User talk:Dual Freq

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Archive 1 - Archived May 15, 2006
Archive 2 - Archived October 28, 2006
Archive 3 - October 2006 to February 2007
Archive 4 - March 2007 - June 2007
Archive 5 - July 2007 - March 2008
Archive 6 - April 2008 -

Add new comments below, click New Section above to start a new section, but consider using the article talk page instead.

A beer for you![edit]

Export hell seidel steiner.png Thanks for the help on the USNS Relentless (T-AGOS-18) article talk page, for doing all that digging and solving that little mystery. It's much appreciated - Cheers - theWOLFchild 06:13, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
Thank you very much. It was kind of fun trying to figure it out. --Dual Freq (talk) 12:49, 25 October 2015 (UTC)


On the loran-C page, you removed the note I added that Loran-C was not functional for navigation anywhere. Hopes for a resurrection, or announcements in magazines of funding (for projects presumably started before the turn-off) are not quite relevant to this.

Do you have evidence of Loran-C working anywhere in the world currently for positioning. Or even transmitting time.

Take this to the article talk page so others can participate. --Dual Freq (talk) 21:56, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

USS Wagner[edit]

Hey, thanks for being so helpful with the mystery of the USS Wagner's launch date. You came up with some very impressive supporting sources! If you don't mind sharing, what's your method for finding evidence like that?

--Tdaynes (talk) 21:20, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

My local library provides free access to for home users. for the book. has newspaper items as well, though I didn't use it this time. I guess I should have tried google newspaper first, because it would have been easier if I had. This is the first hit for terms Vandivier Wagner. Oh well. --Dual Freq (talk) 22:26, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

6 meter page[edit]

Hi DualFreq- I understand the general concept of a circular reference; can you explain why a link to pertinent pages in wikipedia as opposed to duplicating the same information amounts to a circular reference? My point is that the friction between Armstrong and RCA had an impact on the frequency allocation landscape to include the move of the five meter band to six meters. That was probably the first deviation from harmonically related bands. I don't think it's productive to reproduce either of the cited articles, but it is good to give the reader a starting point. As you can tell, I don't edit wikipedia articles, so I don't know all the abbreviations. I look forward to your response.

You'd need to cite a reliable source like a book or reliable internet source that makes that same claim. However, it seems pretty clear that TV was the primary threat to the 50 MHz spectrum from 1938 onward. Neither of those articles mention FM broadcast radio being allocated between 50 to 60 MHz. The article talk page at Talk:6-meter band is a better place for this discussion so others can reply as well. --Dual Freq (talk) 02:40, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

A Dobos torte for you![edit]

Dobos cake (Gerbeaud Confectionery Budapest Hungary).jpg 7&6=thirteen () has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.

To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

7&6=thirteen () 18:32, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Jesse Brown article edit[edit]

Hello Dual Freq,

You removed my reference to the new non-fiction book about Jesse Brown, titled "Devotion." Being a lifelong fan of Jesse Brown, and having read "Devotion," I find it incredibly relevant that a new source about Jesse Brown is available and that it is based on information provided by Brown's family and squadron mates.

You cited that my posting of this information was "trying to sell this book" yet just above my post you allow a paragraph about the Theodore Taylor book "Flight of Jesse Leroy Brown." Why can that information remain yet my update about the new book be removed? On top of that, having read both books, the Taylor book is actually categorized as "fiction" since the author gets into Jesse's head.

I would ask that you remove your edit and allow my information to remain or create an "In Popular Culture" section and reference BOTH books.

To remove one reference to a book about Jesse Brown while keeping the other smells of bias, which I certainly hope is not the case here.

Sincerely, JesseBrownFan (talk) 17:31, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

You may find it pertinent that JesseBrownFan is also very keen on a book by the same author as Devotion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pinkbeast (talkcontribs) 22:00, March 1, 2016‎

As I said in the diff, it looks suspiciously promotional to me. The IP anon had no other edits except to add something by the same author, and it reads like an advertisement. We're not here to assist in selling books, the article is about Jesse L. Brown. --Dual Freq (talk) 22:26, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

airport templates[edit]


You fixed Template:US-airport-minor to have correct faa links, so maybe you can also fix Template:US-airport-ga which has the same issue. I haven't investigated if other templates have the same problem.


Milwaukee pop[edit]

Hi. That's weird. When I checked it the last time I was getting a 401 message: "Unauthorized - You are not authorized to access /popest/data/cities/totals/ on this server", but now that you've reset it, it goes through. Thanks for the correction. Don't know what happened. Onel5969 TT me 15:12, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Initially, the link didn't work for me when I clicked it in the diff header, but I realized my browser was truncating it at the line break. Perhaps the same thing happened for you as well. --Dual Freq (talk) 16:16, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks on the anchor! (USS Halsey Powell)[edit]

I'm pretty new to WP, and still feeling my way around but I've got a desire to build up more info so I was pretty gung-ho to just throw up a picture of this cool anchor using a quick amount of Google searching, but without actually spending more time to factually cite things. I've since found out more info on that anchor, the hard (but correct) way, from the source:

To answer your question below, I just checked our files and this anchor does not have a ship association. It was produced for shipboard use, but became excess to the Navy's needs prior to being placed on a ship.

We hope you find this information helpful. I hope you have a nice 4th of July holiday!

Very respectfully,

Allison Russell

Naval History and Heritage Command

Associate Registrar for Loans

I find it possible, but not substantiated that it may have been produced or associated with either "Powell" ship (the two built in 1943) but as that's speculation I'll just update the picture with the Heritage Command statement and not associate it speculatively with any ship. Thank you again for the critique, it really helps someone new like me focus on facts, not speculation, which keeps things accurate.

No problem. I don't think anchors are typically made with a ship in mind. They are kind of generic. Anchor chains break and anchors are lost on occasion as well. FWIW, I think Powell relates to the manufacturer of the anchor and not related to the anchors intended recipient. Looking at other anchor photos, even battleships do not appear to have had their names cast into their anchors. --Dual Freq (talk) 22:34, 1 July 2016 (UTC)


Thanks for this. (talk) 04:45, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

I don't think I've ever edited that article. It's not even on my watchlist. --Dual Freq (talk) 22:00, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Ford O. Rogers[edit]

Hello Dual Freq,

Thank you for adding of references to my article of Ford O. Rogers. I planned to do that today. But I just want to ask you, where you found information about his graduation from US Naval Academy? And I mean another source than I got papers from USMC Military History Division and there is a mention about his dropout.

Thank you

AntonyZ (talk) 14:52, 7 August 2016 (UTC) says 1917, I have nothing beyond that and had no reason to question it at the time. --Dual Freq (talk) 16:53, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Looking for a second opinion[edit]

Could you please have a look at the gallery in the Columbus, Wisconsin article? Do the images there (a park bench, a fire truck, etc.) add anything to our knowledge or understanding of Columbus? (talk) 17:05, 15 August 2016 (UTC)


Thanks, young KDTW Flyer means well but once again he has jumped ahead based on newspaper articles which forcast the near future, rather than using proven facts. AirOpsExecnPlt (talk) 01:57, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

USS DeHaven[edit]

The source is my source. is my webpage.

If you wrote it, then it becomes an original research issue. You need a reliable source, that is not you, etc. See WP:RS and WP:V. Use a book or something else. --Dual Freq (talk) 17:29, 24 September 2016 (UTC)