User talk:TomStar81/Archive

This user is in the middle of a college semester and may not respond swiftly to queries.

| edit count | edit summary usage

Welcome to my talk page! Please feel free to leave a message here, or email me if you prefer; however, if you post here you I ask that you observe the following requests: Place new messages at the bottom of the page, not at the top. This preserves the chronological order for the page. Separate topic sections with a ==Descriptive header== Sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~). BE POLITE. I am a person, not a computer. I do have feelings, and they can be hurt. Solicitors are welcome here, but do not twist my arm to do something. Its my decision, not yours. If you need/want my input on a matter outside of this page then please leave a link to the page in question. I can not undelete a page without community consensus. To petition the community for your page back click here and follow the instructions. I will consider reasonable request for rollback rights. If you would like rollback rights, leave a message here explaining why you want rollback rights and I will review it. Do not post in the archive(s). I will not answer any post placed on a page that is mothballed. Unless otherwise noted I will respond on your talk page, not mine.

Archives Master Archive Page

The USN big battleship debate

Please don't take my comments as implying that the article needs to be significantly bigger than it is. All nations have debates about change and in this case the US is just a bit behind the rest of the world. A reflection of having the budget to hang onto obsolete capabilities for a very long period. I think the scope of the article is about right, although the actual content of the debate itself is potentially quite complex.

ALR (talk) 21:46, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I noticed you mentioned at the FAC page that you've had intermittent time to work on the article. If you want some help, I can do some work on the prose, specifically, the "pro-battleship" bias the article has inherited, and any other non-research tasks you might be able to think of. I just wanted to get some more specific guidance on where you are going from you before I tackle it, because it makes no sense for me to duplicate effort and/or veer too far from the path you had in mind. bahamut0013♠♣ 01:43, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

I've made some comments on the page you might wish to read. Also, I was referring more to copyedit or rephrasing in my offer; while one would say that a Marine is knowledgable about naval gunfire, my experience about the aprticulars of the debate is limited to what I've read in the related articles. While my tentative position is that the Navy needs to stop dancing about and get the big guns back into play, I must admit that there is little supporting evidence to the Navy's cost arguments in the article. I think that adding some number crunching examples and references would help balance that up, but I've always been weak on the research side of article-writing, and better at the re-work of prose. Do you have any more detailed thoughts on how to best hammer out this "Pro-guns bias"?? bahamut0013♠♣ 20:26, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

I see, you are adding meat to the "anti-guns" view. For some reason, I'd assumed you were going to want to cut some of the pro-guns. I dunno why, and I'm glad I waited before making any big changes; your way is much better. If you leave a note the next time you make a big expansion, I'll whip out the copyediting--no offense, but spelling isn't not one of your strengths. bahamut0013♠♣ 11:19, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Insignia and stuff

I imagine you'll be doing the usual with the insignia once the election is over. If so, would you mind doing the {{subst:The WikiProject Barnstar|message ~~~~}} to thank people for their last six months work? The reason is basically variety, so that people get barnstars not only awarded by me. If this is a problem, please let me know. Thanks in advance, Tom, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 23:37, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

thank you

File:Lorrette Cemetary.JPG		Milhist Coordinator elections
		Thank you very much for your much appreciated support in the recently concluded September 2008 Military History Wikiproject Coordinator Elections. I was thoroughly surprised to walk away with a position of Coordinator. Thank-you for your support, and I assure you that I will do my best to serve this spectacular project well. Esteemed Regards, Cam (Chat) 00:49, 1 October 2008 (UTC) Notre Dame de Lorrette Cemetary - Arras, France

Re: Congrats!

Thank you very much! :-) Kirill ^(prof) 01:14, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks also Tom, and congratulations on your re-election! Nick Dowling (talk) 02:28, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Well done and all the best. I've decided to step aside. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 08:54, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations on your election as Coordinator of the Military history Wikiproject. In honour of your achievement, I present you with these stars. I wish you luck in the coming term. --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 06:07, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

		The WikiProject Barnstar
		In gratitude for your coordination services to the Military history WikiProject, from February 2008 to September 2008, please accept this barnstar. --ROGER DAVIES talk 06:07, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Tom and congrats on your re-election. All the best for your new term. Kyriakos (talk) 09:09, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Edit Summary

Oh ok, thanks for clearing that up. :) JonCatalán^(Talk) 02:16, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

TFA/R

There's an opening now. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:20, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Various barnstars

Any chance you could award the writing contest barnstars this month? It's the WikiChevrons for Bellhalla and the Writers Barnstar for Abraham, B. S.. Bellhalla also gets the A-Class Medal, per the current nom in Awards. --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 17:11, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Ah, the ACM has just been awarded, so one less :) --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 17:14, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

corrections to Wiki Battleship Texas BB35

Hello:

I left a posting on the talk page of the Battleship Texas for corrections that are needed, the sources supporting the corrections and my expertise regarding the ship.

