User talk:Rlboone1917

.== Welcome! ==

Welcome!

Hello, Rlboone1917, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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 help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Whispering 17:49, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding my comments made by Bfg about the V_C article:

The references I made to indicated crusing speed of the B-24 versus the the true air speed ( specifically at high altitude have been deleted, which doesn't bother me. Rlboone1917 17:17, 16 November 2006 (UTC)rlboone1917 Rlboone1917 16:25, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Carpetbagger[edit]

Hi Robert. Apologies - I meant to do some work on the article at the time, but other things swallowed my time. Thanks for contributing it!

"Stub" status is created by a little template which looks like this - {{stub-something}} - on the editing page; if you feel an article is sufficiently long, just whip it off. (The article currently doesn't seem to have one, though)

Feel free to play around with editing the article as it exists - we keep copies of all old versions, so it's easy to fix any problems.

I'm currently doing some formatting work on the article; Help:Editing should give a good overview of how to format text. Basically, all you do is add "markup" characters around words - [[word]] makes a link to the article word, or ''word'' puts it in italics.

Let me know if you have any other problems. Shimgray | talk | 19:27, 7 November 2006 (UTC) Andrew:[reply]

It is rboone1917 again. I was looking at the specificatione of a B-24 J and although we flew mostly 5-24 D's, they were stripped down for added airspeed. Both the maximum and cruise speed of the J should be researched. I believe them to be misleading. It is my opinion that it refers to GROUND SPEED and that the airspeed indicator would read 150 mph or so. I don't wish to do anything about it, but in the interests of history the distinction should be made. Any 4 engine aircraft just did not cruise at an airtspeed reading of 215 mph. Rlboone1917 18:07, 8 November 2006 (UTC)Picky, picky.[reply]

Oh, I just found my old TYPE E-6B Aerial DEAD RECKONING COMPUTER . They were issued to all pilots in the U.S. ARMY AIR CORPS during World War II. It is a hand held mechanical device with a wheel attached to a scale, and when the flight altitude is matched with the outside temperature the true air speed is shown. For instance: The airspeed indicator may read 150 mph, but if at an altitude of 20,000 feet the outside temperature is minus 20 degrees centigrade, the computer will show a true air speed of approximately 248 mph. A distinction should be made. I hope have not made a mistake reading it after all these years. I also found other pages on wiki that make the distinction in speeds.Rlboone1917 15:58, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the tabs at the top of the B-24 page, you'll see one marked "discussion" - if you click on that, you'll be taken to the page for discussing that specific article. (If you'd prefer a direct link - Talk:B-24 Liberator). It's probably the best place to bring up issues with that article... chances are the people who wrote it originally will still be keeping an eye on it.

As to the work on the Carpetbagger page - this is the wonderful power of the computer, I guess. All you need to do is put [[ ]] around the word, and it automatically creates a link to the page with that name. It can take a bit of trial and error to get the hang of what will and won't create a link, but we've got about two million page titles, so most of the obvious suspects work! Do feel free to have a play around with it... Shimgray | talk | 23:20, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

shimgrayI talk

I don’t know if this is the correct way to contact you. I wish to thank you as well as User talk:Bfg for your help with the carpetbagger article. I have been somewhat bewildered by the complexity of Wikipedia and am just now reviewing the talk page and understanding some of what you have advised.

I will go to the B-24 link to discuss air speed as you suggested. Rlboone1917 16:35, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About your comments to the V_c article[edit]

Hi, I would just like to make you aware of the discussion tab on top of each article. Your comments are valuable, but they should be left on an articles corresponding discussion page, in order to avoid clutter of the actual article. As for signing your comments, that is done very easily by writing ~~~~ right at the end of your comments, not in the edit summary, and it will be translated to something like this Bfg 00:02, 16 November 2006 (UTC) You may also be interrested in knowing about the Show preview button, which allows you to see what your edits look like. Thak you for your contributions and good luck with your future edits. Bfg 00:02, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Bfg. Thank you for the suggestions. I was a world war II squadron commader in operation carpetbegger at the tender age of 25, based in England, and a business man after the war.You site is very difficult for for a neophyte such as I, and all help is welcome.

My comments are made from records and combat flights recorded at the time in my log book.

I am curious. With all of your interests how did you discover my comments?

Is my edit summary proper? If not what should I have written?

Rlboone1917 16:32, 16 November 2006 (UTC)rboone1917[reply]

I must start by saying that I'm always a bit impressed whenever I talk to war veterans. I'm 25 myself right now, and had similar circumstances come upon me, I hope I would have had the courage to do the same as you did. I had a look at Operation Carpetbagger, did you fly missions over Norway? I'm quite interested in history, and especially war history, so I'm just curious if you participated in any operation I know about.

