User talk:Jackehammond/Archive 11

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  • Dave Thank you! Thank You!! THANK YOU!!! When ever I archive my talk page from now on this section stays. If I had read that essay a few months back the recent massive disaster would not have happened. Glad you replied. I guess -- I HOPE -- you have accepted my apology. Wilson did. Next time I listen. Jack --Jackehammond (talk) 08:10, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
  • No worries, we're happy with what we've got, right? Unlike someone who keeps going around stepping on toes and wondering why he has no friends, ain't it obvious? About those unhappy ones, please read KJV Proverbs 26:11. Read also... →this← (something that might strike a chord with you), →this← (FWIW, I forgave him a long long time ago...), →this← (stupid sibling rivalry!) and →this← (something that spoke of your understanding of what a good article should be and made me respect you even more). Well, I just got back from a one week vacation and already I'm seeing that I have a lot of catch up to do on Wikipedia. See you around~! --Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 08:48, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
  • Dave That first one about the A-4SU did strike a cord. JEEZ! You could have replaced "Dave" with "Jack" and it would have been my early days. --Jackehammond (talk) 16:29, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

A final comment

Jack, I was away for awhile. I spent time performing basic tasks like laying stone and shoveling dirt -- a very nice pause from other activities I have to say. I'm sorry to see that the article dispute we discussed ended on a somewhat sour note. This kind of thing makes one tire of internet activities; face-to-face, all involved could have probably enjoyed a good shouting match and a few bottles of wine on the way to resolving the conflicting views: but on the 'net, such is is not possible. <sigh> Cheers, W. B. Wilson (talk) 20:24, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

  • Hey, Wilson... that was truly spoken like a gentlemen although I don't think I can drink and then drive later but I'll settle for a cuppa good java anytime! Personally, I just got back from a very relaxing 1-week vacation and am surprised that somethings didn't turn out the way we want them to on WP but I guess we'll managed. (PPS:"Remember that the happiest people are not those getting more, but those giving more." -- H. Jackson Brown, Jr.) Cheers and best~! --Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 00:39, 2 April 2012 (UTC)--Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 00:39, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
    • Awhile back, I wrote down some thoughts about these kinds of situations in paragraph #1. Cheers, W. B. Wilson (talk) 05:44, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
  • 'Wilson I sour on anyone that takes a public victory lap out of spite on Wikipedia over any dispute. That was when I knew I had really messed up and owed Dave and you a public apology. I had learned a very hard lesson and endanger my relationship with my dear friends on Wikipedia. The essay that Dave sent me, even says stay out of these disputes and let the administrators and the Wiki system sort it out. Glad you both did not rub my face in it with "I told you so!" and accepted my apology. THANKS. Jack --Jackehammond (talk) 06:30, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
In my view, nobody can be considered at fault for extending what is at heart, WP:Good faith. But some editors choose to see good faith as a 'weapon' for argueing with, a wholesome endorsement of their actions, rather than leniency and grace. You certainly can't be wrong for acting with moderation and aiming for a constructive consensus, far from it. It is just a difficult case, and one that will hopefully quiet down. Kyteto (talk) 15:56, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Here we go again...

  • Wilson Agree 100%. Any way my fingers are still bandaged and tender from the last time when they got burned. <GRIN> Btw, the 1st part of that "Thoughts" - very good. This says it best Wikipedia:Give 'em enough rope Jack --Jackehammond (talk) 18:38, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Thunderstorm

First of all, I don't understand your comment. It seems like you don't like that it has a {{pp-protected}} template, but there is no reason to remove it. Secondly, if you even interested to check my information I am not an admin and I canNOT protect pages, so I don't get your point. Thirdly, if you want the page unprotected, contact the administrator who originally protected the page. Please, don't come to my talk page under a WP:OWN attitude. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 05:31, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Folks, I left the above as a good example of why unless you know the editor well, that it is always best to stick to editing. When I read the above I thought I had woke up back in 2009 when I first came to Wikipedia and I had added that link to ARMY RECON on the RBS-70 page that upset so many people. Now what happen. I cruise around the back issues of PM and PS magazines. When I find something I post it to the relative page(btw Wilson is to blame for my addiction with that 1917 240mm howitzer page I found and "Hey let's expand it to a separate page" business. <GRIN>). Came across a PM 1953 article that stated over several hours that the average Thunderstorm packs the energy of 50 Hiroshima A-Bombs. While I was on that page I noticed it had a new protection tag. Why would "THUNDERSTORM" have a protection tag. Well when ever I post any information to a page I also add it to my watch list. When someone else edits it after me I go back and check if they removed what I posted and why. If nothing is removed I assume what I posted was ok and remove it from my watch list. I never dispute a deletion. I just move on to the next edit. I just like to read the note to find out why. Well the next edit was by the person above whose note on Thunderstorm said he is "removing a protection template from a non-protected page". I left a note asking if he found out why it had the protection tag if he could drop me a line unless he did not think it was appropriate. That I was just basically curious. They warn cats to not be curious and now I have been warned also. <GRIN> Also, this message is as an example. Let just let it go and all of us move on to editing. I don't want to know why the protection template or his attitude. And the "Grammatically incorrect?" I knew that I was good at finding references and bad at editing pages -- but that bad??? Jack --Jackehammond (talk) 05:59, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

