Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:34, 4 February 2021

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.

Archives

Archive 1 - October 2006 - March 2007 Archive 2 - April - May 2007 Archive 3 - May - June 2007 Archive 4 - June - July 2007 Archive 5 - August - September 2007 Archive 6 - October - November 2007 Archive 7 - December 2007 - February 2008 Archive 8 - March 2008 - May 2008 Archive 9 - June 2008 - August 2008 Archive 10 - September 2008 - November 2008 Archive 11 - December 2008 - March 2009 Archive 12 - April 2009 - June 2009 Archive 13 - July 2009 - Dec 2009 Archive 14 - Jan 2010 - June 2010 Archive 15 - June 2010 - August 2013 Archive 16 - December 2010 - August 2013 Archive 17 - August 2013 - January 2015 Archive18 - January 2015 - March 2016 Archive19 - April 2016 - April 2017 Archive20 - April 2017 - May 2018 Archive21 - May 2018 - May 2019 Archive22 - May 2019 - December 2020 Archive23 - December 2020 - present

This page has archives. Sections older than 14.5 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 2 sections are present.

Hoggardhigh

User:107.134.16.11 has made a couple of edits, after their block. Mutt Lunker (talk) 11:32, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. If it keeps it up, we can contact the last blocking admin to see if we can get a longer block. BilCat (talk) 15:15, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Archive

Your archive has rolled over onto a new page mate. WCM_email 14:56, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, fixed. BilCat (talk) 15:15, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Stopping the Rafale edition war ?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Guys could we please stop the frequent edition war on Dassault Rafale list of primary users ?

Some "people" are constantly adding India to the list of users. They don't seem like they are going to stop. Which isn't in itself a reason to agree with them but let's be honest, the current situation doesn't make sense. There is a list of "primary users" for a plane exported to 4 countries so far and delivered to 3. I don't see how there can be any "secondary users" in this case. If anything, France is the primary user and export countries are secondary due to low quantities ordered. But removing India from the list in the box makes little sense : they have ordered it and it's being delivered as we speak. Next thing you know they will have 3 more than the last time. They are a user of the Rafale and will be even more in the future. I don't understand why India is not a "primary user" . Just because they don't have operational capacity ? So then the section in the box could be changed into "in service" otherwise the distinction makes no sense. I can't see how a product that has been delivered to 3 countries so far can have "primary" and "secondary" users. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KRaikkonen01 (talk • contribs) 12:23, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The consensus standard is to do it that way. We don't let edit warriors get their way just because they won't stop. Also, its very obvious: primary users are French air force and navy; "more users" is everyone else. Pages are limited, by consensus, to primary user + 3 "more users". - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 23:27, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Infobox shows Egypt is a primary user with 24 planes on order. Edit consensus harms the coherence of the list from the user's pov — Preceding unsigned comment added by KRaikkonen01 (talk • contribs) 23:51, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

We go by the total number of aircraft in service, not by orders. Egypt currently has more in service than India. Just be patient, as India has 36 on order. Also, I prefer to discuss article issues on the article's talk page, so other users can comment. Thanks. BilCat (talk) 00:09, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Yes, orders can be canceled. Ordered aircraft don't mean that much until they are delivered and in service. -Fnlayson (talk) 02:39, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

What does Edit consensus harms the coherence of the list from the user's pov even mean anyway? - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:45, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

@The Bushranger: The Dassault Rafale has been hit again by another IP that can't read the notes. Do you think perhaps we could get a semi-protect for a few weeks? Thanks. BilCat (talk) 05:44, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Having looked at the protection log history, semi'd for (another) three months. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 06:50, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks very much! BilCat (talk) 06:53, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

SCB info

Looks good on Skipjack? Tfdavisatsnetnet (talk) 16:02, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Yes, and thanks. BilCat (talk) 16:03, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Please bear with me, I am trying to add the new Enterprise reference by my computer keeps locking up on me.

I'd like some guidance. I really hate the idea of adding SCB project info to individual ships unless they pertain only to the ship. I would much prefer to keep it on a ship class level or higher. Problem is, some classes don't have a class level Wiki article. What do you recommend? Create a class-level article or subsection, or keep as is? Tfdavisatsnetnet (talk) 16:17, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

I will go back and insert references where necessary. Please note that some, such as the Grayback class article, already had the appropriate reference. Tfdavisatsnetnet (talk) 16:26, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

• On having ship class articles, most major ship classes should already have class articles. Some ships were only one-offs, like USS Enterprise (CVN-65), so there isn't a class article for it. BilCat (talk) 18:54, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

• • Correct. The postwar but pre-Newport class LSTs don't, nor do many of the other auxiliaries of the time.Tfdavisatsnetnet (talk) 19:49, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

• • • I don't do much with the minor ship types like LSTs, but if you haven't done it already, you should check out WP:SHIPS. The project does a lot with all ship types. BilCat (talk) 22:21, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

USS Arizona SSN 803 - Sponsor Removal

You removed the sponsor info for the USS Arizona submarine. While I may not be neutral, I am actually the sponsor of the Sub. I have the documentation via the Sec Nav but as it has personal info on there, I am uncomfortable sharing that with the wiki world. Hoping you can add it back to the wiki about section. Thanks ~NS — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ussarizonasponsor (talk • contribs) 23:29, 3 February 2021 (UTC) https://granthshala.com/usa/granddaughter-honors-pearl-harbor-survivor-through-uss-arizona-sponsorship-in-gilbert/ https://www.perch-base.org/Events/2020/2020_11_05_Gilbert/Program.pdf and info on my grandfather - https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/arizona/2020/02/16/donald-stratton-escaped-uss-arizona-pearl-harbor-dies-obituary/4779841002/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ussarizonasponsor (talk • contribs) 23:38, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Ussarizonasponsor: Misplaced Pages doesn't expect you to share private information. That's one reason it requires all information added to articles to cite reliable, published sources. What we need is something publicly available, such as from the US Navy website or a newspaper, to enable other users to verify the information. Do you know of anything like that? BilCat (talk) 23:42, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @BilCat:I added 3 different news paper articles - 2 about my speech and program, and one about my grandfather being one of the last 3 uss arizona survivors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ussarizonasponsor (talk • contribs) 23:56, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @BilCat: - here is the letter I received signed by the Navy. https://twitter.com/stratty05/status/1269264026862850048/photo/1