But enough of me being star struck. I had a look at your user page, and you should write a short resume about yourself, make a paragraph about your war experiences. It lends credibility to your edits on those subjects, but make it brief, if you have a homepage somewhere, you should link to it and perhaps elaborate more there. When responding to comments, you should use an apropriate number of : to give the correct indentation, as I've added to your comments above, and as I'm doing on these comments, it improves readability. For your edit summaries, they are not proper. If I could suggest edit summaries for your last two edits to Operation Carpetbagger they would be Elaborated on target aproaching and Additional reasons for low altitude flying. An edit summary should be exactly a one sentence summary of what you have done to the article. I just want to stress that as long as your edits are done in good faith, you should just keep doing them and learn from your mistakes. None of these suggestions should be interpreted as critique, but rather as suggestions for improvement. If I can be of any help, feel free to ask them at User talk:Bfg, I must warn you though that my acitivity on wikipedia is very on and off, so I may be out of reach for a couple of months.

To satisfy your own curiosity. The short explanation is that I read about V_c and didn't understand the abreviation FAR. Since I didn't understand it, surely there must be others not knowing what it meant, so I linked it up. Consequently I added the article to my watchlist, so when I logged in yesterday to write about streamline diffusion, I routinely had a look at my watchlist, there I could see that someone had been editing the Vc article. As for my interest in that article in the first place, it stemmed from my curiosity in Norways coming aquistion of fighters to replace the F-16. The choice is between JSF,Eurofighter and JAS 39 Gripen, and I want to know what this is all about when the politics is set aside. Bfg 00:38, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bfg: Is this the proper way to contact you? In answer to your question regarding Norwegian missions,my log book records one 7 1/2 hour combat mission to Norway on March 30, 1945. The Group Commander restricted his Squadron C.O.’s from too many flights, and because I had a over 100 anti sub patrols and 30 or so carpetbagger missions I iwas not allowed many flights, and those over France and Belgium.

Reference to the Norwegian operations which were made from Leuchars, Scotland by crews from the carpetbaggers is on the following link: [1]

The historian Tom Ensminger’s site must have a complete record of every flight made by the group. His URL is: [2] Rlboone1917 18:38, 17 November 2006 (UTC)rlboone1917[reply]

Well, as long as I pay attention to this page, you may very well contact me here. As long as there is an ongoing discussion I will monitor this page. But as soon as the discussion go mute I will remove it from my watchlist. Should you wish to contact me then, you should leave me a message on User talk:Bfg, not User:Bfg as that is my profile page, and should not be use for discussions.

Todays little lesson in wikipedia style consists of the following. 1st. Please don't say your site, this is an colaborative effort, and it is just as much yours as it is mine. Like most colaborative efforts I feel I get much more than I put in, so there's a little sting in my body whenever you refer to it as your site. 2nd. There is a difference between curly brackets {} and square brackets [], in short you should only use square brackets, there is a use for curly brackets when you use something called templates, but you really sholdn't concern yourself about those before you become more experienced. An internal link may be done with double brackets like this [[Term you want to link to]], while an external link may be done with single brackets like this [http://www.example.com]. 3rd. the article Visual navigation could certainly become a good article, as I'm sure theres heaps of information about it. But there are a few guidelines to writing a good article. Among those, your article should be selfcontained. You shouldn't imediately set it in the context of another article, allthough you may use it as a case study and otherwise reference it. Once again, you shouldn't sign your contributions to articles, only your contributions to discussions. 4th. Your edit Target and altitude additions to Operation Carpetbagger had a very apropriate summary, but it wasn't minor. Minor are only cosmetic changes like spelling errors, formatting, etc... Bfg 14:23, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking forward to reading your provided references, sometime soon. Bfg 14:23, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Again Hi Bfg: Will you check my user page when you get a chance? I welcome your suggestions. Edit it heavily if you wish. I have been forgetting to fill in the edit summary box and don't know how to go back to those I missed.

Rlboone1917 19:40, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have done so, I hope you approve my changes. I was most uncertain when I did the renaming from U.S. Air Corps to U.S. Army Air Corps, but when I checked the links, it seemed to be the most apropriate. Another little tip, btw. Sign your comments only with ~~~~ not with ~~~~rlboone1917. - Bfg 14:28, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and you are right, the air arm at that time was part of the army, not a separete sevice. I am certain more than a few will think my Army Air Corps is an error. Rlboone1917 20:31, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How to include photos?[edit]

I have a photo of king George VI and Queen Elizabeth reviewing the troops. Should this be included just after the comment in the article in reference to them? If so how do I get it there ? I have others also such as a picture of air crews standing around a jeep, picture of General Jimmie Doolitttle after presenting awards. If this acceptable pleasetell me in easy steps how to get them there and where. Rlboone1917 16:25, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Now, my first question to you is where do you intend to include it. I just want to point out that more information does not necessarily make a better article. If you want to put it on the page of George VI, don't. I'm quite certain it has enough pictures already. If the picture is in relation to Operation Carpetbagger, it might provide a good addendum to the article.

