text:
User talk:Gsl

John Simpson Kirkpatrick sources
Can you please cite your sources when editing on Wikipedia? It makes it easier for people like me who wish to proof your work. Start with John Simpson Kirkpatrick if you can. Thanks. MyNameIsNotBob 10:55, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)

Copyright in various photos
I've found some images which you have uploaded over which I have some copyright concerns. Your claims about the copyright are based on a misunderstanding of British copyright law. You claim that photos taken prior to 1 June 1957 have a 50 year copyright term, which has been incorrect for nearly 10 years. Since the EU copyright extension all photos not in Crown copyright have a term of life of the author plus 70 years or 70 years for anonymous works. Crown copyright photos are under the old term, ie still 50 years from creation. The images are:

 * Image:Boulton Paul Sidestrand.jpg
 * Image:Boulton Paul Overstrand.jpg
 * Image:Fairey IIIF flight.jpg
 * Image:Fairey IIIF.jpg
 * Image:Fairey IIID.jpg
 * Image:Fairey IIIF radial engine.jpg
 * Image:Hurricane Mk1 L1547.jpg
 * Image:Rolls-Royce Thrust Measuring Rig free flight.jpg

If you don't know the author of the photos, then the term of copyright is 70 years after creation, or 70 years from publication if published during that period. Please clarify matters if you can. David Newton 18:47, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * All now deleted. Geoff/Gsl 10:32, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for work on William Mariner
Thanks much for helping out, straightening up any messes I caused. That was the first major move I'd done. Zora 02:46, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

WikiProject British Army
I'm not sure whether your really busy at the moment but just thought I'd ask if you'd like to join the Wikiproject British Army. I've just started it, so it needs alot of experienced hands to get it going.

Take care SoLando 21:16, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

 * No probs.. I was kinda worried that you'd left Wikipedia for good when you stopped editing for quite a while. Its alright on the History of the British Army thing. I haven't had time myself, so I understand. "Real life" - its a pain, eh? :-D

Take care SoLando 16:45, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

Battle of Artois
I would appreciate a source on the first battle, I am unaware of it and would like to read about it. Further, if you are going to revert the numbering on the disambiguation page, how about changing the naming of the articles as well, since they are now incorrectly linked. Im going to fix this and assume you have a source you can pass me that confirms your numbering, but in the future, think about the effects of frivolous reverting before you do it. If I cant find a source on the first battle and you dont send me one in the next week or so, I'll revert back - although I despise re-reverting. Usrnme h8er 07:30, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the sources, I'll see if I can pick up a couple at the local library as I am quite interested in the topic. Do you think it might be worth mentioning this somehow on the "first" and "second" pages? To avoid confusion? Also, the First Battle of Artois page now needs quite a bit of work, although a copy of one of the other BoA pages with changed text should work fine. Usrnme h8er 11:01, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Munster Fusiliers
Could you not have waited till I was finished ?? Coming in when I was working caused me to loose a whole section. Osioni 22:49, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Stop Reverting Lyrics!!
Stop reverting the lyrics on More than a Feeling!! Many articles on Wikipedia have song lyrics on them!!!Spawn Man 03:56, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I assume that "MTAF" lyrics are still copyrighted, being released in 1976. Geoff/Gsl 04:43, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

My RfA
Hi Geoff! Just wanted to thank you for supporting my RfA. I hope I will be able to live up to the confidence placed in me. --Cyberjunkie | Talk 04:04, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Wars and Battles
Thank you for the comments! Since the idea of some manner of merger or scope expansion seems to have fairly strong support, I've tried my hand at a proposal here; I hope that merging in such a fashion will satisfy your concerns about fracturing discussions. Any further comments or criticisms are very welcome. Kirill Lokshin 13:07, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

speedy
Please always use {{db|reason}} or one of the many reason-specific tags. When I see a delete tag without an immediately obvious reason, I remove the tag. -- RHaworth 23:38, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

My RFA
Thank you for your support! If you should ever have any concerns about my actions as an administrator, please be sure to tell me! Kirill Lokshin 13:26, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Disambiguating battles
I'm sorry about our conflict over the Battle of Dogger Bank. When you first changed my edits back back, I couldn't understand your reasons for undoing what I had done (if I had replaced the 1915 battle with the 1781 battle, for instance, I would have understood) and your notes didn't make it clear.

I'm completely appalled by your suggestion that I was trying to pretend that other people's work was my own. I can't believe any Wikipedians do that. I was simply trying to clarify an ambiguity and share my love of naval history. My notes say moved, not wrote, so it should have been clear that I wasn't appropriating authorship or intending to insult anyone.

It took me some time to understand what (I think) your objection was. My lesson is that I should have used the move function, for which I can only apologize to you and others who had contributed to the page. I will try to be a better Wikipedian.

I hope, in return, that you will make your reasons for reverting things clearer as it has taken me some time to understand the basis of your objection -- which is why I reverted you back resulting in a silly edit war.

I have taken your suggestion of submitting a request to the administrators. Thank you for the suggestion. JimmyTheOne 21:11, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Image
Hi Geoff! I've just noticed that "Image:KingsregimentWWI.jpg" (which I recently uploaded) is a duplicate of "Image:British infantry skirmish 1914.jpg", which you uploaded to the Commons in April. Doh! I'll go ahead and list my image for deletion. Just one thing, though: are the British infantry in question from the King's Regiment (Liverpool)? The caption at Firstworldwar.com states they are. Next time I'm going to carry out a thorough search of the Commons before uploading a pic!:-) Take care. SoLando (Talk) 02:42, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks for revealing which battalion those soldiers are believed to have been part of! I've been meaning to visit the Museum of Liverpool Life for a while now (haven't been for months), so will probably make a visit sometime next week (hopefully with a digital camera). With regard to the image title, that's only because I went with the ambiguous (at least in terms of specifics) WWI ;-) Your version is certainly more shaper and the contrast is (IMO) superior. I've just uploaded a modified version of "my" image to see which you'd prefer; the image doesn't appear to have been updated to the current revision, so just click on it to see the newer upload. I also agree on having both images in the page history on Commons. Take care. SoLando (Talk) 04:18, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Ok, I'll go ahead and upload two versions of the image (full size and 1024 width) to your image at the Commons. By the way, the title you suggest seems fine. The book Difficulties Be Damned (very informative, but could have done with some "personal" quotes from soldiers of the regiment) states that their first action came on 27 April in a counter-attack during the Battle of St. Julien, and again on 1 May. Take care. SoLando (Talk) 01:41, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Battle of Uhud
You reinstated an obsolete copyvio notice, imo. Please look at the article's talk page and history and explain why you disagree (in unlikely event you still do) before reverting. TIA FRS 20:54, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

 * See Talk:Battle of Uhud. Geoff/Gsl 20:56, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

My RfA
I would like to express my thanks to all the people who took part in my (failed) RfA voting. I was both surprised and delighted about the amount of support votes and all the kind words! I was also surprised by the amount of people who stated clearly that they do care, be it by voting in for or against my candidacy. That's what Wiki community is about and I'm really pleased to see that it works. As my RfA voting failed with 71% support, I don't plan to reapply for adminship any more. However, I hope I might still be of some help to the community. Cheers! Halibutt 05:10, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Revert in the article Battle of the Somme (1916)
Why did you reverted my edit in the article Battle of the Somme (1916)? Toya 09:23, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Why did you write it? Geoff/Gsl 20:50, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Because in the Hebrew Wikipedia it is written that shelling of artillery precede to this battle. Toya 03:54, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

 * "The first day of the battle was preceded by seven days of preliminary artillery bombardment in which the British fired over 1.5 million shells." is the first sentence of "The first day on the Somme" section.
 * Geoff/Gsl 04:19, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

My RfA

Geoff, thanks for your support on my RfA. The final count was 46/0/0. I hope I'll live up to your faith in me in my use of the mop and bucket. Please accept this wikithanks (and this cowbell) as a token of my gratitude ;) --bainer (talk) 22:56, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

 * You are more than welcome. Geoff/Gsl 00:35, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Reverts and protecting articles
You have twice reverted my quite logical and clearly motivated name-change of use of poison gas in World War I without any motivation of your own. Please reply to my post at the talkpage instead of just auto-reverting without explaining why.

I would also encourage you to be a bit more open to changes to the article. When looking at the constant reverts that you're making of other users' edits, I get the feeling that you wish the article to be more static than is healthy on a wiki.

Peter Isotalo 14:18, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

 * I've very clearly pointed out to you where and how you can discuss the matter without simply reflex-reverting, yet you've chosen to be extremely uncivil by simply ignoring me. Please recosinder your editorial behavior.
 * Peter Isotalo 09:05, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

 * As you wish. The article's all yours. Geoff/Gsl 09:59, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Please try to work on your social skills here. Pouting is not merited in this situation.
 * Peter Isotalo 04:26, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

SoLando's RFA
Hi Gsl/Geoff, thank you for voting in support of my RFA; the result was (28-0-0 ). I'm terrified of clicking on the wrong buttons (protect is right next to the history tab, damn it! ;-)). I hope that I am able to fulfil the expectations of an admin. If you see me mess up anywhere, have any concerns, please don't hesitate to tell me! Take care. SoLando (Talk) 10:08, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Battle images
Greetings, Gsl. Your battle images, such as Image:Battle of Goose Green.png, are fantastic. I just wanted to let you know how much these are appreciated here. Also, I wanted to let you know about Image recreation requests, if you didn't already. All the best, – Quadell (talk) (bounties) 14:59, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

 * On second thought, the category Category:Wikipedia requested maps might be more appropriate. – Quadell (talk) (bounties) 15:53, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history: Coordinator elections
--Loopy e 04:51, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Erich Löwenhardt
Thank you for pointing out the alternative article on Erich Löwenhardt. I am in favour of the merge. I suggest taking the information from the original article and replacing what I created, as it is more thorough. If you can keep the links and the photo, that'd be great also. Then perhaps some wikilinks can be added? I have also corrected other links to Löwenhardt on other wikipages, to correspond with mine.

