User talk:Intothatdarkness/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Intothatdarkness. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

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 style guide that covers 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! Kirill ^{[talk] [prof]} 06:23, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Good research at 8th Cavalry Regiment (United States)‎. Remember, on Wikipedia it always pays off to Be bold!!!!! If you need any help, feel free to contact me on my talk page, Sadads (talk) 18:24, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

I need some help. Somebody doesn't think Abraham Lincoln is relevant to the American Old West, and wants him removed from the category. Could you go to my talk page and give me a little backup? I've been under a lot of Wikistress lately, and I would appreciate the help. Thanks! The Raptor ^{You rang?}/_{My mistakes; I mean, er, contributions} 16:36, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

If you are into US Cavalry stuff, we have been desperately wanting to create an article on the U. S. Army Remount Service, but no one at WPEQ has ever gotten around to it. We have a bunch of red links that would go blue if someone could be so kind...or if there IS one, we just need the proper name to find it and link to it... I did note a few links to Quartermaster Corps (United States Army), but that article says little or nothing about the Remount service...for that matter, there's not an article on the generic concept of a remount either, and I can think of dozens of horse breed articles where that link would be useful. (hint, hint) Montanabw^(talk) 23:07, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

I came across some remount stuff a few years ago in connection with a job I had at the time. The Remount Service was part of the Quartermaster Corps and based out of Fort Robinson, NE. I can take a stab at it, along with the concept of remounts. Here's a quick link to a short history of the Remount Service - historyIntothatdarkness (talk) 14:32, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Let me know (via talkback or something) if you start an article or a sandbox for a potential article. I'm a little too busy right now to be of much real help, but I can help with copyediting and cleanup. Sometimes I can even get motivated to be of real use... two areas where there are potential links are Will Keith Kellogg (whose ranch was a remount depot for a time) and several individual horse articles, where animals spent some time as remount stallions (my interest being Witez II, who came over to the USA thanks to Patton, interesting tale). I think a fair number of Thoroughbred articles may mention remount status of certain stallions also. Montanabw^(talk) 18:40, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

FYI, if you haven't already perused the excellent (FA-class) Horses in World War I, it may have material, including good sources, useful for your work on the Remount stuff. User:Dana boomer did 90% of the work on it and just did a fantastic job! I think that article is probably the pride of WPEQ. Montanabw^(talk) 15:54, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

If you want a good image that is PD, you can get the one here and it has some information in the caption. Also, The Armor-Cavalry Lineage book has some decent information on it's history, also this edition of Army History has an article on the remount service on page 7, hope that helps. Sadads (talk) 16:00, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, folks! I've got the Army lineage stuff in hardcopy, but the majority of detailed stuff on the Remount Service lurks in the respective service journals (Quartermaster and Cavalry). I'm not sure how detailed this article will end up being, but it's certainly better than nothing....:-)Intothatdarkness (talk) 16:03, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Luckily, almost all the .mil web images are public domain, and so that helps! I uploaded a bunch of stuff from there to commons a while back. By the way, for another place with some stuff (though little on remount) see Horses in warfare, a GA, and Horses in World War II, which is pretty rough. Montanabw^(talk) 22:27, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

and if it helps, books: [1], [2], [3]. Montanabw^(talk) 22:33, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! I've read these (had access to a first edition of Carter's work at an old job). Interesting stuff!Intothatdarkness (talk) 21:35, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Also, perhaps minor, but Curtis reminded me of it, check out Will Keith Kellogg and then the Cal Poly site on the Pomona Quartermaster Depot (remount). Plenty of horses there. Looks like we also had depots at Front Royal, Virginia (ah, an East Coast one?) and Fort Reno, OK. Be cool if there was a list. Montanabw^(talk) 01:53, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

There are a couple of lists, although the depots changed over time. Front Royal was one of the early ones (at least one full regiment was usually stationed in VA, so they needed horses).Intothatdarkness (talk) 13:33, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

