User talk:Malo/Archive09

'''DO NOT EDIT OR POST REPLIES TO THIS PAGE. THIS PAGE IS AN ARCHIVE.'''

This archive page covers approximately the dates between 27 July 2006 to 8 September 2006:

Post replies to the main talk page, copying or summarizing the section you are replying to if necessary.

Thank you. -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 00:52, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Re your comment on a block user page.
Actually, I don't - that's what asexual means. If you have a problem with me, you may maturely discuss it on my talk page or kindly leave me alone. What did I do to deserve being vandalised? — Natha  n  ( talk ) / 07:36, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi, you've lost me on this one, what are you talking about?? Please let me know exactly because I dont recall and have never to my knowledge vandalized anything?????? WayneRay 14:05, 28 July 2006 (UTC)WayneRay
 * I just went back four days in my contributions and I don't find your name sorry?? Pl;ease explain WayneRay 14:05, 28 July 2006 (UTC)WayneRay


 * Hi and thanks for getting back to me, the fellow above = User:nathanrdotcom had blocked me for vandalism for a reason I know not right now, above his note on the Vandalism block page was a note from you sau\ying I was blocked on July 4th, which I know not of or recall, That is all, I thought you were invi\olved with this one, it seems the fellow thinks it came from my IP address and not my sign in address. I remember reading his page but I honestly would never vandalize. i recall correcting a small typo or spelling error like a comma or something but that isn't vandalism or what he is tal;king about. WayneRay 15:24, 28 July 2006 (UTC)WayneRay


 * Oh. It seems that your user account has never been blocked, so I am assuming that it was an IP block that you experienced.  It is possible that you were using the same IP range as an vandal that was blocked.  (this happens most often on AOL ip ranges)  Since this is most likely the case, the block message you saw was probably never intended for you.  Sorry if you experienced a block as a result of this.  We refer to such blocks as collateral damage.  If you are ever blocked again as such, please email me, Special:Emailuser/Malo, or contact another admin, and explain the block message that you see.  -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 19:12, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Economy of the Republic of Ireland FARC
Hi there—Economy of the Republic of Ireland is currently in the FARC list. Nothing much has been done to improve the article since its nomination for FA Review. I wonder whether you're able to assist. It would be a pity if te article were de-listed. Tony 14:07, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

USSSA Page
Hello. I am creating the USSSA entry at Wikipedia. And it got deleted. I am the IT engineer at USSSA and we are granting wikipedia the right to display that info —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sceluch (talk • contribs) 20:14, 2 August 2006


 * To use copyrighted material on Wikipedia, it is not enough that we have permission to use it on wikipedia alone. That's because Wikipedia itself states all its material may be used by anyone, for any purpose. So we have to be sure all material is in fact licenced for that purpose, whoever provided it. Hence, since that material is clearly copyrighted at http://www.usssa.com/usssa/usssa-general/history.htm we cannot accept it.  Further more I don't really think it is appropriate for you to use wikipedia as vehicle for advertising.  WP:NOT. -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 20:24, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

i as mike mathews
admit to being the armking vandal, i must say i was apalled to see that dragonflysixtyseven moved my sock puppets page to the willy on wheels page if anything i aim away from it is willy style vandalism.....this of course is my good faith accout (and yes i konw that sounds odd)but mainly ive come here to declare peace with wikipedia it was all fun and great but i was only hoping for a challenge in wikivandalism...i did not find one so i figure i'll move back on to good faith edits now....thank you for the great go-arounds-armking/mike mathews/robert Mike mathews 07:37, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Why did you contine to vandalize and create dozens of user accounts? Do you not see anything wrong with what you have done?  Do you not feel the least bit of remorse for your actions?  Is there any good reason why I shouldn't block this new account you have as well? For despite that fact that you have said you are done, that does not exclude you from having to answer for the actions you have taken, and the hours of hardwork that others have put in, in order to stop your misdeeds.  And while I would like to believe that you mean what you say, you have given me no reason to believe it yet. -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 16:18, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