--Geck0 22:27, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your support of my RfA
Thank you for your support of my successful request for adminship. I am honoured that the nomination was supported unanimously and that the community expressed confidence that I would use the tools wisely. If you have any concerns please let me know on my talk page. Regards A Y  Arktos 01:33, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Just an FYI
Hey! Just to let you know being on commons isnt a reason for speedy deletion. A dmrb♉ltz (T | C) 07:17, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

 * It works for me. Geoff/Gsl 20:39, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject Newsletter, Issue I
delivered by Loopy e 04:58, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Infobox
There is a consensus discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aircraft on adopting a non-specifications summary infobox for aircraft articles. Your comments would be appreciated. Thanks! - Emt147 Burninate!  18:33, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

British 36th (Ulster) Division insignia
I noticed that there was a message on the talk page for the British 36th (Ulster) Division that indicates that the insignia (the hand) needs to be a mirror image (thumb on the left). Checking one of the external links in the article, I see that there is one image where this is the case, but all the rest are as you have it. Perhaps you would like to respond on the talk page. —ERcheck @ 23:10, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

List of military corps by name
Doesn't specify which military. Is it intended to be worldwide? - IstvanWolf 01:30, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Yes. Gsl 02:49, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Battle of the Somme
In Battle of the Somme (1916), you put in a table with casualties for several countries. Where did that data come from? Was it one of your books? Thanks. J. Finkelst e in 00:18, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

 * Ultimately most of the figures come from the British official history (which I don't have). The 419,654 British Empire and 204,253 French total casualties come from there and are used in Sheffield's The Somme and Keegan's Face of Battle (though he says "nearly two hundred thousand French").  The killed & missing figures (95,675 British & 50.756 French) I got from Neillands' The Great War Generals which he got from the British official history.  The German range (465,000 to 600,000 casualties) is from Sheffield.  The source of the German killed & missing is explained in the article and came from Neillands.

 * As for the British Empire breakdown, the Australian official history and Prior & Wilson's The Somme have by-division casualty listings which can be used to get Aus, NZ and Canadian totals. The South African count was a guess based on 2000+ casualties at Delville Wood.  The British & Irish figure is the difference or thereabouts. Gsl 07:40, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Barossa Germans
The article out of which supposed copyright violation comes from is one of a number of similarly worded articles. It seems that the link you have given contains part of the article. Other links allow for free use of this material. eg. http://www.articlealley.com/article_62716_29.html I'm not sure of the wiki procedures on this matter, where to next? Ozdaren 07:28, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Gordon Bennett
Was called Gordon Bennett. Adam 01:10, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Image tag for Image:Australian Army Rising Sun Badge 1904.png
Hi - could you please provide a source for Image:Australian Army Rising Sun Badge 1904.png? Without a source, I am not sure whether it is eligible to be tagged as PD-Australia. I understand you uploaded it some time ago and maybe you cannot remember. Thanks --A Y Arktos\talk 23:19, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Gordon Bennett
I have again moved this article to his correct name, which was GORDON. Please don't move it back again. Adam 13:56, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Rolls-Royce Avon
Would you mind visiting the Rolls-Royce Avon talk page? I am curious about a statement it appears you added to the article. Maury 00:56, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Poison gas in World War I FAR
Poison gas in World War I has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 02:27, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Aviation Newsletter delivery
The March 2007 issue of the Aviation WikiProject 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. Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 16:09, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

No content in Category:World War I literature
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:World War I literature, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:World War I literature has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (CSD C1). To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:World War I literature, please affix the template  to the page, and put a note on its talk page. This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Category:World War I literature itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. Thanks. --Android Mouse Bot 2 21:43, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Trench warfare up for review
Trench warfare has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.--Konstable 14:02, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Gallipoli_movie_poster.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Gallipoli_movie_poster.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Videmus Omnia Talk  00:38, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Hawthorn Ridge Redoubt
Thank you for originating the Hawthorn Ridge Redoubt article. A quote you included reads, in part, "Higher and higher it rose, and with a horrible grinding roar the earth settles back upon itself, leaving in its place a mountain of smoke.". Is it possible a minor typo crept in? The word "settled" makes more sense in its context. I am thinking you may have the original reference work on hand or available, and will be able to say. Hertz1888 01:33, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

 * The quote is from Malins' How I Filmed The War (p. 162-3), reproduced in Sheffield's The Somme (p. 48). Sheffield uses "settles".  I don't have Malins' book so I can't confirm the primary source. 59.167.152.178 02:26, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Gsl. No point to fixing what's not clearly broken. Best to leave it be & move on. I think this quirk enhances an already colorful quote. I appreciate your response. Very best, Hertz1888 03:02, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:BattleboxStart
A tag has been placed on Template:BattleboxStart requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 20:50, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

FAR
Shrine of Remembrance has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

FILE:Australian Army Rising Sun Badge 1904.png
Just to let you know that I recently copied the above image that you uploaded to Wikipedia over to WikiMedia Commons, the Wikimedia central media repository for all free media. The image had been tagged with the Copy to Wikimedia Commons template. Your image is now available to all Wikimedia projects at the following location: Commons:FILE:Australian Army Rising Sun Badge 1904.png. The original version of the image uploaded to Wikipedia has been tagged with WP:CSD. Cheers! --, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

An exciting opportunity to get involved!
As a member of the Aviation WikiProject or one of its subprojects, you may be interested in testing your skills in the Aviation Contest! I created this contest, not to pit editor against editor, but to promote article improvement and project participation and camraderie. Hopefully you will agree with its usefulness. Sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here. The first round of the contest may not start until September 1st-unless a large number of editors signup and are ready to compete immediately! Since this contest is just beginning, please give feedback here, or let me know what you think on my talkpage. -  Trevor  MacInnis   contribs  00:34, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Ellis Ashmead-Bartlett
Hi, I see you added a photograph of Lancashire Fusiliers heading for Gallipoli, said to be taken by Ashmead-Bartlett. Both the Imperial War Museum and Australian War Memorial have this and similar photos which they attribute to Ernest Brooks. ?? regards, Rod Rcbutcher (talk) 01:47, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Somme Maps
From images loaded into Commons, it is clearly evident that you are the Guru of WWI strategic maps. Any chance for you to assist on maps for some further battles? Farawayman (talk) 18:04, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Gsl! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created  is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the article:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 15:58, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Ian Liddell -

Articles for deletion nomination of Curtiss Helldiver (band)
I have nominated Curtiss Helldiver (band), 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 Articles for deletion/Curtiss Helldiver (band). 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. Joe Chill (talk) 03:18, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

File:British 3rd Infantry Division1.png listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:British 3rd Infantry Division1.png, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted.  F ASTILYsock (T ALK ) 02:30, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

File:British 36th (Ulster) Division Insignia.png listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:British 36th (Ulster) Division Insignia.png, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted.

File:Tel el Saba October 31 1917.png listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Tel el Saba October 31 1917.png, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:47, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:William George Malone.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:William George Malone.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. 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 media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:10, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Maps
Greetings Gsl, I've been revising the Somme pages and have noticed that you have uploaded the most informative maps. If you have any more pending or fancy having a go at maps for Guillemont, Ginchy etc I'd be grateful for a look. ThanksKeith-264 (talk) 14:54, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Agree these are excellent. Good work FWIW. Anotherclown (talk) 08:28, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation
Your upload of File:British 33rd Division insignia.png or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:08, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

 * Another one of your uploads, File:British 56th (1st London) Division insignia.png, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:10, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

 * Another one of your uploads, File:British 41st Division insignia.png, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:11, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

 * Another one of your uploads, File:British 49th (West Riding) Division insignia.png, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:18, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

 * Another one of your uploads, File:British 32nd Division insignia.png, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:15, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

 * Another one of your uploads, File:British 21st Division insignia.png, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:15, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

 * Another one of your uploads, File:British 47th (2nd London) Division insignia.png, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:16, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Kings Regiment history
Template:Kings Regiment history has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 14:26, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Category:Austro-Hungarian people has been nominated for merging
Category:Austro-Hungarian people has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Laurel Lodged (talk) 13:19, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Battle of Amiens (1918)
Battle of Amiens (1918) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Iseult  Δx parlez moi 06:34, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

title: User talk:Gsl


text:
User talk:Encyclopedic

Welcome to Wikipedia!
Hello Encyclopedic, welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for all your contributions. Here are some useful links in case you haven't already found them: If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!
 * MediaWiki User's Guide
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

—Noldoaran (Talk) 05:17, Dec 12, 2003 (UTC)

SGpedians' notice board
Our very own notice board is up! Do try to look through and contribute. ;)--Huaiwei 08:54, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: User talk:Encyclopedic


text:
Zorndorf

Zorndorf may refer to:

 * Sarbinowo, Gmina Dębno, a Polish village formerly known as Zorndorf
 * Battle of Zorndorf, fought there in 1758 between Prussia and Russia during the Seven Years' War

title: Zorndorf


text:
User:The Cunctator/Agglomeration

Wikipedia works a lot better when entries are kept as close to a single unitary concept, broken up into distinct entries as they grow. This not only ensures maximal specific interlinking but it also is crucial to using the process of accumulative edits to ensure improvement and refinement of the content. The longer an entry gets and the broader the range of concepts it covers, the less likely there is to be a consensus on what is proper form for the entry.