I know Front Royal was where the horses Patton's people captured from the Nazis landed. Is that also a big Navy base? Montanabw^(talk) 04:31, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Not that I know of, but there's enough military stuff within that area that it would make sense for them to have landed at, say, Roanoke and then moved to Front Royal.Intothatdarkness (talk) 15:46, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

New book, on target: http://www.equisearch.com/resources/reviews/remount52703/ Promising, haven't read it. Montanabw^(talk) 22:22, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Already saw that one and used it in the (slowly evolving) draft. I think it would interest you because it has a good list of the studs involved in the program and such.Intothatdarkness (talk) 13:38, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

On my wishlist at Amazon, actually. Along with a lot of other stuff... =:-O Montanabw^(talk) 19:34, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Hey, any time you want to take the Remount article out of the sandbox and into the mainspace, I'm all for it. We have many red links to kill! Let me know if you need any help. Montanabw^(talk) 17:59, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

I'll be getting there. There's some stuff I want to bring in from Starr's books on Union cavalry.Intothatdarkness (talk) 18:19, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, can you remeber the other bits that didn't sit well? YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 03:46, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

A lot of it was word choices, mainly. In some places it had an almost editorial feel as opposed to a flat encyclopedic style. I can haul through it at some point if you'd like.Intothatdarkness (talk) 13:41, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Feel free YellowMonkey (new photo poll) 01:16, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LIII (July 2010) Front page Project news Articles Members Editorial

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:31, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LIV (August 2010) Front page Project news Articles Members Editorial

As a listed member, your input would be valued at this discussion on the coverage of fiction for WikiProject_American_Old_West. Jason Quinn (talk) 09:38, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. You are cordially invited to help pick fourteen new coordinators from a pool of twenty candidates. This time round, the term has increased from six to twelve months so it is doubly important that you have your say! Please cast your vote here no later than 23:59 (UTC) on Tuesday, 28 September 2010.

With many thanks in advance for your participation from the coordinator team,  Roger Davies ^talk 19:10, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

		The Content Review Medal of Merit
		By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted work on the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews for the period 1 April-30 September 2010, I am delighted to award you this Content Review Medal.  Roger Davies talk 08:04, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Pruned, I think YellowMonkey (new photo poll) 06:19, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

I put the December 1964 South Vietnamese coup up there; you reviewed the ACR YellowMonkey (new photo poll) 23:58, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi. I have responded to all of your concerns here. Please let me know if there are any other things that need addressing. —Ed!^(talk) 19:26, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LV (September 2010) Front page Project news Articles Members Editorial

Your Military history Newsletter Project News: Editors for the newsletter, GAN backlog reduction drive Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: EyeSerene sums up our "Five years of military history"

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:59, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors, "Military Historian of the Year", New Incubator, Black Project Report Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: bahamut guides us through "Nominating military biographies for deletion"

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:36, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Intothatdarkness/Archive 1! WikiProject United States, an outreach effort supporting development of United States related articles in Wikipedia, has recently been restarted after a long period of inactivity. As a user who has shown an interest in United States related topics we wanted to invite you to join us in developing content relating to the United States. If you are interested please add your Username and area of interest to the members page here. Thank you!!!

--Kumioko (talk) 17:57, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

		The Content Review Medal of Merit
		By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted work on the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews for the period Oct–Dec 2010, I am delighted to award you this Content Review Medal. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:47, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Your military history newsletter – Volume LVIII, December 2010 From the editors • "Military Historian of the Year" • Discussions • The month's new featured and A-class content • Review awards Contest results • A-class medal recipients • bahamut teaches us proper usage of "Jargon and acronyms" To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here. BrownBot (talk) 20:59, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi, the 1st Provisional Marine Brigade ACR is due to be closed as the 28 day period has passed. I'm not sure if your comments have been addressed or not, so would you mind quickly taking a look again and stating on the review page whether or not you support or oppose its promotion to A-class? This would be a big help to me as the closing co-ord in determining whether it should be closed as successful or unsuccessful. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:57, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Fixed. I added a "support" line under my comments.Intothatdarkness (talk) 14:36, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. AustralianRupert (talk) 22:30, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Your Military history Newsletter Project News: From the editors Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: EyeSerene discusses "Writing neutrally for Wikipedia"

