User talk:Middim13

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] AfD nomination of ARTHUR LEOPOLD BUSCH

An editor has nominated ARTHUR LEOPOLD BUSCH, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ARTHUR LEOPOLD BUSCH and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. Jayden54Bot 20:56, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Arthur Leopold Busch

Please note that the article as it stands is very heavily POV and not written in the proper tone that would be expected from an encyclopedia article. Please correct these problems (read WP:NPOV and WP:MOS), or the article may be reverted back to the version kept in AFD, or renominated for deletion. --Coredesat 20:09, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Our discussion

I don't have access to the documents you've mentioned. I will take your word for it. To start you off editing so your contributions measure up to Wikipedia norm (since you have a lot to offer), I'm going to recommend you read Wikipedia:MOS, Wikipedia:Five pillars and Help:Contents. Please read through them to find out how to make nicely formatted pages and to word your contributions neutrally. I am very much interested in the history of Electic Boat! (PS: the screwdrivers still cost $900 on a modern sub). -N 02:51, 6 June 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Notability of Arthur Leopold Du Busc

A tag has been placed on Arthur Leopold Du Busc, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Mickthefish 15:48, 12 July 2007 (UTC) {subst:empty-warn|Arthur Leopold Du Busc|header=1}} 172.146.136.185 23:20, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Issac Rice

You added comment "The true character of this strange and selfish individual will make its way to the surface - much like those he used and took advantage of!)". I am curious what you mean. If it can be done NPOV I would like to see it in the article? B.S. Lawrence 23:29, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 3RR warning

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. TomTheHand 01:24, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Middim13 for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page.

Parsecboy 02:14, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] randomness

where are you from? city. ANOMALY-117 03:33, 4 December 2007 (UTC) I'm from Falls Church, Virginia... HQ of General Dynamics.

[edit] January 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Imperial Japanese Navy submarines. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. ffm 20:44, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Change my username?

Is it possible for me to change my name? I would like to change my name. Is that possible? Can you please tell me whether it is possible or not to chang my name? Is there perhaps some wikipedia-page for people in need to change there username for a valid reason? I am new here, so I'd like some help and some directions. Shojaijekhi (talk) 20:27, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Plunger-class

According to K. Jack Bauer's "Register of Ships of the U.S. Navy, 1775-1990: Major Combatants", Norman Friedman's "U.S. Submarines Through 1945", and the Navy's "Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships", the class in question is known as the A-1 or Plunger class. I'm not sure where you got the impression that it was named after the second ship of the class, USS Adder (SS-3), also known as USS A-2. Please stop changing references to the Plunger-class to refer to a "Adder-class". TomTheHand (talk) 02:05, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

As I look further into the issue, I see references to the Adder-class; I apologize for the tone of my first message. However, I would ask that you please explain why you feel that the class article should refer to them as the Adder-class when the convention of the U.S. Navy is to name the class after the first ship in its designation scheme. See the Colorado-class battleship, which isn't referred to as the Maryland-class. TomTheHand (talk) 02:19, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Again, please discuss before continuing to replace references to the Plunger class with references to the Adder class. Many sources refer to the class as "Plunger", including U.S. Navy sources. Please join this discussion, make your case, and follow the consensus. TomTheHand (talk) 16:55, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Keep checking into this matter and you will come to find that even the U.S. Navy calls these first submarines A-class/Adder-class.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Middim13 (talk • contribs)
Show me where. You can't just keep shouting "You're wrong! You're wrong! You're wrong!" over and over again and expect results. Here are some Navy pages:
USS Plunger referred to as an A-1 class submarine; A-1 was Plunger herself.
USS Adder referred to as "Plunger (later A-1) class"
USS Adder referred to as Plunger class
I can provide more if you need. TomTheHand (talk) 22:34, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your recent edits

Please do not add defamatory content to Wikipedia, as you did to Frank Taylor Cable. If you would like to experiment please use the sandbox. Thank you. TomTheHand (talk) 15:49, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to add defamatory content, as you did to Frank Taylor Cable, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. TomTheHand (talk) 14:57, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did to USS Holland (SS-1). Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. The information you replaced had previously cited a reliable source; you changed it to contradict that source without citing a more reliable one. TomTheHand (talk) 13:32, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did to General Dynamics Electric Boat, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. TomTheHand (talk) 20:19, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing Wikipedia for a period of one month as a result of your disruptive edits. You are free to make constructive edits after the block has expired, but please note that vandalism (including page blanking or addition of random text), spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, personal attacks; and repeated, blatant violations of our policies concerning neutral point of view and biographies of living persons will not be tolerated. I am familiar with the IP addresses you edit anonymously under as well, and if you edit with them before your block has expired I will block them as well. I am blocking you for repeated violations of Wikipedia's policies on verifiability, neutral point of view, and no original research. While you are blocked, please read those policies, as well as Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may be best off editing topics unrelated to Electric Boat for a while, until you have had the opportunity to learn how Wikipedia works. TomTheHand (talk) 01:54, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

I have reset your block to another month as of today because you are attempting to evade the block through anonymous editing. TomTheHand (talk) 17:51, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I have reset your block to another month as of today because you continue to attempt to evade it. TomTheHand (talk) 22:43, 4 April 2008 (UTC)