Moreover, it simply gives you a more asthetically pleasing and consistent experience.

See the difference between an "agglomerationist" version of "sport" and my "atomized" version (which also involved the creation of sportsmanship, history of sport, professional sports, asthetic appeal of sport, nationalism and sport, and regulation of sport).

Another example: From content from the still-too-long homosexuality entry, I created or reworked societal attitudes towards homosexuality, sodomy law, sodomy laws in the United States, persecution of homosexuals, reparative therapy, gay disease.

The primary (and essentially only) benefit of agglomeration is that it it makes for a better printed version (if well done, which is unlikely given the wiki editing scheme). But that is not the primary goal of the Wikipedia. The fallacy of using paper encyclopedias as a model, which also leads to deletionism, is pernicious.

It's true that there should be better methods of linking up related entries into a single page if one so desires, but that is ancillary to the primary goal of Wikipedia.

title: User:The Cunctator/Agglomeration


text:
Sing As We Go

Sing As We Go is a 1934 British musical film starring Gracie Fields, John Loder and Stanley Holloway. The script was written by Gordon Wellesley and J. B. Priestley.

Considered by many to be British music hall star Gracie Fields' finest vehicle, this film was written for her by leading novelist J.B. Priestley. In this morale-boosting depression movie, set in the industrial north of England, Fields stars as a resourceful, determined working class heroine, laid off from her job in a clothing mill, who has to seek work in the seaside resort of Blackpool. This gives her the opportunity both to fall into many misadventures and, of course, to sing.

The decision to film on location brings the film a life and immediacy all too absent from most films of the period. The film provides us with a snapshot of life in a seaside resort in the 1930s. The final scene of the millworkers returning to the re-opened mill while Fields leads them in the rousing title song has become an almost iconic film cliché.

Main cast

 * Gracie Fields as Gracie Platt
 * John Loder as Hugh Phillips
 * Dorothy Hyson as Phyllis Logan
 * Stanley Holloway as Policeman
 * Frank Pettingell as Uncle Murgatroyd Platt
 * Lawrence Grossmith as Sir William Upton
 * Morris Harvey as The Cowboy
 * Arthur Sinclair as The Great Maestro
 * Maire O'Neill as Madame Osiris
 * Ben Field as Nobby
 * Olive Sloane as Violet - The Song-Plugger's Girlfriend
 * Margaret Yarde as Mrs. Clotty
 * Evelyn Roberts as Parkinson
 * Norman Walker as Hezekiah Crabtree
 * Florence Gregson as Aunt Alice

Critical reception
The Radio Times Guide to Film gave the film three stars out of five and described Sing As We Go as a "dated but spirited musical comedy...amusing and politically astute".

By contrast, in The Making of Modern Britain, Andrew Marr singled out Sing As We Go as an icon of British pop culture of the 1930s, concluding: "Fairy tale or not, this is probably the worst film I have ever seen."

In popular culture

 * The main theme of this movie, the song "Sing As We Go" (written by Harry Parr Davies), is one of two signature songs of The Kampen Janitsjarorkester Symphonic Band of Kampen, Oslo, Norway.
 * The melody of the song was used by the comedy group Monty Python in a parody song called "Sit on My Face".

title: Sing As We Go


text:
Exocet

The Exocet is a French-built anti-ship missile whose various versions can be launched from surface vessels, submarines, helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft.

Etymology

The missile's name was given by M. Guillot, then the technical director at Nord Aviation. It is the French word for flying fish, from the Latin exocoetus, a transliteration of the Greek name for the fish that sometimes flew into a boat: ἐξώκοιτος (exōkoitos), literally "lying down outside (ἒξω, κεῖμαι), sleeping outside".

Description
The Exocet is built by MBDA, a European missile company. Development began in 1967 by Nord as a ship-launched weapon named the MM38. A few years later, Aerospatiale and Nord merged. The basic body design was based on the Nord AS-30 air-to-ground tactical missile. The sea-launched MM38 entered service in 1975, whilst the air-launched AM39 Exocet began development in 1974 and entered service with the French Navy five years later in 1979.

The relatively compact missile is designed for attacking small- to medium-size warships (e.g., frigates, corvettes, and destroyers), although multiple hits are effective against larger vessels, such as aircraft carriers. It is guided inertially in mid-flight and turns on active radar homing late in its flight to find and hit its target. As a countermeasure against air defence around the target, it maintains a very low altitude while inbound, staying just one to two meters above the sea surface. Due to the effect of the radar horizon, this means that the target may not detect an incoming attack until the missile is only 6,000 m from impact. This leaves little time for reaction and stimulated the design of close-in weapon systems (CIWS).

Its solid propellant rocket motor gives the Exocet a maximum range of 70 km. It was replaced on the Block 3 MM40 ship-launched version of the missile with a solid-propellant booster and a turbojet sustainer engine which extends the range of the missile to more than 180 km. The submarine-launched version places the missile inside a launch capsule.

Replacement Future Cruise/Anti-Ship Weapon is under development.

Versions
The Exocet has been manufactured in versions including:
 * MM38 (surface-launched) – deployed on warships. Range: 42 km. No longer produced. A coast defence version known as "Excalibur" was developed in the United Kingdom and deployed in Gibraltar from 1985 to 1997.
 * AM38 (helicopter-launched – tested only)
 * AM39 (air-launched) – B2 Mod 2: deployed on 14 types of aircraft (combat jets, maritime patrol aircraft, helicopters). Range between 50 and 70 km, depending on the altitude and the speed of the launch aircraft.
 * SM39 (submarine-launched) – B2 Mod 2: deployed on submarines. The missile is housed inside a watertight launched capsule (véhicule Sous marin, VSM), which is fired from the submarine's torpedo tubes. On leaving the water, the capsule is ejected and the missile's motor is ignited. It then behaves like an MM40. The missile will be fired at depth, which makes it particularly suitable for discreet submarine operations.
 * MM40 (surface-launched) – Block 1, Block 2 and Block 3: deployed on warships and in coastal batteries. Range: 72 km for the Block 2, in excess of 200 km for the Block 3.

MM40 Block 3
In February 2004, the Direction Générale pour l'Armement (DGA) notified MBDA of a contract for the design and production of a new missile, the MM40 Block 3. It has an improved range, in excess of 180 km – through the use of a Microturbo TRI-40 turbojet engine, and includes four air intakes to provide continuous airflow to the power plant during high-G manoeuvres.

The Block 3 missile accepts GPS guidance system waypoint commands, which allow it to attack naval targets from different angles and to strike land targets, giving it a marginal role as a land-attack missile. The Block 3 Exocet is lighter than the previous MM40 Block 2 Exocet.

45 Block 3 Exocets were ordered by the French Navy in December 2008 for its ships which were carrying Block 2 missiles, namely Horizon-class and Aquitaine-class frigates. From 2021, the Block 3 upgrade was also being extended to three of the La Fayette-class frigates selected for life extension refits. These are not to be new productions but the conversion of older Block 2 missiles to the Block 3 standard. An MM40 Block 3 last qualification firing took place on the Île du Levant test range on 25 April 2007 and series manufacturing began in October 2008. The first firing of the Block 3 from a warship took place on 18 March 2010, from the French Navy air defence frigate FRENCH FRIGATE Chevalier Paul. In 2012, a new motor, designed and manufactured in Brazil by the Avibras company in collaboration with MBDA, was tested on an MM40 missile of the Brazilian Navy.

Besides the French, the Block 3 has been ordered by several other navies including that of Greece, the UAE, Chile, Peru, Qatar, Oman, Indonesia and Morocco.

The chief competitors to the Exocet are the US-made Harpoon, the Italian Otomat, Israel Gabriel-V, the Swedish RBS 15 and the Chinese Yingji series.

MM40 Block 3c
The “Block 3c” variant integrates a digital Radio Frequency (RF) seeker to the missile that has been developed by Thales. The Block 3c variant is described as more resistant to jamming systems and may be able to recognize surface vessels, based on the use of advanced wave forms. Block 3 missiles introduced a longer 200 kilometer range but retained the same RF seeker as Block 2. This technology remained non-digital.

The Block 3c variant is to begin delivery to the French Navy in December 2022 with 55 new missiles ordered in addition to 45 “MM40 Block 3c kits” to update existing Block 3 missiles to the Block 3c configuration. In September 2023, tests of the missile conducted by the frigate Alsace confirmed the variant as ready for operational service.

Falklands War

In 1982, during the Falklands War, Argentine Navy Dassault-Breguet Super Étendard warplanes carrying the AM39 air-launched version of the Exocet caused damage which sank the Royal Navy destroyer HMS Sheffield (D80) on 4 May 1982. Two more Exocets struck the 15,000-ton merchant ship Atlantic Conveyor on 25 May. Two MM38 ship-to-ship missiles were removed from the destroyer ARA Seguí, a former US Navy Allen M. Sumner-class destroyer destroyer, and transferred to an improvised launcher for land use. The missiles were launched on 12 June 1982 and one hit the destroyer HMS Glamorgan (D19).

