User talk:Husnock/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Second Archive of User talk:Husnock

Contents

[edit] Archive Talk Page

Hi Husnock - I just moved your talk archive out of the main namespace - see the link above for its current location. Cheers --Rlandmann 21:02, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thank you! -Husnock

[edit] ST: Motion Picture Ranks

Are you sure this rank refers to ensign? I think ensigns supposed to be no insignia on ST:TOS as well as ST:MP. If thats the case two lists can be merged. --Cool Cat My Talk 03:28, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Star Trek: The Motion Picture had no rank of Lieutenant Junior Grade. This is established in several offical sources from the producers of the film (there also was no rank of Fleet Captain in the Motion Picture). Also, the original sereis rank stripes were of a different style, fabric, and color than the later motion picture ranks. Motion picture stripes were more "metalic". Please do not remove the Motion Picture column from the Star Trek rank article. Thanks -Husnock

I waited for your opinion ;) --Cool Cat My Talk 03:28, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wiki Ranks

If you check out my user page youll see SF ranks for wikipedia, what do you think? --Cool Cat My Talk 08:14, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

More power to you -Husnock

[edit] Movie Pins

That wasnt my intention, you see, I was planning on breaking up pins into smaller, reusable parts that way theya re generic (hence derivable ranks) -Coolcat

Please, please, please leave the movie pins alone. There is absolutely no reason to modify or change them. The article is pretty much at a complete stage now. There shouldnt be anything to correct except for factual errors and new info from official sources. Thats my opinion. -Husnock
As you wish... --Cool Cat My Talk 22:16, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Additional articles

Do you have another "rank" article I can help? Having generic pips is very usefull as you see :) --Cool Cat My Talk 22:17, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Im focusing more on my Nazi Germany articles now. Thanks, though. Good luck with the NATO one. -Husnock

[edit] US Ribbons

Good work on presenting the recent US medals for Iraq and Afghanistan. I do wish to let you know that every so often, I will be uploading new versions of the military ribbons (a bit cleaned up, in my view). I also wish to ask do you think the Iraq ribbon can be placed under the GWOT section? Zscout370 02:10, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The Iraq Campaign Medal is deemed to be a service medal for the 2003 invasion of Iraq, considered in the order of service medals to be separate from the War on terrorism (although no doubt linked). -Husnock
  • Ok, well, one thing I mentioned on the Awards talk page is that I will be putting the images in the png format. The gifs are not bad at all, however, I believe Wikipedia wants still graphics to be png, while the animated images be gif. Zscout370 03:30, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] You've got mail!

I hereby award you with the Working Man's Barnstar for your continious non-stop work on various articles most notably the Ranks and insignia of Starfleet. Congratulations. --Cool Cat My Talk 07:03, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Star Trek Templates

Keep in mind that templates are usable in other articles as well. --Cool Cat My Talk 22:10, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Good idea with the templates. It freed up a lot of article space and, like you said, can now be used in other articles. -Husnock
Another thing, want to do Klingon, Romulan, Bajorian ranks? Also check out the Ranks and Insignia of NATO, should we incorporate that format to this article? ie

ranks era1 era2 era3... a rank insig1 2 and 3

to

Era rank1 rank2 era1 insig1 insig4 era2 insig2 insig5 era3 insig3 insig6

This way all eras will have their own template. --Cool Cat My Talk 08:59, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] NATO insignia

I cant find any picture of the ranks worn by supreme nato generals, nor can I find the rank insig of the general in charge of us military, if such a thing exists, I mean the first non politician above all other military aside from Supreme NATO generals which are Officialy, Formaly, and Nominaly are in charge of all armies of Nato. --Cool Cat My Talk 09:02, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

As far as I know, there is no "supreme NATO insignia". NATO commanders are mostly four star generals (or equivalents). With the exception of the United Kingdom, I dont think there are any active duty 5 star equivalents in service. And, even in the UK, the five star ranks such as Field Marshal and Admiral of the Fleet are honorific in the modern age. -Husnock 14:46, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
They are 4 star generals on a position where they diplomaticaly appear above all, I know they have their regular 4 star us pin + something on it. I dont know what. --Cool Cat My Talk 22:14, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] None of my business but...

