Jump to content

User talk:Larnue the dormouse

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by David91 (talk | contribs) at 02:56, 9 April 2006 (→‎Shock and Awe and your concerns about JW1805). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Shock and Awe

Hi. Firstly, thanks a lot for taking your content disputes to talk pages and not making things worse with unilateral or edit war-type behaviour. If everyone did what you have just done, this encyclopaedia would function a lot better; so thanks. Also, please do not hesitate to contact any user via his/her talk page, and do not worry that you are "new". Indeed, there is a whole policy all about being nice to new editors! So again, don't be discouraged.

Onto your concern. From what I can see, both of you have a case. I do not know enough about the minutiae of military tactical terminology, and as such whether or not it is a "doctrine" is not really my area of expertise. The redirect did seem a little hasty, though, and if you can find more stuff for the page (it was a little spartan before, but I am sure it can be bulked out), then by all means remove the redirect. Being bold is a central editing policy, so go for it.

If I were you, I would contact User:JW1805 via his talk page with your concerns, laid out as politely as you did on my talk page, and see what he has to say. If he does dismiss you for being "new", or even tries to block you or any other punitive action, then contact me again, and I will weigh in. As it is now, you seem to know what you are talking about, so I leave the dispute with you unless you feel you need more help. Any questions, contact me on my talk page again. Happy editing! Batmanand | Talk 20:34, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response. I realize that most editors at Wikipedia would listen to others who disagree with them, but it appears that JW1805 often accuses people of being sockpuppets, has them banned, and they have to write letters to try to prove their innocence. Looking at his logs, sometimes these people are unbanned and JW1805 admits his paranoia, but I don't want to have to go through that hassle, and it looks like many other people don't want to either. Here are a few of the people he has successfully labeled a sockpuppet with nothing as evidence except their edit history, which shows only that they disagreed with JW1805:
I don't want to become the next "sockpuppet or impersonator of Zephram Stark," so I'm not going to openly disagree with JW1805 by myself. Still, I appreciate your feedback on my proposal. Thank you. --Larnue the dormouse 20:57, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I am not very knowledgeable about military strategies, so I can't really decide which structure is correct. My suggestion is to find references that you can quote. You can also discuss this on the article talk page, or on Wikipedia:WikiProject Military. I also agree with the comments by Batmanand above. Good luck! -- Chris 73 | Talk 22:54, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Those are some good suggestions. Thank you. I feel confident enough to discuss this further in the discussion page of the article. --Larnue the dormouse 23:19, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shock and Awe and your concerns about JW1805

I hope you don't mind me noting your concerns about JW1805 on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. As your concern seems legitimate, I'd like to see the issue properly sorted out.

As for the Shock and Awe article, I suggest you write your justifications on the talk page of Rapid Dominance and make note of it on the Shock and Awe talk page also. Then go ahead and change things (back) to how they should be, making reference to your discussion on the talk page(s) of the article(s). It may have been an oversight on JW1805's part, or otherwise it may need discussion. —Pengo 23:11, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your help. I'm going to do that. --Larnue the dormouse 23:14, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting

This is not my field of expertise but I see the logic of your position. Your best strategy in this situation is to rapidly expand "rapid dominance to shock and awe JW1805 into submission. Simply reverting is not enough on its own (albeit partially explained on the talk page) and might be considered slightly provocative. But if you give chapter and verse amd confirm your credibility as an editor, it is more difficult for the POV pushers to assert their POV. David91 02:56, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Larnue_the_dormouse&oldid=47642442"