User talk:Crf59

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Crf59, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to The Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Introduction tutorial
Contributing to Wikipedia
How to edit a page
Introduction to referencing
Help pages
Simplified Manual of Style
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need personal help ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome. --VViking_TalkEdits 14:03, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 2023[edit]

Hello Crf59. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Crf59. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Crf59|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. --VViking_TalkEdits 14:09, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The current article leads you to believe that Vigor was the sole company involved in the building of Sea Hunter. In fact Leidos, Inc was the prime contractor, designer, and developed all the autonomous systems. That's not advertising, it's fact. A simple search on line will produce numerous articles including the following: https://defbrief.com/2021/04/08/leidos-delivers-second-sea-hunter-medium-usv-to-us-navy/

So not only did Leidos prime the first vessel, they were the prime (second one built by USMI in Mississippi) contractor on the second vessel of the class called Seahawk. Also verifiable even on the Leidos website. Crf59 (talk) 23:06, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/11/navy-next-drone-warship-sea-hunter.html Crf59 (talk) 23:18, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.maritime.dot.gov/sites/marad.dot.gov/files/docs/about-us/foia/11706/leidos-inc-sea-hunter-and-maritime-autonomous-behaviors.pdf Crf59 (talk) 23:20, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So as I read this yet again, it occurs to me that I did not answer your original question. I am the Chief Technology Office for Leidos. I am not being paid to edit this document, but as the proud CTO for the organization responsible for Sea Hunter and Seahawk, it is unsettling that this Wiki page is so incomplete and inaccurate on the genesis of the Sea Hunter. It also perplexes me that you chose an article actually written by Vigor as the substantiation for their claim that they built Sea Hunter for DARPA. Vigor was not even the original builder and they had no interaction with DARPA. It was Christensen Yachts until they went bankrupt and we then contracted Vigor to complete the build of a hull that had already been fabricated. So the article is incorrect on several topics. So since you are so sure of your standards, check out the following as justification for my claims. Perhaps you should check yourself a little more thoroughly.

https://news.usni.org/2021/04/08/navy-takes-delivery-of-sea-hawk-unmanned-vessel

http://www.navaldrones.com/ACTUV.html

https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/actuv.htm

https://spectrum.ieee.org/darpa-actuv-self-driving-submarine-hunter-steers-like-a-human

https://www.militaryaerospace.com/uncrewed/article/16719649/darpa-awards-contract-for-antisubmarine-warfare-continuous-trail-unmanned-vessel-program

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/saic-awarded-prime-contract-by-defense-advanced-research-projects-agency-178857671.html

https://www.naval-technology.com/news/newsdarpa-selects-saic-asw-actuv-prototype/?cf-view

https://www.defense.gov/News/Speeches/Speech/Article/779197/remarks-at-the-actuv-seahunter-christening-ceremony/

https://govtribe.com/award/federal-contract-award/definitive-contract-hr001112c0086 Crf59 (talk) 22:10, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]