User talk:Ussrangercv4

Hello, Ussrangercv4, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits to the page Jesse B. Oldendorf have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and have been reverted. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! -MBK₀₀₄ 02:24, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

March 2010

Please do not use styles that are unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in Jesse B. Oldendorf. There is a Manual of Style that should be followed. Thank you. -MBK₀₀₄ 04:20, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jesse B. Oldendorf

Hi, Ussrangercv4. I reverted your edits to the above article. The main problem is the citations you've included. Most of them aren't reliable sources (this includes forums and the stuff from Navsource). Also, you've cited several books, but provided no page numbers. You can't cite an entire book for one sentence, you need to say what page you're specifically referring to. A side note, the book about Tennessee is this one, and it's not anonymous, it was written by Lawrence F. Bellatti, so you'll want to add that to the citation. You may want to read through Wikipedia's policies on citations as well as the one covering reliable sources (which I linked above). We're not trying to pick on you or tell you your contributions aren't wanted, we're just trying to point you in the right direction as far as formatting and citations go. If you want any help or have any questions, feel free to ask me here or on my talk page. Parsecboy (talk) 11:17, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here's another problematic edit: 1. You absolutely cannot cite Wikipedia as a reference for anything, especially not in this case. You are effectively using the Oldendorf article to cite itself (since the category to which you linked is populated by a link on the article itself). Please do not do this in the future. Parsecboy (talk) 12:20, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

cruise books fail NPOV

Cruise books, since they are published by the ship's crew, are considered self-pubished sources and are not considered reliable or neutral here. Please do not use them. -MBK₀₀₄ 02:53, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Request re-review of NPOV standards with regard to cruise book references

Note the following Wikipedia guideline as to when NPOV references may be used.

Self-published and questionable sources as sources on themselves Policy shortcut: WP:SELFPUB Self-published or questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, especially in articles about themselves, without the requirement that they be published experts in the field, so long as:

the material is not unduly self-serving; it does not involve claims about third parties; it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject; there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity; the article is not based primarily on such sources.

Cruise books meet all of the criteria cited above by wikipedia. Therefore they should based on the letter of the law be allowed to be used as references.

To bolster this case please see Department of the Navy Office of the Chief of Naval Operations OPNAV INSTRUCTION 5070.1C, http://www.cruisebookcentral.com/content/dod-opnavinst-5070-1c-nonfillable.pdf which identifies cruise books as extremely important historical material. --Ussrangercv4 (talk) 04:06, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you'd like an "official" review of the books, you can make your request at the reliable sources noticeboard for an evaluation by the experts. Parsecboy (talk) 12:21, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have received an "official" review response from the reliable sources noticeboardhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Allowable_Use_of_Self-Published__Material:_NAVY_CRUISE_BOOKS_Request_Evaluation indicating that

We have discussed cruise books before... they are considered reliable. Blueboar (talk) 13:50, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard"

Having receive this response how do I go about re-adding the material to the page so that it is registered as approved? --Ussrangercv4 (talk) 13:59, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, you can go ahead and add it. For reference, the older discussion that was mentioned is here if you wanted to read through it. Another thing to read is Wikipedia's manual of style. Since you're interested in ships, you might also consider reading the guidelines specifically for ships. Parsecboy (talk) 14:08, 27 March 2010 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Parsecboy"

Use of Cruise Book Images in Wikipedia Articles

WWII Navy Cruise Book Images: Fair Use? I'm seeking guidance as to whether WWII Navy Cruise Book scanned images/pictures and the original pictures that went into a cruise book are considered fair use and may be used in Wikipedia articles.

SPECIFIC EXAMPLE: I would like to update the Jesse B Oldendorf article with some historically significant pictures of the Admiral taken by a Navy Photographer during WWII and included in the USS TENNESSEE Cruise Book.

Pictures of a fighting admiral during historical actions are very rare and extremely historically important. To my knowledge no pictures of Admiral Jesse B. Oldendorf during WWII have ever been seen except by a few researchers in the National Archives and the lucky few who have access to the very rare USS Tennessee cruise book.

