User talk:John Moore 309

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome to the John Moore 309 Talk Page.

- and a particulaly warm welcome to anyone who

• Wants to comment constructively on any of my edits or posts.
• Would like my help, advice or comment on any matter.
• Wishes to pass on useful or fun information or advice.
• Knows of an article or talk page in which I might be interested (for my interests, see my User & Contributions pages).
• Has a good reason for thinking that I don't know something that I need to know.
• Cares who I am and what makes me tick.
• Can help me become a better Wikipedian.

Remember, POV (point of view) is OK on a talk page. Please be civil.

Regards, John Moore 309 16:41, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Contents 1 Fast Battleship Classes 2 Controversial Subjects 3 Swiftsure 4 Swiftsure History Merge 5 Pre-dreadnoughts 6 Books 7 Dreadnought cat 8 battleships 8.1 Welcome to the Military history WikiProject! 8.2 Maritime warfare task force 9 Task Force 10 Military history WikiProject Newsletter - Issue VI - August 2006 11 Feedback 12 HMCS Prince David 13 WikiProject Military history Newsletter - Issue VII - September 2006 14 Cumberland 15 The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue VIII - October 2006 16 Good job! 17 The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue IX - November 2006 18 The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue X - December 2006 19 HMS Dreadnought (1906) Collaboration 20 The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XI - January 2007 21 Illness 22 Ironclads and Battleships 23 WP:MILHIST Coordinator Elections 24 Personal 25 Off Topic But... 26 WikiProject Military History elections 27 WikiProject Military history/Coordinators 28 The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XII - February 2007 29 Auto-unblock request 30 Battleship fonts 31 Last battle of the bismarck 32 The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XIII - March 2007

[edit] Fast Battleship Classes

I've added a list of classes that appear to have been generally regarded as fast battleships. I'd be interested in your thoughts. Nloth 10:31, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I've fixed the link to the Bismark class (doh!). Don't worry about people ignoring the article - I think it's a useful resource. Nloth 00:31, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Controversial Subjects

I've been doing Wikipedia editing for quite a while, but only recently under this name. I've found that any article on Wikipedia is controversial once it passes a particular length. I try an avoid topics where there's an ongoing edit war (try changing the casualty figures on the Eastern Front (World War II) article one day). Nloth 00:31, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Swiftsure

John: Thanks for that. I am working through in chronological order, so will get up to 1870 over the next couple of weeks. There were, as I would give long odds you know, several HMS Swiftsures. What a shame that the author of the article you found didn't know that! It's a fun project, and as a new Wikipedian I am pleased to have found a major gap that I can fill.--Anthony.bradbury 18:31, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

John: I just checked, and if i go in strict order and by-pass the ships who already possess some sort of artcle, HMS Swiftsure is twenty-fourth on my list as of now. Currently doing the Prince Consorts. But I will get there!

Interestingly, the HMS Triumph article - I guess you know that Swiftsure and Triumph were always built as a pair - refers to the correct ship, though it's not a great article.

Thank you for your interest and support. --Anthony.bradbury 16:56, 27 May 2006 (UTC)--Anthony.bradbury 23:13, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Finished Prince Consorts. The total number of ships and classes yet to do is quite scary.--Anthony.bradbury 23:13, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Swiftsure History Merge

Hey there. I merged every edit that seemed to pertain to the 1870 ship into HMS Swiftsure (1870) and everything pertaining to HMS Swiftsure (1903). It was sort of a messy case, so please review the edit histories to see if I made a mistake anywhere. Thanks for the request, and feel free to post any others you have on the WP:SPLICE page or contact me directly. Thanks. AmiDaniel (talk) 03:38, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pre-dreadnoughts

Hi; I just did a count, and there are sixty-seven articles waiting to be done, not counting expansion of already existing ones. So it will take me a little time, but watch this space!--Anthony.bradbury 17:10, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Now got as far as HMS Bellerophon (just finished).--Anthony.bradbury 23:39, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Books

John: thank you for your suggestion, which I shall follow through on. As I get to ships of a later period, I shall also start quoting Jane, but he does not quite go back far enough.--Anthony.bradbury 22:14, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

p.s. Down now to fifty-nine still outstanding.--Anthony.bradbury 22:17, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dreadnought cat

Hey John, I wanted to ask you about the new Dreadnought category. Is that category intended to just contain HMS Dreadnought and get her into Category:Battleship classes, or is it intended to hold all post-Dreadnought type battleships?

