Misplaced Pages

User talk:Husnock: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 16:14, 18 October 2005 editHusnock (talk | contribs)12,977 edits →Category renames← Previous edit Revision as of 16:15, 18 October 2005 edit undoHusnock (talk | contribs)12,977 edits →Master CommandantNext edit →
Line 19: Line 19:
:Yep, pretty sure. Ive read it in a few places. That whole article could use expansion to include sources and references. -] 23:14, 10 October 2005 (UTC) :Yep, pretty sure. Ive read it in a few places. That whole article could use expansion to include sources and references. -] 23:14, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
:: and say that the rank of Master Commandant was renamed Commander in 1837 or 1838. This would parallel the evolution of ranks in the ] (where Master and Commander became simply Commander). The Lieutenant Commander was originally a ''lieutenant commanding'' or ''lieutenant commandant'', a substantive lieutenant with command of a vessel. The position was rewarded first with higher pay, then uniform distinctions, and finally recognised as a separate, higher rank during the Civil War (see and ). In both cases, one of the sources is an official U.S. Navy site. — ] 08:10, 11 October 2005 (UTC) :: and say that the rank of Master Commandant was renamed Commander in 1837 or 1838. This would parallel the evolution of ranks in the ] (where Master and Commander became simply Commander). The Lieutenant Commander was originally a ''lieutenant commanding'' or ''lieutenant commandant'', a substantive lieutenant with command of a vessel. The position was rewarded first with higher pay, then uniform distinctions, and finally recognised as a separate, higher rank during the Civil War (see and ). In both cases, one of the sources is an official U.S. Navy site. — ] 08:10, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
::That all sounds fine to me. I suggest an expansion and update of the article. -] 16:15, 18 October 2005 (UTC)


==Category renames== ==Category renames==

Revision as of 16:15, 18 October 2005

General Rules

  1. Questions asked of me will be responded to on THIS Talk page. I will not be posting a duplicate reply on the Talk page of the User who asked the question.
  2. Unsigned questions or questions from anon users will generally be deleted unanswered. Some special cases may apply.
  3. Obscene and personal attack messages will be deleted and reported as vandalism.
  4. Please use the "== XX ==" format when posting messages and sign all messages.

Archives

Current Posts

Master Commandant

Are you sure that Master Commandant was replaced by Lieutenant Commander, not Commander. -- Geo Swan 23:01, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Yep, pretty sure. Ive read it in a few places. That whole article could use expansion to include sources and references. -Husnock 23:14, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
This page and this page say that the rank of Master Commandant was renamed Commander in 1837 or 1838. This would parallel the evolution of ranks in the Royal Navy (where Master and Commander became simply Commander). The Lieutenant Commander was originally a lieutenant commanding or lieutenant commandant, a substantive lieutenant with command of a vessel. The position was rewarded first with higher pay, then uniform distinctions, and finally recognised as a separate, higher rank during the Civil War (see here and here). In both cases, one of the sources is an official U.S. Navy site. — Franey 08:10, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
That all sounds fine to me. I suggest an expansion and update of the article. -Husnock 16:15, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Category renames

Renaming a category doesn't create any redirect problems at all. All the articles are automatically redirected by a bot. We rename categories with hundreds of articles all the time. Please reconsider your vote. CalJW 01:40, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

I suppose if bots are doing it, that would be okay. I just wonder if its really worth all the effort. -Husnock 14:21, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Regarding categories, you might want to do some research before accusing contributor 155 of vandalism by adding the scottish american tags. Could it be that your pride was just hurt from his corrections to your Legion of Merit text? CantStandYa 13:43, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

It appeared to me an anon user was adding the category in question everyone in Misplaced Pages that had a Scottish name. An admin actually agreed with me on the notice page. The IP address in question has also been a known vandal in the past. As far as Legion of Merit...didnt even realize that IP had edited the article and I dont stoop to such low levels of revenge. -Husnock 14:19, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
Perhaps you should withdraw your charge of vandalism, since this clearly wasn't the case. These citations have all been sourced. It would go a long way toward clearing this up. This would be consistent with your character as an officer and a gentleman. CantStandYa 15:36, 18 October 2005 (UTC) (Lt Col)

BTW - the IP in question is a networked Army system with thousands of users. Most are responsible users, a few are not. Please do not condemn the responsible users for the past acts of a few. Most of the scoundrels are gone now.

I think the vandal log is just a record of accusations and is not cleared or withdrawn or voted on, like a VFD. Its a,so a day by day log which is hard to go back into after some time has passed. I'm sure if its a big issue, a line could be added in by any concerned party stating it to be a public IP address. Its also not really an accusation page, more like a person has noticed something that appears to be vandalism. Its looked at by admins and, if warranted, they can take further action and also add notes if its a misunderstanding. Its not meant to be taken personally. Ive been listed there once or twice over misunderstandings. -Husnock 16:14, 18 October 2005 (UTC)