There are additional changes that go all the way through 1990.

Before I make any changes, I wanted for someone to look at what I posted.

Charels Moore

— IronShipIronShip (talk) 20:53, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXI (September 2008)

The September 2008 issue of the Military history 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.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:07, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

FAC support

Thank you for the helpful comments!!!! Cheers, —the_ed17— 00:25, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

RE:Block templates

There is {{Uw-ublock}} which is probably what you are looking for: it is for accounts where there is some ambiguity over their intentions, ie may not have meant to offend. You can use the |reason= parameter to include the reasoning behind why it is against the username policy. For obvious violations such as "User:Woody sucks dick" then use {{Uw-uhblock}}. For the account that you blocked, it could have been done indef under vandalism-only so no need to really worry about templates. For the comprehensice list of templates, see Template:Blocksnotice/inner. Regards. Woody (talk) 09:26, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Clayton Hartwig

Hello, TomStar81. You have new messages at Travellingcari's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Arizona's guns on the Nevada (in your 14" gun article)

TOM! I WAS LOOKING FOR THIS FOR AN ENTIRE HOUR ONE DAY!!!!!!!! ("Notably, slavaged 14"/45 caliber guns from the #2 turret aboard the battleship USS Arizona (BB-39) were removed and installed aboard the battleship USS Nevada (BB-36) in the fall of 1944, and these guns would later be fired in anger against the Japanese by Nevada in 1945")

!!!!!! Thanks! [if you couldn't tell, I'm happy.] :) —Ed 17 for President _{Vote for Ed} 15:00, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Psh. A dual-nom? What did I do to deserve a DYK (assuming that that becomes a DYK...!)You wrote the bloody article!!! :) Thanks though. —Ed 17 for President _{Vote for Ed} 00:42, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

I added an alternate + a note...this is what I added...what do you think?

• • Alternate? "...that the three 14"/45 caliber guns that were originally in the USS Arizona (BB-39)'s turret 2 were removed and installed aboard the battleship USS Nevada (BB-36) and used in action against the Japanese in 1945? —Ed 17 for President _{Vote for Ed} 00:51, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  • A second thought. It isn't in the article, but the source says "It is often stated that USS Arizona (BB-39) never fired her guns in anger [...] These guns [that were installed on the Nevada] were then used for shore bombardments during the 1945 Pacific campaigns, so it may be technically said that Arizona's guns were fired in anger after all." If that was incorperated into the article, there could be a hook like "...that the popular statement that USS Arizona (BB-39) never fired her guns in anger" is a myth?" Nice cliffhanger, IMHO...will get people to go to the article.... —Ed 17 for President _{Vote for Ed} 00:51, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

...though it needs a link to the article in question... =/ —Ed 17 for President _{Vote for Ed} 00:52, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks.

Thanks TomStar. Congratulations on your RfA. I think I actually saw that a little while ago, when I had come to RfA just to see if there was anything new. Justin^(Gmail?)_(u) 15:12, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

I have not heard from the other editor about my corrections the the BB35 article. I am logged in but I can not get access to his talk page to leave a message.

Can I post historic documents (deck log, ship's war diary etc) that are references to the Common page where BB35 photos are posted?

–– —— —Preceding unsigned comment added by IronShip (talk • contribs) 03:14, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't know how to do this

"I am once again declining csd deletion; the article asserts some notaibility and is in compliance with WP:V "Verfiability, not Truth". File an afd for any future deletion, please; it may yeild better results." -- how do I file one of these? please respond on my Talk page--Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici (talk) 04:51, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind I think I got it right; please check deletion tag on the article now. --Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici (talk) 05:11, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for supporting my request for adminship. I appreciate your confidence. Regards, Lazulilasher (talk) 23:55, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Anytime

Glad to be of assistance. If you ever need someone to proofread an article, just drop me a line and I'll get right on it. --AtTheAbyss (talk) 02:33, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

You suck

TomStar81, you failed. I thought you were better than this. You have screwed up a perfect FAC record by allowing this FAC to fail. You are the weakest link.