We've been discussing what to do with unique/one-off ships on Wikipedia:WikiProject Ships and it seems that the conclusion was that it's a bad idea to create categories that can only contain one ship. Instead, in the near future we're planning to create a Category:Unique ships, with subcategories Category:Unique battleships, Category:Unique aircraft carriers, etc. These categories would be listed under Ship classes, Battleship classes, etc. They would contain all ships of a particular type which are built to a unique design. TomTheHand 17:43, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Hello, Tom! It's nice to hear from you. I created the Dreadnought (1906) category as an experiment, having read the discussion on the Category:Unique ships proposal and being somewhat puzzled by it. As you may know, I am fairly new to Wikipedia, and haven't worked much with categories; before entering the discussion, I thought I would attempt to create a category for a one-ship class myself, and see if I could figure out what the problem was. Having tried it, I'm still puzzled. You say that "it's a bad idea to create categories that can only contain one ship". I have read the discussion carefully, and I still don't understand why. If we don't envisage categories for classes containing n ships, where n = 2, 3 , etc, why do we need a special category for the case n=1? Moreover, I don't see where this category is going to fit in under the Category:Ship classes category. In your dialogue with Graeme, you said that it makes Category:Battleship classes look prettier if everything's in categories and makes it easier to find things there. Even though Agincourt was a one-off, I still feel she should be able to be found under Battleship classes. I agree. But if all one-ship classes are hived off into a seperate sub-category, won't this have the opposite effect?

As I say, I am not the world's expert on categories, so I would be grateful if you could help me out. Many thanks for taking the time to contact me, and thanks also for the effort that you are putting into the project.

Regards, John Moore 309 10:24, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

PS I hope you won't feel that I am being disruptive if I put a copy of this on the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ships Talk page.

I don't enthustiastically support one side or the other. I responded on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ships with my thoughts but I think others have stronger feelings. When I started the project, I was really on the fence about what to do with one-ship classes because I didn't have much experience with categorization. I started out creating one-ship categories and then stopped as soon as someone suggested otherwise. TomTheHand 11:11, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] battleships

John: in case you were wondering, I have not stopped my battleship series; I have slowed down pending delivery of "D K Brown", which you recommended and which is currently in transit from Amazon.--Anthony.bradbury 11:17, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome to the Military history WikiProject!

[edit] Maritime warfare task force

Good news: Kirill Lokshin (talk • contribs) has recently created the Maritime warfare task force as part of the Military History project. Bad news: so far, it has only three members (the worst news is that one of them is me).

I think this would be a good forum for discussing of maritime warfare/naval history, exchanging ideas and establishing best practice at a more general level than the Ships project. If you are interested, can I suggest you pay a visit and, if you like what you see, sign up?

Regards, John Moore 309 16:24, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for raising this. I'm not sure what the qualifications and commitment are: I'm no expert, just an amateur with a butterfly mind, as you might see from my contribs. There are a number of better informed peeps than me and I don't feel sufficiently academic to produce quality work. I don't want the task force to be devalued by my association, but I don't mind raising issues and doing "grunt" work, like tagging appropriate articles. Comments? Folks at 137 08:27, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

You do yourself an injustice, Folks. We are all amateurs (so far as I know), and what I have seen of your work is well up to standard. Your recent edit to the Hipper-class, for example, was a significant improvement to the balance of the article. As for "grunt" work, there will be enough of that to see out the millenium. I would like to see this task force succeed, and this will be more likely if you are on board. Regards, John Moore 309 12:55, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Task Force

John: As you suggested, I have added my name.--Anthony.bradbury 00:32, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

P.S. "Warrior to Dreadnought" delivered today.

[edit] Military history WikiProject Newsletter - Issue VI - August 2006

The August 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot -- 12:17, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Feedback

You requested feedback on Wikipedia:WikiProject Ships. Nice work cleaning up the Hood references. You may want to consider using {{cite web}} or {{cite book}} inside the ref tags. Their use encourages a uniform style to refs. --J Clear 01:50, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] HMCS Prince David

Thank you, John. As a matter of fact I'm in the processes of building a page for HMCS Prince Robert. Once I get a little further along, I'll post the page. There is a fellow at the University of Brandon (Manitoba) who has a personal connection with the Robert (as I do with the David) and I'm hoping for some help from him, especially photographic uploads. Considering the unique circumstance under which the three ships were brought into the RCN and the different tasks they performed during the conflict, I think that they all should be represented. Having said that, there is quite a bit of overlap, particularly with the David and Henry, so let's see how the Robert page goes and a re-evaluation can be made down the road. With regards to the Prince David page, I agree that it is getting a bit voluminous and although I do have more info, adding it may begin to boarder on trivia. For now I'll leave well enough alone and hope that someone can add interesting items, until then I guess a "B" is a fair grade. Regards Elusive/Alberg22 06:18, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

• On sober second thought, and after realizing how much good information is contained in my latest archival plunder, l've decided to plod on and add more info to the PD page. I have added the HMS Voltaire incident. In the scheme of things, it is a minor tragedy, but very telling as to the desperate state that our two countries were in during the early days of the Battle of the Atlantic. Another item of interest is a discrepancy in the details of an event which involved the PD. I've posted a query as to how to proceed on the Canadian military task force talk page. If you get a chance, maybe you could comment on my conundrum. Elusive/Alberg22 05:22, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Military history Newsletter - Issue VII - September 2006

The September 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by Grafikbot - 19:26, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cumberland

John

You are quite right. I was writing the article is response to a request from another editor who was attempting to disambig the word "ram" and insisted on putting in a link in several of the battleship articles to "male sheep|ram". I checked my data on Lissa, but added the snippet on Cumberland from memory. I will go and change it unless someone else has.

