User talk:Bellhalla

Archives

Archive 1 (Aug 2005 – Aug 2007) Archive 2 (Sep 2007 – May 2008) Archive 3 (May 2008 – Aug 2008) Archive 4 (Aug 2008 – ) Archive 5 ( – )

This page has archives. Sections older than 15 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

I just created the above article and could use some help with it as ships are not really my area of expertise. I plan on working on it more tomorrow, but any help or advice you could offer would be appreciated. KnightLago (talk) 03:19, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's a great start, but still needs some more work (but you knew that already, right?). Some suggestions that may help:

• The Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships (DANFS for short) has information on the ship (scant though it is) here. WikiProject Ships has put together a guide for converting the public domain text from DANFS into Wikipedia articles at Wikipedia:WikiProject Ships/DANFS conversions.
• Some general article guidelines are found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Ships/Guidelines#Article Construction, and ship infobox information and an example can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Ships/Tables.

If you have any questions or find any of the information confusing or seemingly contradictory, just ask. I'll try to help the best I can. Good luck working on it. — Bellhalla (talk) 03:46, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice. I got a basic outline going but it needs a lot of work. I will work on sourcing and improvement tomorrow. Anything you could do to help would be great. Thanks! KnightLago (talk) 04:15, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When you get a minute could take a look at the above article and offer any suggestions or advice that come to mind? I looked at adding a ship infobox, but at this point it is beyond me. Thanks! KnightLago (talk) 01:19, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess besides more in-depth details, the only information I am having trouble with is the technical information about the ship. I really don't know how to format and describe the tons and length and stuff. Any help you could offer would be greatly appreciated. KnightLago (talk) 02:23, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nice expansion! I'll take a stab a creating the infobox but it won't be for a couple of days. — Bellhalla (talk) 04:49, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you do me a favor and take a try at creating an infobox for this article? Thanks. KnightLago (talk) 03:37, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 20 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SS Pennsylvanian, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Victuallers (talk) 14:12, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 21 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SS Dakotan, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--–Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 22:57, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I understand why you are watching this category, but can you explain why you think that Category:Military history by era applies to the Category:Naval ships by era? As I see it, naval ships are just weapons, and only actions they participated in would be history--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 11:23, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The category Category:Military history by era was placed on Category:Ships by era by an IP user. Since the latter category encompasses all ships, not just military ships, I moved the IP's cat addition from the latter category to Category:Naval ships by era. By the way, I'm not sure I agree with your assertion that naval ships are "just weapons", but I certainly have no objection to their inclusion in Category:Weapon history. — Bellhalla (talk) 11:31, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, naval ships I supposed to be warships that belong to navies, and they are by and large weapon platforms while civilian ships are not. I'm not sure what is under the Category:Ships by era, but if they are passenger ships that were at some stage used by navies, they need to be moved to the Category:Naval ships by era since at the time of their use by navies they were either armed or carried some sort of military materiel such as armed troops, or military cargo and usually had some rudimentary auxiliary armament added, if only AA machine-guns that made them armed merchantmen and therefore subject to naval engagement during conflicts. These engagements are the military history part, but they would have articles of their own usually titles Action of XX Month, YYYY year at ZZZZZZZZZ place. The articles about the vessels themselves are just that, histories of their use (summaries of logs)--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 12:37, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you re-read my comment, I was not disputing that naval ships are weapons, only your contention that they are just weapons. I have my opinion, you have yours, but the category can be in both (as it is now) to support each view. I'm cool with that.

As far as the distinction of "ships" versus "naval ships": "Ships by era" does include non-naval vessels. Ships that have been both civilian and naval ships—like SS Kroonland, a passenger liner but also a commissioned transport in WWI—should be (and for the most part are) properly categorized in both an appropriate "ship" and "naval ship" category. — Bellhalla (talk) 12:46, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so aside from the classification issues, what else is a warship other than a weapon platform, or a weapon with sea-going capability? Opinions are a plenty in Wikipedia, but I'm curious where you gained yours given the lots of quality articles you have done because I will be touching on the subject elsewhere--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 14:42, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes they are weapons platforms, but you can also consider them a fighting unit, much like one would a battalion or a division. (Certainly on a macro scale, a battalion, division, or army could conceivably be considered a "weapon" of sorts to the generals moving them around.) — Bellhalla (talk) 14:50, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 23 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SS Washingtonian, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:51, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Congraduations on two more well-written articles. I have completed the GA reviews of SS Dakotan (the review is at Talk:SS Dakotan/GA1) and SS Washingtonian (the review is at Talk:SS Washingtonian/GA1). I have placed the Dakotan on hold to allow time to review a couple of minor concerns. The Washingtonian I have passed to GA status. I did have one comment in the review, but it was nothing that would prevent the article from passing. If you have any questions, you can ask them on the review pages or on my talk page. Dana boomer (talk) 14:55, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:The Lawrence Journal-World front page.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. ViperSnake151 15:56, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to this http://ntic.msun.ru/ntic/exhibition/fesco/second/f260.html the correct variant is Зырянин. Зыряне - Komi_peoples Hellinalj (talk) 16:29, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. — Bellhalla (talk) 16:42, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 26 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SS Montanan, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thank you for your contributions, and all the best for your GAC! - Mailer Diablo 13:44, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Milhist A-Class medal
		For prolific work on three ship-related articles – USS Mercy (AH-4), SS Pennsylvanian and SS Dakotan – all promoted to A-Class in August 2008, by order of the coordinators of the Military history WikiProject, you are hereby awarded the Milhist A-Class medal --ROGER DAVIES talk 15:20, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 29 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SS Minnesotan, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Royalbroil 05:08, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 30 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SS Panaman, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