His response is at the least misdirected. There's two things here that may be in play. One is that the other editor is from a different culture and that, while good with English, it is not his native language. The other is that your comment capitalized "thunderstorm" followed by several question marks. This is pretty harmless, but sometimes people interpret the caps as shouting and don't like the emphasis given by repeated punctuation. That is the only thing I can think of that set him off. About the protection template -- these go onto articles that are frequently vandalized by IP editors. It slows the vandals down and removes some of the fun for them for a limited period of time, at the end of which they have usually moved on to other activities. Cheers, W. B. Wilson (talk) 16:27, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
  • Wilson That is probably the answer. But either way, unless I know the editor well, I am sticking to my talk page and editing. I don't think trying to discuss the misunderstanding with him would be to wise Really, I felt like I had woke up back in 2009. <GRIN> Jack --Jackehammond (talk) 18:14, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Follow me to join the secret cabal!

Plip!

  • Dave, THANKS A LOT!!! I knew I could count on you. <GRIN> <GRIN> Btw, On the internet you would think the webpage forums you would have the most misunderstanding, would be a non-native tongue. But I have found out and others say the same are the India webpage defense forum. Yes they may speak English, but it isn't an English many Americans understand. I got in big trouble on a section that was dedicated to the Indian Army under the Raj. Couldn't figure it out, till a gentleman from India explained half the members had distance relatives who fought in the British Indian Army and the other half had distant relatives were with the mutineers in 1857. That the Indian government even ordered a parade canceled and no discussion of the 1857 Mutiny. And worst he stated was to stay clear of any discussion of the INA (Indian National Army) that fought for the Japanese in WW2. Last, I read a travel article that states when anyone from England travels to the US they have no problems. But Americans traveling to England, thinking everything is ok, except the side of the road you drive on trip all over themselves. Jack --Jackehammond (talk) 03:09, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
        • Jack, the editor's bit about "grammatically incorrect" is a standard line he inserts into all of his comments on the talk pages of other users. Confuses communication IMO. Cheers, W. B. Wilson (talk) 04:28, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
  • Wilson I am not worried about it. If his ranting at me helped make it better for others he deals with on Wiki then I have accomplished something positive this week. My problem is like my nephews little dog named Zoe. Zoe assumes that if she is friendly with another dog or cat, they will be friendly with her. Ain't so. But the part about my grammar did throw me. I mean I knew I was bad which was why when I was writing whole pages I really needed Jonathon, Dave and you. Remember the High-Low System page. You must have worked two weeks or more to get that one edited right after I finished. Had to reshuffle the section around big time. And Dave must have worked a month re-editing the 76mm/L62 Allargato page. Both of you must have secretly (and maybe openly) thought "Jeez! It would just be easier on our nerves to get the administrators to just ban him." Thank to both of you for not taking the easy way out. And if I ever get the urge to start doing whole pages again, I will give plenty of notice so you can run. And don't you just miss the old days when I would post a message to Dave, Jonathon and you that asked "Well, what did I do wrong this time and who have I p*ssed off?" <GRIN> Jack --Jackehammond (talk) 04:56, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
  • For what's it's worth, I had a similar problem with this editor. Hard to tell if it's the ESL or if they're just rude... - thewolfchild 15:57, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Dave So right you are. For what ever reason your first 6 months on Wikipedia are like a new love. You are full of so much energy and it is so much fun. Instead of minor edits and finding references you do whole pages on new subjects. But then then it ends as it should. But you always have the memories. They were good days. Thanks for the reminder. I would love to ask one editor that we are familiar with two question: Do you see any time period as the good old days on Wikipedia? And do you find editing on Wikipedia fun? I may be wrong, but I don't think that person's answers would be positive. Do you? Again, thanks for your generous support since 2009. I mean it! Jack --Jackehammond (talk) 09:13, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Page numbers on magazine article for reference

Folks, I have run into this problem quite often. And before someone goes screaming to an administrator, I hope someone can give the correct answer. For example. Let us say I am using a Popular Mechanics article for a reference. And that article has a lot of pages, but only one page has the info I need for the reference. The article goes from page 66-69. But the needed info is on page 67. As of now I handle it this way Popular Mechanics, July 1952, pp. 65-69/247, see p. 67. Is this the correct format? Jack --Jackehammond (talk) 05:45, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Need a good editor on the Surface-to-air missile page