Please note, the Reliable Sources board has taken up the question of Navy cruise books and consider them reliable but I couldn't find if the question of fair use of Navy cruise book images has been determined previously by the board.

Please Advise. --Ussrangercv4 (talk) 12:46, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Pictures taken by US federal employees as part of their duty are in the public domain. Fair use does not apply, the images can be used freely. This is off-topic for this noticeboard, however. If you still have questions, see WP:IMAGEHELP. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 12:58, 28 March 2010 (UTC) Thanks Stephan. Your response is much appreciated. I wasn't sure which board advises as to image use so I thought I'd try here since the board was very helpful with advising about Navy cruise book reliability. Cheers --Ussrangercv4 (talk) 13:16, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Re your edit summary at the Biography WikiProject

There is no "board" (unless you count the Foundation, but even then...). WP is essentially made up of thousands of independent editors. A small number of those decide to work more pro-actively on certain groups of articles and form a WikiProject. I basically made a unilateral decision that the article was no longer a stub, but based my decision on past consensus of what constitutes a stub. Another editor may take issue with that decision, of course, which creates a cycle: click here. This is one of the norms on WP. I notice you have being getting into a little trouble over your edits. Perhaps a review of the pages linked in The five pillars of Wikipedia might be the way forward? Any other problems don't hesitate to ask me: User talk:Jubileeclipman. (You can also click the final part of my signature: many editors on WP "hide" certain links in their custom signatures. My musical symbol will take you to the WikiProject I coordinate, for example.) Cheers --Jubilee ♫clipman 11:12, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ranger

Hello again. I had a look at the article (it already was listed as a "Start" class article, which is a step above "Stub") and made a few fixes. In the future, you can put the full citation to a book in the reference section, and then in all of the footnotes just use a short citation. Take a look at the article now and see how much less cluttered the citations look. Also, for this style of citation, the footnotes go directly after the punctuation (so right after a period, comma, semi-colon, etc. without a space). If you want to submit an article to be reviewed for B-class, you can do so here (though this is only for military history-related articles; it's fine for Ranger, but not Marsh rice rat, for instance). As a regular at the B-class review page, I can tell you there are still a few uncited sections in the Ranger article for it to meet B-class right now. A good rule of thumb is to make sure every paragraph has at least one footnote at the end to cover the material discussed (take for example SMS Deutschland (1904), an article I wrote over the past few days). I hope that helps! Parsecboy (talk) 11:57, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, something else to consider: the lead section should summarize the entire article, like an abstract for a journal article. And for a unique ship like Ranger, you'll want to include sections discussing the technical characteristics of the ship. Take a look at HMS Ark Royal (91), a contemporary to Ranger, for how you can arrange it. Parsecboy (talk) 12:01, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 19:24, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

APPROACH TO TABLE POSITIONING WITHIN WARSHIP ARTICLES

I've come up with an approach to address the positioning of tables within the USS TENNESSEE BB-43 article based partly on feedback and discussions with various Wikipedia groups and largely on close examination of how similar tables are handled in scholarly works about this and other war ships.

The approach will be to position each table at the point in the article where it has hightest historical relevance and then to provide context within the section highlighting the relevance.

For example, the artllery table under this approach would be repositioned to a section that covers USS Tennessee's most outstanding counter battery duel and then context would be added to highlight this aspect of the battle.

Another example, the casualty table under this approach would be repositioned to a section that covers USS Tennessee's battle that resulted in the most grevious loss of life and then context added to highlight this aspect of the battle.

Implementation of the updates necessary to complete the implementation of this approach in the USS TENNESEE BB-43 article will be rolled out in phases due to the amount of work to complete.

Phase I, the repositioning of the tables has already occured. Reshaping each section to highlight the relevance will happen next on a section by section basis until all have received the required updates.

This will take some time but will result in a much better article. Stay Tuned.

Ussrangercv4 (talk) 12:26, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 14:14, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Ussrangercv4. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]