look at my contributions...and notice for over 20 days no " arm" or "mr.a"accounts were created, honestly i have no idea wheather there are other vandals that take advantage of the people pc/earth link multiple ip system, i honestly believe no hours were spent reverting my vandalism...often vandalising took roughly 15 minutes to an hour and was generallly completly reverted in under 10 seconds ,i can provide you with some helpful information on stopping other vandals aswell. as far as i can see, i see not a reason for remorse as no real damge was done on any permanent scale, only to make better more usful edits in the future.Mike mathews 00:12, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Andromeda Class AKAs
I seem to remember you as the one who was very interested in ship classes. I've recently added a bunch of Andromeda-class ships. I'm totally ignorant of how classes are handled, but this one needs an entry if it doesn't already have one. (If you're the wrong guy, sorry.) Lou Sander 16:32, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the delayed response, yes I remember showing you some of the categories and footers for such ships and classes. I have already tagged most all of the Category:Andromeda class cargo ships, and I'll start working on a footer to be placed at the bottom of such articles.  -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 05:35, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


 * You and I got caught in an edit conflict on USS Alshain (AKA-55), and I inadvertently clobbered the "Andromeda class" box you had put at the bottom. I'm not knowledgeable about those boxes, so I don't want to go trying to repair the damage myself.


 * Also, the box really should be named "Andromeda class attack cargo ships" (with whatever punctuation and italics are proper), and the link at its bottom should be to "attack cargo ships," or AKAs.


 * I've become addicted to putting the DANFS entries for all the AKA's into Wikipedia. Sheesh! I found an interesting thing: one of 'em is named USS Theenim (AKA-63), after a star. There isn't a star by that name, but there IS one named Theemin. Looks like somebody in the Maritime Administration made a speling errer way back when! Lou Sander 14:36, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

USS Evans image
Hi, I just realized it might be copyrighted, but I'm not sure. I found it here. Would it still be covered from 1957? Sorry--for some reason I zoned out and thought this was a .gov site. rootology (T) 07:36, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Template:Hero Cities
The template represents the cities which were awarded by Soviets the status of "Hero Cities" per their claimed role in WWII. The template includes cities of ex-USSR, which are now in Belarus, Ukraine, and Russia. Speaking of Ukraine, following the fall of the Soviet Union, WWII has not been seen anymore only under the previous Soviet propaganda angle. Now, the views are more complex, in particular, the role of Ukrainian forces in the war has been under reevaluation. In pair, the Hero Cities of Soviet time are not seen as such by many Ukrainians, being as of now a topic of controversy within the Ukrainian society. Also, the views in the West on the Soviet times under Stalin are not the same as the view, which were expressed by Soviet propaganda, of which Hero Cities is a part of. In the end, the template is divisive at least for Ukrainian society, and is inflammatory for many people who do not share the Soviet view on WWII.

If you have time, could you look on that template? I know, you have deleted many user infoboxes under T1. I think the divisive templates in articles are even worse. --KPbIC 06:09, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
 * After reviewing this template and your argument that it is divisive, I personally have not come to the same conclusion. The fact of the matter is that these cities were awarded a title.  Now whether or not present day Ukrainians identify themselves with this award, or whether or not Ukraine forces played a significant role in the attaining of such an award is in my view, irrelavant. Simply because the USSR has since dissolved does not exclude cities such as Kiev from being called "Hero Cities".  It should be made clear in the article Hero City, that the title is potentially a propaganda tool, however I don't see that as grounds for deletion.  I have found the talk page Template talk:Hero Cities to be rather informative as to the issue of this template.  -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 19:40, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Contirbution to USS Saratoga CVA60 page
I made some contributions to this page for the period of the 70s. I described a series of incidents that took place in 1971. I cited a book by Paul Gilchrist Feet Wet: Reflections of a Carrier Pilot.

