Contents

User talk:RASAM

Hey, I see you expanded the article on U-66. I don't think you were aware of it, but I had a userpage draft in my userspace on this topic since about January of last year. I've added my info into the article, so I suggest you check if any of yours was accidentally deleted. Cheers, Buggie111 (talk) 20:53, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

LittleWink (talk) 13:23, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've found what happened on May 4th - have a look at your VP thread. Peridon (talk) 15:22, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Could we get you to read over MOS:IMAGELOCATION - " avoid sandwiching text between two images that face each other, and between an image and an infobox or similar.".Moxy (talk) 14:48, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here is an example File:World war 1 sandwich text.jpg.Moxy (talk) 18:55, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I assume that you are watching this page.

I have looked at the example and to be honest, I think that having 'sandwich'ed text is a lot better than having acres of white space, IMO; or is there another way round this & if so, what is it? RASAM (talk) 19:58, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what you mean by white spaces - I don't see this. You on a modern computer?Moxy (talk) 16:50, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty modern. I got it (a new computer) in February this year, with Windows 8 and Internet Explorer 10 and believe me, the white space I see on some pages is horrendous. When I look at a typical page, over 80% of the pictures seem to be to the right, hence the white space. And besides, the code for each image is such that it automatically defaults to the right. Other images are marked 'right' and go there. Still others are marked 'left' and go there, so I don't think there is a problem with this rechner. Maybe yours is a little bit crook.

Now I think about it, my old computer (with Windows XP and IE 7), didn't seem to have this problem ! RASAM (talk) 21:14, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edittoNorthumberland Hussars may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:54, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done RASAM (talk) 20:38, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the 103rd was pretty much all my work. Thankyou for the copyedit; I don't usually blind revert changes. Buckshot06 (talk) 21:58, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your editto20th Operations Group may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• 20th’s assault, destroyed three aircraft himself and was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross]] for his performance.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:56, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done RASAM (talk) 19:13, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your editto23rd SS Volunteer Panzer Grenadier Division Nederland may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• 1945, the brigade received orders to evacuate the pocket by sea and report to the [[Swinemünde]] (now [[Bremerhaven]]-[[Stettin]] area to participate in the defence of the [[Oder]] line. The

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:12, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done RASAM

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your editto3rd SS Division Totenkopf may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• ]<br>[[Matthias Kleinheisterkamp]]<br>[[Georg Keppler]]<br>[[Hermann Prieß]]<br>[Heinz Lammerding]]<br>[[Max Simon]]<br>[[Hellmuth Becker]]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:20, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done RASAM (talk) 19:13, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Great that you put in such a lot of work in order to have the format of the York article in better shape; thanks!
Just a tiny bit of a correction, concerning the 15 March 1949 accident:
Gatow is not located "southwest of West Berlin", it is in the southwest part of West Berlin itself (now called Berlin only). Once you are dealing with the York article again, you might want to correct it. - Regards --Uli Elch (talk) 07:29, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; I try.

I was stationed in west Berlin in the early seventies with the British army. So I should have known. Maybe I'd got it into my head that Gatow in the late forties was sw 'of' instead of 'in' the Großstadt; (it was inside the wall in my time there). My mistake. RASAM (talk) 15:03, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In the Execution by firing squad article, I put that two German spies were executed by American firing squad in Toul, France. But from the looks of it, countries-by-countries that used firing squad only lists if it's under the occupation and administration of military forces or civilian administration who implemented its rules on a foreign country. I don't think France was under US occupation and implemented its rules on the country by US occupation military and civilian leaders as they let the previously sympathetic French leader back to their own places before WWII begin. What is your view on this? Is this fine? Thanks XXzoonamiXX (talk) 03:15, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, XXzoonamiXX

I don't think I can be of much use to you on the subject of 'Execution by firing squad', except to say maybe that part of northern France was under American martial law for a short time during World War II ? I originally put the bit about a First World War execution in because it seemed to me to be a good example of a lack of recoil in a soldier's rifle which was soon noticed. I think it's examples like this that might have prompted the introduction of cartridges with wax bullets.

As for Toul, I thought you had misspelt Toulon, which of course is in southern France. A quick look at the Toul article soon put me right !

Sorry I couldn't be of more help

RASAM (talk) 20:23, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Question for you here. Talk:Battle of Neuve ChapelleKeith-264 (talk) 17:04, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edittoHMS Walker (D27) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• the first leg of her voyage in the [[Northwestern Approaches]]. On 17 February 1942, she joined [[[List of World War II convoys|Convoy WS 16]] – 21 troopships headed for Suez and Bombay &

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:50, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done RASAM 2 December 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edittoFrank Messervy may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Officer Commanding]] in Chief or (GOC-in-C) ''Northern Command'', [[India]] in 1946 and 1947).

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:37, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done RASAM 22 December 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edittoHarperley POW Camp 93 may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• [[Category:World War II prisoner of war camps in the

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:08, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done RASAM 22 December 2013

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Force H, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Operation Collar (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) 12:23, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Herbert Kaminski, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eastern front (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) 09:05, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done RASAM 29 December 2013

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited HMS Protector (A146), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Falkland (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) 09:08, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Done RASAM 20 June 2014

Hello
I gather you have added stuff from Herbert Werner's book "Iron Coffins" to a number of articles in the past; I'm sorry for all your hard work but I've just raised the issue of its reliability as a source at MILHIST. It's here if you wish to comment. Xyl 54 (talk) 12:05, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the trouble to track me down and let me know about changes to the Werner article. I will reply on the MILHIST page in due course.

