Jump to content

User talk:RM Gillespie

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by RM Gillespie (talk | contribs) at 13:31, 25 October 2011 (→The Bugle: Issue LXIV, June 2011). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

==Battle of Khe Sanh== You did a really excellent job on this article. Have you thought about nominating it as a featured article? Raul654 03:13, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your Opinion

Hi there, I noticed the great works you've done on Khe Sanh, Dak To and many other pages. I've gained more knowledge of those battles due to your two-sided coverage with no bias, I really appreciate it. Because of your knowledge I want to ask you one question, what is your opinion on the saying that "America won every battle of the Vietnam War"??Canpark 04:11, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Kiril Strikes Again!

You're very welcome! Given how much work you're putting into writing these, taking care of the little technicalities is the least I can do. Kirill Lokshin 21:45, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Battle of Khe Sanh assesment

Done. Kirill Lokshin 17:19, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Battles versus campaigns

Hey, just to let you know, we now have distinct category trees for battles versus campaigns, all of which fall under "military operations"; see WP:MILHIST#CONFLICTS. The combined "battles and operations" categories should now be used only for battles and sub-battle-scale operations. (They're eventually going to be renamed to be simply "Battles of ...", with the non-battle operations placed directly in "Military operations of ..."; but that's a longer-term goal.) Hope that makes my change a bit more understandable! Kirill Lokshin 10:51, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks great; thanks for taking the time to go through them all! Kirill Lokshin 15:44, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cambodian Campaign

I would inundate you with yet another award had my eyes not just been burnt away by bright yellow wiki-chevrons! I have to say I really enjoyed reading the Cambodian Campaign, it is very Windrow-esque! The Last Valley is one of the most deliciously written books I've read, and your article is very reminiscent of him! Keep up the great work! SGGH 15:10, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PS - One day I hope to earn some Military History Chevrons myself! I wrote the Mozambican War of Independence which made FA not too long ago if you're interested in taking a look, and I'm planning to get Russian-Circassian War to FA too, and perhaps Colombian Civil War (1860-1862) too, hope one of them sparks your interest. SGGH 15:13, 16 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Battle of Khe Sanh

Just wanted to give you a heads up, and I hope this and many more of the articles you have worked on wind up as examples of quality work on Wiki. Torturous Devastating Cudgel 18:05, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apocalypse Now is still running...

... and an interesting place to relax. I'll buy you a beer there next time you're in town. Thanks for your note, yep Cambodia is home for me, I still love this crazy fucked-up place. It would have been great to see it in '70 - What was it like? Listen RM, what do think about this 'Operation' Pony Express article - it looks like a complete mess to me and it drags down the tone of the rest of the excellent articles in the series - that Campaign info box should go for starters. Cheers, Paxse 05:30, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Vietnam War

I found your comments under the Ngo Dinh Nhu section to be funny. "Madame Ngu" eh? In Vietnamese, Ngu (no diacrtics) means stupid. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:49, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

VN War and WP:MILHIST

Hi. I was wondering if things like Hue Vesak shootings and Xa Loi Pagoda raids come under WP:MILHIST - I ask since you are a designated contact for the VN war and since.... these activities were executed by the ARVN and the ARVN special forces. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:59, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Barrel Roll

Hi, I saw the fantastic work you did at Operation Barrel Roll. Have you considered nominating it for Featured Article status? Perspicacite 08:44, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ARVN Generals

Sir, You have done a great job on the visibility of the South Vietnamese Generals during the Vietnam War. Thank you so much for your efforts and bookmarks. I commend you for your hard work and for joining wikipedia. I am an advid contributer of the military of South Vietnam. For some insight on South Vietnamese Generals I have found a good source I would like to share with you. Here is a site created by South Vietnamese General Hieu's brother: http://www.generalhieu.com/danhtuong-2.htm Bnguyen 00:01, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ho Chi Minh campaign

Hi RM Gillespie. Well done again. I was going through the article and saw you had found photos of ARVN personel on the CMH website but when I googled and went there and searched for "Pham Van Phu" I couldn't find anything. Could you show me how to search their database? Thanks, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:53, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Media

Hi, I did a lot of the media section with a different name, so feel free to slice and dice - also nice work> Ken E. Beck 12:49, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, again. My work sometimes requires that I interact with people who wish me harm. I thought it prudent to switch my user name. Ken E. Beck 14:18, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FAC plans/position

Noting the great work your doing (in my opinion rivalring your fellow editor User:Cla68) would it be possible to find out whether you plan on pushing any of the A-class articles through FAC, or if not what is your position on the whole FA process? Thank you. 70.51.117.130 14:56, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • The answer is emphatically no (see my comment on my user page). Have had two articles pushed up the FA ladder by other editors, neither of which made it because: the prose was not up to the editor's opinion of "excellent", they were too long and too detailed, they were not geared for the "average" reader, blah, blah, blah. I won't waste my time on rewriting an A-Class article to suit them. That's not what I'm doing this for. I have better things to waste my time on, like writing new articles. I don't have an opinion on the process because I refuse to participate in it, all I can say is that it seems too much like "ticket punching" and ego stroking. RM Gillespie 16:40, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Release of official NSA Indochina history on the web

Just wanted to let you know that the U.S. National Security Agency just released its official history of its involvement in Indochina from 1950 to 1975. Even better, it's posted on the web at: http://www.fas.org/irp/nsa/spartans/index.html. Cla68 (talk) 23:37, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gulf of Tonkin edits

Don't know if you're still around, but if so, you may want to revisit the Gulf of Tonkin entry. Someone from 129.71.73.243 is slowly trying to undo your work as it does not pass their political filter. Pugget (talk) 20:36, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MIlhist articles

from Talk:Battle of Khe Sanh

  • Thanks for the offer Paxse, but I've had my belly full. Am vastly tired of re-reading and revising according to the whims of numbskulls. To make this a featured article would mean making it fit the criteria of non-military specialists, who have other agendas. As a matter of fact, it seems as if every other editor seems to have an agenda of his/her own. All I wanted to do was provide as detailed and unbiased an account as possible. I am totally surprised that this article's A rating has not been reduced as have others that I have produced for wiki. You want to try it - good luck mate!RM Gillespie (talk) 12:21, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This can be done easily. The only A-removal was on MACVSOG by some editors who were wondering about some paragraphs with no source, and some flamboyant language, or using "unfortunately" to describe an anti-communist setback. None of which down grades the content. The sourcing is a relatively streaightforward thing that doesn't affect the content YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 02:06, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Milhist A-class and Peer Review Jun-Dec 2009

 Military history reviewers' award 
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your good work helping with the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews during the period July-December 2009, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject Reviewers' award. TomStar81 (Talk) 02:14, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste {{WPMILHIST Review alerts}} to your user space

The Bugle: Issue LXV, July 2011

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 22:59, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXVI, August 2011

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 18:34, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:RM_Gillespie&oldid=457314761"