User talk:Mdhennessey/Archive 1

Thanks for the Wikihalo
I apreciate the nod!--Lord Kinbote 17:06, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use disputed
Well done on the template, stands out much better next to Replaceable fair use now. // Laughing Man 04:22, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Mission Nuestra Señora Reina de los Angeles
Why on earth did you revert me? That last edit by by User:Lordkinbote not only was misinformed, but was against the consensus being worked on in the talk page and is tactually wrong. ---evrik (talk) 20:03, 20 November 2006 (UTC) Which of the three commentaries are you referring to:
 * First of all, I posted that the article be renamed, and discussion was not done yet so any major changes were premature. I have also posted my sources and the logic behind what I'm trying to do. There were only 21 missions, and Mission Nuestra Señora Reina de los Angeles was not one of them. --evrik (talk) 20:13, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Template talk:Alta California Missions
 * Talk:Mission Nuestra Señora Reina de los Angeles
 * Talk:Spanish_missions_in_California
 * I don't have a problem listing the other churches in the article, just not a missions. If it wasn't a mission, it shouldn't be called mission. --evrik (talk) 20:22, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

"Yes, specious. Take a look at Spanish missions article for one. This web site not only defines the term, but clearly states that Mission los Angeles was an asistencia. Mdhennessey 20:58, 20 November 2006 (UTC)"
 * What am I not getting? Mission Nuestra Señora Reina de los Angeles should be named La Iglesia de Nuestra Señora Reina de los Angeles. There should be no article named Mission Nuestra Señora Reina de los Angeles. --evrik (talk) 20:28, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
 * What about Mission San Antonio de Pala? It was an assistencia.--evrik (talk) 20:36, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Missions and assistencias were substantively different things. While a mission might have been a church, not all churches were missions.--evrik (talk) 20:40, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Specious? Hardly. Show me some cites that say asitencias were considered mission? Please elucidate me.--evrik (talk) 20:51, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You just proved my point. Asistencias were not considered missions. and the article refers to La Placita as Old Plaza Church in Los Angeles and not as a mission. --evrik (talk) 21:04, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
 * This change to the article Spanish missions in California is another example of the changes I see should be made. --evrik (talk) 22:53, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Please stop

 * Please stop this edit war and discussion it out on the talk page. --evrik (talk) 21:25, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Edit Warring
Would you two please stop your edit warring. --evrik (talk) 21:31, 20 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't like getting tage teamed. Do you think I want to waste time fighting over this? --evrik (talk)


 * Multiple editors taking up views in opposition to yours is not "tag teaming." You are the one perpetuating this issue at this point.--Lord Kinbote 19:04, 21 November 2006 (UTC)


 * FYI on the above.--Lord Kinbote 19:07, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Mission San Antonio de Pala
Please have a look at this.--Lord Kinbote 16:25, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Hull numbers
Hi Mdhennessey!

I noticed that you edited ony of "my" (:-)) articles (and several others) adding ship "hull numbers". Frankly I don't care much, but Naming conventions (ships) policy/style is
 * "Do not give the hull number or other disambiguation information unless it is immediately relevant. Someone who needs to know can follow the link".

so I'm going to revert USS Barrow (APA-61). If you want to change it back, that's fine.

Also, when you do want to use the hull number USS Rochambeau (AP-63) looks just like USS Rochambeau (AP-63) and it's a lot less typing. You can get different effects depending on how the pipe (|) symbol is used. So:
 * USS Rochambeau (AP-63) (no pipe) shows up as USS Rochambeau (AP-63)
 * USS Rochambeau (AP-63) (nekkid pipe) shows up as USS Rochambeau
 * Rochambeau (something after the pipe) shows up as Rochambeau

but they all point to the stuff before the pipe.

Cool, no? --Saintrain 01:48, 28 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Except that in all cases Rochambeau should display in italics in the article text. You can use the USS template (e.g. USS Rochambeau (AP-63)), although I've never gotten around to allowing that template to supress displaying the hull number.--J Clear 13:48, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