HMS Sheffield
Sheffield was a Type 42 guided missile destroyer. On 4 May 1982, Sheffield was at defence watches (second-degree readiness) the southernmost of three Type 42 destroyers when she was hit by one of two AM39 air-launched Exocet missiles fired by Argentine Super Étendard strike fighters. The second missile splashed into the sea about half-mile off her port beam.

The missile that struck Sheffield impacted on the starboard side at deck level 2, travelling through the junior ratings' scullery and breaching the Forward Auxiliary Machinery Room/Forward Engine Room bulkhead 2.4 m above the waterline, creating a hole in the hull roughly 1.2 by. It appears that the warhead did not explode. Twenty members of her crew were killed and 26 injured. The ship foundered while under tow on 10 May. The loss of Sheffield was a deep shock to the British public and government.

The official Royal Navy Board of Inquiry Report stated that evidence indicates that the warhead did not detonate. During the four and a half days that the ship remained afloat, five salvage inspections were made and a number of photographs were taken. Members of the crew were interviewed and testimony was given by Exocet specialists (the Royal Navy had 15 surface combat ships armed with Exocets in the Falklands War). There was no evidence of an explosion, although burning propellant from the rocket motor caused fires which could not be checked as firefighting equipment had been put out of action.

SS Atlantic Conveyor
Atlantic Conveyor was a 14,950 ton roll-on/roll-off container ship that had been hastily converted to carry aircraft on her deck. She was carrying helicopters and supplies, including cluster bombs. Two Exocet missiles had been fired at a frigate, but had been confused by its defences and re-targeted the Atlantic Conveyor. Both missiles struck the container ship on her port quarter and warheads exploded either after penetrating the ship's hull, or on impact. Witness Prince Andrew reported that debris caused "splashes in the water about a quarter of a mile away". Twelve men were killed and the survivors were taken to HMS Hermes. Atlantic Conveyor sank while under tow three days later.

HMS Invincible
On 30 May, two Super Étendards, one carrying Argentina's last remaining air-launched Exocet, escorted by four Douglas A-4C Skyhawks, each with two 500 lb bombs, took off to attack the carrier HMS Invincible. Argentine intelligence had sought to determine the position of Invincible from analysis of aircraft flight routes from the task force to the islands. However, the British had a standing order that all aircraft conduct a low level transit when leaving or returning to the ship to disguise her position. This tactic compromised the Argentine attack, which focused on a group of escorts 40 miles south of the main body of ships. Two of the attacking Skyhawks were shot down: one by a Sea Dart missile fired by HMS Exeter, and while the fate of the Exocet has never been established beyond doubt, the crew of HMS Avenger claimed that their 4.5-inch gun had shot it down. No damage was caused to any British vessels.

HMS Glamorgan
HMS Glamorgan was a County-class destroyer destroyer launched in 1964. On 12 June 1982 an MM38 Exocet missile was fired from an improvised shore-based launcher as she was steaming at about 20 kn 18 nmi offshore. The first attempt to fire a missile did not result in a launch; on the second attempt, a missile was launched but did not acquire the target. The third attempt resulted in a missile tracking Glamorgan. The incoming Exocet missile was also spotted on Glamorgan and a turn was ordered to present the stern to the missile.

The turn prevented the missile from striking the ship's side and penetrating the hull; instead, it hit the deck coaming at an angle, near the port Seacat missile launcher, skidded along the deck and exploded, making a 10 x hole in the hangar deck and a 5 x hole in the galley below. Fourteen crew members were killed.

Post–Falklands war
In the years after the Falklands War, it was revealed that the British government and the Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) had been extremely concerned at the time by the perceived inadequacy of the Royal Navy's anti-missile defences against the Exocet and the missile's potential to tip the naval war decisively in favour of the Argentine forces. A scenario was envisioned in which one or both of the force's two aircraft carriers (HMS Invincible (R05) and HMS Hermes (R12)) were destroyed or incapacitated by Exocet attacks, which would make recapturing the Falklands much more difficult.

Actions were taken to contain the Exocet threat. A major intelligence operation was initiated to prevent the Argentine Navy from acquiring more of the weapons on the international market. The operation included British intelligence agents claiming to be arms dealers able to supply large numbers of Exocets to Argentina, who diverted Argentina from pursuing sources which could genuinely supply a few missiles. France denied deliveries of Exocet AM39s purchased by Peru to avoid the possibility that Peru might supply them to Argentina because they knew that payment would be made with credit from the Central Bank of Peru. British intelligence had detected the guarantee was a deposit of two hundred million dollars from the Andean Lima Bank, an owned subsidiary of the Italian Banco Ambrosiano.

Iran–Iraq War

Exocet missiles were used by Iraq mainly as part of the Tanker War, the Aérospatiale SA 321 Super Frelon, Dassault-Breguet Super Étendard and Dassault Mirage F1 were aircraft used by Iraq to launch the missiles.

During the Iran–Iraq War, on 17 May 1987, an Iraqi aircraft identified as a Mirage F1 (but was in fact a modified Dassault Falcon 50) fired two Exocet missiles at the American frigate USS Stark (FFG-31). Both missiles struck the port side of the ship near the bridge. No weapons were fired in defence: The Phalanx CIWS remained in standby mode and the Mark 36 SRBOC countermeasures were not armed. Thirty-seven United States Navy personnel were killed and twenty-one were wounded. The ship did not sink, and was eventually repaired.

Current operators

 * Argentine Navy – MM38, MM40 and AM39
 * Royal Brunei Navy – MM38, MM40
 * Bulgarian Navy
 * Brazilian Navy – MM38, MM40 Block 2 and AM39, SM-39
 * Cameroon Navy – MM38, MM40 (on P-48S (Bakassi) craft)
 * Chilean Navy – AM39, MM40 block-2, MM40 block-3 and SM39 for the Scorpène-class submarine.
 * Cyprus Navy – MM40
 * 🇪🇨: MM40
 * 🇪🇬: AM39, MM38 & MM40
 * French Navy – MM38, MM40, AM39, SM39
 * German Navy – To be replaced with the RBS 15.
 * Hellenic Navy – MM38, MM40 Block 2/3
 * Hellenic Air Force – AM39 block 2
 * Indonesian Navy – MM38, MM40 Block 2, MM40 Block 3
 * Indian Navy (on Kalvari-class submarine)
 * Royal Malaysian Navy – MM38, MM40 Block 2 and SM39 (on Scorpène-class submarines)
 * Royal Moroccan Navy – MM38, MM40 Block 2/3
 * Moroccan Air Force – AM39
 * Pakistan Navy – SM39 on Agosta 90B (Khalid)-class submarines
 * Sea King helicopters.
 * Pakistan Air Force – on the Mirage 5PA3
 * Peruvian Navy – MM38 on PR-72P-class corvettes, AM39 Block 2 on ASH-3D Sea Kings and Mirage 2000P, MM40 Block 3 on Lupo-class frigates
 * 🇿🇦: South African Navy – MM40 Block 2 on Valour-class frigates. The navy plans to upgrade to the Block 3 missile.
 * Royal Thai Navy – MM38
 * MM-40 Exocet for the La Combattante III-class fast attack craft
 * MM38
 * UAE Navy MM40 Block 3 on Baynunah-class corvette
 * National Navy of Uruguay – MM38 on João Belo-class frigates
 * Royal Malaysian Navy – MM38, MM40 Block 2 and SM39 (on Scorpène-class submarines)
 * Royal Moroccan Navy – MM38, MM40 Block 2/3
 * Moroccan Air Force – AM39
 * Pakistan Navy – SM39 on Agosta 90B (Khalid)-class submarines
 * Sea King helicopters.
 * Pakistan Air Force – on the Mirage 5PA3
 * Peruvian Navy – MM38 on PR-72P-class corvettes, AM39 Block 2 on ASH-3D Sea Kings and Mirage 2000P, MM40 Block 3 on Lupo-class frigates
 * 🇿🇦: South African Navy – MM40 Block 2 on Valour-class frigates. The navy plans to upgrade to the Block 3 missile.
 * Royal Thai Navy – MM38
 * MM-40 Exocet for the La Combattante III-class fast attack craft
 * MM38
 * UAE Navy MM40 Block 3 on Baynunah-class corvette
 * National Navy of Uruguay – MM38 on João Belo-class frigates
 * Peruvian Navy – MM38 on PR-72P-class corvettes, AM39 Block 2 on ASH-3D Sea Kings and Mirage 2000P, MM40 Block 3 on Lupo-class frigates
 * 🇿🇦: South African Navy – MM40 Block 2 on Valour-class frigates. The navy plans to upgrade to the Block 3 missile.
 * Royal Thai Navy – MM38
 * MM-40 Exocet for the La Combattante III-class fast attack craft
 * MM38
 * UAE Navy MM40 Block 3 on Baynunah-class corvette
 * National Navy of Uruguay – MM38 on João Belo-class frigates
 * MM38
 * UAE Navy MM40 Block 3 on Baynunah-class corvette
 * National Navy of Uruguay – MM38 on João Belo-class frigates
 * UAE Navy MM40 Block 3 on Baynunah-class corvette
 * National Navy of Uruguay – MM38 on João Belo-class frigates
 * National Navy of Uruguay – MM38 on João Belo-class frigates

