Talk:Hooyah

Untitled

In the Sea Bee's we use this as well as the Seals MDSanker 05:20, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Navy battle cry

How could I have graduated fro the Naval Academy AND given 24 years of service to the United States Navy and never have head of this? Stlrfn437 (talk) 21:40, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Because it was invented in a PR campaign in 2010. I tried to expand the article, but my additions became deleted, despite this being a stub. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:2C2:8180:2D90:5914:9827:9DCD:A95A (talk) 03:50, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

While people like Garuda28 probably won't believe it, the Navy wide adoption of Hooyah happened post-2010, and that is why most people won't recognize it. AT1(AW)Howell (talk) 14:10, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Stop fighting the expansion of a stub

The expansion and explanation of the phrase is correctly laid out in the last paragraph. Please stop deleting it, as this is annoying. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:2C2:8180:2D90:5914:9827:9DCD:A95A (talk) 03:53, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Seriously, the admin needs to stop fighting the accurate information that is being added to this stub. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:2C2:8180:2D90:5914:9827:9DCD:A95A (talk) 03:56, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Additions are unsourced. Please provide a source to back up your claim. Garuda28 (talk) 05:26, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

User talk:Garuda28 is against expansion of a stub article for some reason. I was there when it happened. I am the source for the Navy attempting to adopt one failed "battle cry" after another. My oldest kid just joined up, and everyone kept talking about "hooyah". Like the guy earlier in the discussion page, who said he never encountered it, I hadn't heard of it during my years of service either. I then found, in a ten second google search, that it became the popular battle cry in about 2010, like I said in the paragraph that Garuda28 keeps deleting. It's just another case of an editor (Garuda28) demanding less information to keep from interrupting his pretend narrative that he has going in his brain. I'm guessing he's an armchair general who watched the film "G.I.Jane" too many times. And quit with the "Please provide a source" noise. Look at the article. There aren't any sources now. I could see you arguing this on a page that was well sourced, but on a stub that has no sources to begin with? Lame.

WP:PROVEIT applies. Moreover, the more I look at these edits, the more I realize this is likely a bad joke or vandalizsm (pirate argh with a hook gesture, seriously)? Garuda28 (talk) 13:10, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

That's right folks, User talk:Garuda28 watched G.I.Jane enough times that he feels he knows more than the people who were actually there and the sourced articles that show his ignorance. During the war, Garuda28 was playing a LOT of video games, so it makes him far more of an expert than the people who actually had to stand in formation and make that ridiculous noise.

Anyone interested in actual events will quickly recognize that this "battle cry" is just another one of the Navy's attempts to create new "old traditions". Yelling Hooyah is one of these, and dates all the way back to...2010. Another example (but not the only attempt) is when big Navy decided we should all make a hook gesture and yell pirate noises at each other. Everyone knew it was insane, but big Navy loves their PR campaigns. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:2C2:8180:2D90:5914:9827:9DCD:A95A (talk) 13:33, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

IP, you need to add some sources to back this up, otherwise this just appears to be a bad joke about the Navy and pirates. I’ve looked at this issue, I cannot find anything. The source you have is from a spouse blog, which is not WP:RS, and even if it was it doesn’t back up your claim at all. Garuda28 (talk) 13:39, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

So, video game warrior Garuda28 says that this stub, that had no sources, cannot be expanded on by someone who actually knows what they are talking about because they were actually there when it happened, and the sources provided "aren't good enough" against an unsourced stub and Garuda28's vast imagination. We have officially hit the point where this doof is saying that eye witness accounts and links to articles aren't enough against his imagination space on an unsourced stub article. This loon is actually saying "your proof isn't enough against my imagination". Have we explored the possibility that Garuda28 is a bad joke or a vandal? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:2C2:8180:2D90:5914:9827:9DCD:A95A (talk) 13:48, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

The material you're adding is not supported by the sources. Add it again and you'll be blocked from editing. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:33, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

@AT1(AW)Howell: creating a new account to add the same unsourced information you’ve been warned against adding will not go well for you. Support it, or stop with information that is suspect at best and vandalism at worst. Garuda28 (talk) 15:15, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Blocked 'em all. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:17, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