RASAM (talk) 12:35, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know I've posted the proposal about splitting the article (here). As you did most of the work on it, do you have any thoughts one way or the other? Xyl 54 (talk) 22:48, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know about the split; my main concern would be that although I can see the sense in keeping the book "Iron Coffins" separate from any Herbert Werner article, I would be worried that an HW biography only offering would be too short, and condemned to be a stub for a long time. Indeed, in the early days of the article's life, somebody wanted to put it on some sort of list, there was even talk of deletion (read the talk page). I defended it, saying something like: 'to have survived the war' would make him (HW) notable'.

If there is more material available (from a reliable source, natch), I would say: Go for it!

RASAM (talk) 21:48, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fair point. I was pleased that the general view in the discussion was that the book has enough notability for a stand-alone article, but there's no hurry about making the split. I wouldn't want to jeopardize the Werner article, though (to use the Papillon example yet again) being the author of a best-selling book is notability enough: Charriere doesn't merit an article for anything he did as a small-time crook. I'm happy to leave it until the Werner article is more secure. Regards, Xyl 54 (talk) 22:34, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you do not have too long to wait. All the best.

RASAM (talk) 18:12, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 13:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To You and Yours!
FWiW Bzuk (talk) 21:17, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My user page was written with obvious delusions of grandeur, basically in the "royal we", and derived from my bio at a time when I was much more into myself as an author. I'll have to look at it again and make some changes. Thanks for the heads-up. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 14:06, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Operation Overlord page, your edit caused a URL error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:25, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 02:59, 26 December 2016 (UTC) [reply]

Dear RASAM,

I noticed you added the 'Background' section on the page on 'Submarine pens'. This mentions the research on air protection carried out by the Naval Construction Office in Berlin in the 1930s. I assume you refer to the Marinekonstruktionsamt. Do you have any reference for that? I am looking for any information on the continuity between the submarine pens of the First and Second World Wars.

Best,

W— Preceding unsigned comment added by Wbekers (talk • contribs) 16:17, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

HiWbekers
I am replying on this page as I assume that you are watching it.

To try and answer your query, I see that I edited 'Submarine Pen' on 160911 and 'Valentin Submarine Pens' on 250813; so I'm not sure which article you mean.
Ithink one of the references that I used was "Hitler's U-Boat Bases" by Jak P. Mallman Showell (2002) [You'll have to get the ISBN from the page]. Another might be the 'U-boat.net' website, (but beware, it has a lot of typos in it).
I can't remember any mention of the Marinekonstruktionsamt in either source.

Sorry I can't be of more help, but both contributions are lost in the mists of time.
Good luck.

Regards

RASAM

Hi RASAM,

Sorry for any confusion. I did mean the article 'Submarine Pen'. It contains the following information: The mid-1930s saw the Naval Construction Office in Berlin give the problem serious thought. Various factions in the navy were convinced protection for the expanding U-boat arm was required. An RAF raid on the capital in 1940 plus the occupation of France and Great Britain's refusal to surrender was enough to trigger a massive building programme of submarine pens and air raid shelters.

I assumed that the 'Naval Construction Office' would be the 'Marinekonstruktionsamt'. I will have a look in Showell (2002) first.

Thank you!

Wbekers

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)[reply]

...to you and yours, from the Great White North! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 04:28, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi RASAM!

Sorry to pester you, I see you added content to the Ernst Röhm and Hermann Göring articles. I'm having some trouble with one editor about what is allowed to be added and what isn't, regarding linking to an existing stand-alone article. I'm not asking for you to take sides, I'm trying to get some guidance here. I added to the content of the article by creating an Awards and Decorations section. I then added some awards and decorations and provided links to their own stand-alone pages on wiki. One editor in particular has now decided that some of them are "trivial" and I, and presumably anyone, is not allowed to refer to these stand-alone articles. I have had several sections of added content on the Röhm page, and others, deleted because of this so-called trivial/menial business, yet when I've asked for a hard and fast list of all the articles I'm not allowed to refer to via links, I've not been given one. I'm not sure why a stand-alone article exists if you're not allowed to link to it? What do you think I should do here? Just never refer to an existing article via a link or persevere and hope for the best. As it stands now I just add links and wait and see if they are deleted under this new totally ambiguous decision by this editor, and then wait for the inevitable aggressive warning. Not sure what to do! Sorry for bothering you Troy von Tempest (talk) 02:43, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Troy von Tempest

I have looked at my Contributions page and gone as far back as 050916; I can find no mention of ever having been on the Ernst Röhm or Hermann Göring/Goering pages/articles. I don't remember going to them, either.

I think you have the wrong editor.

RASAM (talk) 19:18, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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) 00:06, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Light Up the Sky! (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bombardier. 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) 06:23, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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) 01:28, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:23, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 2023 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) 00:24, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]