Former operators

 * Belgian Navy operated Exocet on its Wielingen-class frigates. These warships were all sold in 2008 to Bulgaria.
 * Georgian Navy
 * 🇮🇶 Iraq
 * Iraqi Air Force – operated the Exocet on its Mirage F1s and Super Étendards during the Iran–Iraq War.
 * Iraqi Navy - used on Super Frelon helicopters during the war with Iran.
 * Royal Navy - operated Exocet until the last MM38 armed surface vessel was decommissioned in 2002.
 * Venezuelan Air Force – operated Exocet on its Dassault Mirage 50s.
 * Republic of Korea Navy
 * Royal Navy - operated Exocet until the last MM38 armed surface vessel was decommissioned in 2002.
 * Venezuelan Air Force – operated Exocet on its Dassault Mirage 50s.
 * Republic of Korea Navy
 * Republic of Korea Navy
 * Republic of Korea Navy

title: Exocet


text:
Brown shrike

The brown shrike (Lanius cristatus) is a bird in the shrike family that is found mainly in Asia. It is closely related to the red-backed shrike (L. collurio) and isabelline shrike (L. isabellinus). The genus name, Lanius, is derived from the Latin word for "butcher", and some shrikes are also known as "butcher birds" because of their feeding habits. The specific cristatus is Latin for "crested", used in a broader sense than in English. The common English name "shrike" is from Old English scríc, "shriek", referring to the shrill call.

Like most other shrikes, it has a distinctive black "bandit-mask" through the eye and is found mainly in open scrub habitats, where it perches on the tops of thorny bushes in search of prey. Several populations of this widespread species form distinctive subspecies which breed in temperate Asia and migrate to their winter quarters in tropical Asia. They are sometimes found as vagrants in Europe and North America.

Taxonomy
In 1747 the English naturalist George Edwards included an illustration and a description of the brown shrike in the second volume of his A Natural History of Uncommon Birds. He used the English name "The Crested Red, or Russit Butcher-Bird". Edwards based his hand-coloured etching on a specimen that had been sent from Bengal to the silk-pattern designer Joseph Dandridge in London. When in 1758 the Swedish naturalist Carl Linnaeus updated his Systema Naturae for the tenth edition, he placed the brown shrike with the other shrikes in the genus Lanius. Linnaeus included a brief description, coined the binomial name Lanius cristatus and cited Edwards' work. The specific epithet is Latin meaning "crested" or "plumed".

Four subspecies are recognised:

 * L. c. cristatus Linnaeus, 1758 – central, east Siberia and north Mongolia, India to the Malay Peninsula
 * L. c. confusus Stegmann, 1929 – east Mongolia, southeast Russia and northeast China Malay Peninsula and Sumatra
 * L. c. lucionensis Linnaeus, 1766 – east China, Korean Peninsula and south Japan southeast China, Philippines, Borneo and Sulawesi
 * L. c. superciliosus Latham, 1801 – the island of Sakhalin (southeast Russia) and north, central Japan southeast China and east Indochina to the Lesser Sunda Islands

Description
This shrike is mainly brown on the upper parts and the tail is rounded. The black mask can be paler in winter and has a white brow over it. The underside is creamy with rufous flanks and belly. The wings are brown and lack any white "mirror" patches. Females tend to have fine scalloping on the underside and the mask is dark brown and not as well marked as in the male. The distinction is not easy to use in the field but has been tested with breeding birds in Japan where the female can be identified from the presence of a brood patch. The use of multiple measurements allows discrimination of the sex of about 90% of the birds. Subspecies lucionensis has a grey crown shading into the brown upperparts and the rump appears more rufous than the rest of the upper back. The tail is more brownish and not as reddish as in the red-backed shrike. Younger birds of lucionensis have a brown crown and lack the grey on the head. Subspecies superciliosus has a broad white supercilium and a richer reddish crown. The tail is redder and tipped in white.

A number of confusing forms are known from central Asia where the populations of cristatus, isabellinus and collurio overlap. The taxonomy has been in a state of flux and some forms such as phoenicuroides formerly considered as subspecies of L. cristatus have been moved to the species L. isabellinus. Subspecies lucionensis has been recorded interbreeding with superciliosus in Ishikawa, Japan while superciliosus has interbred with Lanius tigrinus in central Japan.

Distribution

The nominate form breeds in northern Asia from Mongolia to Siberia and winters in South Asia, Myanmar and the Malay Peninsula. The race confusus described from the same region is not well marked but is said to have a wider white brow and paler upperparts and is sometimes included within the nominate population. Subspecies superciliosus (sometimes called the Japanese shrike) breeds on the islands of Sakhalin, Kuril and Japan and winters in Hainan, Sumatra, Java, and the Sundas. Subspecies lucionensis, sometimes known as the Philippine shrike (local names: tarat or pakis-kis),  breeds in Korea and eastern China wintering mainly in Taiwan and the Philippines but also on the Andaman Islands and in peninsular India. Stuart Baker suggested that the species may breed in the Cachar Hills of Assam but the idea was questioned by Claud Buchanan Ticehurst.

This species is rare in Europe and vagrants have been recorded in the United States and Canada.

Behaviour and ecology

The brown shrike is a migratory species and ringing studies show that they have high fidelity to their wintering sites, often returning to the same locations each winter. They begin establishing wintering territories shortly after arrival and their loud chattering or rattling calls are distinctive. Birds that arrive early and establish territories appear to have an advantage over those that arrive later in the winter areas. The timing of their migration is very regular with their arrival in winter to India in August and September and departure in April. During their winter period, they go through a premigratory moult. Their song in the winter quarters is faint and somewhat resembles the call of the rosy starling and often includes mimicry of other birds. The beak remains closed when singing and only throat pulsations are visible although the bird moves its tail up and down while singing.

The breeding season is late May or June and the breeding habitat includes the taiga, forest to semi-desert where they build a nest in a tree or bush, laying two to six eggs.

They feed mainly on insects, especially Lepidoptera. Like other shrikes, they impale prey on thorns. Small birds and lizards are also sometimes preyed upon. A white-eye (Zosterops) has been recorded in its larder. They typically look out for prey from a perch and fly down towards the ground to capture them.

title: Brown shrike


text:
User:The Cunctator/Deletionism

The motivations behind deletionism is perhaps best expressed by what Cyan calls his definition of "unencyclopedic":

when I say an article is "unencyclopedic", basically, what I mean is a combination of these two ideas:

 * readers don't come to an encyclopedia looking for this information
 * when readers see this material, it will adversely affect their opinion of Wikipedia as an authoritative and serious source of information

It is a concept explicitly based in comparison to dead-tree encyclopedias, which Wikipedia is not--the same misguided motivation behind agglomeration.

Dead-tree encyclopedias share one universal bias towards information--a bias away from the trivial. There is a core physical limitation on how much information can be included, so there must be a high bar set for the size of the audience for any individual piece of knowledge.

But Wikipedia does not share that limitation, and its goal is include knowledge without approving a bias.

It is impossible for any reference work, including Wikipedia to avoid the bias of exclusion of information, simply because Wikipedia cannot include everything, because if it did, it would be everything. Thus Borges's cautionary parable about the perfect map:
 * In time, those Unconscionable Maps no longer satisfied, and the Cartographers Guild drew a Map of the Empire whose size was that of the Empire, coinciding point for point with it. The following Generations, who were not so fond of the Study of Cartography saw the vast Map to be Useless and permitted it to decay and fray under the Sun and winters.
 * In the Deserts of the West, still today, there are Tattered Ruins of the Map, inhabited by Animals and Beggars; and in all the Land there is no other Relic of the Disciplines of Geography.

However, that should not stop up from this accuracy being our eventual goal. The bar for relevance can be set much, much lower than that for the paper encyclopedia. And Wikipedia has a built-in standard--interlinking. Any piece of knowledge so trivial that it cannot be connected to knowledge already in Wikipedia should not be included.

The only practical limitation for inclusion in Wikipedia is title collision--the "3000 Michael Jordans" scenario. Again, a classic problem of the limitations of symbol vs. object. All those Michael Jordans are unique; it is only their names which are indistinguishable.

title: User:The Cunctator/Deletionism


text:
Russian Naval Infantry

The Russian Naval Infantry (Морская пехота России), often referred to as Russian Marines in the West, operate as the naval infantry of the Russian Navy. Established in 1705, they are capable of conducting amphibious operations as well as operating as more traditional light infantry.

The Naval Infantry also fields the Russian Navy's only special operations unit, known as the ‘commando frogmen’. Frogmen are typically drawn from the Naval Infantry's ranks, and they are capable of a wide range of special operations tasks and missions. Colloquially, Russian-speakers may refer to Naval Infantrymen using the abbreviation морпехи (morpekhi (plural), singular form: морпех (morpekh)).

The first Russian marine force formed in 1705, and since that time it has fought in the Napoleonic Wars, the Crimean War (1853–1856), the Russo-Japanese War (1904–1905), the First World War (1914–1918) and the Second World War (1939–1945). Under Admiral Gorshkov (Soviet Navy Commander-in-Chief from 1956 to 1985), the Soviet Navy expanded the reach of the Naval Infantry and deployed it worldwide on numerous occasions.

Since 2019 Lieutenant General Viktor Astapov has commanded the Naval Infantry in his capacity as the Deputy Commander for Coastal Troops/Commandant of the Coastal Troops of the Russian Navy.