Why do you use === instead of ==? You can use = and ==, that way people do not accidentaly post a == via a +. --Cool Cat My Talk 22:14, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It is the way I have my talk page set up. -Husnock

[edit] Fictional Medal of Honor receipients

I think that in the movie "The Manchurian Candidate" (2004), the one of the main characters won the CMH in the early course of the movie. Zscout370 20:22, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

That was the person elected the vice president, former Sgt. Raymond Shaw. --Cool Cat My Talk 09:06, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
His name was added to the list, which I think it is a good list to have on the page. Zscout370 14:53, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Reichsfuhrer-SS

Hi, - I just saw your Wikistress levels on your user page " a bit tense" and realised I should have been treading a bit more carefully ... No offense or assault on the article was meant. You are doing great work. I still think though references to fiction are slightly inappropriate, or otherwise a much larger section on SS etc in literature would be a worthwhile undertaking. Fatherland is a brilliant novel, but in teh end only one among many alternate histories and other attempts to deal with teh horror of the time in a literary fashion. Refdoc 22:54, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

You made a very good point about having the fiction info in the article. I am redoing the format to have fiction in its won section. Then it can be moved out when and if someone creates the Third Reich in Literature article you mentioned. No offense was taken...I just wanted to talk about it. -Husnock

[edit] Schout bij Nacht

Hi, Thanks for correcting grammar :-/ I gave some explanation on the origin (and maning) of the rank in the talk section of Admiral. Further: I disagree with your mentioning about admiraal, still being an official rank. It can be found on navy listings and flag protocols, but that has mainly to do with tradition. In a few other sources (government, NATO) the rank seems to be scrapped. Rob. (btw I cannot sign here, I don't have account on the English Wiki-pages)

[edit] Ranks and Insignia of NATO

What do you think? --Cool Cat My Talk 07:05, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Congratulations!

Hey there Husnock! First of all congratulations on your two barnstars. I havent had the pleasure of reading any of your articles, I believe, but you have been here since April of 2004 and already got a barnstar plus a high worker's barnstar, that is quite an achievement! I have been here since 2002 and have gotten only one barnstar. Ive been suggested that maybe its because of the nicknames I give myself that a lot of users dont like them. I only do that to make people laugh a little. Anyways, you are a credit to our encyclopedia and I hope you keep up the quality work and stay with us for about 50 more years working!!!

I wanted to say I totally agree with you on the issue about John Paul II's title about "His Holiness". I know that boxing and religion have little in common (although I found a reference to pugilism in a Bible verse once, cant remember which verse it was) anyways, you know, former world champion boxers are always called "champion" or "world champ" by their fans and followers out of respect even if they dont hold a world title anymore. I think His Holiness is right out of respect just like I consider Muhammad a prophet out of respect too although Im a Christian.

Like we both have said on the talk page, furthermore, if His Holiness is erased based on POV issues, then hundreds of other pages containing honorable titles, such as Bill Clinton (42nd President, even through hes a FORMER president in reality) would have to have these titles erased as well. Too long of a task if you ask me.

I respect your opinion and like the fact we both agree on it. I look forward to reading some of your work soon. Whats more, send me some pages you have done cause I cant wait to read your work!

Thank you and God bless you! Sincerely yours, "Antonio Homie Boy Martin"

Thank you for the wonderful comments! It was sad to see many attacking that article. The "His Holiness" issue was flat out anti-Catholic trying to hide behind the POV issue. In any event, its great that we can stick together on this website and uphold the truth. -Husnock

[edit] MoH Rosette Image

Hey man, I am not offended at all by you removing my PNG image of the MoH rosette, since you are right about the jpg image. The reason why I drew it is that we can have a small picture of the rosette, and plus since I drew it, any copyright problems will be gone. Though since you list that anything from the DoD is PD, then there is no copyright problems either.

You know what Husnock, come to my talk page, because I need to work with you on the ribbon images that I have redone for the past few weeks now. Zscout370 18:08, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Rankings

Greetings Luetenant! I hope you dont mind me calling you by the rank, I believe you should be sick of being refered by the rank.

