one day be a position worthy of five-star rank.[citation needed] This would be problematic in that with the appointment of United States Marine Corps Generals as Chairman, there is no current five-star USMC rank. "

To this: "In the 1990s, the U.S. Department of Defense gave indication that the office of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff would possibly one day be a position worthy of five-star rank.[citation needed]"

Removing the un-sourced statement that using 5 stars for C-JCS would be problematic. My reason: How would it be problematic? They would just create the USMC 5 star rank. There was no 5 star rank for the Army or Navy until they were needed and created. Unjustified assertion.

I removed the sentence from the end of that same paragraph. The preceding sentence discusses Omar Bradley's promotion to 5 star rank, and clearly states that it was given as recognition of his WWII and post-war service, and not because of his selection as C-JCS.

The next sentence, which I removed, says, "In particular Bradley was not, because he was serving as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, to have, in his person, the most senior rank in the uniformed services of the United States."

What does that mean? Does it add anything to the article that wasn't already said in the previous sentence? Does the sentence mean to say that when Bradley was of 5 star rank that he was NOT the most senior active officer? Who would have been senior? What is the source of this assertion? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.41.55.251 (talk) 05:22, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of William F. Halsey, Sr.

I have nominated William F. Halsey, Sr., an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William F. Halsey, Sr.. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. -- Mufka ^{(u) (t) (c)} 17:28, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Richard Radecki

After losing the field with the speedy delete of his article, people are now going after his picture which was very hard to find. There are only two in existence, both screenshots from Men of Honor. I stated this on his picture page but got a very short one line answer. Your chiming in would be much appreciated since there simply are no other pictures of him available. -OberRanks (talk) 12:53, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Demographics of the Supreme Court of the United States FA-drive

Sorry for spamming you, but in light of the impending shift of the Demographics of the Supreme Court of the United States, I'd like to get this article up to FA status within the next few weeks, and ready for the front page by the time the Court starts its fall term. Any help or advice you can provide would be appreciated. Cheers! bd2412 T 01:20, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Agree with table on List of Presidential Medal of Freedom recipients

MrDolomite, agree with your table suggestion on the List of Presidential Medal of Freedom recipients article. Comments in the discussion. - Thaimoss (talk) 22:51, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

concerning dick clark edit i made

hello.

first off, allow me to state that im not tryin to tell you that you were wrong, or argue with you at all. im just hopin to understand better, so as to not cause anyone to go through the trouble of worrying about correcting me anymore.

i did not intend to leave what would be considered vandalism, i hope from the reading of my edit to dick clarks page, it is at least noticable that i was attempting to word it in a way that would not be considered defamatory? .... well i dont really know what defamatory is, but i was trying to word it in a way that wouldnt be considered as an attack or insult to him.... simply a theory (albeit one that most would consider implausible, granted) as to why dick clark had remained so youthful over all these years...... cuz i was even going to include a joke about about ending his "vampiric reign of terror" during a new years ball dropping ceremony, by decapitatin him right as the ball got to the bottom of the pole, and figured 'no... that wouldtn be taken well at all probably". and i was gonna also crack some wise about his middle name 'wagstaff' and how only a vampire could have such a moniker. but at a loss to humor, i went ahead and removed those.... i state this, not to point out why i think i was right, but to hopefully impress upon you that i earnestly did not mean to be a 'vandal', as it seems i was taken.

so basically... i was hopin you would have time to give, and wouldnt mind givin me a little more detail/explanation as to what exactly was bad about my submission. i would honestly hope there is some way to leave that edit in a way that would be acceptable, if possible. thank you, i appreciate your patience and understanding. have a nice day.

if by some chance i messed up on the guidelines for this talk page interaction then i aplogize. thank you for your understanding and patience.

begonder -Begonder (talk) 22:43, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Service awards proposal

Hello, MrDolomite! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards. If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 04:17, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Feedback About My Changes to Mother Teresa Wiki

Thanks for the feedback about my changes to Mother Teresa's wiki. I changed her religion again and cited a good source (CBS) and it still got reverted. Please help me understand why. Thanks so much for your time. Bluetd (talk) 04:34, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Replied on his talk page. — MrDolomite • Talk 05:11, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Ice hockey 2002 Olympics

I was deleting something that was irrelevant to the page, and not something that should be in an encyclopedia.

