Talk:USS Worden (CG-18)

Witch hunt section
You should read WP:OR, WP:RS, WP:Cite and WP:NOT. This is an encyclopedia, and every case of Captain's mast or courts martial on a ship is not needed. --Dual Freq 22:13, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

The page will be reposted every day UNTIL 60 minutes does it's investigation of the incident. You can continue to erase it all you wish, it will be reposted daily. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alvinthefirst (talk • contribs).

When over 200 people were incarcerated or punished then it is History. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alvinthefirst (talk • contribs).


 * Your editing of the Worden Drug incident was unwarranted. It is a part of history and there was even a tragedy related to this incident. If you were NOT on the USS Worden in 1975/76 you not only have no knowledge of this incident, you have NO right to edit what is is the ships log and is in the annals of Naval Legal History. If you want verification , I suggest you go to the USS Worden Crewmember list and query the crewmen who were aboard the Worden during that time period , but don't assume you know something didn't happen when it did. The fact that there were deaths surrounding this incident warrants mentioning JUST as the Oriskany and Forrestal Fires did. My name happens TO be on the crewmember list and I don't need verification when I was there.http://www.navysite.de/crew.php?action=ship&ship=CG_18 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alvinthefirst (talk • contribs) 22:14, February 18, 2007 (UTC) (removed from my talk page)


 * Sea stories are entertaining, but without sources it is called Original research. --Dual Freq 22:20, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

www.history.navy.mil, National Archives is the source. Would you like the exact section of the National Archives ? I have a source. Under WHAT authority do you refute it ? Ships logs are viewable at The Navysite. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alvinthefirst (talk • contribs).

If you post this everyday, you will just be blocked for vandalism. Wikipedia is not a soapbox for a personal crusade. --Dual Freq 22:30, 18 February 2007 (UTC)


 * The page on relable source says information from LIVING PERSONS. SINCE I WAS ABOARD THE WORDEN FROM 1974 TO 1976 AND THIS IS MY ORAL HISTORY, IT MAKES YOUR EDITING UNWARRANTED AND IT FALLAS IN THE GUIDELINES. PLEASE GO THE THE CREWMEMBER LIST , YOU WILL SEE MY NAME . THANK YOU. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alvinthefirst (talk • contribs). (moved from my talk page)
 * We are not reliable sources, cite a newspaper, book, reliable website etc. This is not the place for a personal witch hunt, or a place to drum up support for one. There is no need to place comments in random spots on my talk page. --Dual Freq 22:40, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I did JUST that and you still erased it. This is no personal withc hunt as a man comitted suicide because he was falsely accused of using drugs it is a fact as it is a historical fact that over 200 men of a ships crew of 380 were Punished based on two statements, NOTHING like this has ever happened in the Navy and it is history. JUST because YOU don't think so is YOUR opinion. I cited the Naval Ships logs held at the National Archives, and I am NOT going to get into a pissing contest with a smart ass who thinks he has the power to change history by the wtroke of a keyboard. The original page went to Senator Levin anyway and I guess he will ask you why you keep changing history. What makes YOU the arbiter of history ? I have seen other pages on Wikipedia with JUST as controversial content but no one has made themselves self righteous enough to change it. Either ask the crewmembers YOURSELF or let it go, because it is history and it is in the National Archives , 1976 ships log section.

I decided to go one step further, I have in my posession copies of the ships log from there and will send them to Wikipedia myself , I think YOU need to be reported for vandalism because YOU continue to change what is a proven fact.


 * We're writing an encyclopedia here, not a creating a personal soapbox to air our complaints about the navy, the government or whoever. This is not the place to make your case against the government. Please read Policies and guidelines and familiarize yourself with the way this encyclopedia operates. --Dual Freq 22:57, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I retired from the Military, NO need for a soapbox. Fact is still no such action has EVER been taken in the history of the Navy. I have and I edit under SEVERAL other names, I just used this one because it is the name under which I am listed in the Crew Member list just in case someone wants to know WHO is doing the editing and why. Again, you're giving me your personal opinion and not fact and again this is an immature pissing contest , It will continue to be edited regardless of what you say and YOU can Never block all 16 of my ID's. Have a nice day. As far as the comments on your talk page, it seems that you have been lambasted quite a bit for improper edits. Perhaps minding YOUR business would be an appropritate term here Jr ? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alvinthefirst (talk • contribs).

By the way according to Wikipedia, and I have conferred with an editor on this is that the header of the page should say " This page contains information from unverified sources " NOT erasing as you do. Wikipedia says YOU are the one committing vandalism. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alvinthefirst (talk • contribs).