- Blocked who? The guy saying that he has personal knowledge of something as well as sources for something else? Why the block? I think the admin needs to justify that nonsense. Are you in favor of censorship? I thought Wikipedia was all about sharing knowledge. - I, too, have personal knowledge of the raised pirate hook finger and "argh!" I was stationed at Pensacola Naval Air Station in Sep 2000-Mar 2001 for Avionics Electronics Technician (AT) "A" School, and every week after the barracks room inspections, the Theodore Roosevelt Barracks Chief had us all in formation on the east concrete pad to talk about random best-practices military bearing, integrity, pride, work ethic, etc. He ended every single one of those weekly meetings with all of us raising our curled index finger high above our heads and shouting "argh!" He would have us do it multiple times if he didn't feel we were motivated enough. Within the next couple of years while I was stationed aboard the USS John F Kennedy (CV67), I encountered sailors coming from training commands all across the fleet doing the same thing, and I'm certain I saw it on AFN and in Navy Times once or twice. Is this information somehow banned by Wikipedia from being shared? - Hooyah was never something the US Navy shouted en masse until about a decade ago. It was always something the SEALS, EOD, divers shouted. In Pensacola, sailors go to classes with Marines, and the Marines ran all the PT sessions. We all shouted "ooh-rah!" as part of these PT sessions because the Marines heading it would shout it and we were expected to reciprocate. Outside of PT, the sailors never did it, save for a few sailors who were particularly fond of PT and adopted "ooh-rah" as their own personal motivational saying, since the Navy didn't actually have one that took hold throughout the fleet. No one really liked the "argh" and pirate hook – we only did it after those barracks meetings. I never heard anything as a sailor-led motivational saying until I was transferred to USS Ronald Reagan (CVN76) in October 2008. I was at a transitional duty station in San Diego since the ship was on deployment, and all the afternoon clean-up meetings were led by a sailor shouting "Hooyah!" and everyone would reciprocate. I encountered "ooh-rah" again once aboard USS Ronald Reagan (CVN76) whenever the air-wing was with us because we had Marines on board, and the sailors joined in. When the Marines weren't with us, we never shouted anything as sailors-only until after the 2011 deployment when we'd shout "Hooyah!." Please note that the sailors would shout "ooh-rah" along with the Marines, not "Hooyah." The sailors-only command-wide motivational saying of "hooyah" didn't reach the Reagan until after our 2011 deployment. - That source cited on the main page saying it's the onomatopoeia version of a battle stations siren is simply untrue. THAT is a joke. This is the kind of "source" you allow here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.195.124.142 (talk) 20:46, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

That's very exciting. Unfortunately, Wikipedia's verifiability and reliable sources policies don't allow for "personal knowledge" to be used to sourcing. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:54, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

But "sources" posted elsewhere with no source of their own is allowed? Have you seen the source that is referenced on this entry? It's simply untrue information. And why the block of the other guy? They had valid info and sources. This entire discussion reads like a Facebook comment thread in a group where the admin bans everyone who posts something they don't like. "Not true." "Totally is, and here's a source that backs up at least part of it." "So what? I don't believe the first part. You're obviously a troll." "Blocked 'em all." Seems real suspicious to me about the efforts to maintain integrity of the Wiki entry. Perhaps it would be better to appreciate the information and say it's been supported by at least 2 different commentators. At the least, the entry above, plus us two verifies the main entry's information to be false as three separate individuals with first-hand knowledge of the Navy's NON-usage of "hooyah" until recently. Perhaps there's a way to modify the main entry without violating the rules, hiding the truth, or censoring editors who are only trying to ensure lies aren't being spread as fact by the main Wiki entry. AND, I thought this Talk section didn't need published sources. So what's the issue? From the rules, read the following section: Self-published and questionable sources as sources on themselves. What if the individual you blocked were to be unblocked, and allowed to write an entry about themselves not having encountered "hooyah" until about 2010, and how they had previously encountered a separate attempt at popularizing a hook gesture with the left index finger accompanied with a shout of "argh"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.195.124.142 (talk) 22:00, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

If you have a real source (not alleged personal experiences) I suggest you provide it. If not, then we have nothing more to talk about on this issue. Garuda28 (talk) 22:52, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Three separate individuals claimed to have first-hand knowledge that your Wiki article and referenced source is bogus. I suggest that it is YOU who needs to find a better source to support the article. Otherwise, in accordance with Wikipedia's verifiability and reliable sources policies, the article shouldn't even exist at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.195.124.142 (talk) 23:14, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