The Naval Infantry, alongside the Coastal Defense Missile Artillery Forces, form part of a larger institution—the Coastal Troops of the Russian Navy (Береговые войска ВМФ России, Beregovye voyska VMF Rossii).

History
Little is known about the Russian Naval infantrymen during the Imperial era of Russia because many of the units formed consisted of supernumerary ship crews of destroyed or immobilised Russian warships.

The history of the Russian Navy could be traced back to the 16th century with Ivan the Terrible with the formation of his special team of Streltsy "sea soldiers" as part of his crew of flotilla ships.

The official history of the Naval Infantry could be traced back to the creation of the Russian ship Oryol (lit., Eagle), which launched in 1668 & sailed with a crew of 23 sailors & 35 soldiers, with the soldiers duties of boarding & capturing enemy ships & providing sentinel service under the command of Ivan Domozhirov.

During the Azov campaign of the Russo-Turkish War, under Peter the Great, the soldiers in these units; many of whom were recruited by the Preobrazhensky & the Semyonovsky Regiments of the later-to-become Imperial Guards, were shown to be particularly effective in carrying out those duties. Those soldiers would later on form the Russian Navy's very first infantry regiment consisting of 4300 men.

The first admiral of the regiment was appointed by no less than Tsar Peter I himself, General Admiral Fyodor Golovin, who later gave the respective order to Vice Admiral Cornelius Kruys on November 16, 1705, marking the glorious years following for the Russian Naval Infantry.

Official formation
In November 16 (27), 1705, following a decree of Peter I, the first regiment "of naval equipage" (морской экипаж) (or in other words, equipped and supplied by the Russian Imperial Navy) was formed for boarding and landing operations, on the ships of the Baltic Fleet. The regiment had 1200 men (two battalions of five companies; 45 officers, & 70 non-commissioned officers), and from this original regiment began the long history of Naval Infantry within Russia.

Great Northern War
In 1714, the regiment won a victory against the Swedes during the Battle of Gangut. However, after the war, a review of the Regiment's performance during the war concluded that the regimental organization of the unit did not work with the organizational structure of the Navy's fleet and did not allow it to be correctly utilized in combat conditions. As a result, the naval regiment was disbanded, and in replace of it, five naval battalions of consisting of men drawn from the army was created in 1712–1714 & attached to the fleet:

 * "Vice Admiral Battalion" - for service in the vanguard squadrons on the ships of the squadron's avant-garde;
 * "Admiral's Battalion" - for service on ships of the squadron center;
 * "Rear Admiral Battalion" - for service on the ships of the rear guard of the squadron;
 * "Galler Battalion" - for service on combat ships of the Galere fleet;
 * "Admiralty Battalion" - for guard duty and other tasks.

Russo-Turkish Wars
The Russian naval infantry were involved in a series of victories against the Ottoman Empire including the rout of the Turkish Navy at the Battle for Cesme Harbor in 1770, and the taking of Izmail Fortress on the Danube, in 1790.

Napoleonic War
During the prelude to the war, in 1799 the Russian naval infantry took the French fortress at Corfu after a four-month siege. In 1806, a Russian landing force took Naples by storm and entered the Papal States. During the War of the Sixth Coalition, the Russian naval infantry distinguished itself against La Grande Armée at the Battle of Borodino (1812), Battle of Kulm (1813) and the Siege of Danzig.

Crimean War
By 1813, significant parts of the naval infantry were transferred to the Army & subsequently lost naval connections. For almost 100 years, there were no large infantry units in the Russian Navy. Nevertheless, in 1854–1855, during the Siege of Sevastopol against British, French and Turkish troops, there were renewed calls for revival of the military's Naval Infantry units. 17 separate sea battalions were formed and they participated in the defense of Sevastopol.

Russo-Japanese War
During 1904 Russo-Japanese War, the naval infantry defended Port Arthur against Japanese forces. Personnels were recruited from regular sailors & naval crews to make up the numbers. Seven separate naval rifle battalions, a separate landing squad of sailors, three separate sea rifle companies and several machine-gun teams were formed.

World War I
The question of the formation of permanent Naval Infantry Units were raised only in 1910 and in 1911, projects were underway under the Chief Naval Staff for the development of permanent infantry units in the main naval bases of the country: an infantry regiment under the Baltic Fleet, an infantry battalion in the Black Sea Fleet and the Vladivostok Battalion for the Pacific Fleet.

In August 1914, two separate battalions from the personnel of the Guards Fleet Crew and one battalion of personnel from the 1st Baltic Fleet Crew were created in Kronstadt. In March 1915, a separate naval battalion of the 2nd Baltic Fleet Crew was transformed into the Marine Regiment of Special Purpose. It included a mine company, a machine-gun team, a communications team, regimental artillery, a technical workshop, a convoy, and individual commands of the steamer Ivan-town and boats.

At the end of 1916 and the beginning of 1917, the first two divisions of naval infantry were formed; the Baltic Division and Black Sea Division.

The naval infantry was deployed to the Baltic to defend the homeland against German attack as well as the Caspian Sea for operations against Ottoman forces.

Post-Russian Revolutions and the Russian Civil War
These naval infantrymen, who served under the Navy of the Imperial State, would later on form the core of the naval infantry service of the young Soviet Navy in 1918, which distinguished itself during the long Russian Civil War (1918–1922). Many of their fellow servicemen though supported the White movement and distinguished themselves as part of anti-Soviet military operations during those years. Many were shot upon capture by Soviet authorities. Others were tortured and killed.

The Soviet Naval Infantry's major force during the civil war was the Baltic Fleet Naval Infantry, the ex-Imperial fleet division's Communist servicemen would provide much of the fighting power during those years following the Revolution.

Kronstadt rebellion
Following the winding down of the Russian Civil War by 1920, the following year, many Soviet Naval Infantrymen stationed in Kronstadt mutinied against the Soviet government in 1921. The mutiny was quickly put down by Soviet forces with the mutinying Naval Infantrymen facing retribution by the Soviet government leading to their eventual execution.

World War II
During World War II about 350,000 Soviet Navy sailors fought on land operations. At the beginning of the war, the navy had only one naval infantry brigade in the Baltic Fleet, but began forming and training other battalions. These eventually were:
 * six naval infantry regiments, comprising two 650 man battalions each,
 * 40 naval infantry brigades of 5–10 battalions, formed from surplus ships' crews. Five brigades were awarded Gvardiya (Guards) status,
 * On November 1, 1944, the greatly understrength Red Army 55th Rifle Division was converted into a garrison formation for the Porkkala Naval Base after the Finnish capitulation in late September 1944.
 * plus numerous smaller units

Many of the new units were raised as part of the Black Sea, Pacific and Northern Fleets. The military situation demanded the deployment of large numbers of naval infantry on land, so the Naval Infantry contributed to the defense of Odessa, Moscow, Leningrad, Sevastopol, Stalingrad, Novorossiysk and Kerch.

The Naval Infantry conducted over 114 landings, most of which were carried out by platoons and companies. In general, however, Naval Infantry served as regular infantry, without any amphibious training. They conducted four major operations: two during the Battle of the Kerch Peninsula, one during the Caucasus Campaign and one as part of the Landing at Moonsund, in the Baltic.

During the war, five brigades and two battalions of naval infantry were awarded Guards status. Nine brigades and six battalions were awarded decorations, and many were given honorary titles. The title Hero of the Soviet Union was bestowed on 122 Naval Infantry servicemen.

The Soviet experience in amphibious warfare in World War II contributed to the development of Soviet operational art in combined arms operations. Many members of the Naval Infantry were parachute trained; they conducted more drops and successful parachute operations than the Soviet Airborne Troops (VDV).

The Naval Infantry was disbanded in 1947, with some units being transferred to the Coastal Defence Force.

Cold War

In 1961, the Naval Infantry was re-formed and became a combat arm of the Soviet Navy. Each Fleet was assigned a Naval Infantry unit of regiment (and later brigade) size. The Naval Infantry received amphibious versions of standard armoured fighting vehicles, including tanks used by the Soviet Army.

By 1989, the Naval Infantry numbered 18,000 troops, organised into the 55th Naval Infantry Division at Vladivostok and at least four independent brigades: the 61st Kirkenneskaya Brigade at Pechenga (Northern Fleet), 175th at Tumannyy in the North, 336th Guards Naval Infantry Brigade at Baltiysk (Baltic Fleet), and 810th at Sevastopol (Black Sea Fleet).

By the end of the Cold War, the Soviet Navy had over eighty landing ships, as well as two Ivan Rogov-class landing ships. The latter could transport one infantry battalion with 40 armoured vehicles and their landing craft. (One of the Rogov ships has since been retired.)

At 75 units, the Soviet Union had the world's largest inventory of combat air-cushion assault craft. In addition, many of the 2,500 vessels of the Soviet merchant fleet (Morflot) could off-load weapons and supplies during amphibious landings.

On November 18, 1990, on the eve of the Paris Summit where the Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty and the Vienna Document on Confidence and Security-Building Measures (CSBMs) were signed, Soviet data were presented under the so-called initial data exchange. This showed a rather sudden emergence of three so-called coastal defence divisions (including the 3rd at Klaipėda in the Baltic Military District, the 126th in the Odessa Military District and seemingly the 77th Guards Motor Rifle Division with the Northern Fleet), along with three artillery brigades/regiments, subordinate to the Soviet Navy, which had previously been unknown as such to NATO.