This was my first attempt at a contribution and I am amazed to find that you have removed the additional material. Did I do something incorrectly? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theref (talk • contribs) 15:48, 9 August 2006
 * The information you added was not cited in such a way that I could tell where it came from. Please take a look at WP:CITE.  While now I see that part of your addition is apparently sourced from this book, I'm not sure that the rest of your addition is.  Thank you for your efforts, and please don't take my removal of your additions personally. -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 15:59, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Artemis class AKA's
I've just added a bunch of these ships. (I think all but one of them, and that one is coming soon). They'd really benefit from one of those magic boxes at the end that shows all the ships in the class, etc. I'd be glad to make up the box if I knew how, and to add it to each of the ships, but you seem to be master of that stuff already.

If you want to make the box and/or add it to the ships, by all means go ahead. If you want me to do it, please just give me a clue on how to get started. Keep up the good work. Lou Sander 14:24, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I've created a new footer template and category for this class of ships. I'd be happy to show you how to make such templates,  and for me the best way to learn is to have a look at all the code.  If you like take a look at Template:Artemis class attack cargo ship and then click the edit button you can see all of the code at work. Which in turn makes the template appear as such


 * I also made the category Category:Artemis class attack cargo ships. I'll be going over the Artemis class ships, sooner hopefully than later, and add both of these.  If I can be of more help, let me know. -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 20:03, 11 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Most excellent! Thanks! I took the liberty of changing the link at the bottom of the Artemis template to point to amphibious ships rather than auxiliaries. If that's a problem, just let me know, or change it back, or both.


 * DANFS says that Veritas is a Sidonia-class ship, but I'm thinking that that's a mistake. Sidonia herself is Artemis-class, and there's nothing about Veritas that would seem to make her anything but Artemis-class. My judgment says it would be good to correct the mistake in the DANFS article. What say you? Lou Sander 04:16, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you for changing it from auxiliary to amphibious, that was my mistake. As for the Veritas and the Sidonia, I haven't really found any significant evidence that there was another class.  Are there any significant changes in the specifications of these two ships versus the rest of the class?  Also the DANFS isn't perfect and it does occassionaly make mistakes and typos, so if we can't find any strong evidence of another class, we may as well take it for an Artemis class ship. -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 15:45, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election - vote phase!
The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will select seven coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of eleven candidates. Please vote here by August 26!

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot - 11:54, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Tolland class AKAs
I've created the article Tolland class amphibious cargo ship. It's decent, as far as it goes, but it certainly can be expanded. I'll do some of that, hopefully soon. In the meantime, there's an issue with the name of the class. It's interrelated with other things, so I don't want to change things myself and risk messing up a pile of relationships. It's probably harder to describe than it is to fix:

The main thing is that instead of "amphibious cargo ships," these are all "attack cargo ships." The designation "amphibious cargo ship" came into being on January 1, 1969, when all the AKA's still afloat were redesignated as LKA's. The "attack" was changed to "amphibious" at that time, and most of the Tolland class ships were long gone by then. The List of United States Navy amphibious assault ships handles this perfectly, IMHO, by having two separate categories, and if a ship was in both categories, by listing it in both.

I believe that both the new Tolland class article and the corresponding template should use the word "attack" instead of "amphibious." (This goes for the other AKA classes, too, but I'm trying to get Tolland perfected before working on the others.)

Also there has been some renaming in the "List of..." article, so the article and its link in the template presently have different names. The link works fine, though. Nevertheless, IMHO, the names should match.

Finally, I'm wondering how to get a list of all the Tolland class ships added to the new article. It seems like adding a template box would be a good way to do it, but I'm not sure if adding the box creates an undesirable entry somewhere.