I mentioned antiquity briefly, but did not feel the need to go into the era in any detail insofar as the article was meant to link to warships of the Victorian era. It might be possible to expand the whole subject into an FA. I will think about it.--Anthony.bradbury 14:17, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorted. I will clear up the two red links over the next day or two.--Anthony.bradbury 14:22, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue VIII - October 2006

The October 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 21:55, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Good job!

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Your service to Wikipedia is most deserving of this barnstar. Good job! Sharkface217 21:45, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue IX - November 2006

The November 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 22:37, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue X - December 2006

The December 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 22:52, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] HMS Dreadnought (1906) Collaboration

Hi. I read your pertinent comments on the Peer Review for Dreadnought from a while back. Since little seems to have been done on the article, would you be interested in a collaboration? This has to be one of the most important pages for Wikipedia yet it doesn't meet that standard in accuracy or content. I've sidelined all my Wikipedia stuff in favour of other internet projects, but this is something I'd like to see fixed. --Harlsbottom 22:40, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind remarks; like you, I've got tied up with other stuff, but I'm keen to see this key article brought up to scratch. Do you intend to nominate this as a Collaboration of the fortnight, or just to get a few guys together and start plugging away?

Regards, John Moore 309 23:17, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

PS I've taken the liberty of copying this thread to your Talk Page.

It's probably a good idea to nominate it for collaberation. It ought to generate more interest than the latest Review did (how anyone thought it would serve as a featured article I cannot imagine). On the discussion page Carom had some sound thoughts on transferring the American all-gun warship information (out of place in my opinion to a development page, but little seems to have come of it. Start plugging away sounds good. I'm armed with my Warrior to Dreadnought, The Grand Fleet, (D.K. Brown, as I believe you know) Battleships at War (B.R. Coward), Dreadnought Gunnery at the Battle of Jutland (John Brooks) and the Battleships of World War One (Antony Preston) as well as a few other unmentionables. --Harlsbottom 21:13, 24 January 2007 (UTC) (Copied back to my discussion page)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XI - January 2007

The January 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 20:49, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Illness

John; thank you.--Anthony.bradbury 18:55, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ironclads and Battleships

Hi - thanks for your comment!

'm fairly happy with the way things are working out. While pre-industrial armoured ships is a bit of a clunky name I'm happy for it to be linked from the top of the Ironclad warship article. And I'm not going to insist on the Napoleon being covered exclusively in ironclad, so long as it's noted there because of the importance of steam power to ironclad dvelopment. And yes it's well worth including in ship of the line as well as battleship, though probably more in the latter. The Land 15:48, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:MILHIST Coordinator Elections

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect seven coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 11!

Delivered by grafikbot 10:48, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Personal

John, thank you for your thoughts. Look at my talkpage; I did not know I had so many friends.--Anthony.bradbury 14:09, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Off Topic But...

Thanks for the heads up on my revert. I will make a note of this. This is wierd but my father's name is John Moore also. Strange coincidence. Happy Editing! Plm209 (talk • contribs • count) 22:15, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Military History elections

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting seven coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by February 25!

Delivered by grafikbot 14:16, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you kindly for the vote of support! --Petercorless 02:32, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Military history/Coordinators

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XII - February 2007

The February 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 15:26, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Auto-unblock request

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): Autoblock of 82.110.109.214 lifted or expired. Request handled by:  Netsnipe  ►  14:54, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Battleship fonts

Hello, FayssalF. I notice that you recently experimented with a reduced font size on the Refererences section of the Battleship article. Do you mind if I change it back? The smaller font is very difficult to read on my monitor, and seems inappropriate for such a large area of text.

You may reply here if you wish; I have added this page to my watchlist. Regards, John Moore 309 11:59, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi John. No worries. You can change it back of course. I just wanted to gain some space as the article is so long but your concerns are pretty valid as well. Cheers. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up ®} 12:05, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Last battle of the bismarck

Re (some of) your comments. The changing from "Decisive victory" to just "victory" and the merge tag are the work of User:Kurt Leyman. The merge is something he feels strongly about. GraemeLeggett 09:18, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XIII - March 2007

The March 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 19:14, 30 March 2007 (UTC)