And that's not to mention the fact that two separate individuals have provided first-hand knowledge about events which you obviously don't believe to be true. Well, I'm sorry, but we didn't have smart phones, easy access to small and portable cameras, or an incessant need to document all the crazy stuff we experienced in the Navy on the off chance that someone won't believe us one day. Go read the policy on "Self-published and questionable sources as sources on themselves." Individuals are permitted by Wikipedia to be sources about their own experiences, about events which happened to them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.195.124.142 (talk) 23:54, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

^ This last bunch of comments from 98.195.124.142 are me. I just created an account so I can possibly get e-mail notifications that someone replies. I see that no one has yet. Did y'all realize the error of your ways and don't want to own up to it? 1. "Self-published and questionable sources as sources on themselves." Individuals are permitted by Wikipedia to be sources about their own experiences, about events which happened to them. If an entry is made by an individual and they mention themselves and describe an event, making it about them and their experience, then it's 100% permitted by Wikipedia. 2. Why was the other person blocked? As of right now, this reads as fascist censorship. That's right – I said it. "I don't believe you. BLOCKED!" That's not how Wiki is supposed to work. I see there's mention of "multiple accounts." Where's the second account? I see someone who wasn't logged in making a complaint, and then they logged in. Isn't that what I just did just now? Does this qualify as a "multiple account" situation? If this is your justification, then you should own up to your mistake and apologize. If your justification is that you don't believe what they – and I – offered as a true event – however absurd, which is why it never took hold – then I sincerely hope you can back it up with a Wiki policy which says this warrants a ban. 3. There are now three separate people attesting to the fact that it is not a Navy-wide "battle cry," let alone one that has stood the test of time. 4. Read the referenced source on the main Wiki Article for "hooyah." It's false. There is zero reason to believe that "hooyah" is a long-held tradition by the Navy as an organization, or that it is the onomatopoeia version of the "guhooyah" one might hear from a weird horn-siren – much like you would have heard from an early-model motor vehicle. I can tell you right now that the General Quarters ("man your battle stations") alarm is more of a "bong bong bong bong..." Check it out for yourself: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWS3J6NrRXk This fact alone calls into question the veracity of the referenced source, and additional sources need to be provided in order for this article to remain on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KarmaChris80 (talk • contribs) 16:12, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Nice attempt at wikilawyering, but the section you've quoted about self-published sources is in regards to biographical articles, and isn't applicable here. If you attempt to repost unsourced material on the article, you will be blocked as well. Isn't there anything else to do for fun in Houston besides trying to post made up things on Wikipedia? OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:27, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

I am a navy vet. I remember the pirate argh noise and hook hands from about 2001 to 2003 or so. I don't remember ever using hooyah, so it must have been used after 2011. Roddypiper38 (talk) 17:04, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm a veteran in new York and heard that some admin was making up excuses to block veterans from editing the Wikipedia military pages. What the hell? Roddypiper38 (talk) 17:11, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

@Ohnoitsjamie : Does this sound like it's exclusively used for biographical articles? Is that how you read this? If that's the case, then change the rules. I didn't make them; you are supposed to follow them. Copied from the verifiability policy (reliable sources has almost identical wording): "Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, usually in articles about themselves or their activities" KarmaChris80 (talk) 17:16, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

All I am trying to do is broker an amicable solution to this situation. The fact remains that it still reads as though you blocked someone simply because you didn't believe what they reported from their own experiences in the US Navy. If you want to keep the details of that particular "battle cry" attempt out of the main article, fine. But I'm sure there's a way to report on the Navy's multiple campaigns over the years to establish a "battle cry" like the other services have, without breaking the rules and without referencing an obviously and demonstrably false (which I've already proved with the YouTube link) source which is being used as fact. KarmaChris80 (talk) 17:26, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

The solution is what you have been told already- have published, independent reliable sources for what you state. We can't just accept your word, even if you are 100% correct. No other solution is possible. 331dot (talk) 23:28, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

"and the to build" needs clarification

"and the to build" needs clarification, probably something along the line of "and the US air force to build". But I don't know what to suggest. R. Henrik Nilsson (talk) 15:57, 11 October 2023 (UTC)