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 15:56, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I'm a new member of WP:AOW. I've noticed that the stub templates have been proposed for rename ... no problem, but the stub categories have also been nominated for deletion. Could I get your help to oppose the category deletions (here: Wikipedia:Stub_types_for_deletion/Log/2011/February/15) --Hutcher (talk) 17:23, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi - there seems to be a bit of confusion as to what I was actually proposing here - hopefully my latest comments have explained things a bit better - could you have a second look, please? Grutness...wha? 23:37, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: Ed talks about real-world collaborations and how you can help

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 21:56, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

		The Content Review Medal of Merit
		By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted work on the WikiProject's Peer, A-Class and Featured Article reviews for the period January–March 2011, I am delighted to award you this Content Review Medal. AustralianRupert (talk) 08:04, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 21:47, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: Dank helps you see what article writers want from reviewers

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 03:47, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: Buggie111 discusses neutral point of view

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:43, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors – Contest results, A-class medal recipients Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Editorial: Hawkeye's thoughts on the article writing process

To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:47, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't know if it's just the equine project that's this way or WP as a whole, but we seem to get these tendentious sorts on a regular basis. I appreciate your input, though. Seems like when we get a tendentious person, I seem to wind up on point as the target of the bullying and such. Probably something in my style, but for the life of me I don't know what it is. The current hands spat involves two users, one relatively new and still getting his feet under him who has a POV that I don't really agree with at times, but he knows the rules and isn't a bad sort, just someone who is opinionated, which I understand. The other, and more problematic, individual is someone I've tangled with on other occasions, seems to escalate in a situation where I revert something, and then hoo boy, I'm just an evil control freak who is also completely wrong and stupid, then if I stand up for my position, all of a sudden several articles I edit become an issue. It's nasty, he's done this two or three times now. I other news, I also just had someone else try to"out" me as well, (they got blocked for sockpuppetry) and in the midst of it all I'm trying to keep a lid from blowing off some of the rodeo articles because the animal rights activists are targeting the Calgary Stampede because of how Prince William and Kate are going to be there! These problems seem to come in waves. Could it be related to sunspot activity or something?? Montanabw^(talk) 19:28, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I'm looking to conclude the ACR of Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment/Battle_record_of_Arthur_Wellesley,_1st_Duke_of_Wellington asap, but I am informed I require 3 reviewers who Support that the article meets A-class requirements. Could you please consult your review, and reassess whether you are satisfied that the article now meets the criteria. Thank you. Ma®©usBritish (talk) 17:14, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I'm afraid the ACR for Battle record of Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington "timed out" and I have had to re-open the article for Assessment again. I would appreciate your support, once again, to avoid another lack of consensus. the article remains pretty much unchanged since your last review, although I welcome any further comments - probably aiming for FLA in the near-future. Thanks, Ma®©usBritish (talk) 00:32, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

		The Content Review Medal of Merit
		By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted work on the WikiProject's Peer, A-Class and Featured Article reviews for the period Apr–Jun 2011, I am delighted to award you this Content Review Medal. AustralianRupert (talk) 08:51, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Finland and Spitfires Op-ed: Fifelfoo and hunting for plagiarism

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) 23:12, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 15:28, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Zeebrugee and Afghanistan Op-ed: WereSpielChequers examines RfA

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) 22:16, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

It was recently suggested that WikiProject Montana might be inactive or semiactive and it might be beneficial to include it in the list of projects supported by WikiProject United States. I have started a discussion on the projects talk page soliciting the opinions of the members of the project if this project would be interested in being supported by WikiProject United States. Please feel free to comment on your opinions about this suggestion. --Kumioko (talk) 01:50, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