That's it for now. I'm hoping you can take care of the needed fixes, since I'm still too new at this do be confident about doing it properly. (I'm learning, though.) Lou Sander 03:59, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I see what you mean, and since nearly all of the Tolland class ships were decommissioned well before 1969, I have moved everything to the attack designation. Including Tolland class attack cargo ship, I have also created a new category Category:Tolland class attack cargo ships to replace the old one.  And I have added the footer template to the Tolland class page.  This way you can see each of the ship's names right there.  If you'd like to see it differently on the page, feel free to change it.  -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 17:20, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Titanic Edit
Long time no see, I havent seen you for a while and the Titanic article had been vandalised almost everyday. I tried to put a warning comment, that didnt do a jack. I thought about reverting it back like what you did because the intro sounds really akward, but instead I re-word it and it less akward but its weak. I didnt notice someone added an italian theory that sounds like tabloid trash. Im glad you revert it back to "normal". Jbrian80 07:40, 15 August 2006 (UTC) (edit i forgot to log in)

Arcturus class AKAs
This is the only class that doesn't yet have a template for the box at the bottom of the page. Existing classes are Andromeda, Artemis, and Tolland, plus Charleston for the LKA's. There were several AKA's that were single ship classes (if such a thing can even be called a class).

With my new-found knowledge of these boxes, I could probably do the Arcturus one myself, but there may be an advantage to having it done by the master (Malo).

Once the Arcturus box is done, I plan to do an article on the class, then expand all the articles on AKA classes (research required, but I own a couple of the key books) and the main article on AKAs. After that, I'll go through all the articles on the ships themselves, and try to fix errors, polish them, etc. Lou Sander 13:45, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I finally got around to making the footer and category. Take a look at Template:Arcturus class attack cargo ship and Category:Arcturus class attack cargo ships. I haven't had a lot of time to wiki-away lately, but I am glad to be of service.  There is a minor descrepency regard the class though.  The USS Libra (AKA-12) is labeled within this class, and concurred by both navsource and the DANFS  , however I find it odd that the USS Oberon (AKA-14) is labeled as a Libra class.   It seems to be the only ship labeled as such, so I'm confused.  Perhaps the Libra, over the course of it's long career, could be classified within two ship classes?  Or do you think that perhaps there is no Libra class?  What do you think? -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 22:08, 18 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm thinking that the Oberon is NOT a Libra class ship, but I don't have documentation for it. I'm also wondering about the Skagit (AKA-105). DANFS says it's Andromeda class, but it was built where the Tollands were built, and its hull number is in the range for Tollands. I don't regard DANFS as the last word on this stuff--it has too many other errors for me to be totally comfortable with it. I've got two authoritative books on WWII shipbuilding, and I'm planning to try to run this stuff down and fix it. Neither of the books says much about "classes," but they've got good info on what ships were ordered in groups, from whom they were ordered, etc. I'm also going to look at some WWII-vintage Jane's Fighting Ships at my public library. They normally list ships by class, and I can remember seeing that stuff there when I did some research back in 2003.


 * I think we've got a very good foundation of information on all the AKA's and LKA's. It's probably better than whatever else may exist anywhere else. There are still some unverified facts, and maybe some errors in the articles, but with a bit of polishing those will go away.


 * One of the things I'm working on is a set of good links for words that come up in these articles. I've put it together as I've entered the ships, so some of the earlier entries are missing good stuff that I found subsequently. Some of the best links are to battles and invasions that are briefly mentioned in the articles. With the proper links, one is really able to put some of these voyages into context. I wish I knew more about some of the automated editors that people have, so I could use them in fixing some of these links. Right now, all I have is manual fixing.


 * Thanks again for all your work with the classes. Lou Sander 00:51, 19 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I just looked at scans of a bunch of pages from Jane's that I made a couple years ago. Sometimes they seem to put ships in whatever class suits them. There's also some bad information, for example that the 5" gun was removed from Rankin, and was scheduled to be removed from others, all to be replaced by twin 3"-50 mounts. The Rankin was sunk in 1988, and you can still see the 5" gun in place. Sheesh! Lou Sander 01:12, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