What do you think? --Cool Cat My Talk 01:12, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

First of all, you call call me by my rank, but User Name would be better. Second, the talk page of your pilot project speaks for itself. People will probably not go for it. -Husnock

[edit] USMC Ranks

Hey. I am not quite sure if you seen this yet http://www.tecom.usmc.mil/vim/IMU/pages/logos.htm. I am sure there will be a few things in there that we can use, since they are all PD. Zscout370 01:09, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Pope Benedict XVI Images

I haven't changed any tag on any photo released by the Vatican. I have only added tags to photos *I* have uploaded. You are lying and you will be reported. —Cantus…☎ 03:42, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)

You're in the edit history of an immge as changing the image tag to copyvio for no reason [1]. This has been reported as vandalism. -Husnock 03:45, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Cantus found the source for Image:Pope_Benedict_XVI.jpg, that one's okay now -- KTC 04:52, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Fair enough. I also found one from the U.S. Navy. it might be a good cease fire photo! -Husnock

Images aside, I am glad you got involved in this Edit War. Things were very bad yesterday, and since you stepped in, you have solved problems left and right. I do not know what you do, but man, it is awsome. Zscout370 11:19, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Military Pope Image

Sorry for coming on a question which has apparently been discussed already, but could you give me a link to where Image:MilChapPope.jpg comes from ? I have skimmed though the talk pages but haven't found a link... We'd need this for commons.. thank you very much ! Rama 11:02, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hello! I knew that question would come up. That image was e-mailed to me by a Lieutenant Chaplain in the U.S. Naval Reserve. For obvious privacy reasons, I cannot post his personal e-mail address on Wikipedia for interested parties to contact him as to where he got in from. However, he stated in the e-mail it was released by the Chief of Chaplains office in Wasington, DC. I imagine the photo was cropped from some other source, but it is verified, by me, as coming from the U.S. Navy since it was a navy.mil account on which I recieved it. -Husnock 22:27, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Thank you very much ! I am copying you answer on Image:MilChapPope.jpg, but of course please do feel free to correct it if I misunderstood something. And thank you for a most remarkable photograph ! Rama 22:37, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] VfD

It was not at all vandalism, thank you. Even if it wasn't me, any anon is allowed to nominate an article for deletion. I can't log in from school, but if you'll check the history of that static ID, you'll see that I frquently identify myself when using that ID. RickK 22:38, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)

Thats fine. Sorry that I deleted it, it should be back now. I am new to the rules about VfD. Once its over, can a person simply put it up there again and start up a whole new vote? Also, if an article does get deleted, can someone simply write it again? Just curious. Im sure the vote will go fine and we'll do what the people (and the admin) want. -Husnock 22:42, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
If an article is deleted, and someone recreates it, it falls under the speedy delete status, and any admin can and will delete it rapidly. If it is kept, there is no formal policy concerning renomination, but it is generally frowned upon. There is a current VfD of an article which was re-listed less than 24 hours after the keep vote had closed, and even those who voted delete on it previously are voting keep because of the inappropriateness of recreating the VfD. Generally, three months is concerned a minimum time to relist something, but that's not official. RickK 22:50, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Afghanistan and Iraq Service Medals

Hello again! Well, to let you know, the medals and ribbons have been starting to go on sale on MCAS Cherry Point Cash Sales/Uniform Shop. My father has purchased an Afghan ribbon (he served with the 22nd MEU in 2004) and I will try to see if I can purchase an Iraqi ribbon. Based on the Afghan ribbon, the shade of green is a borderline on light/lime green, unlike the dark green I had earlier. I will check the colors of the real ribbons and see if they match up to the images I drew. If you have any questions, just let me know. Zscout370 00:58, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Purple Heart

Thanks for your vigilance. I blocked him for vandalism (and for violating the three-revert rule). — Knowledge Seeker দ 18:11, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

