User talk:OdinintheNorth
Welcome!
[edit]
|
- Thanks for the welcome Paul! I'll have take a look at these links when I have time. - Odin (talk) 23:33, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
Renaming the article USCGC Taney (WHEC-37)
[edit]This renaming of a ship's name was done without any discussion on the articles talk page. I would urge you to rethink this action because the renaming of the article serves no useful purpose and will only cause confusion. I would be interested in why you think this article should have its name changed. Cuprum17 (talk) 18:43, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
- I thought it would be clearer for the article name to match the name of the ship, since it appeared to have been renamed in 2020. I did look at the talk page first, but didn't see any discussion of moving the article in the two years since then. If it that is not the way the article should be named, then I obviously do not mind if it's moved back. I'm a relatively new editor and just assumed no one had gotten around to moving the page yet. - Odin (talk) 18:52, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thousands of Coast Guardsmen were assigned to serve on Taney during the fifty years the she was in commission. They didn't serve on the WHEC-37. They knew her as Taney.
- The article notes that... "In 2020, Historic Ships in Baltimore and the Living Classrooms Foundation announced that they will remove the name Taney from the ship, in recognition of her namesake's historical acts of racial injustice, instead identifying her as simply WHEC-37." While I understand the reasoning behind the renaming of the cutter, that doesn't erase history. History is to be learned from so that acts of injustice are not repeated. Whatever the Historic Ships in Baltimore does with the cutter, it is just politics and that is not why the cutter was commissioned in the first place. Military service is supposed to be non-political and the Coast Guard at the time of commissioning was merely naming the cutter after one of the former Secretaries of the Treasury like at least a dozen other cutters commissioned into Coast Guard service. This was because in 1936 when Taney was commissioned, the Coast Guard was part of the Department of the Treasury. There is a movement afoot today by certain parts of the population to rename anything that is related to racial injustice. Whether that part of American society is right or not is not the issue. The fact is that each time things or places are renamed America as a whole loses a bit of history. This process repeated time after time will only serve to confuse. When things or places are renamed, we lose a signpost as to how far we have come since the Civil War. We have come a long ways in the 160 plus years since that war was fought and we have some more ways to go, but renaming things and places are not serving history, the renaming of things and places are serving a political agenda.
- As a former Coast Guardsman, I am too involved in Coast Guard history to be unbiased in my viewpoint so I'm not going to say anything that would influence your actions on this article one way or another (although looking at the previous paragraph I kind of have). From the standpoint of Wikipedia naming rules on ships there needs to be a different article name for each ship if there were two ships with the same name. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Ships/Guidelines for style guides. There was another Taney commissioned in 1834. The name style for her would be USRC Taney. The style for the cutter commissioned in 1936 would be USCGC Taney. The hull number WHEC-37 would be unnecessary unless the Coast Guard would name another cutter Taney, and both you and I know that isn't going to happen.
- I don't mean to discourage you from editing Wikipedia, and I am not an expert on all things Wikipedia. I would encourage you to explore and read and help in anyway you can with a valuable resource that Wikipedia has become. I don't edit here much anymore but do watch all of the more common Coast Guard articles. I have written a few...
- You do what you will with your edit, just make it so that Wikipedia is a reference and not something else. Thanks for the conversation... Cuprum17 (talk) 22:53, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
- I appreciate your input and have undone the move. I am not sure that we entirely agree, but it's clear that any future move of this page will require a discussion first. I will leave that to other editors. Thank you for taking the time to reach out. - Odin (talk) 03:31, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for May 16
[edit]Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Division (military), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Georgia. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 06:11, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:51, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Requested move for Twitter article
[edit]
Your opinion on this issue is requested
You have been tagged to this conversation because you may have previously participated in similar discussions and there has been a notable development. Please consider sharing your views.
𝓣𝓱𝓮 𝓔𝓭𝓾𝓬𝓪𝓽𝓲𝓸𝓷 𝓐𝓾𝓭𝓲𝓽𝓸𝓻 06:14, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Fort Pillow
[edit]Thank you for correcting my blatant factual error. Not sure what I was thinking, it was a pretty serious case of brain fog. Gamaliel (talk) 00:41, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- All good, it happens to us all! And the rest of your edit seemed a good improvement to the article. – OdinintheNorth (talk) 02:41, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message
[edit]Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:39, 19 November 2024 (UTC)