Much of the equipment, which was commonly understood to be treaty limited (TLE) was declared to be part of the naval infantry. The Soviet argument was that the CFE excluded all naval forces, including its permanently land-based components. The Soviet Government eventually became convinced that its position could not be maintained.

A proclamation of the Soviet government on July 14, 1991, which was later adopted by its successor states, provided that all "treaty-limited equipment" (tanks, artillery and armoured vehicles) assigned to naval infantry or coastal defence forces, would count against the total treaty entitlement.

Landing Assault units of the Naval Infantry
In addition to the Landing Assault Troops of the Ground Forces similar units were also formed by the Soviet Naval Infantry with the main task to execute airborne landings (by parachute or by helicopters), take over and defend a beachhead for the amphibious landing of the main force. By 1989 these units were organized under their respective Fleet HQs as follows:

Red Banner Northern Fleet (Краснознамённый Северный флот) - ZATO Severomorsk, Murmansk Oblast, RSFSR

 * 61st Separate Kirkenesskaya, Red Banner Naval Infantry Brigade (61-я отдельная киркенесская краснознамённая бригада морской пехоты (61-я обрмп)) - Sputnik, Murmansk Oblast, RSFSR
 * 876th Separate Landing Assault Battalion (876-й отдельный десантно-штурмовой батальон (876-й одшб))

Twice Red Banner Baltic Fleet (Дважды Краснознамённый Балтийский флот) - Kaliningrad, Kaliningrad Oblast, RSFSS

 * 336th Separate Guards Belostokskaya, Order of Suvorov and the Order of Alexander Nevski Naval Infantry Brigade (336-я отдельная гвардейская бригада морской пехоты (61-я обрмп)) - Baltiysk, Kaliningrad Oblast, RSFSS
 * 879th Separate Landing Assault Battalion (879-й отдельный десантно-штурмовой батальон (879-й одшб))

Red Banner Black Sea Fleet (Краснознамённый Черноморский флот) - Sevastopol, Crimean ASSR, Ukrainian SSR

 * 810th Separate Naval Infantry Brigade 60th Anniversary of the USSR (810-я отдельная бригада морской пехоты имени 60-летия образования СССР) - Sevastopol, Crimean ASSR, Ukrainian SSR
 * 881st Separate Landing Assault Battalion (881-й отдельный десантно-штурмовой батальон (881-й одшб))

Red Banner Pacific Fleet - Vladivostok, Primorsky Krai, RSFSR

 * 55th Mozyrskaya, Order of the Red Banner 55th Naval Infantry Division (55-я Мозырская Краснознамённая дивизия морской пехоты (55-я кдмп)) - Vladivostok, Primorsky Krai, RSFSR
 * 165th Naval Infantry Regiment (165-й полк морской пехоты (165-й пмп)) - Vladivostok, Primorsky Krai, RSFSR
 * unidentified Separate Landing Assault Battalion (Н-й отдельный десантно-штурмовой батальон)
 * 390th Naval Infantry Regiment (390-й полк морской пехоты (390-й пмп)) - Slavyanka, Primorsky Krai, RSFSR
 * unidentified Separate Landing Assault Battalion (Н-й отдельный десантно-штурмовой батальон)

Russian Federation
The Naval Infantry of the Russian Navy includes the 55th Naval Infantry Division of the Russian Pacific Fleet, the independent brigades of the Northern (61st Brigade at Sputnik, Murmansk Oblast) and Baltic Fleets and of the Caspian Flotilla, and the independent regiment of the Black Sea Fleet.

In 1994, Exercise "Cooperation from the Sea" was conducted, in and around Vladivostok, with the U.S. III Marine Expeditionary Force, to foster a closer relationship between the Russian Naval Infantry and the United States Marine Corps. U.S. Marines and Russian naval infantrymen conducted their first exercise on U.S. soil the following year, in Hawaii. "Cooperation From the Sea 1995" was a maritime disaster relief exercise, which included cross training and personnel exchanges, and culminated in a combined U.S. and Russian amphibious landing. The purpose of the exercise was to improve interoperability, cooperation and understanding between U.S. and Russian personnel.

In 1998, the 22nd Motor Rifle Division, Far East Military District, at Petropavlovsk-Kamchatka, was transferred to the Pacific Fleet. In 2000 the division became the 40th Independent Motor Rifle Brigade, and on 1 September 2007 the 40th Naval Infantry Brigade (40 отд. Краснодарско-Харбинская дважды Краснознаменная бригада морской пехоты). In 2013, the regiment became, again, the 40th Naval Infantry Brigade.

From 2000 onwards, the Caspian Flotilla included a new naval infantry brigade, the 77th, based at Kaspiysk. The headquarters and two battalions of the brigade were scheduled to be established by August 1, 2000. It was reported by Agenstvo Voyenniykh Novostyei (AVN) in June 2000 that the new brigade, which may have inherited the lineage of the 77th Motor Rifle Division, was to have its troops housed in Kaspiysk and Astrakhan, along with as many as 195 combat vehicles and two hovercraft sent to it from Chukotka and the Northern Fleet, respectively. The brigade was also reported to have had helicopters assigned to it.

Syrian Civil War
In early September 2015, it was estimated that approximately 800 Russian Naval Infantrymen had taken up positions all along western Syria with the majority of them being stationed in the mountainous city of Slunfeh in east Latakia – the remaining personnel had been moved to the Homs (Wadi Al-Nasara) and Tartous (Masyaf and Safita) Governorates in preparation for the Russian military intervention in the Syrian Civil War.

On the night of 19 to 20 September 2015, Russian Naval Infantry engaged in a fight with militants of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) near the city of Latakia. The militants tried to mount an attack on the airbase there, however, they were ambushed by the Naval Infantry. As a result of the clash, three militants were killed, two were captured, and the rest retreated.

Before dawn of 24 September 2015, Russian Naval Infantry went into battle for the first time since their deployment to Syria, Debka file's military and intelligence sources reveal. The 810th Guards Naval Infantry Brigade fought with Syrian Army and Hezbollah special forces in an attack on ISIL forces at the Kweiris air base, east of Aleppo.

In November 2015, a Russian Naval Infantryman was killed during an operation to rescue the crew of a Russian Sukhoi Su-24M bomber aircraft that was shot down by the Turkish Air Force near the Syria–Turkey border.

In March 2016, the 61st Naval Infantry Brigade conducted operations in which it aided the Syrian Army's liberation of the Syrian city of Palmyra. The 61st also participated in the storming of the city. Sources consider it one of the best trained and most combat experienced units of the Russian forces.

In mid-May 2016, Russian Naval Infantry helped Syrian forces recapture the initiative in east Homs, while also recovering several points near the Al-Sha’ar Gas Fields and T-4 Military Airport.

In September 2016, it was reported that Russian Naval Infantry were conducting operations on Aleppo's Castillo Highway.

Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation
Russian Naval Infantry participated in the annexation of Crimea in 2014.

War in Donbas (2014–2022)
The 61st Naval Infantry Brigade (Russia) participated in the Russo-Ukrainian War in the Luhansk Oblast.

2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine
On 24 February 2022, Russian Naval Infantry started an amphibious assault on the Sea of Azov coast and besieged the city of Mariupol. Ropucha-class landing ship and Ivan Gren-class landing ship capable of landing tanks have reportedly been deployed in the region. The 155th Guards Naval Infantry participated in the Kyiv offensive which was later repelled forcing the Russian forces to retreat to Belarus in April later redeploying to Yehorivka and Pavlivka in the Donbas.

By 9 November 2022, the 155th Guards Naval Infantry and 40th Naval Infantry Brigade participated in an attack on the Ukrainian military garrison in Pavlivka. Members of the unit claimed to have taken roughly 300 casualties, with many of these complaints shared with notable Russian media figures and the unit's garrison. The members went further stating the attacks took place due to their commander's desire to earn bonuses and distinction through awards. On 15 November 2022, a commander of the Russian-proxy Donetsk People's Republic indicated that lower-level commanders within the 155th Guards Naval Infantry disregarded orders in the attack on Pavlivka.

In December, The New York Times reported on the deployment of the 155th Guards Naval Infantry to Pavlivka. Recruits "lacked sufficient food, maps, critical medical supplies, or walkie-talkies, and they were forced to use 1970s-era Kalashnikov rifles — with some members having to resort to using Wikipedia to locate instructions for using certain weapons". There was also a shortage of ammunition. One soldier said, "This isn't war. It's the destruction of the Russian people by their own commanders." Many used their Russian cellphones to call home, enabling Ukraine to track the unit and attack it. Many soldiers were volunteers but had "little experience" regarding the use of firearms.

In January 2023, the 155th Guards Naval Infantry Brigade attempted a breakthrough assault in Vuhledar against the Ukrainian 72nd Mechanized Brigade but failed. The unit saw initial success, however, but according to former FSB colonel Igor Strelkov, their assault stagnated following heavy losses to infantry and lack of ammunition for their organic fire support, despite using their T-80 tanks in an indirect fire role, and '' in general-poor technical support for the attacking units and their low staffing. ''

Organization
The largest naval infantry units are brigades or regiments. A Naval Infantry Regiment consists of roughly 2,000 personnel and is equipped with the PT-76 and BRDM-2, consists of 1 Tank Battalion and 3 naval infantry battalions, one motorised with BTR-60-series amphibious vehicles. brigades are somewhat larger. Although, sizes vary depending on mission and specializations.