  • One more thing, the way to use the vandal template is {{vandal|Username}}. That will list his user, talk and contribution page one line. I already fixed that for you. Zscout370 18:19, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I honestly thought that person was an innocent anon who just didnt understand the system. After about the third warning, and then name calling in the edit history, it was pretty obvious we were dealing with a vandal. Thanks for everyone's support. -Husnock 19:39, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Your welcome. You had our back in previous situations, we are just returning the favor. Zscout370 19:46, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
One more thing: if the image keeps on changing, that is my fault yall. I am trying to upload a better picture of the medal. Zscout370 01:23, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Star Trek Enterprise

Red Alert! All Hands to battle stations! I dont know if you watched the latest ST:Ent but there is a NEW ranking sceme in the alternate universe. Looks more like the Enlisted Slovanian ranks IMHO. --Cool Cat My Talk 12:16, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I watched it and was very impressed. The episode Mirror, Mirror didn't really have any kind of insignia, except for a Lieutenant stripe worn by evil Sulu. The new Enterprise episode apparently did have a coherent system. They are releasing them on DVD in the next few months which will give a chance to study it under a microscope. -Husnock 13:11, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
OK, keep me posted. :) --Cool Cat My Talk 04:52, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
What about DS9? --Cool Cat My Talk 04:53, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] US warrant officers

OK. I dont have a good NATO rank comparasion chart for non officer ranks so, Ill ask you this. What is the Equavalanet of US warant officers to other armed forces, for example the British? Also what is the NATO rank code? --Cool Cat My Talk 04:52, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia image policies/copyright

I've noticed you seem to be somewhat knowledgable on the issues of Wikipedia image policies. I have copyright images that Permission has been granted to be used on wikipedia, but not under any free licences, and the copyright holder doesn't want them under the GFPL. What are wikipedia's policies on the matter? McKay 18:40, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I've had many battles with images and am involvoed with one right now. Tell me the image name and I will take a look at it. I am trying to figure out, myself, if a verbal statement from someone is good enough to verify a sources since some of these images are from books/other sources than the Internet. -Husnock 18:49, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
They are my images. I have only uploaded one, but I want to upload more if I can give Wikipedia permission to use them, and not under the GFPL. Is it against Wikipedia policies. McKay 05:14, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Sorry to but in, but it is allowed. There is a template you can use on your pages that you will not allow Wikipedia or any of their sister projects to relicense your stuff. See Wikipedia:Template_messages/User_namespace#Licensing_Templates. Zscout370 17:30, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Medals Question

I was wondering where do you find the pictures of the various medals. I am asking that, since I want to remormat the pictures on the Legion of Merit page to look something like the Order of Suvorov (create a table, put the pictures of the various degrees side by side, then ribbons). Zscout370 (talk) 01:43, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Most every award ribbbon and medal picture comes out of a database at the National Personnel Records Center (which I am actually in charge of maintaining). The images are typically obtained freom a site called "Foxfall Medals" as well as the Medals information webpage at Randolph Air Force Base and the Institute of Heraldry. -Husnock 07:35, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Thank you. Zscout370 (talk) 13:12, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Nazi Gemany stub

This won't answer the question you raised at the stub template talkpage, but your new stub category creates several another much more serious. It cuts straight across the WWII-stub category, created after debate at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Criteria last month. Stub categories should normally be cleared by Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting before creation to ensure this sort of thing doesn't happen - the overlap in this case is quite sizable, and sorting out where one category ends and the other begins is likely to cause considerable problems.

If you can provide any information on why the stub was created, please add a note to entry for the stub at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Criteria#Newly-discovered stub categories giving the reason for it. In addition, if there is any Wikiproject associated with the stub add that information. Thanks.

If you're interested in helping sort stubs, we're always looking for new members of the project! Grutness|hello? 01:06, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

My first time trying to invent a stub. Hope I didnt break any rules. In any event, a lot of the Nazi Germany articles pertian to events of the 1930s or even the 1920s. The National Socialist Flyers Corps for instance, was big until about 1935 at which time it dwindled to almost no importance by 1940. To call that a WWII stub would not be accurate. So, thats the primary reason. To stub articles specifically about Nazi germany that contain info from before the years of the Second World War. -Husnock 01:46, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
And generally, the period is usually from 1933 - 1939, when the war officially began. Six years of history can be covered by one stub. Zscout370 (talk) 02:06, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Original Research Star Trek

