Jump to content

User talk:SeaCeptor

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello, SeaCeptor, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to help you get started. Happy editing! - wolf 23:22, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Email

[edit]

Hi there, if you have questions about edits, please address them through my talk page rather than through email. As I stated in the edit summary -- thrice now -- your edits were reverted for multiple reasons.

1) No consensus for an unexplained modification from the ship's official displacement figures (cited to the official Navy website for the vessel). 2) No consensus to change "displacement" -- a static, standard measurement used across basically every significant warship covered on Wikipedia, with "full load displacement", an arbitrary definition that is not commonly used and variable. 3) Mass blanking of sourced content -- this appears to either be a mistake, or vandalism, it's unclear which, but it's disruptive regardless.

Please refrain from replacing the displacement figure with the "full load displacement" figure in the infobox in the future, and please further refrain from blanking parts of the article, whether that's intentionally or accidentally. SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 00:48, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Queen Elizabeth Class Displacement
T SeaCeptor (talk) 00:57, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to be having some significant trouble with basic editing as evidenced here and here. This is a little concerning, given your seemingly technically competent edits elsewhere so I'm not sure what's going on here, but if you need help there are resources available in the welcome message at the top of this page. SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 03:36, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I will look at the resources to assist.
Did you receive the message I put in regarding the full load displacement and why I made the edits, to reduce confusion when comparing aircraft carrier classes? SeaCeptor (talk) 09:08, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I received an email, which as I indicated above, I'd prefer to address on-wiki rather than through private communication. These changes do not actually "reduce confusion" when comparing anything -- in fact they significantly increase the confusion, because they are a change away from the official numbers, and use a different metric than that which is generally the consensus across all of our naval vessels. If you want to change that, you'll have to seek consensus for that change which is not an insignificant measure since it involves changing an infobox in common usage by hundreds, likely thousands of pages and which is under the purview of a Wikiproject. I'd suggest opening up a discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ships if that's the route you want to go.SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 19:31, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd argue these changes reduce confusion.
For example, what is the displacement of a Nimitz Class?
According to Wikipedia from the infobox:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nimitz-class_aircraft_carrier
So why can the Nimitz Class infobox use full load, but the Queen Elizabeth Class can't? SeaCeptor (talk) 19:54, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Because in the case of the Nimitz, the official data already uses the full load number. That is not the case with the QE. An infobox purpose is to summarize key facts about the subject, not to enable easier comparisons with other articles. Each article's infobox should be reflective of the data present in that article, not contingent on that of others. SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 20:02, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm using a new reference from Janes Fighting Ships which is an incredibly reputable source, used by navies across the world. Using the updated reference will allow a better comparison because it's like for like. I can take a picture of the source if required, as I have access to it at the moment. SeaCeptor (talk) 20:12, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm familiar with Janes, and it's not a question of whether Janes is a good source or not; it's a question of whether Janes is a *better* source than the MOD's official statistics on their official website. SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 21:32, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Royal Navy website isn't a great source. It's not routinely updated, for example it still lists HMS Queen Elizabeth as the fleet flagship (it changed over two weeks ago to HMS Prince of Wales), SeaCeptor (talk) 22:04, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Swatjester If you want further proof that the RN website isn't necessarily an accurate source, according to them, the Commanding Officer of HMS Medway is Cdr Jon Fletcher MBE
https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/organisation/units-and-squadrons/river-class/hms-medway
However he handed over Command in July 2024 ...
https://x.com/HMS_Medway/status/1816859372389056790?t=N_EECAgdBm-np4BMmxrs-g&s=19 SeaCeptor (talk) 22:58, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]