Naval Infantry Battalions comprise the backbone of the naval infantry fighting force. The battalion is made up of three naval infantry companies, a mortar platoon, an antitank platoon, and supporting supply and maintenance, medical, and communications units. In all, the battalion numbers about 400 men. This unit, reinforced, constitutes the basic amphibious attack force in the assault landing-the battalion assault force (BAF).

At least one infantry battalion of each regiment or brigade is parachute trained, while all of the remaining infantry battalions are trained to be able to carry out air assault missions.

Pacific Fleet

 * 155th Guards Marine Brigade
 * Brigade HQ
 * 390th Marine Regiment
 * 59th Marine Battalion
 * 84th Tank Battalion
 * 263rd Artillery Battery
 * 1484th Signals Battalion
 * Air Defense Battery
 * 40th Krasnodar-Harbin Marine Brigade (Kamchatka) – redesignated from 3rd Regiment in 2013.

Baltic Fleet

 * 299th Baltic Fleet Coastal Forces Training Center
 * 336th Guards Marine Brigade– Baltiysk
 * 877th Marine Battalion
 * 879th Air-Assault (Desant) Battalion
 * 884th Marine Battalion
 * 1612th Self-Propelled Artillery Battalion
 * 1618th Anti-Aircraft Missile and Artillery Battalion
 * 53rd Marine cargo escort platoon – Kaliningrad

Northern Fleet

 * 61st Marine Brigade – Sputnik, Murmansk Oblast
 * Brigade Headquarters
 * 874th Marine Battalion
 * 876th Air-Assault (Desant) Battalion
 * 886th Reconnaissance Battalion
 * 125th Armored Battalion
 * 1611th Self-propelled Artillery Battalion
 * 1591st Self-propelled Artillery Battalion
 * 1617th Anti-aircraft Missile and Artillery Battalion
 * 75th Naval Hospital
 * 317th Marine Battalion
 * 318th Marine Battalion

Black Sea Fleet

 * 810th Guards Marine Brigade – Kazachye Bukhta, Sevastopol (a regiment until 1 December 2008)
 * 880th Marine Battalion
 * 881st Air-Assault Battalion
 * 888th Reconnaissance Battalion
 * 1613th Artillery Battery
 * 1619th Air-Defense Artillery Battery
 * 382nd Marine Battalion

Caspian Flotilla

 * 177th Marine Regiment

Equipment
Russian Naval Infantry had been gradually phasing out PT-76 amphibious tanks, and starting to receive a number of T-80s and upgraded BMP-2Ms. A full-strength Naval Infantry Brigade may have up to 80 tanks. The Russian Naval Infantry has 50 T-72B, 150 T-72B3, 30 T-72B3 mod. 2016, 50 T-80BV and 50 T-80BVM as of 2021. The APCs used by the Naval Infantry are either wheeled BTR-80s (in Assault Landing Battalions) or tracked MT-LBs (in Naval Infantry Battalions). Naval Infantry units are receiving BMP-3 IFVs; about 40 were delivered in 2021. BMP-3s may equip one company per Naval Infantry battalion.

According to a Defense Ministry statement published by RIA Novosti in November 2009, "All units of Russia's naval infantry will be fully equipped with advanced weaponry by 2015." Included in this upgrade would be T-90 tanks, BMP-3 IFVs, 2S31 120 mm mortar/artillery tracks, wheeled BTR-82A armored personnel carriers, air defense equipment and small arms. All Naval Infantry units were equipped with Ratnik infantry combat gear and all Northern Fleet naval infantry units were equipped with BTR-82A APCs as of November 2016.

Naval Infantry and Navy units also receive new-technology binoculars. As of 2017 the Naval Infantry had started to receive a modernized version of Strelets reconnaissance, control and communications system and completed receiving D-10 parachutes. All Pacific Fleet and Caspian Flotilla naval infantry units were equipped with BTR-82A APCs as of September 2019. 40 BTR-82A were delivered for the Black Sea Fleet in early 2021. The Pacific Fleet Naval Infantry were armed with "Sectant" small robotic reconnaissance systems in late 2021.

In late February 2014, at least one Black Sea Fleet assigned unit (at company level) was apparently using Tigr armored cars near Sevastopol during the 2014 Crimean crisis. During the crisis in March 2014 imagery emerged of some Naval Infantry personnel carrying what appeared to be the OTs-14-1A-04 7.62×39mm assault rifle with an under-barrel GP-30 40 mm grenade launcher, a bullpup design normally associated with Russian Airborne Troops, as well as Combat Engineering and Spetsnaz units. Naval Infantry of the Caspian Flotilla received modernized 5.45-mm Kalashnikov assault rifles, AK-74M with an "Obves" modernization kit in 2021. The newest anti-landing mine PDM-MD passed state tests in 2019-2020.

Heroes of the Soviet Union

 * Seaman Ahmed Dibirovich Abdulmedzhidov (1945)
 * Petty Officer Noah P. Adamia (1942)
 * Junior Sergeant Pavel Petrovich Artemov (1945)
 * Lieutenant Mikhail Ashik (1946)
 * Seaman Mikhail Avramenko (1945)
 * Seaman Yakov Illarionovich Balyaev (1945)
 * Major Mikhail Barabolko (1945)
 * Seaman (Naval Infantry) Pazhden M. Bartsits (1944)
 * Captain Nikolai Belyakov (1943, posthumous)
 * Major General Petr Bordanovisy (1943)
 * Corporal Ivan P. Dementyev (1945, posthumous)
 * Lieutenant Petr Deikano (1943)
 * Chief Petty Officer (Naval Infantry) Pavel Dubinda (1945, also full Cavalier of the Order of Glory)
 * Staff Sergeant Varlam Gabliya (1946)
 * Second Lieutenant Nikolai Kirillov (1943)
 * Seaman 1st Class (Naval Infantry) Aleksandr Komarov (1945)
 * Major Tsezar Lvovich Kunikov (1943, posthumous)
 * Gunnery Sergeant Nikolai Kuzhetsov (1943, also Cavalier of the Order of Glory)
 * Petty Officer 1st Class (Naval Infantry) Yuri Lisitsyin (1945)
 * Major Pavel Litvinov (1943)
 * Seaman Kafur Nasyrovich Mamedov (1942, posthumous)
 * Guards Sergeant Viktor I. Medvedev (1945)
 * Lieutenant Nikolai Motshalin (1945)
 * First Lieutenant Konstantin Olyshanskiy (1945, posthumous)
 * Seaman Pavel D. Osipov (1945, posthumous)
 * Lieutenant Pyotr Shironin (1943, shironintsy)
 * Private Andrey Arkadevich Skvortsov (1943, shironintsy)
 * Private Aleksandr Fedorovich Toropov (1943, shironintsy)
 * Midshipman Sergei N. Vasilyev (1942, posthumous)
 * Petty Officer Sergey G. Zimin (1943, shironintsy)

Heroes of the Russian Federation

 * Starshina (Warrant Officer) Gennadiy A. Azarychev (1995)
 * Lieutenant Vladimir A. Belyavskiy (2006)
 * Senior Lieutenant Vladimir V. Borovikov
 * Colonel Aleksandr Chernov
 * Guards Lieutenant Aleksandr Darkovich (1995)
 * Midshipman (Warrant Officer) Andrey Vladimirovich Dneprovskiy
 * Senior Lieutenant Sergey Firsov
 * Major Pavel Nikolaevich Gaponenko
 * Major Andrey Y. Gushchin (1995)
 * Major Vladimir V. Karpushenko
 * Lt. Col. Dmitriy Nikolayevich Klimenko
 * Guards Captain Yevgeniy N. Kolesnikov (1995, posthumous)
 * Major General Yevgeniy Nikolayevich Kocheshkov
 * Senior Lieutenant Yuriy Gerasimovich Kuryagin
 * Major-General Aleksandr Otrakovskiy (2000, posthumous)
 * Guards Captain Dmitriy Polkovnikov (1995)
 * Guards Major General Sergey Sheiko (1995)
 * Major General Viktor Shulyak
 * Seaman Vladimir Vladimirovich Tatashvili
 * Captain Viktor Vdovkin
 * Senior Midshipman (Sr. Warrant Officer) Gregory Mikhailovich Zamyshlyak
 * Midshipman (Warrant Officer) Andrey N. Zakharchuk

Sealift

The Alligator tank landing ship and more modern Ropucha-class landing ship is a typical amphibious assault ship. Propelled by diesel engines, this ship is relatively small, displacing about 4,500 tons. In 1978, the Soviets launched a new amphibious ship, the Ivan Rogov. The advent of the Ivan Rogov was taken in the West as an indication that the Soviet Navy was planning to strengthen the power projection mission of Naval Infantry.

Twice the size of earlier ships, it can launch amphibious vehicles from its open bow doors. It also carries helicopters. Among the various small assault landing vehicles to launch from the bow are hovercraft, such as the Aist, which can carry the naval infantry ashore at speeds of fifty knots.

The composition and the class of the main ships:
 * 4 units – Alligator-class landing ship
 * 12 units – Ropucha-class landing ship + 3 improved Ropucha-class
 * 2 units – Zubr-class LCAC + 1 in hold (in More (Feodosiya))
 * 5 units – Dyugon-class landing craft
 * 2 units – Ivan Gren-class landing ship

title: Russian Naval Infantry