Explain how what Bob Cole said when the Rangers won the Cup in 1994 is remotely relevant to the 2002 Winter Olympics. It's not. Please do not threaten me when you are the one that is wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.44.181.22 (talk) 17:30, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Replied at User_talk:24.44.181.22#Ice_hockey_at_the_2002_Winter_Olympics

Template:Nomainpage

ahh, ok as you would of seen, the pages are/were link in a loop, with no actual main article. the template was an attempt at pointing that out (as it was the first time i had made one).

Sghfdhdfghdfgfd (talk) 20:27, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

General of the Armies

General of the Armies is under fire once again. The same old stuff, i.e. Washington was a seven star general superior to Pershing. This combined with removing references to Congress and stating the President is in charge of giving out this rank as well some pretty heavy POV edits. I've done two reverts so far, you may wish to take a look. -OberRanks (talk) 02:50, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

The user returned and is making the same edits that SJ did last year. Basic stating that Washington was a seven star general. He isn't listening to reason and has removed a lot of the original references. Your help would be greatly appreciated. -OberRanks (talk) 23:17, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

United States Secretary of War

Re: United States Secretary of War diff - Timothy Pickering was a Pennsylvania resident from the mid 1780s to 1802. This covers his time in the Washington and Adams administrations. Thank you for caring, but Presidential appointments are listed by the state of residence, not the person's state of birth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gevan (talk • contribs) 05:31, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Cross pattée

Regarding Cross pattée - Only on Wikipedia could a piece of entirely relevant and correct information be removed on the whim of someone with too much time on their hands. Well done, you have successfully managed to stifle me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.9.23.124 (talk) 19:43, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

well you've managed it (to stifle) thanks very much, seems by many of your other messages i've read, that you've tread on quite a few feet in your ruthless pursuit of supremecy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.9.23.124 (talk) 19:55, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

WARNING!

RE: EDD BYRNESS....THIS IFORMATION HAS BEEN HERE FOR YEARS, IT HAS BEEN VERIFIED! DO NOT DELETE IT JUST BECAUSE YOU DON'T LIKE IT — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.91.148.188 (talk • contribs) regarding Edd Byrnes

• See also User talk:68.91.148.188, User talk:68.92.232.84, User talk:68.90.157.30, User talk:68.94.145.4, User talk:67.65.250.79 as well as the discussion on Talk:Edd Byrnes for this information reverting going back to February 2009. — MrDolomite • Talk 20:33, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Submitted to WP:RFPP diff after fourth different IP edit. — MrDolomite • Talk 01:26, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
    • Temporary semiprotected for 3 days on 14 April 2010 diff. — MrDolomite • Talk 11:51, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Added specific WP:BLP note on Talk:Edd Byrnes seen here. — MrDolomite • Talk 01:36, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
• See also edit to Talk:Edd Byrnes made by THETRUTHPROTECTOR (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) seen here requesting the information be added after the page had been protected. Request denied to due lack of source, diff. — MrDolomite • Talk 11:58, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Category:Tropical cyclone articles

Hi. I've reverted your edit to Category:Tropical cyclone articles, since the __HIDDENCAT__ tag is intentional; the category is used for maintenance purposes only. Cheers, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:41, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Sounds good; thanks! –Juliancolton | ^Talk 04:05, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Courtesy note

You are receiving this message because an RFC has been initiated at Talk:John J. Pershing#RFC about a matter on which you may have commented in the past. Thank you, –xeno^talk 15:54, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Sergei Fedorov article

I entered a [citation needed] for the second endnote "Wings of Legend: Sergei Fedorov". DetroitRedWings.com. http://www.detroitredwings.com/history/wol/wol-sergeifedorov.jsp. Retrieved 2007-01-26."

No such article exists in the link. If you want to submit another source for that information (ie. a link that works), please do so. But do not let that it appear as if the link provided at the moment would be a proper citation for the fact you provide.

128.214.164.62 (talk) 14:26, 28 April 2010 (UTC) npyrhone