My assumption was due to the lack of (theorised) [2]--Cool Cat My Talk 04:19, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the web page you list is a fan page which is not in any way connected to the producers of the Star Trek series. It cannot be considered offical according to Wikipedia policy. "No original research" means that we cannot propose new ideas, therories, or state things that have not been established by an offical source. Your Star Trek ranks seem great, but they simply arent supported by any offical source material, only fan info which is quite clearly not offical. -Husnock 05:01, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Nazi Awards

I know of that particular award you refer to. Mussolini had a unique variant with diamonds, I do believe.

User:Expatkiwi 23:20, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

I've added another NSDAP award: The Golden Party Badge on Wikipedia. Hope you like it.

User:Expatkiwi 00:50, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "Stubs to be discussed"

Hello,

A question has come up at talk page for the WikiProject Stub Sorting about the purpose behind the category Stubs to be discussed. I don't think there'd be any question if there were a topic focus to the category (such as "star trek stubs to be discussed"); the breadth of the area covered implied by the name is large enough to be difficult to fathom being useful very shortly after inception. However, the benefit of the doubt is yours and I and the rest of the stubs project denizens would be interested in your thoughts behind the creation of this new category.

Thanks for visiting the talk page and contributing your comments.- Courtland 23:22, 2005 May 9 (UTC)

I came to this page to ask this very question, there's a bunch of folks working on stubs and stub sorting and speaking for myself anyway this seems like it might be much too large to be of effective use. But it might be that I'm misunderstanding it's useage. Could you drop by the talk page when you have a moment and share your thoughts? Thanks! Rx StrangeLove 01:11, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
The category you are referring to linked to a template box called "Template:Newstubs". Its intended as a list for proposed stubs that have been created yet not added to articels. I created a Nazi stub and ws blasted from all sides that I did not discuss it and "ask" for approval. it was actually only one particualr person who was behaving like the "Stub Police", reverting new stbs and then lecturing those who had created them "without permission". So, the category is mainly to deal with situations like that. -Husnock 06:35, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] I support factual data

No hard feelings at all. I do think deleting the article is a bad idea tho, I scanned the internet and checked the data I presented. bajoran ranks are probably accurate, not sure about gorn or any other race. klingon looks right, many sites agreed, then again many sites maybe using each others data. Star Trek games have a good deal of ranks I think. Borg ranks can be aquired from star fleet command 3. I am in process of changing the continent/country I live on so I got my hands full just a bit. Again I am not seeking to put fanfic on wikipedia I did not just go to a site to present the data. Link I gave you has most ranks tho. Bear in mind that some discrete races were in several star trek games. --Cool Cat My Talk 05:41, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ranks and insignia of Starfleet

I know you did some good work on that article, and I know you want it to become a FA, just like the Medal of Honor article. I, stated earlier, I want to redraw many of the ranks on there, so not only they can become png files, but to erase the copyright issues. However, should the images become public domain or under the GDFL copyright? Zscout370 (talk) 18:27, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

The stripes and pips you can just redraw and release as the creator of the image. No one has copywright over stripes, circles, triangles, and rectangles! :-) The movie pins are tricky as I got them off of public sites, the same with some of the Next Generation and Enterprise Admiral insignia. Probably should leave those alone so other people cant say you copied or took off someone elses webpage or broke rules about Paramount images. -Husnock 18:32, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
I am first redrawing some pips and some stripes and bars. I know there will be other images I will try to redraw, but if you want me to leave certain images alone, that is fine with me. Zscout370 (talk) 18:47, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
Feature Film Rank Pins and all Admiral insignia should probably be left alone. Also be careful about the stripes for original series and motion picture. Coolcat put alot of work into those and would probably get miffed if they were changed and/or modified. Thanks for all your efforts on the other pics. -Husnock 20:24, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
One more thing, I think two people have stated that the way CoolCat uses the images on the templates is making their broswer screw up. Example, the images can get out of alignment if the window size is shrunk. I want to fix this, but I have been reverted twice. Can you see the complaints at the FAC and see what do you want to do with the templates? Zscout370 (Sound Off) 23:48, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