I invite you to participate in a discussion at Talk:Audie Murphy. Thank you, in advance, Bullmoosebell (talk) 01:42, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

The September 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 21:17, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Carthage and Australia in Palestine Op-ed: Remembering 9/11

Thank you Muchas gracias, merci, vielen Dank and many thanks for your trust and voting me into the team of coordinators. MisterBee1966 (talk) 07:56, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

No problem. You've always impressed me with your editing and contributions.Intothatdarkness (talk) 13:34, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

		The Military history reviewers' award
		By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer, A-Class and Featured article reviews for the period Jul-Sept 2011, the Military history WikiProject Reviewers' award. Buggie111 (talk) 21:58, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D and Ian Rose look at Australian air power Op-ed: Buggie111 ruminates about WikiLife and WikiDeath

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D analyzes three books from Osprey Publishing Review essay: Nick-D reviews the new Bundeswehr Military History Museum

The December 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 02:44, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors – MHotY coming; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at the Congolese Wars Review essay: Ian Rose goes to El Alamein Op-ed: DCI's call to revitalize WikiProject History

Nominations for the "Military Historian of the Year" for 2011 are now open. If you would like to nominate an editor for this award, please do so here. Voting will open on 22 January and run for seven days. Thanks! On behalf of the coordinators, Nick-D (talk) and Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 23:21, 15 January 2012 (UTC) You were sent this message because you are a listed as a member of the Military history WikiProject.

The January 2012 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumi-Taskbot (talk) 19:05, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D Nick-D looks into two recent Milhist books Review essay: Kirill Lokshin, the first coordinator Op-ed: Hchc's English Castles

FYI: Wikipedia:ANI#Justlettersandnumbers Montanabw^(talk) 21:34, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Interesting. Looks like, as appears to be the norm around here, the disruptive party has a higher-level patron and tries to hide behind the "I'm new here and constructive" defense.Intothatdarkness (talk) 14:45, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Frustrating, isn't it? Sometimes these "new" users show up with a remarkable amount of knowledge right off the bat, too. Things that make you go "hmmmm..." Thanks, by the way, for your comments! Montanabw^(talk) 23:14, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome! Must be the whole "fight the power" thing.Intothatdarkness (talk) 23:16, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks into two recent Milhist books Op-ed: Ian Rose discusses article assessments

Hi ITD, and greetings from "another state with a small population" wikiproject. I thought you might be interested in recent events, as I saw your post about what happened to WPOW. As there has been a change, now might be a good time to make for the exits if you're so inclined. Best, Markvs88 (talk) 21:09, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks into two recent Milhist books Op-ed: Hawkeye on Wikipedia collaborating with the AWM

Thank you for expressing your support for me in the Sanddunes Sunrise thread and/or participating in the Ostereierbaum (Easter Egg Tree) thread. Peace to everyone. PumpkinSky talk 01:01, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

	support
	Thank you for fighting silent battles in creating content, reviewing, defeating vandalism and supporting civility, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:35, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!Intothatdarkness (talk) 13:44, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Bomzibar on Subhas Chandra Bose; Hawkeye on corps commanders; Nick-D on American special forces Op-ed: The Land on commemorating World War I

• Perhaps "saddles by type" is not a good name for this category but if you look in the "saddles" category you have "Girth (tack)",

"Saddle", "Saddle blanket", "Stirrup", "Tapadero", none of which are types of saddles, I was trying to figure out a better way to arrange the whole Horse tack category. Do you think that "Types of saddles", Types of bits" etc would be better. there are a lot of articles listed in the horse tack category and no way for the casual reader to know what most of the articles are about without reading each one. Any input would be helpful, thanks. Samuraiantiqueworld (talk) 01:29, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

I think you need to just start over with the saddles, actually, and organize them by main use (military, civilian, pack, and so on). Your idea about Types of Saddles, Types of bits, and so on is good. It makes much more sense. With the existing model you'll just end up with a ton of artificial "types" categories.Intothatdarkness (talk) 13:46, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks, I did a little organizing in the horse tack category, maybe you can take a look and see what you think if you have a chance.Samuraiantiqueworld (talk) 05:09, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

