User talk:Red1001802

February 2008

Hi, the recent edit you made to Cadillac V8 engine has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. - ✰ALLSTAR✰ ^echo 06:01, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Question for Father Goose

Father Goose, do you edit offpage (using cut and paste)?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Red1001802 (talk • contribs)

Occasionally, though usually I just use the edit box onsite. I only edit offline when I'm working on some magnum opus that will take me several days to finish.

When you're starting out, using the onsite edit box is good for learning how wiki formatting works. Hit "show preview" before you post or whenever you're experimenting with a new feature. The buttons at the top of the edit box are useful for learning the most basic formatting features.--Father Goose (talk) 20:58, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Seems like you get reverted if you take too long. I haven't done this scholarly-type stuff for years. It's kinda fun to do it on Wikipedia. There's some debate here about when Melville first read Chase's account, before he went to sea or at sea when he met Chase's son. Who knows? Each position has its sources - mine is Whipple's book, written in 54, which got me interested. I find the story of Mocha Dick fascinating, particularly since when we studied Moby Dick at Amherst it was never mentioned! I wonder if the prof even knew about it - probably not.Red1001802 (talk) 21:26, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

That's why "show preview" is good -- it lets you see what your edits will look like without actually changing the article until you hit "save page". Half-finished edits do tend to get reverted, so either make small edits that don't look half-finished or preview a lot until you're completely finished with a big edit.

I read Moby Dick about 10 years ago and it's my favorite novel. The first I ever heard about Mocha Dick was here on Wikipedia. It is fascinating stuff.

Incidentally, try to avoid speculation in what you write, such as "Melville probably read Chase's account before sailing". This is what Wikipedia calls "original research", and sooner or later, it will get deleted. The line "Melville would likely have come across the Knickerbocker" -- which I take it you didn't write -- is even more speculative, and should be rewritten. Words like "likely" and "probably" raise red flags. You can, however, state that "source so-and-so hypothesized...", as that is a factual account of someone else's speculation.--Father Goose (talk) 23:18, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

I've been researching the subject a bit and have come across these sources: [1] [2] [3]. No doubt they could be of use to you in your rewrite of the article.--Father Goose (talk) 23:29, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Here's a couple of better modern pictures of white sperm whales: [4], picture at bottom of page.--Father Goose (talk) 02:39, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Harry S. Truman

Do you find this to be a poor addition:

In the years since the bombings, however, questions about Truman's choice have become more pointed. The Targeting Committee at Los Alamos apparently had no doubts about using the bomb on civilians, but many others, including Dwight Eisenhower, publicly and privately expressed opposition to this tactic.

Supporters of Truman's decision to use the bomb argue that it saved hundreds of thousands of lives that would have been lost in an invasion of mainland Japan. Eleanor Roosevelt spoke in support of this view when she said, in 1954, that Truman had "made the only decision he could," and that the bomb's use was necessary "to avoid tremendous sacrifice of American lives."[53] Others, including historian Gar Alperovitz, have argued that the use of nuclear weapons was unnecessary and inherently immoral.[54] Dwight Eisenhower was among those who questioned the necessity of dropping the bombs on civilian targets.'

Sounds like a parrot is in the room doesn't it?

~ WikiDon (talk) 07:43, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

PS: Also, put a space after the close REF tag and before the start of the next sentence.

Right you are, right you are.

German cruiser Blücher

Hi there. Thanks a lot for your fine edit to German cruiser Blücher. One tiny little tip, though. We're not supposed to use stuff like Ibid. and Id. etc. on Wikipedia, it's too easy to edit and your Ibid may very rapidly point to a completely different reference. For repeating the same reference we must use ref name="name of reference". Like this the first time: <ref name="Ribsskog 50">Ribsskog 1998: 50</ref> and this the following times: <ref name="Ribsskog 50"/>. Keep up the good work and thank you again. Manxruler (talk) 09:29, 5 September 2008 (UTC)