Coolcat can be a very interesting person and I have been annoyed at his work more than once as he adds things that dont make a whole lot of since and sticks to dieing causes. He can be a good guy, though, I give him some slack since he is paprently a non-english speaker I think from asia minor or the med, as far as I can tell. In any event, I like your pics much better. Simple revert to what you want and leave a strong worded message on his talk page. I had to do that when he seriously messed up the images of the movie rank pins on the insignia page. Thanks for all your support -Husnock 00:00, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

You are quite welcome. I left an edit summary on both edits that I have done, explaining about the problem and what I am solving. If I get reverted again, I will revert back, and you can revert too. I am still using Cool's images, but I am going to combine them using Print Screen and Microsoft Paint. Also, I am trying to have an article made FA too, called Hero of Belarus. If you want to look at that, be my guest. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 00:10, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

I realize what is going on now with the reverting between me and CoolCat. CoolCat stated this in an edit summary "Template:Ranks and Insignia of Starfleet/Flag Officers; 19:07 . . Coolcat (Talk) (I am more concerned about users accessing this page rather than it becoming a FA. I havent simply reverted the page, it looks identical and loads 13 times faster.) ." Am I getting the message that he is trying to undermine your goals? Zscout370 (Sound Off) 00:13, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the message at CoolCat's page. To let you know, I am finished with the Cadet and Warent Officer's Templates. I will upload a few more images in the next few days, since my eyes are killing me. I have been drawing not only for you, but for my articles, and also countless variations of suspension devices for the Barnstar of National Merit. If you need anything else, just let me know. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 03:03, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Support for FAC

Done. --Cool Cat My Talk 20:43, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

Thank you, good sir!

[edit] Ribbon bar

I welcome you to expand on this stub. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 18:55, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

Ill be more than happy to after the battle over FAC is at last won! :-) -Husnock 00:01, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] DSC

The previous editor was right; the article now says,

"The Distinguished Service Cross is equivalent to the Navy Cross (Navy and Marine Corps) and the Air Force Cross (Air Force). The Distinguished Service Cross was introduced in January 1918 by President Woodrow Wilson and formalized by the United States Congress on July 9, 1918. The DSC is the Army's equivalent of the Navy Cross and the Air Force Cross." It doesn't need both. —wwoods 22:18, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. -Husnock 22:23, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] FAC Support

I was wondering if you wish to look and comment at Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Hero_of_Belarus. Thanks. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 23:58, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Nice job

I hope you are able to address my technical objections for the Ranks and insignia of Starfleet FAC. That article is great and I'd really like to see it featured. --mav 00:16, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

Ive done my best. Its pretty much finished now. I was very surprised how much flaming of the article there was. There were a few folks who really didn't want to see it featured. -Husnock 05:15, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ranks and insignia of Starfleet

If you insist. Bother me when you guys decide on a sceme. --Cool Cat My Talk 20:28, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

"sceme"? :-) Please understand there is a battle right now for FAC status. One wrong move and an admin could close the vote and we would have to start over. Changes to the article most be closely monitored. -Husnock 05:15, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] List of Starfleet officers

You may want to use data here to complete Ranks and insignia of Starfleet, I used data only from [www.startrek.com] so nothing is fannon :) (I used primary chars only) --Cool Cat My Talk 04:16, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

I would referece those dates you are using so it doesnt look like you amde them up based on personal opinion, as that would be Original Research. -Husnock 05:15, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Here You Go

I wish I found this earlier, but you should see this website. [3] It is a Wiki project, so we can probably use some of their information and put it on here. I also suggest that we can take information here and stick it on that website. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 23:33, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Featured article withdrawn

Why did you do this? You had my complete support. Just because several people object doesnt mean anything. It isnt necesarily votes that count sometimes either. Its an excellent article. --Cool Cat My Talk 21:40, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

