User talk:Devildave

Welcome to Wikipedia from Docboat
Hi,. I welcome you to Wikipedia! Thank you for all of your edits. I hope you like editing here and being part of Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four squiggles (~&#126;); when you save the page, this will turn into your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or put  (and what you need help with) on your talk page and someone will show up very soon to answer your questions. Again, welcome! docboat (talk) 14:30, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Your edits at Freemasonry
Hi Devildave... Thanks for your edits at the Freemasonry article... Unfortunately, I have had to remove them because they are not actually representative of Freemasonry as a whole. To illustrate: The term "Blue Lodge" is only used in the US, and is actually frowned upon by the rest of the world (where they call it Craft Lodge), and the position of Marshal is not even common to all US jurisdictions. Our goal is to discuss the craft in a way that relates to all of Freemasonry around the world... so we omit things that are unique to only a few jurisdictions.

The claim that US Masons give over a million dollars a day to charity is a good one to include, but it needs a citation (and preferably not one that comes from a Masonic source... we have had anti-masonic editors complain that using masonic sources to back such claims is "puffery" and is unverifiable).

I hope you will not take my removal of your edits personally... they were not meant as such. I encourage you to continue to help with the article, and to improve Wikipedia. Happy wiki-ing. Blueboar (talk) 14:49, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I also reverted some of your edits. This is an encyclopedia, not a test of flowery prose.  Freemasonry did not "reveal itself to the world"; it "was established".  Moreover, some of your other edits are erroneous, or not generally applicable to the scope of the article.  The article as it stands has been worked on for quite a long time, and you might wish to engage in discussion prior to editing in future so we can all work in the same direction, rather than in opposition. MSJapan (talk) 20:25, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Indeed, Freemasonry had been "revealed" to the world long before the first Grand Lodge was formed. The first non-masonic source to use the word "Freemasonry" dates from the mid 1600s. Blueboar (talk) 23:22, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Devildave... I am sorry you are frustrated by the resistance to your edits so far. Part of the problem is that many of your edits reflect what you are familiar with... US Freemasonry. However, the article attempts to reflect the craft in multiple areas of the world (England, Continental Europe, etc.) Much of the language in the current article is the result of previous discussions and compromises by editors (many of them Masons) from these disperate backgrounds. We don't mean to brush off your contributions, but I hope you can at least understand that, once a consensus is reached on the wording of an article, it is somewhat jarring to have a new editor come in and upset that consensus.

I do have one suggestion that may help save your sanity here ... instead of being BOLD and just changing things in the article, try going a bit slower and discuss a proposed change on the talk page first. This will give you a chance to explain why you want to make the change, and give others a chance to explain why we do, or do not agree. Through discussion we can probably reach a new consensus... one that you can feel a part of. Blueboar (talk) 23:16, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

skyhawk
I will have to dig a little more to find a citation that documents my edit. My father was hired at McDonnell Aircraft St. Louis as a Double E to work on the F4 project in the fall of '57. That project was not yet fully online and for several months dad worked "On the line" (his term)building Skyhawks until he was needed to repair F 4s. Years later I asked him about this again and he explained. The Navy had ordered several hundred Skyhawks from Douglas. Once they got their hands on the little "Hot Rod" they wanted more and more quickly than Douglas could build them. Douglas contracted with MAC to build Skyhawks in St. Louis under a contract/license agreement. (Kinda like the Harrier more recently) This project was the start of the relationship between the 2 companies that later led to its merging. Over the years I have heard many of my Dad's friends talk about Skyhawks being built in MAC's STL plant.

Additionally, every few years McDonnell Douglas would host an Open House and would let Employees, their families and the public tour the buildings. At one such tour in the late 70's, MCD/D had parked one of every type of aircraft (in a fan pattern) they had built in front of Hangar 1. A photo of this display was used on several different MCD/D publications including their Annual Report. As I walked through the planes with Dad, he told me about each. When we got to the Skyhawk, Dad again told the story of Skyhawks being built in STL and showed me features on the Skyhawk sitting there that indicated that that particular plane had been built in STL before the merger. He also told me MCD/D had experimented with an F 4 type drooping tail for the Skyhawk but abandoned the idea.

I will continue to look for a printed citation to satisfy you. I don't want to get into a mess like I did on the Freemasons page. I found some errors and inconsistancies in the article. I discussed them with some of the more frequent editors on their talk pages. They encouraged me to make changes as I saw fit and when I did, the wrath of Hell came down on me. (I had been set up) Apparently some of the editors had a tremendous emotional investment in that article and guarded every comma and period. It got nasty/messy. I thought all of this rigid formality and protectiveness was a bit much for a USER edited online FREE encyclopedia. Afterall no one hired them to build the page. It was very important to these editors (although their profiles indicated they were Americans) to keep the British (or maybe Britanica) flavor to Wikipedia.

Randy Meisner Edits
Meisner has said in his own words, "When I quit (my emphasis), it was like Timothy Schmit joined the group, and it was like Timothy was the guy now, and I can't blame them for that." He says he quit - we need a reliable source to include the other version. There's two sides to every story - undoubtedly the other side said he was "fired". Quoting it would make the article better for sure. Cheers, Devildave :> Doc9871 (talk) 09:04, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

The other side would be Richie Furray.