A pack saddle isn't a saddle accessory...it's a type of saddle. It looks ok otherwise, but I'm not a horse expert. Intothatdarkness (talk) 13:40, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Well, not to put too fine a point on it, I am a horse expert. And while I do applaud Samurai for wanting to put in more subcats from the Horse tack category, which did need to happen, I have a better way to look at this. A stirrup, for example, is an integral part of a saddle, so no need to split these things out and put all the saddles into yet another subcat, necessitating yet another click-through to get to the primary topic, especially when there are only three stirrup articles. Same for bits and all their parts. I will arrange these things in a more useful fashion. There was unnecessary disambiguation of categories (no need for (horse) to be added to a cat name if nothing else claims a word) and there is no need to fork out a category when there are only three articles on it (such as the whips). Montanabw^(talk) 20:24, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Nothing wrong with another opinion. My kick came from the military saddle. And I am a bit of an expert there. There wasn't enough variation in the McClellan to require a separate category. Military Saddles would be more unified and work better to deal with the variety that existed in the United States alone prior to 1900. Intothatdarkness (talk) 20:29, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

My objection was to a main "Saddles" category with all the actual saddles in a "types of" category is what made no sense, combined with similar moves on all the bit articles and my need to review dozens and dozens of category moves that just showed up out of the blue (one or two are bold, but dozens and dozens without a discussion are not cool). I'd understand a special category for military saddles (maybe even an article by that title?), if there were enough articles, but at the moment, is there anything else out there besides the McClellan article? That's probably the best-known USA design, still seen around some today, and worth its own article, but I'd sure have no complaints about more saddle articles on appropriate topics as long as we don't get into content forking. Montanabw^(talk) 22:35, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

My take is pretty simple: to plan for future expansion you have a military category and maybe civilian category (not sure on the exact title for that one). With the US alone, you have the Grimsley, Jenifer, and 3-4 other varieties proposed between 1850 and 1880. And that's just the US. I expect that someone could develop other articles for European military saddles. Just because no one has braved the Wiki-tank to write a Grimsley article doesn't make it insignificant (it was the standard military saddle prior to 1859). To be clear, I don't support each saddle having its own category (that just doesn't make cataloging sense), but do see some use in having 2-3 (say) overall divisions within saddle (Military, Civilian, Pack, for example). Intothatdarkness (talk) 13:41, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

• Intothatdarkness, this is an example of what ANYONE who makes edits on any horse related article or category comes up against, this self imposed "expert" reverts other editors edits with out discussion and yet the same "expert" wants anyone else to "discuss" their edits before making them. ("I appreciate your attempts to organize and tighten up the horse tack categories, but Please DISCUSS your category changes on the horse tack articles before you make them. You don't understand a lot of the equipment or how it is used, so please stop making a bunch of work for those of us who use this equipment every day. Montanabw"). This so called "expert" on both horses and Wikipedia editing should know better than to revert these perfectly valid edits with out discussing them first on talk pages, now if I were to revert any of these edits what would happen...an edit war? This "know it all" attitude is not only rude and offensive it tends to keep people from adding their information to these categories and articles in order to avoid the inevitable confrontation, especially when this editor has had several previous confrontations with me and other editors in the past over similar situations, thanks for the input.Samuraiantiqueworld (talk) 23:41, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

And the above is a classic example of how Samurai handles everyone who crosses him -- vicious, personal attacks. In over 6 years of editing wikipedia, I have NEVER been blocked or subject to any disciplinary sanction, other than the occasional scolding for being rude to people who behave like Samurai. In contrast, Samurai HAS been blocked for his approach to conflict. I have never challenged Samurai's apparent expertise on things Japanese, I would appreciate the same courtesy as it extends to horses. Montanabw^(talk) 17:56, 16 May 2012 (UTC)