Putting up pictures carries a few special responsibilities. First of all, be sure that you own the copyright, or have an open license to redistribute it. American copyright laws are among the strictest in the world, (and you are trying to force them on the rest of the world to my greater displeasure, sorry, I just had to say so) and since the servers are located in Florida, Wikipedia has adopted strict policies to ensure that no copyright violation occurs. Neglecting to properly mark a picture with the appropriate copyrights will ensure a swift deletion. US Government, has one policy that may be helpful if your picture was taken by another soldier though. If a work (eg. picture) is made by a government employee during worktime, the work automatically falls into public domain. I'm trying to be brief here, so please ask me to elaborate if necessary.

Having taken the necessary precautions the next step is quite easy. As I assume your pictures are already in an electronic format, press the Upload file link in the toolbox on the left side of the screen. And fill out the form. When that is done, if you need any more help, we'll take it from there. Bfg 00:34, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to ask you this: In your comments of 16.32, 16 November 2006 (UTC)rboone1917, I do not know what you mean by "When responding to comments, you should use an appropriate number of : to give the correct indentation, as it improves readability". Can you give me an example ? Rlboone1917 19:43, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly, as you may have noticed, some of my comments appear more indented than yours. This is done as follows:

Comment (1)
:Response to comment 1 (2)
::Response to comment 2 (3)
:::Response to comment 3 (4)
::Response to comment 2 (5)
:::Response to comment 5 (6)
:Response to comment 1 (7)

As you can see a comment has one more : in front of it than the comment it responds to. This makes the text more readable. I'm not sure if that was a good explanation. Just ask if it wasn't. Bfg 00:12, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really care about the pictures but only wanted to improve the page and was under the impression that they welcomed pix. I don't want to clutter it up and am happy as it stands. Thanks for the advice.Rlboone1917 00:52, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your help and patience. I believe I have gone as far as I am capable and will follow the article for edits and improvement by you or others, if someone wants the chore.

Please, if you wish, put things in their proper order. I am pleased that it has risen from stub status to a grading of start class on the quality scale and would like to see it higher if possible.

It has been quite a learning experience for me but all I have to offer now are anecdotes that tell of some missions, the life we lived while not on missions, the humorous happenings that help keep morale high and a short illegal diary I kept when reconfiguring our first B-24D’s for our work, and these things are taboo on wikipediaRlboone1917 16:18, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, but you were not clear on which page you meant. What I said above was not meant to discourage you, and if you meant to improve the Operation Carpetbagger article, it would be a loss to Wikipedia, if I disuated you from posting your pictures. I only wanted to assert that your pictures weren't immediately deleted, due to some error on your part. Bfg 18:15, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it was a shock to hear you say "trying to force them on the rest of the world" As I stated, these pictures were specifically taken at our base, and shows The King and Queen reviewing our troops, General Doolittle after presenting awards to us, some combat crew members in conversation around a jeep. One other would have been a photo of any one of our crews in front of their aircraft.

I thought Wikipedia was interested in my raising our status from start class. I really have gone as far as I care to and will turn this over to Tom Ensminger, the historian, If he wishes to accept the chore. Rlboone1917 21: 40, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Please accept my apologies, I see now that what I wrote was ambigous, and could be interpreted as critique aimed at you, it was not. The comment you cited was directed at US policy in WTO and on similar arenas, it was totally misplaced in this setting, and it was stupid of me ever to mention it.

When I read your initial question again, I see that I may have missed your implied assumption that these pictures were taken in relation to the operation. English is my 3rd language which I hope could provide some explanation to why some subtleties might evade me. Should we continue this conversation in the future I hope you will bear over with any perceived rudeness and poor formulation on my part, and be assured that it was never intended in such a way. Again I offer my apologies!. Bfg 05:02, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All is forgiven. I do think it best, however, for me to turn any future additions or changes over to the group historian. He is in a position to add photos from his site. He also has a suggestion that the lead of the entire article be ammended, and he has suggested such on his talk page instead of editing it without feedback. Let me know if this is the way for him to proceed or if he should just edit this as a major change for the editors to evaluate.Rlboone1917 16:38, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]