Folks, I just happened to stumble on the page Surface-to-air missile and Early Efforts and the dispute over the world's first operational SAM. And of course I decided to set that issue straight. Well after working on it for five hours, I got the record straight with verifiable and reliable references, etc. But the problem is that after fiddling for hours with the original texts it is a mess and the reading of it is impossible. Can anyone go over to that page and take a looksie? Really would appreciate it. Thanks Jack --Jackehammond (talk) 08:53, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

This 1952 photo is ASTONISHING

Folks, Cruising back issues of PM, PS and FLIGHT is fun and some of the stuff is very interesting. But in a 1952 issue of Popular Mechanics, I came across an astonishing photo. Which basically changes the history of aviation as we thought we knew it. Basically an aircraft type that was suppose to have been totally retired (and non-flying) was still in service in 1952. When you click the link below you will be astonished. I know I was. I had read about everything there was on the history of this type of aircraft and the Russians and the Warsaw Pact was still the only nation using this type of aircraft -- ie by either military or civilian. "This is the the link to the ASTONISHING PHOTO." I have the link for just one page, so it will come up black and then in a few seconds the page will pop up. If you want to read the full article, click the arrow at the left side, then click expand (arrows pointing out four ways) and then it will work right. Why I don't know. I think it is a google thing to bug me. Best Jack --Jackehammond (talk) 06:32, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

  • Dear Dave, No the glider. They were all sold for the boxes and to make cheap travel trailer for hunters before the Korean War started. Sorry I didn't post a message to you also. I didn't think you were interested in this type of military or aviation history. I thought you were more interested in more modern aviation and weapons. But according to your message and inquiry, you are and are knowledgeable on this subject also. Have to remember that when I get stumped on something of this era of weapons and aircraft. Btw, I also found this one what I think is still the world's smallest aircraft. Any pilot is put in the cockpit with a lot of grease and a shoe horn. "Seven Foot Airplane Flies 150 Miles Per Hour.". Also I would like to thank all of you on your side of the international date line, because it seems everyone in Asia and Europe with a computer is on google books slowing it down for us in the Americas! <GRIN> I thought the BT-67 was South African. Learned something I didn't know. Thanks --Jackehammond (talk) 07:05, 29 April 2012 (UTC)Jack
  • Dave, I have been interested in little know history of wars, units weapons for a long time. I have read a lot about the assault gliders off WW2. After WW2 some were kept but all the crated ones were sold off. Some people bought them to make cheap travel trailers for hunting (that is how some were found to restore for museums) but most were bought for their big wooden crates for the wood! Jack--Jackehammond (talk) 18:02, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
  • Hey Dave, just the Wiki expert I need to talk to. What are the rules on cut a paste between Wikipedia pages. I found an article on a power generation project of the 1950s between the US and Canada and a treaty that governs the flow of water. On another Wikipedia page I found the perfect paragraph explaining how the treaty allows more water to flow at night 5 months of the year and then even more during the winter. I just copied it and pasted it into the other article with a reference. Is that allowed or do I have to go back and reword it? When my father was station on Okinawa between 1957 and 1960 there was a Marine base below where there was family housing with hundreds of those Quonset Huts. I was in one once. D*mn they are hot in the Summer. But they stand up a lot better to Typhoons (what do they call them in Singapore, Typhoons or Cyclones?) than standard flat wall housing. But again: THEY ARE HOT!! Finally, from what I am reading because of China claiming all the water to the beach sand line, in your part of the world, the other nations are buying attack subs as fast as they can be built and crews trained. Indonesia just bought a couple of German 209s based on the South Korean models along with some Russian Kilos. I know Singapore likes Western combat aircraft, but I think all the nations need to follow North Vietnam lead and buy the SU-27 with that Mach 5 ramjet antishipping missile. The Su-27 has such a long range without refueling that is unmatched. Also, I think the Philippines are scr*wed as we say. The landed elite to get the Catholic Church support demanded we get the h*ll out of Subic Bay. And many Americans think the Filipinio people had best learn to sleep in their bed, and make the best deal they can with the Chinese. Also, is there any talk of a defense alliance by SEA nations against China's claims? Jack --Jackehammond (talk) 04:35, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Jack, as far as I can tell... nobody I know over here wants to be in them huts between 1000 to 1500hrs (the most hottest part of the day!) because of the possibility of getting roasted alive! And a typhoon is still a typhoon to us, though none has hit my region ever before. Lastly, except Philippines and Vietname, the rest of ASEAN countries are not too concerned with China as several of us are all on very good terms with PRC, being one of our biggest investment/trading nation/partner after US and/or Japan. In the final analysis, nobody in their right mind wants to become a thorn in the eye of PRC except for those two brainless idiots/barking dogs, who are in essence, wanting to get US and Japan involved in something the rest would rather not be a part of. That much I can tell. --Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 05:33, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jackehammond/Archive_11&oldid=1143540356"