AKA's probably in the wrong class
There's a discussion of this subject HERE. I'd appreciate your review and comment. Lou Sander 14:18, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Deletedpage Vandal
Isn't there some way you can block this guys IP from making new usernames or is just gonna keep up with the cycle of REVERT,REVERT,BLOCK until he gets tired? --Wildnox 01:11, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
 * also, Thank you for reverting the attack on my talk page. --Wildnox 02:46, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I am being blocked for some reason as i have apparently deleted who;le pages (am sure some of thr links that my comp will not access wil explain this in detail to me if o could reach tjhem) but i have NEVER deleted any pages fropm wikipedia, NEVERE, i enjoy using wikipedia for my writing research and wiould never dream od altering such informative pages.

my e-mail is RikkiQC02@aol.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.12.116.13 (talk • contribs) 14:27, 23 August 2006
 * All of the autoblocks caused by my blockings should be removed at this point. -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 21:35, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

AOL
Can you please purge the autoblocks from AOL?

I keep running into these when I edit certain pages and it's very frustrating. Joecrede 20:23, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
 * All of the autoblocks caused by my blockings should be removed at this point. -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 21:35, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Sig
Thanks for the heads up! Never knew there was so much risk. - Thanks, Hoshie 21:54, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the correction
I will avoid Uranus in the future, which is probably good advice for everyone. AbstractClass 15:45, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Your sense of humor is not appreciated. I and many other users, take this encyclopedia seriously.  And for you to make joke edits so casually, will not be tolerated.  -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 02:00, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Award

 * I am not sure what I did to deserve this, but thank you. -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 02:00, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Louisiana propulsion
Hello. I got the mode of propulsion from 3 sources. One was the Journal of the Franklin Institute from 1860 which occasionally carries descriptions of ships about to be launched. It just happened to have one on the Louisiana. (I don't have the exact issue on hand, but I believe I can find it). Another source was Harlan & Hollingsworth's 50th anniversary book which listed all the ships built up to 1870. Lastly, the atlas companion book to the Official Records of the Civil War shows a cutaway view of the Louisiana in which it depicts a propellor driven craft. I'll dig out one of these sources and add it to the entry on references. --Hollingsworth 00:33, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject Newsletter - Issue VI - August 2006
The August 2006 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 is an automated delivery by grafikbot -- 12:24, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

unblocked #238815
Thank you--71.247.243.173 13:32, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I've put in a request for a name change, would you mind if I continue transcluding the RD in the mean time? It looks like Changing username has an even larger maintenance backlog than the RD, so this might take a while, and I may as well do something in the mean time. --71.247.243.173 13:37, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * On second thought, I'll just wait for them to change it--71.247.243.173 13:38, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Is this better? --VectorPotential 13:50, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry for any inconvience that this username block may have caused you, however having a username that is attempting to simulate an IP address is too confusing and not appropriate. I'm sorry if you were in the middle of editing something, and perhaps I should have asked you to change it instead of outright blocking it. I will try to be more patient in the future. -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 01:48, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Roosevelt raconteurs removal
why was the comment about the racs using theodore roosevelt on a poster removed?

62.53.13.113 23:19, 1 September 2006 (UTC)confused raconteurs fan62.53.13.113 23:19, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I didn't think it was really noteworthy to have such information in this article. In 100 years I don't think anyone will care.  If you disagree, I suggest asking on the talk page for the article and seeing what other users think.  -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 04:33, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for reverting the vandalism on my user page. :)-- thunderboltz(Deepu) 10:03, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Hello, you recently blocked a vandal using AOL
? and they went on an autoblock spree, could you help clear the damage?--172.145.6.153 00:14, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Suggest block/ban of Anonymous User:24.59.193.92
Hi there, I saw that you've issued a warning to this user before. FYI, this user has since been repeatedly attacking the John Seigenthaler page including this edit suggesting that he "killed and ate JFK" which lasted from Sept 6 to Sept 8. Suggest heavy block/ban given the special status of that page? thanks for your consideration Bwithh 02:37, 8 September 2006 (UTC)