 * You conferred with another editor? Tell them to speak up. I have done nothing wrong and your intimidation will not give you your soapbox. -Dual Freq 23:17, 18 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Blocking 16 accounts would be a trivial matter and its done all the time here, I hope it will not come to that. If you provide reliable sources and explain how this belongs in an encyclopedia article, there will not be an issue. Right now this is just a story you are telling, that you obviously have a personal opinion and conflict of interest in and saying trust me its true, I was there. Unfortunately, none of our stories or personal experiences can be trusted thats why we have guidelines and policies requiring sources and citations. Anything else is original research. Wikipedia is not a publisher of original research. I'll ignore your continued personal attacks. As for if you were or were not a crew member, it really doesn't matter, cite a newspaper article, 60 minutes something reliable. Wikipedia can not use anecdotes. Sign your posts too, just type 4 of those tilde things (~) in a row. --Dual Freq 23:15, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I just cited the ships logs which are held on microfiche in the National Archives and gave you references. Again, your point is trivial as it either happened or it didn't. IF you choose to reute the ships log, then fine , but prove it isn't there as I can prove it is there. The source was cited SEVERAL times, and IF it comes to me posting the entire ships log from 1975 to 1976 , I have all the time in the world. As for the personal attack thing, there are 15 people who question your ability to edit anything as per your page and I don't see anything on YOUR page which gives you the qualifications. Personally, everything in the 1970-79 section is hearsay because NONE of it cites a source article. Most of it comes from the Department of the Navy site and the exact same information is posted on the USS Worden crew page, technically , it is hearsay as well. Missing are several ports of call in 1975, missing is the near accident with the Soviet Guided Missile Cruiser of the Sea of Ohotsk after the Worden left Sasebo , and missing are several deaths , one when a missile fired in the Gulf of Tonkin at a Vietcong Mig failed and killed two people on the bridge. Wikipedia relies on people like myself who were there to fill in the gaps. Unfortunately, people like yourself want only the GOOD things and want to leave the bad things out. We are not judges, neither YOU nor I , and you cannot change history. Had you not been so self righteous, I would have provided you with my microfiche copy and commentary by the Naval Courts of Appeals on several of the cases which were thrown out. I have spent 31 years researching this. I am sending them to Wikipedia, however and consulting with the same editor I have been discussing this matter with , perhaps it is time to have you blocked as 57% of the people commenting on your page feels that your editing was meddlesome and unwarranted. Block away, there are over 200 of those crewmembers still alive who will post the same thing. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alvinthefirst (talk • contribs).


 * The rest of the article is basically a copy of DANFS, the Public domain dictionary of fighting ships. Thats the source for the rest, not hearsay. --Dual Freq 23:33, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Worden Drug Arrests, Stars And Stripes Yokosuka Edition , July 11 , 1976 .... Look it up. Intimidation ?/ who says ?? Because I checked with someone else on procedure it's intimidation ? Thanks to archiving, I can send all of these to Wikipedia and let them decide for themselves. Its not a soapbox, it is a historical fact. Your opinon, basically after reading your page and the eidts and error you have contributed to is worth half of jack. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alvinthefirst (talk • contribs).

Editors are subject to the same rules as everyone else. Several editors deleted content from my talk page. Please admonish them in the same manner. Rules are rules and EVERYONE must abide by them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alvinthefirst (talk • contribs)


 * No, they did not. Nobody but you has ever removed content from your talk page; I just looked at it. TomTheHand 16:42, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Frigate?
I really didn't think that anyone would contest the change I made, changing the definition of the hull designation of DLG from "Frigate" to "Destroyer Leader", but here we are.

If you go to the U.S. Navy's website and search for "DLG", you will find a series of articles in which DLG is either defined as "guided missile destroyer" or guided missile destroyer leader". There are only two pages that define DLG as "guided missile frigate" and one is a copy of the other.

In addition, no one I know that ever served aboard a DLG (while it was a DLG) would have called their ship a "frigate".

The only reference to them being Frigates in the Navy.mil website is on a handful of ship histories, but not all of them.

I don't know who called them "frigates" but the Navy doesn't (and didn't) and the sailors that served on them don't (and didn't.)

I also would like to call your attention to the USS Norfolk (DL-1), the USS Mitscher (DL-2), the USS John S. McCain (DL-3), the USS Willis A. Lee (DL-4), and the USS Wilkinson (DL-5). If a DL is a Destroyer Leader, why isn't a DLG a Guided Missile Destroyer Leader?

-TCav 01:02, 6 July 2007 (UTC)


 * This Google search shows all pages at navy.mil where both "frigate" and "DL" appear. It appears that when the DL designation was first used in 1951 it meant "destroyer leader", but DLs were reclassified "frigates" in 1955. TomTheHand 01:58, 9 July 2007 (UTC)


 * The US Navy Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships repeatedly uses the word frigate in it's Worden IV article. I don't know if we need a centralized area for this discussion since this same item was posted on about a dozen talk pages. See also:Talk:USS Fox (CG-33) and others. --02:12, 9 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I'll leave this comment at USS Fox and put links at all the other talk pages to point people there for centralized discussion. TomTheHand 15:02, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Please change the label "Frigate" to Guided Missile "Destroyer/Cruiser" as appropriate to the timeframe. A frigate can not sustain independent "offensive" operations in a combat environment, whereas a cruiser can, hince the classification, "Cruiser". A Frigate can perform in a similar mission, but in a defensive character of operations. The Worden (CG-18) has never been classified as a Frigate.

Being a "Tin-Can" sailor that has served on Cruisers, Destroyers, and Frigates, and in particular a crewmember aboard the USS Worden(CG-18) from Jan 77-Dec 79, this girl was so much more than a Frigate! "Id Fiat Worden Si"! "The Best In The West"!

Just for the semantics, D/DD = destroyer, F = frigate, FF = fast frigate, D = Destroyer, C = Cruiser, G = guided missile, N = nuclear, L = leader, CV = carrier (V denotes airwing), then we get into the L types (Amphibs), P types (Patrol), and others.

~OSC(SW) Samuel Glenn USN, Retired. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.234.164.6 (talk) 23:36, 6 January 2010 (UTC)