User talk:Cobatfor

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Welcome...

Hello, Cobatfor, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! Fnlayson (talk) 17:09, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] A-4 Skyhawk: photos

Thanks for your comment on the A-4 photo. I just really don't see the need to remove any photos from the A-4 page. Regardless of which photo is "better" or "more representative", there is still lots of room for photos on the page, it is not maxed out for photos at this point in time. I always figure more pictures are better than fewer, even if we have to move some to a gallery section. Keep in mind that researchers using the page as a source of information, particularly high school and younger students, can use images (especially PD images, like the one you removed) in their own reports. I always try to focus on who is the "typical end user" for this encyclopedia that we are all writing together and try to provide the best content for that person to use. Especially in the case of the aircraft articles, I always consider a grade eight student who is doing a report for history class, and consider what would help them produce a good essay and then focus on providing that content, text and photos, for them to use. - Ahunt (talk) 13:15, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] P-3F picture

I have nothing against that picture, it's people were the whole time changing all the numbers on the list, so I reverted everything....The Honorable Kermanshahi (talk) 14:53, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] FJ Fury

Thanks for finding these great pics! I've been kicking around splitting up the FJ Fury page by the 3 main varaints (-1, -2/-3, and -4), but I hate to do that when I don't have at least one good image for each variant. Now I can put togetehr a plan and get some feed back on it. I've noticed you've been adding pics to a number of articles, especially vintage USN jets, and most of those pages desperately needed more images. Thanks again. - BillCJ (talk) 22:25, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I am glad to be of any assistance and also that my decades-long hobby can be used for something! It is also thrilling to find a photo of a not so well known plane (hail the U.S. copyright laws!). Although, being on one hand a historian (MA) and a European (GER) on the other, it is often not very easy to get accustomed or even accept the attitude of some authors towards the military, as they seem to appraise it unconditionally. I prefer a neutral point of view, as far as any individual can have a neutral point of view. Maybe you would like to discuss that. As you being American, I would be very interested in your view. As you are a Southerner, you do not by any chance have a connection to LSU, because I used to study there once?! GEAUX TIGERS! Greetings -- Cobatfor 21:20, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

No, I've never even been to to the state of Louisiana! I won't be more specific on an open source, but I could in private comm. About the military, I think you'll find attitudes in the US spread pretty much across the spectrum from "Love It" to "Despise it as root of all evil in World". As to authors, I'm not sure of the context here in your question, as to what authors, what media, etc. To take it as a comments on authors of military equipment, I'd say they have a sympathetic-neutral view in most cases, but those who served in the military will usually be more apt to praise it. Some people in the US feel that a neutral point of view is that all militaries are inately evil by their mere existance - I certainly don't hold to that! I do believe that militaries are a necessity because of human nature, and that they will always need to exist. I can say alot more, if you want to continue the topic. - BillCJ (talk) 01:04, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, some people call it "Lousyana", it was nice, anyway. As a historian it would be idiotic in my point of view to think that the military was not necessary. It is just the difficult part to decide where, when, and for what purpose. The losers in this "game" are normally the civilians and the soldiers, but that's the way it is (watch "Lord of War"!). For being "neutral" I was thinking for example of the term "Global War on Terror" which is a term used by the Bush administration, but not by the U.S. democrats. By using it in Wikipedia I would state (in my opinion) that I am a supporter of the Bush administration, and that I am not aware of the diffcult political views concerning this term (or I do not care, which is even worse). Whereas anybody can vote for whom he or she wants, I try to respect the views of others, especially if a term is heavily disputed. In this case I would prefer "War in Iraq/Afghanistan". Like the socialist (USSR) historians always named us (NATO members) "US-Imperialists", or Hitler a "facist". Certainly Hitler was a fascist, but much worse a National Socialist, planning and executing mass murder, which Mussolini, the founder of fascism, never thought of. So, in short, I like to stick to the hard facts, no matter what my personal opinion is. Someone in the German wiki for example wrote that the F-8 was used in the "unjustified" attacks on NVietnamese PT boat bases in 1964. Well, I say read (a hopefully thoroughly researched) article on the Tonking Gulf incident to find out, if this was "unjustified", but leave this out of the F-8 history! It was used in the Vietnam war, for this, that, and that... Period. Especially some US authors decorate their user sections with medals and ribbons, ad "proud" and "remember" and praise the military. Well, the military is necessary, its use sometimes inevitable, I am for fighting whatever dangers to our societies, BUT I still want argue encyclopaedic. Greetings -- Cobatfor 21:08, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I understand your point on neutrality. I've had a recent battle in the SH-2 Seasprite article, documented on Talk:SH-2 Seasprite, regarding the appropriateness of including a quote of a defense minister's comments on the Seaprite's cancellation. The problem was that his statement was composed entirely of political attacks on a previous government official, and had little substantive information on the actual reasons for the cancellation. I can't see this type of quote as having a place in an article about the helicopter itself. The politics behind the entire matter is very convoluted, but not that important to the article. Anyway, keep of the good work adding pics and fighting for neutrality. - BillCJ (talk) 21:30, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Ha, a fellow soul! Anyway, I am doing so, see FJ and AJ. About the SH-2 in general, on the German wiki I moved it from SH-2 to H-2, as the SH is only the AS-variant... -- Cobatfor 21:39, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Referencing

