User talk:Argonauthistorian6
Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!
[edit]
- Hi Argonauthistorian6! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
-- 03:57, Tuesday, February 17, 2015 (UTC)
| Mission 1 | Mission 2 | Mission 3 | Mission 4 | Mission 5 | Mission 6 | Mission 7 |
| Say Hello to the World | An Invitation to Earth | Small Changes, Big Impact | The Neutral Point of View | The Veil of Verifiability | The Civility Code | Looking Good Together |
Your submission at Articles for creation: USS CP-552 (February 23)
[edit]
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:USS CP-552 and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
- You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.
|
Hello! Argonauthistorian6,
I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! -- Sam Sing! 04:04, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
|
Talkback
[edit]
Message added 17:15, 23 February 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
-- Sam Sing! 17:15, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: USS PC-552 has been accepted
[edit]
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
- If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
- If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
—CraigyDavi (T∙C∙@) 07:35, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for accepting this article. I will continue to improve it.
Dave Argonauthistorian6 (talk) 08:19, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!
[edit]- Hi Argonauthistorian6! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
-- 03:39, Saturday, March 14, 2015 (UTC)
| Mission 1 | Mission 2 | Mission 3 | Mission 4 | Mission 5 | Mission 6 | Mission 7 |
| Say Hello to the World | An Invitation to Earth | Small Changes, Big Impact | The Neutral Point of View | The Veil of Verifiability | The Civility Code | Looking Good Together |
Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!
[edit]- Hi Argonauthistorian6! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
-- 03:42, Saturday, March 14, 2015 (UTC)
| Mission 1 | Mission 2 | Mission 3 | Mission 4 | Mission 5 | Mission 6 | Mission 7 |
| Say Hello to the World | An Invitation to Earth | Small Changes, Big Impact | The Neutral Point of View | The Veil of Verifiability | The Civility Code | Looking Good Together |
Disambiguation link notification for March 15
[edit]Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited USS PC-552, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sentimental Journey. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:24, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for May 6
[edit]Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited USS PC-552, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Y gun. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:52, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
USS PC-552
[edit]I've taken the liberty of trimming a bunch of barely related images from your page creation. Please don't take offense. The page while interesting is way more detailed than desired. That said, nobody wants to discourage your enthusiasm and rich knowledge of the subject and sources. Please consider discussing this here or on the article's talk page. There's a group of editors at Wikiproject Ships who have an interest in helping editors like yourself do justice to a subject like your addition. Many of those editors would be more than willing to help you build and shape USS PC-552 into a very good page. Again, welcome and please accept the changes as a collaborative improvement, not a net negative. If I can help, please call on me. BusterD (talk) 03:36, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Dora,
I don’t know what to say. Suddenly, a number of “experts” descended on the PC-552 page and wiped about a month of painstaking work. As far as I know, that work is lost forever. There was no discussion; it was just done. These people do not identify themselves in any meaningful way and don’t seem to understand the purpose of the page. I can tell they don’t understand the time and place of this ship. I could understand this so much better if there had been some dialogue but there wasn’t. Here is what someone who wiped out the crewmembers at D-Day said:
“ History of the crew members[edit source | edit] The following was removed from the main article. I would not oppose a list of notable crew members, if there were any. Notable meaning notable enough for their own Wikipedia page, but listing every person attached to the ship on a certain day is not needed. Sorry. --Dual Freq (talk) 15:15, 22 May 2015 (UTC)” There you have it. That schedule took me a week to painstakingly create from source documents. I spent a couple of thousands of dollars of my own money to get some of those documents and interviewed people all over the country such as yourself. Obviously, that person never experienced combat in the service of our country as your father and I have. The HEART of that ship is the officers and men at D-Day. I agree with you, it is very clear that officers are important, crewmembers aren’t. The person who did this vandalism lists himself as Dual Freq (talk) on Wikipedia. I am washing my hands of Wikipedia. I am embarrassed to be associated with this. Sorry. .
From: dora david [1] Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 18:11 To: Dave Subject:
Dear Dave,I have been looking at your wikipedia page and the names of the crew members is gone ? It comes across that unless you were an office that they were not instrumental or just insignificant . I was proud to see my fathers name there but, now it's gone only officers. I can't tell anyone about it because I can't prove that my father was there.So sad. I am sorry but at this time I can not send what I have, to only give credit to officers. Dora David Argonauthistorian6 (talk) 00:36, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
- First of all, wikipedia is not a personal website, a memorial website or an indiscriminate collection of information. No one owns the any of the articles. If you want to own your own webpage http:\\www.blogger.com or something similar might meet your needs. Secondly, I didn't permanently delete anything. Talk:USS_PC-552#History_of_the_crew_members has the list, and the article history at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=USS_PC-552&oldid=663271204 has all the material that you put on there. There has been some discussion at Wikiproject:Ships that others felt the article was not representative of a proper encyclopedia article. I'm sorry you feel upset, but wikipedia is not the place to go to that level of detail. --Dual Freq (talk) 00:52, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
- As User:Dual Freq points out above, none of the work is lost. Everything is in page history and can be recovered. The issue is that Wikipedia isn't a website in which one can post every tiny detail on a naval vessel. Wikipedia is not a hosting service. Instead wikpedians just like yourself create and improve articles designed for an encyclopedia. Here are examples of articles based on vessels similar (but certainly not identical) to PC-552: USS Orizaba (ID-1536), USS Siboney (ID-2999), USS West Bridge (ID-2888). Notice the encyclopedic tone. Note the concise but thorough treatment of the subject. USS PC-552 has the potential to be one of Wikipedia's finest articles, but right now the page is filled with excessive detail. Nobody here is claiming to be an expert on your subject. Editors here are quite good at developing an encyclopedia article on such subjects. Here is the version which was approved for inclusion. Here is the version I came across last night. You can extract anything you want from those versions. If you want to create your own website to honor the memory of this fine vessel and its storied crew, nobody here will disagree or think less of you. If you want to post an article on Wikipedia, then you must accept that others are going to edit it. Just above the "Save" button in the edit view is the statement: "By clicking the "Save page" button, you agree to the Terms of Use and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution..." Above the edit window is this line: "Work submitted to Wikipedia can be edited, used, and redistributed—by anyone—subject to certain terms and conditions". These are the terms you agree to when you submit work here. It's not exactly a secret; it's in plain sight.