DYK
Thank you for all of your excellent articles on naval vessels. Keep up the good work! --ALoan (Talk) 10:48, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Haskell change
While I nominally agree with having a picture of the Haskell leading Haskell class attack transport article, that's a particually poor quality image. Please consider reverting your edit there until a better Haskell image is found. --J Clear 13:52, 22 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Forgot to ask, do you have some personal connection with the Haskell Class, or just helping out? Also per Naming conventions (ships) you don't need to prefix the ship name with "the", although it's not wrong.  To me it doesn't sound right to use it though.  You wouldn't use "the" with the title and proper name of a person except to emphasize a difference.  "The Sargent Joe Friday", doesn't sound right to me, unless we're discussing him and clones.--J Clear 21:20, 22 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Another subtle point, per WP:Stubs, stubs are "placed at the end of the article, after ... the category tags, so that the stub category will appear last" [empahsis added]. Not trying to pick on you.  ${DEITY} knows it takes me long enought to find where these rules are when I want to find them again. --J Clear 22:41, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Congrats!
Hello. I leave you this message to congratulate you on your recent article, USS Chesterfield County (LST-551). Please continue to make wonderful contributions, such as this one, to this encyclopedia. Happy editing! Boricuaeddie Talk • Contribs  •  Spread   the love! 22:31, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

P.S. There seems to be a problem with the image. Yours truly, Boricuaeddie Talk •  Contribs  •  Spread   the love! 22:31, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Phew!
About Nuestra Señora Reina de los Angeles Asistencia. I'm glad that's all over and hope that we can work togteher in the future. --evrik (talk) 17:40, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Ship infoboxes
Thanks for finding images for the LST articles, it's a great help. I am curious about infobox protocol, though. There appears to have been some discussion on a template talk page concerning background colors, and, indeed which box to use. There appear to be two different templates (maybe more). I started out using the one you're using (ship table 02), and switched to the one I've been using after User:wwoods pointed it out to me, and I found it easier to work with. At risk of stepping on a landmine, is there an established protocol? Is there one protocol for USN ships and another for everybody else? Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining. I just don't want to make extra work for myself and everybody else.  Acroterion  (talk)  20:45, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


 * We probably ought to make a decision between us and whoever else is likely to be involved here, so there's some consistency. I've modified the infobox I've been using to have a second, and sometimes third national service box, complete with the appropriate flags for ships that have been transferred to another country.  That, I'd like to keep.  Other items, and colors, I'm not particularly committed to.
 * Also, congratulations about LST-802 below!   Acroterion  (talk)  19:36, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:SJC plaza circa 1896.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:SJC plaza circa 1896.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 17:15, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

USS Hamilton County (LST-802)
Hi Mdhennessey. You are off to such a great start on the article USS Hamilton County (LST-802) that it may qualify to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page under the Did you know... section. Appearing on the Main Page may help bring publicity and assistance to the article. However, there is a five day from article creation window for Did you know... nominations. Before five days pass from the date the article was created and if you haven't already done so, please consider nominating the article to appear on the Main Page by posting a nomination at Did you know suggestions. If you do nominate the article for DYK, please cross out the article name on the "Good" articles proposed by bot list. Again, great job on the article. --  Jreferee  (Talk) 18:50, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:San Juan Capistrano, O.F.M..jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:San Juan Capistrano, O.F.M..jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 03:08, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:San Juan Capistrano 1850 by HMT Powell.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:San Juan Capistrano 1850 by HMT Powell.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 10:07, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Francis J. Weber
Would you please include the sources you used to create this article? Pairadox 04:22, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Invitation to join WikiProject Ships


Please clear up your mess, sailor!
See Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_October_30 Johnbod 11:58, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I had found this support for 501 being a class separate and distinct from 401:
 * "The LSM(R), Landing Ship Medium Rocket, was designed to support amphibious landings by providing close-in fire support using their primary battery of rocket launchers. There were two classes of LSM(R)s, the earlier class consisted of modified LSMs, equipped with eight to ten twin 5 inch automatic, continuously fed rocket launchers. Each launcher was capable of firing thirty spin stabilized rockets per minute. The later class looked quite distinctive, with their superstructure at the stern, and no open well deck. They also had greatly increased fire power (a single 5"/38 gun mount, two twin 40mm gun mounts, four twin 20mm gun mounts, twenty continuous loading 5" SS rocket launchers, and four 4".2 mortars)"

After your comment at the CFD, I did a little more research. I found some "LSMR-501" class mentions in DANFS entries ( Targeteer White River Pee Dee River), but I also found many of the 501+ ships described as "LSMR-401", the patently incorrect "LSM 1", or as belonging to nonexistent classes (this is one common failing of DANFS, in my experience). I haven't yet seen anything that feels conclusive to me; do you have better sources available? Thanks. Maralia 19:32, 30 October 2007 (UTC)