User talk:Dhatfield

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 1a 2 Re plagiarism 3 timelines 4 Tank 5 Thanks for the compliment! 6 The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVII (May 2008) 7 Transcluding into an image frame 8 Email as per Tank talk page 9 Montana class battleship 10 Thank you! =) 11 Thank you!

[edit] 1a

Thanks for your point. [1] TONY (talk) 17:17, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re plagiarism

Since it's getting a bit off-point for here, let me bring it here.

You're missing the point of what plagiarism is and is not and hence coming into conflict with other authors. It's not about "the exact words". That's the High School approximation to the idea of plagiarism and a prime example of applying the letter, rather than the spirit, of a policy (which is against policy). Plagiarism is about theft of ideas and/or credit. The principle of avoiding plagiarism is "credit where credit is due". If I paraphrased someone else's work (without using a single "exact phrase") and claimed it as my own that would be the most deceitful form of plagiarism. I found that writing a Doctoral thesis and considering how my ideas might be stolen gave me a broader perspective on intellectual property issues. Maybe you would also benefit from the exercise. Mentioning the source is not enough: hence inline citations. Dhatfield (talk) 15:57, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

"You're missing the point" Actually not. They're both wrong. What troubles me is both spirit & letter being ignored on WP. The principle behind plagiarism may be theft of ideas; the execution is (often) theft of words. I draw no distinction, because if you're stealing phrasing, it's not your work anymore.

"If I paraphrased someone else's work (without using a single "exact phrase")" Do I take you to mean you'd object to use of information contained in a source? How, then, do you do research? That is a paraphrase, no? Or did you mean only without citation?

BTW, since you seem to've gotten a bit bent out of shape over this, I'm prepared to believe it was inadvertent; take a look at some of WP's submarine pages, which are direct verbatim lifts from DANFS, & it's easy to suspect plagiarism everywhere. I've inadvertently borrowed, myself (an essay on the Pacific War used a view from Blair I'd read years before & adopted, without recalling it wasn't original to me), so I'm very careful about it, now, & sensitive other people may not be so careful. As noted, I take the approach quote & cite always, & there's no question that way. I imagine that makes me seem narrow-minded; just very careful. I didn't get burned for it; I don't want somebody getting burned badly for taking WP on faith if we're not careful enough about it.

One other thing. In retrospect, I should've brought the concern here in the first place, rather than put it on the talk page, but in looking at the page history, it looked like it came from an anon IP, & I wanted a public notice if an anon was copying. (I find the summary pages more than a bit confusing sometimes.) Trekphiler (talk) 21:42 & 21:49, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

No offence intemded. It was a bit bad form of me. Trekphiler (talk) 22:22, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] timelines

Sure thing. What do you have? —EncMstr (talk) 18:17, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks User:Dhatfield/Sandbox. Dhatfield (talk) 20:18, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I took a couple swings at it, but couldn't get it to budge. That's in line with my frustration with the timeline facility: it doesn't behave intuitively. I'm not very experienced though, and assume I'm mostly to blame for its shortcomings.  :-(

Any reason not to use the .svg graphic? (You could put the timeline details and instructions for creating it offline on its description page.) —EncMstr (talk) 20:43, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tank

Thank you for the medal and the chevrons, although to be honest I had not expected it since I haven't written anything major for Wikipedia in almost a year (although, I plan to expand the Verdeja article, beginning tomorrow - an article on Spain's most successful tank program can not left in such a pity state!). I added two references to the Tank article, although none specifically state that ETC is the most mature of alternate technology to powder guns and liquid propellants. OTOH, the first reference offers a glimpse of ETC compared to EM, whilst the second reference details the integration of the XM291 into the turret of a modified M8 armored gun system. The ETC article needs to be updated, as there is a lot of information I have access to now and not before; new information can be read in an article, which I can't link because apparently invisionfree is blacklisted . So, after the Verdeja article (which I will try to get featued, like the T-26) I hope I have time to work on that ETC article some more. In any case, to avoid boring you with my life story, I will not let you be ... thank you again! JonCatalan (talk) 23:16, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

A question on the timeline you made for the article. The Challenger 2 was never retrofitted with a 120mm smoothbore gun. There are plans to retrofit Rheinmetall's 120mm L/55 tank-gun soon, and it has been covered in Janes. Unfortunately, I think it will block me linking it to you, but I could copy and paste it here, if you'd like. JonCatalan (talk) 23:24, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for the compliment!

What brought you to my doorstep? :) Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 13:37, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVII (May 2008)

The May 2008 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 has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:22, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

{{helpme}}

[edit] Transcluding into an image frame

Is it possible to transclude a page into an image frame? I'd really like to put my clickable EasyTimeline (at the bottom of the page) into an image. Dhatfield (talk) 16:23, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, that's not possible at this time. You'll have to make the image manually. ffm 16:25, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Email as per Tank talk page

If you haven't read Tank's talk page yet, this was to send you some PDFs relevant to tank warfare in the 21st century. My email is <deleted>; if not interested, then just scratch out my email address. Thank you! JonCatalan (talk) 21:23, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Montana class battleship

Another copyedit has occured within the article. Would you consider revisiting your comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Montana class battleship?

[edit] Thank you! =)

I'm hardly a pro; just a bit of a logical perfectionist? >_> Thank you for the pretty star (I don't want uglies on my page either. xD). MissMJ (talk) 20:51, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you!

Hi, Dhatfield. You've done a great job with the video. Thank you! I've never thought that kind of edit was possible.I've changed my vote to support orinal and edit. Maybe you'd support your edit too and it will pass. Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 22:09, 11 June 2008 (UTC)