User talk:Kheetah

June 2013
Please stop edit warring on article Battle of Ia Drang. The generally accepted result is that the battle was inconclusive to both sides. This is evidenced by the fact that the North Vietnamese forces re-occupied the valley as soon as the US troops left. Also the sources you quote are hardly notable, being all non-official US sources. The "inconclusive" result was reached after proper discussion and consensus by Wikipedia editors from all available notable sources. If you continue to "edit war" you may be blocked from editing. Thank you, David J Johnson (talk) 10:01, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

The battle was not inconclusive and was an American victory. I can cite numerous articles stating this and last time I checked the history channel is very notable and so is the report I also included. What this comes down to is that you believe that you are not wrong, but I am sorry you are wrong. I take great offense to your ignorance being that my grandfather fought in Ia Drang and my father knew Harold "Hal" Moore personally (being a Army officer too) who stated that they won that battle. Also last time I checked the NVA were pushed out of the Ia Drang Valley by the US, which in its self constitutes victory, not to mention the body count. Even though the NVA reoccupied the valley after the US left, that was done without a battle and what we are determining is the battle's out come.


 * Firstly, please sign your posts. You have failed to answer why you are edit warring on this article, after the battle outcome was agreed by several experienced editors. Wikipedia operates by consensus and not by one persons opinions.  It is no good stating unreferenced statements re: Hal Moore etc: if you check through the references for this article, you will find a statement that Hal Moore considered the battle to be a draw (en.citizendium.org/wiki/Battle of Ia Drang) under para LZ X-Ray. The NVA were not pushed out of the whole Ia Drang valley and quickly resumed their positions. Frankly, the History Channel in recent times is hardly notable. I have now asked an Administrator for their opinion on your actions. Thank you, David J Johnson (talk) 11:32, 22 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Can I please suggest that you take your views to the article Talk page, rather than constantly edit warring. Your edits are against consensus and as I have stated above - Wikipedia operates by consensus. Please also bear in mind "Hal" Moore's view that I have mentioned above. Thank you, David J Johnson (talk) 13:27, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

(personal attack redacted) Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124; © &#124; WER  10:43, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Edit warring on Battle of Ia Drang
You need to stop edit warring. There appears to be a well founded and sourced consensus on the article talk page. Insisting on saying it was a US victory without even attempting to start a dialog after a dialog has already established a consensus based on sources is exactly what our policies on WP:NPOV and WP:Edit warring were designed to prevent. You might also read WP:BRD. Continuing to blind revert against consensus without discussion on the article talk page will get you blocked, friend, so just take it to the article talk page first. Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124; © &#124; WER  11:54, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for Disruptive editing, personal attacks, tendentious editing.. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice:. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124; © &#124; WER  10:38, 24 June 2013 (UTC)


 * You will be able to edit again in 3 days, but the next block will likely be for an indefinite period of time. Wikipedia in a collaborative project.  If you can't work with others and discuss the merits of an edit, you would be better off finding a different hobby.  If you want to remain editing at Wikipedia, you need to use a different tact. Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124; © &#124;  WER  10:41, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Blocked for sockpuppetry

 * I don't suggest you continue evading your block by sock puppeting any more, or you will likely be looking at an block for an indefinite period of time, losing all rights to edit here. Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124; © &#124;  WER  00:17, 25 June 2013 (UTC)


 * User:Phucku717 just caused the block to be raised to a month. Sockpuppet again and it will definitely be an indef block.  Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124; © &#124;  WER  23:34, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Weapons of the Vietnam War
On what information are you basing your assertion that the M60 served in Vietnam? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.162.8.80 (talk) 23:40, 29 January 2014 (UTC)