—Wknight94 (talk) 20:14, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 31 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SS Ohioan (1914), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Congratulations! Keep up the good work, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:25, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 1 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SS Iowan, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 01:50, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya Bellhalla. I know you're busy, but if you have amoment I could use another set of eyes here to help with the review. Anything you could do would be apreciated. TomStar81 (Talk) 19:33, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The WikiChevrons
		I Woody, do bestow upon you, Bellhalla, these WikiChevrons for an extraordinary effort in expanding articles on US Naval ships. Your score was a record tally for one month in the Milhist article writing contest, a truly magnificent effort. Well done, and keep up the good work. Woody (talk) 20:09, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! amazing work! Congratulations on your spectacular efforts this month (109 POINTS! Holy /OMITTED\!!). Cam (Chat) 23:22, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on September 14!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:33, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I know you're likely quite busy with the next round of Mercantile-Marine Vessel articles, but would you happen to have time next week to do a GA-Review of Operation Lüttich for me? I'm almost finished a complete rewrite of the article, so I wouldn't need the review done until sometime next week (if you need, I can do any GA-Reviews necessary for the next round of vessels). Best Regards, Cam (Chat) 23:27, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter Issue XXX (August 2008)
Project news The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is underway, to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 14 September! Voting starts at 00:01 (UTC) on 15 September and runs until 23:59 (UTC) on 30 September. A new barnstar specifically encouraging and recognizing excellence in Milhist article creation and development has been introduced. Any editor who has made a significant contribution to three or more Milhist A-Class articles promoted since 1 August 2008 under the new A-Class criteria is eligible. Nominations for the medal should be made here; should list the three A-Class articles for which the medal is sought; and must be subsequently supported by three or more project coordinators, who will be responsible for making the award. Editors may nominate themselves or any other qualifying editor.	Articles of note New featured articles: Domitian HMS Ark Royal (91) John McCain Operation Ke Panzer I Warwick Castle New featured lists: List of Korean War Medal of Honor recipients List of USAF Test Pilot School alumni New A-Class articles: Harry Murray Horses in warfare Kaunas Fortress Kiev Expedition (1018) Napoleon I of France Operation Ke Panzer IV SS Dakotan SS Pennsylvanian TAM (tank) United States Naval Gunfire Support Debate‎ USS Mercy (AH-4)
Current proposals and discussions A new discussion about whether Milhist should adopt C-Class is underway. All comments are welcome. The 2008 Tag & Assess Workshop is still open, seeking input on ways to improve the efficiency, user-friendliness and organization of future Milhist drives. All comment is welcome, especially from people who didn't participate in the drive!
Awards and honors Durova has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of her exemplary work on military history featured pictures, sounds, and articles. JonCatalán has been awarded the new Milhist A-Class medal for his work on three newly-promoted tank-related articles: Panzer I, TAM and AMX-30E. The new Milhist A-Class medal also goes to Bellhalla for his three ship-related articles: USS Mercy (AH-4), SS Pennsylvanian and SS Dakotan. The Contest department has completed its seventeenth month of competition, which saw an unprecedented 54 entries. The top scorer this month is Bellhalla with a record 120 points, followed by JonCatalan with 56 points. Abraham, B.S., Cam, Ed!, Woody, David Underdown, Gaia Octavia Agrippa and Kyriakos also fielded entries. Blnguyen remains the overall leader, with 226 points in total. The Chevrons go to Bellhalla and JonCatalan gets the Writer's Barnstar. You are encouraged to submit any articles you are working on as entries. Thanks go to Abraham, B.S., Bedford, Benedict of Constantinople, Borg Sphere, Canglesea, Climie.ca, Dashiellx, Ejosse1, El Greco, Fusionmix, Geoff Plourde, Jim Sweeney, Judgesurreal777, MBK004, Mifter, Parsecboy, Red4tribe, Rosiestep, Suyogaerospace, and TomStar81 for their help with the 2008 Tag & Assess Workshop.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:16, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 4 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SS Kentuckian, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Good job! --I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 10:26, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just why you'd want to retain that level of dilution of the high-value links in the article is an important question. Please note that the autoformatting of dates is now deprecated. I can supply further information if you require it.

As for the reversion without notice ... well, people are bound not to edit war, so if you feel really strongly about the blue-splotch, and are prepared to go against what has been a widely popular move to improve readability, appearance, and the highlighting of high-value links, so be it. I just think it's a pity for the article and its readers.

No hard feelings, but I hope to convince you that it's worth supporting the move. Tony (talk) 14:16, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bellhalla. You have new messages at Lightmouse's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

the_ed17 15:17, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By the order of the coordinators of the Military history WikiProject, you are hereby awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of your exemplary work on military history articles and DYK entries. For the coordinators, Wandalstouring (talk) 15:43, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]