User talk:172.8.197.150

Hello, 172.8.197.150, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to help you get started. Happy editing! - wolf 05:27, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Getting started

• Introduction
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Intuitive guide to Wikipedia

Finding your way around

• Table of contents
• Directories and indexes
• Department directory

Editing articles

• How to develop an article
• Simplified Manual of Style

Getting help

• Frequently asked questions
• Cheatsheet
• Our help forum for new editors, the Teahouse
• The Help Desk, for more advanced questions
• Help pages
• Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles

How you can help

• Community Portal
• Join a WikiProject
• Follow Wikipedia etiquette
• Practice civility
• Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

hi

Recent edits to battleship articles

Hi there! Sorry for the poor experience you've had with making edits to Design A-150 battleship and Yamato-class battleship. The reason why your edits were removed is that Wikipedia relies on reliable sources that can verify the content we host. To qualify as reliable, warshipprojects.com would need to pass the guidance listed at WP:SPS.

However! This isn't a dead end. Warshipprojects lists a number of reliable sources at the end of its Yamato article. You could use those sources, citing by page numbers etc., to add to our Wikipedia articles.

Thanks for the time you've spent on Wikipedia so far, and I hope this explains the issues you've encountered. Don't hesitate to ask me any questions you have; you can leave a message here or on my talk page and I'll see it. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 15:35, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

I've resubmitted after retrieving what I had and further editing it using a source I looked over in a library this afternoon. I ended up sourcing from the book almost exclusively to get a comprehensive look at their development; hope that's alright. By looking at the material again for another subsequent time, I discovered a greater understanding of how the A-150 Project and Yamato Project were related, became separate projects and then became an improvement project to the existing Yamato Class under fears of rejection by the Imperial Diet when the original A-150 designs were considered. This source includes high detail about A-140 (Yamato) as well as Project A-150 including proposed variants before Yamato as we know her today and also proposed improvements afterward.

The Primary Source used is this for all edits between both pages (I couldn't find a better source from the rest of the ones listed in the original website as one was too general and the rest were out of print and in Japanese or otherwise included drawings only of these classes and general design text):

Lengerer, Hans, and Lars Ahlberg. Capital Ships of the Imperial Japanese Navy, 1868-1945: Ironclads, Battleships & Battle Cruisers: An Outline History of Their Design, Construction and Operations. Ann Arbor, MI, USA: Nimble Books, LLC, 2014. 172.8.197.150 (talk) 02:36, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Can you get Sturmvogel to revert the changes he made to the A-150 page. Due to him making edits in-between, I can no longer directly revert back. He might be planning to revert my Yamato edits too. I cited my sources in Chicago manual of style like what I assumed Wikipedia was using based on the styling. He gave at least one petty and bullshit excuse and some insulting or poor excuses to excise the changes entirely in his edit text.

1. There's no such thing as an Admiralty in Japan

Although the concept of an Admiralty doesn't exist in Japan, it was a historical compromise to use the term itself. An elite group of admirals which lobbied the design department did exist in Japan, however were never formally named or designated an Admiralty. How am I supposed to tell the reader there is an elite group of admirals that is lobbying the design department that is somehow not an admiralty, even though the concept of one was foreign to the Japanese. Therefore the word Admiralty was used to describe a group of elite admirals in the same manner as it was used to term the elite admirals of the British Navy.

2. No Page References

In that page I referenced the entire chapter pertaining to thee class. Is he a cite nazi? What is his problem.

3. Failure to match cite format

Because it wasn't cited "exactly" the right way he reverted over 12K words. I'm sorry, but he definitely has a problem that is more him than me.

4. Poor grammar

Again, quite insulting, though I do admit I was planning to make edits this morning to that page to fix them. Still a very poor excuse to excise 12,000 words of new detailed information that replaced the dated and contradictory information of the old page. Grammar nazi?

5.Excessive detail

That is a complete and utter bullshit excuse. Simplicity is nice for a children's article, but this isn't exactly an article meant for children is it. It is meant for plebs and amateur historians to learn more detail about this class of warship. Simply reverting changes for excessive detail ought to get him removed from Wikipedia. Details are there to give more information. Keeping it simple on these pages with out of date information as opposed to the detail of current information (as I had it) is much like keeping humans in the stone age just because they might revolt if they got iron tools.

Sturmvogel has turned the page back into the toxic swamp of bad information it had, and is likely to do the same to the Yamato class as well. 172.8.197.150 (talk) 14:07, 12 October 2022 (UTC)