I have reverted all your changes to the SBD Dauntless article as you have made unconventional changes to a Modern Language Association (MLA) style for bibliographic records. If you wish,I could provide some background as to how citations and references should read. FWIW Bzuk (talk) 13:42, 9 March 2008 (UTC).

Sorry, if you regard the changes as unconventional, but I tried to adjust to the US citation way, so I would be glad for a short handout to avoid further problems. The official German way of citation is completely different from the US one (although you are Canadian, I assume yours are similar). It would be like this: "Bushy, Georg (Author): How to become famous (Title). University of the Falklands papers on people 41 (series, if existing). 437th revised and never read edition (edition, if not first), Timbuktu (city where it was published), 1896 (year of publication)." No publisher is given. --Cobatfor 22:44, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] G.91 pics on German Wiki

Cobatfor, would you be able to tranfer a couple of images from the German Wiki over to the English side? Due to their licenses, they can't go on Commons, and I can't tell if we're able to copy them over here or not because I don't read German. The images are de:Bild:Fiat g91 jaboG33.jpg and de:Bild:G91y-1.jpg. We only have a 3-view of the G.91Y availabe through Commons, so I'd like to get at least one good image on the "Yankee" model before I post a new article I'm working on for that aircraft. Even though the image isn't the greatest, it's all we have for now. The G.91R pic, in Luftwaffe markings, is gorgeous, so I'd love to get it over here too. User:Nimbus227 was able to move a few images for me this weekend from there, but his German is a little shaky, so I thought I'd give you a try this time.If you're not sure how to tranfer the image, he should be able to help. Thanks for looking anyway. - BillCJ (talk) 02:51, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Done. Glad to be of assistance.--Cobatfor 21:04, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] MBB

Cobatfor, currently Messerschmitt-Bölkow-Blohm (MBB) is redirected to Messerschmitt. I'm thinking about converting the redirect into a full article. de:Messerschmitt-Bölkow-Blohm on the German wiki is quite lengthy, and I was wondering it you could tell me if it was worth trying to get it translated. Thanks. - BillCJ (talk) 15:53, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I can translate some. Most of the stuff written is about the companies MBB bought. --Cobatfor 09:36, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Whatever can be done to expand the page would be good. I have a source I can add that has some of that acquisition info too, and I'll try to source the mmain points from it. Also, I went with Messerschmitt-Bölkow-Blohm as that was the name used on the German wiki, and since MBB is a DAB page, that title wasn't available. - BillCJ (talk) 09:58, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for your work on the MBB page, especially in creating the logo. I know it's not "my" page, but I did ask for your help, and it is much appreciated. Also, I found two QH-50 DASH pics that you had added, and have uploaded them to the QH-50 DASH page. I also created a QH-50 DASH page on COmmons for the pics, in case you run across any more of them. Thanks again. - BillCJ (talk) 22:42, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Keine Ursache - No problem! Just call again when needed. Cobatfor 16:50, 21 April 2008 (UTC)