There was a group of people openly attacking the article as "pure fiction" as well as two persons who were outright calling the article nasty names. It was never going to be resolved as some persons would vboice a complaint and, after the complaint was corrected, come up with something new. The people calling the article "pure fiction" and "fancruft" were simply doing it to cause problems. Rather than have the situation get even more unpleasant, i.e. sockpuppets and vandals, I withdrew the nomination. -Husnock 21:44, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
I think you should realise backing down is not the right thing at this point. If they dare to use sockpuppets I'll make sure hell breaks loose on them. IRC does wonders. "pure fiction" is 100% acurate we do not have warp capable ships after all. "fancruft" is not right. We rellied on official publication, aside from screen caps. I and you can verify all the ranks we have provided. Some people exist only to complain, I care not of such people, if you are comlaining about something you must establish the problem, explain why this could be a problem or offer a solution or two to such possible problems. I serriously recommend resuming this article as a Featured Article candidate. I do not now how to do it, I mean resume. :/ --Cool Cat My Talk 00:25, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
Give it a week or two, then I will resubmit it. I had an article go through the FAC process, so I can provide some tips if you need anything. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 00:29, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
A modicum of self-criticism would be really appropriate here. The article is about pure fiction, it is fancruft and that trekkies publish and consume enormous amounts of written material without any regard to whether it has academic value doesn't change a thing. I agree that some of the critical comments could've been better worded, but they are all concerned with a very valid objection; why should we treat a completely non-academic subject though it were like any other research and raise it to the level of an FA? This is not about the level of detail, but whether it is reasonable to promote extreme details of fiction as something encyclopedic enough to get the best approval you can receive on Wikipedia.
And lashing out at critics with completely unfounded and irrelevant implications of drawing sockpuppets and vandals into the discussion is very disproportionate behavior and so is accusing them of doing it just "to cause problems". The only one being unreasonably belligerent and defensive here is Husnock, even if I don't question his plight nor his knowledge of the subject at hand. And trust me on this: I would have the exact same objections about any fictional subject I myself was fond of.
Peter Isotalo 11:28, May 28, 2005 (UTC)
And yet, "Dalek" is a featured article on Wikipedia. Sorry that you don't like Star Trek, but not liking an article is not reason enough for objecting to to it in a featured article vote. In all fairness to you, I do thank you that you voiced your views as a "comment" this time and not as an "object". As far as lashing out at critics (where's my whip?!?) I felt I was justified to do this for the two people who calle dthe articles names. One called it "petty", then put an article on his talk page urging admins to delete the article, and the other referred to the article as a "crufty pile of minute" or some nonesense like that. Name calling of articles has absolutely no place no here. -Husnock 18:11, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Procedure

First, I would move the original FAC page to an archive page, so it will not be blanked. Then, make sure you got everything you wanted to fixed before heading to the FAC page. Third, create the nomination page as you did before, put down your reasoning on why it should be FA and also the changes you have made. Place the template at the FAC page and just announce the re-opening of the FAC. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 01:49, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

Oh yeah, one misc. item: if you want to show on the front page which articles you created became FA, put this template before or after the article link: {{FA}}. This will produce a 20x20 pixel star, the same star used on FA templates. Enjoy. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 02:29, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Starfleet Insignia Pictures

I am almost, almost done with them. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 01:56, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Hopefully, "the evil one" will cease messing with your pictures. I left another message asking him to stop. -Husnock 02:33, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
I will be out for the next few days, but in reality, all I need to do is the Officer Insignia and I will be done. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 02:51, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] FAC

Did you even read my first comment on the first FAC? I gave very high praise to the article and am in fact a Star Trek fan. So your insinuation that I will just keep finding things to object to based on me not wanting a Star Trek article featured are outrageous and insulting. Also, the FA criteria is just a list. From that list are other pages that explain the criteria in more detail. The two relevant links in that regard are Wikipedia:lead section and Wikipedia:Summary style. You have some reading to do. --mav

My main concern is that you now feel the article is "bloated". I really don't know how to fix that. The other changes you said I plan to make. I've done two of them already (TOC and intro paragraph). The last nomination just got pretty nasty with people attacking the thing from all sides with no end in site. Not that you did that, I'm just really hoping it doesnt happen again. -Husnock 15:35, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../h/u/s/User_talk%7EHusnock_Archive_2_7f0e.html"