User talk:Alberg22
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Reply to HMCS Prince David question
Welcome to Wikipedia. I guess the best answer for me to give you would be to point you towards an article about a ship that has reached Featured Article status. Take a look at USS Missouri (BB-63) for an example of what can be done with articles on Naval vessels. Hope this helps and gives you an idea of how far an article can be taken. Hope you stick around and continue to edit and if there is anyting else I can help with please feel free to ask. Cheers--Looper5920 01:54, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] HMCS Prince David
I have to admit, when I hit the wiki page on the Prince David, I was overwhelmed! What a beautiful article you have put together! When I initiated the article, I merely thought to add a few details about the ship since the article didn't exist. Thank you very much for putting so much effort in to making this article so robust.
Now, from a triumvirate-article standpoint, I don't think that one super-article would be appropriate; it would be a very long and convoluted subject. The problem I can forsee is that since there are divergent histories surrounding each of the ships, the article would end up being excessively complex, and difficult to read. Any parts of the articles that are virtually identical could eventually be separated out and linked to a new topic about the common operation or general history. As an example of what I mean, the sections about "pre-war", "Armed Merchant Cruiser" and "Landing Ship Infantry" could be rolled into a separate article where the information is general on the other hand, specifics about the individual ship as related to each section would remain. I am certain you understand what I mean, but as I write it out I can see this could well be a momentous undertaking!
I think what has happened, as I read this article, is that as you (and others) contributed information, the article sort of ballooned in order to explain all the various aspects of the ship's history; and when placed in a large military context, this ballooning probably has no definable end. 'Tis quite a conundrum indeed. I may muck about with something in my own sandbox and let you know if I come up with something useful.
But I am really quite awed by what you have contributed! The article barely resembles the original at all (laugh), but that isn't to say anything derogatory about it. Quite the opposite, in fact; I don't think I would have had the patience required to be so thorough.
Now, as far as photos and anecdotal information is concerned, I actually have quite a bit available to me. Unfortunately, however, I don't really have the time to do it all justice. My wife's music, my home renovations, and a complete career change (first a BSc in Genetics, then a Union tradeworker, now a 4th Class Power Engineer), plus two very young children have all conspired against me. I think there is a quote about that by someone; something to the effect that the jobs at hand expands to fill all the time available allotted. Well, these jobs seem to think I have 35 hours a day I think ;)
Anyway, keep up the fantastic work. I look forward to collaborating with you on these subjects! Em3rald 03:24, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
- Hello, Alberg22! You will see that I have rerated HMCS Prince David to B-class; this is long overdue for an excellent article, clearly a labour of love. I would say that it had a strong claim to A-class status, but this can only be awarded by project coordinators. If you would like to try for it, the instructions are here.
- It strikes me that the Prince David was a member of a three-ship class, but there is no article on the class. It is normal in Wikipedia for there to be an article for classes of two or more ships, giving the design history, rationale and technical specification, while the articles on the individual ships focus on their operational history. If you were to create such an article, it would allow you to lighten the current article, by moving out the material which is common to all three ships. It would also be a useful resource to yourself or other editors when starting articles on the sister-ships.
- Congratulations again on your excellent work. Keep it up!
- Regards, John Moore 309 17:44, 20 September 2006 (UTC) (John Moore, London, England)
[edit] License tagging for Image:HMS-RENOWN.png
Thanks for uploading Image:HMS-RENOWN.png. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 04:06, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Wikipedia Search
Well, there are two possible explanations that occur to me:
- The index used by our internal search hasn't updated to include the article yet. This probably isn't too likely.
- The small number of incoming links (only four other articles link to it) is pushing it down in the search results.
It may be something else entirely, of course; but those are the only things that come to mind. Kirill Lokshin 01:18, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] RCN convoys
Have you seen Milner's North Atlantic Run? It's great coverage of Canadian efforts. I recommend it to anyone with an interest in RCN history, convoys, Battle of Atlantic, or ASW. (Who's left?) Also recommend van der Vat's Atlantic Campaign. It's a very interesting piece of work, which ties together WW1 & WW2 ASW; unfortunately, it's full of errors & questionable claims. Still... If I can offer aid, don't hesitate. Trekphiler 09:52, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Re: HMCS Prince David
I haven't been able to find a table of commanding officers per se, but there's plenty of examples for the table syntax itself, such as the table here; hopefully, it won't be too difficult to adapt that to your specific needs.
As far as the background: it should certainly be given, but in a "Background" section rather than filling up the lead. The lead section is meant to be a summary—a "mini-article" that can stand alone as an introduction to the topic—rather than merely background information. Kirill Lokshin 02:13, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Admiral Comments
Glad to be of help. Can't really offer any tips; you're a bit outside my area. As for why your branch doesn't have Milner et al, likely they didn't think it was worth buying. It's (I think) 1997; haven't actually got a copy (yet...), I read it from my local branch, after seeing Milner as a specialist interview on a TV doc. He's done a couple of books that look pretty interesting, including co-writer of one on Canadian corvette development. You might also look at H.T.Lenton, who's done a couple of small, specialist works on escort ships; nothing Canadian-specific, as far as I know, but his British escort ships title might have ref to transfers or joint ops. Hope it helps. Trekphiler 06:40, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