@Ussarizonasponsor: How many sponsors are there? M.Bitton (talk) 00:05, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

@M.Bitto: Just one, one woman for one ship/sub/carrier etc. It ranges from First Ladies, to movie stars, to politicians. Here is a full list. As the USS Arizona sub hasn't been built yet, my name isn't on there yet. https://societyofsponsorsofusn.org/membership/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ussarizonasponsor (talk • contribs)

@BilCat: What do you think of these sources? M.Bitton (talk) 00:14, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

@M.Bitton: Thank you! The Az Republic has been amazing to our family. And yes, Gilbert was offically named and voted on as the Sponsor City/Town of the USS Arizona — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ussarizonasponsor (talk • contribs)

@M.Bitton: Thanks, yes, those should work. BilCat (talk) 00:37, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

@BilCat: I'll leave it in your safe hands. Regards. M.Bitton (talk) 00:41, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Ussarizonasponsor! I was asked to step in and offer you some assistance regarding your changes to the USS Arizona (SSN-803) article. As BilCat has stated above, all content that we add to any Misplaced Pages articles must be attributable to a reliable source - a source that's secondary, independent of the article subject, and that's peer-reviewed and generally accepted as being trusted. Misplaced Pages does not accept original research, which generally refers to someone "citing themselves" (or work that they, themselves, have written) as the source of content. Basically, it means that I cannot say that "I'm the source", or "I know this because I know this person", "I'm writing this because I have person experience with this", nor can I cite any sources or work that I've written. It looks like you've provided a few sources above in your response. That's great, so long as the references actually state what you're trying to add. We also try to avoid content that's unnecessary or trivial. My question to you is this: Does the article need to have information about the submarine's sponsor? Why is adding this information so important to you? Based on your username, I can tell that your intentions are single-purpose, meaning that the reason that you are creating an account here and editing Misplaced Pages is solely to add this information. Is this information encyclopedic and beneficial to the reader? What makes this content necessary for addition to the article? Please make sure to ping me in your response by typing {{ping|Oshwah}} within your reply so that I'm notified that you responded. If you have any questions or need assistance, you can message me by clicking here. Best regards - ~Oshwah~ 02:30, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Oshwah, most US Navy ship articles do have the sponsor information in the infobox, which is what the user was adding to the Arizona submarine article. So having the sponsor name there isn't an issue. We do have independent sources now, so I'll be adding it there shortly. BilCat (talk) 05:03, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

BilCat - Perfect! I'm happy that this has been resolved! :-) ~Oshwah~ 06:03, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict)@Oshwah: SPA & COI issues aside, I'm not really sure of the (erm, stuck on a word here... relevancy? legitimacy? necessity?, well anyway) of asking "why" she wants to add this info. (Plus it's obvious, isn't it? She's the sponsor because of her grandfather.) Anyway, a huge number of USN ship pages (dare I say majority?) have the ship's sponsor noted. There's even a parameter for it in the Infobox ship career template (and the parameter is also accepted manually in the Infobox ship begin template). Bilcat asked for a source and that request was satisfied. I'm not sure any further discussion on that is needed, just as I'm not sure why there is a need to single out and question this user about this edit, (or do so on this tp, I think Bilcat likes to keep chitchat here to a minimum). This revert/sourcing discussion should've been held on the article tp (if the user knew better), just like any other questions specifically about that article should be. The spa & coi issues are probably better off posted on that user's talk page, and questions in general about the need to include a ship's sponsor are better off asked at wt:ships where you'll find editors (like myself) happy to discuss that with you. (just my humble opinion) - wolf 05:49, 4 February 2021 (UTC) (talk page stalker)

Hi Thewolfchild! Thanks for letting me know. I wasn't aware that the sponsor of a submarine or ship was normal content to add to an article... I'm obviously no expert when it comes to this exact topic. It looks like the issue has been resolved; the user has provided reliable sources and it'll be added to the article soon. I consider this case closed. :-) ~Oshwah~ 06:05, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

As the person who asked for Oshwah's input, I'm satisfied with all of his responses here. BilCat (talk) 07:02, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

BilCat Oshwah User:Thewolfchild - just to provide some background - yes I am the sponsor, and yes I am the granddaughter of an Arizona survivor. Sponsors are the first and perpetual member of the crew for the entirety of the ship's lifespan. They sign their initials in the keel, break the bottle over the bow, and commission the ship bringing it to life. It is a 40+ year commitment one that lasts from before the ship is built to well after it is decommissioned. Had I realized I needed to cite a few articles I certainly would have. However I do plan to keep the page up to date with future dates (ceremonies etc) that come across my path. As the sponsor, I am (outside of the direct navy) the first to know of items details the sub. I appreciate the back and forth and I have learned quite a bit from it and will be sure to get things in order the next time I post or update. The Arizona is going to be unlike any other ship in the Navy with its twin sitting under the water at Pearl Harbor. Thank you all for your assistance