- So how do we proceed? Many here admire your effort and your research and are willing to help develop the page. But we'll be doing it the way encyclopedic authors do, not as a memorial website. We need to trim a bunch of stuff that wouldn't go in a World Book or Britannica article. We'd be able to do it better if you stick around and help. You may find that our WikiProject Ships members know more about how to look stuff up than you have learned so far, perhaps about aspects of the vessel you wouldn't think to research. Your work may benefit other veteran sailors looking for ways of understanding the subject matter. Please consider not leaving. Please consider staying and working with us. BusterD (talk) 01:17, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
- I've restored everything at your sandbox. I've temporarily disabled the categories so they don't interfere with normal category structure. BusterD (talk) 01:33, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
BusterD,
Thank you for explaining your position. I wish you well with your goals and I accept them 100%. I deliberately gave some thought to this before I made my decision. To provide insight into my thinking, my first encounter with this was when someone deleted the photo of Captain Spielman without discussion. This person claimed to be a World War II expert from the German side and this person said he knew that was not Captain Spielman's photo; Captain Spielman was a kapitän of a U-Boat and he knew better. It turns out, the origin of the name "Spielman" is German, something I did not know. But the Captain Spielman I had a photo for was real, an American captain. It went worse from there but it seemed there is always an expert somewhere who just acts without dialogue. It deeply concerns me that my work can be just blown up without any discussion. Then there are so many versions of rules and it seems each person interprets them differently.
This is a long winded explanation as to why I can't support Wikipedia for now. I appreciate it and agree with its goals, but I think I will wait a few years before I attempt something like this again. I think Wikipedia needs to spend some time on this issue. Someone else may take on the site. In the meantime, as you kindly point out, there are alternatives. Thank you for taking the time to explain this to me. Argonauthistorian6 (talk) 02:01, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
- I appreciate your responding to me here. Please feel free to take whatever information and images from your sandbox if/when you develop your own site. Almost all art used on Wikipedia if available under a creative commons license, which means it can be used anywhere so long as the source is disclosed. I'd take it as a personal favor if you'd make a notice here when your site is up and running. I (and I'm sure many others here) wish you the best, and as the son of a career USN CPO myself, I'd still willing to help you when you ask. BusterD (talk) 02:51, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
PBS claims copyright on their shows. "© 2014 WGBH Educational Foundation / MC4"[2] Dual Freq (talk) 18:04, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
I promised myself I would move on from this and leave Wikipedia for good and I still will but this is such a good example of what I am writing about. I communicated in writing with the good folks at WGBH in Boston. They explained to me they did not have a copyright on this photo. They directed me to a film producer in Paris, MC4, who directed me to the actual photographer, who all agreed holds the copyright on this photo. He freely gave up the right to this photo in writing and actually was excited about it being publicized. The names of the people are listed on the photo on Wikipedia as providing this as a courtesy. You may contact them if you wish. The photographer approved the Wikipedia post at my request.
If this goes as the previous issues about photos went, this writing will not be considered and the photo will just disappear. That is how it has worked so far. Argonauthistorian6 (talk) 03:02, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
- I've replied on Commons at c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:D-Day Sunken Tank.jpg. To summarize, c:Commons:OTRS is the route needed to be taken for permission to be granted for use. Commons is not the same as Wikipedia. If they granted permission to use only on Wikipedia, that is not the same as licensing a work CC-SA-4 on the Commons saying anyone, anywhere can use or modify the image to suit their own purposes as long as it complies with CC-SA-4. Many, many uploads occur claiming permission has been granted when it actually wasn't. Don't take this wrong, I'm not saying I don't trust you specifically, but after 10 years of doing this, I don't really trust anyone when they claim permission was granted unless I see there has been an OTRS ticket on it. --Dual Freq (talk) 19:36, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
- As an aside, Commons is a different animal than Wikipedia. I've uploaded over 2,000 images to Commons, but I've had my own photos that I took with my own camera deleted on Commons because they violated Freedom of panorama. It gets complicated, so don't feel bad here, there is quite a bit of misunderstanding. It's best not to upload someone else's work to the Commons. Upload your own, or work that is obviously public domain from Flickr or clearly licensed PD-USNavy, etc. If you have permission, follow the OTRS method, or it will be deleted. --Dual Freq (talk) 19:36, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)