User talk:Rossusna02

USS Enterprise (BLDG 7115)

Done. Sorry about that.

TheSuave (talk) 22:21, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RTC

(replying here. you may reply either place). Not a problem. I'm happy to help where I can but I tend to work at the 'margins' of the encyclopedia rather than pretty up content already, so I am not always able to help in that fashion. As for dealing with people looking down your nose, I don't know what to say. Some of it is kinda bullshit, but some of it is the kind of stuff that only becomes a big deal when you stop following the rules strictly (like the copyvio stuff). No one (really) is going to bust our chops for using that guidebook, but if we start down the practice of letting that slide the only possible result is a costly lawsuit in the end. This about the same as making recruits fold their t-shirts the way they have to. It doesn't really matter how t-shirts get folded. Taken in a vacuum it is kind of bullshit. But the lesson it teaches is that attention to detail and compliance with procedure is always important, ~~even~~ especially when it seems like bullshit.

The same social norms are at work here. For good or ill, this article has found someone who is going to scrutinize everything mercilessly. It seems like garbage in a vacuum. And if this were divorced from context, it would be 100% unhelpful, but in the sense that each bit of the encyclopedia comprises the whole, it is important. So I'm not saying love your neighbor. I'm not saying he is right for doing it specifically. But I am saying that there is a function for people like that in the encyclopedia. This is kind of a weird place when you start looking at it.

If you need any other specific help on the RTC article just shoot me another message and I'll see what I can do. Protonk (talk) 03:57, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Revert of Xymax edits

I'm confused why you reverted an apparently good edit to the RTC page. In my opinion, Xymax's version would be preferred for the tone expected in this encyclopedia. Normally when you revert good faith edits (i.e. not vandalism) you post a note on the talk page or at least provide a detailed edit summary. I'm going to restore the page to this revision if I don't hear back. Thanks. Protonk (talk) 00:37, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the info I posted on Xymax talk page- The changes you made to the article are less accurate. It is not "The" Recruit Training Command; it is just Recruit Training Command. Also, Recruit Training Command is a Tennant Command not an organization. I have undone your changes to restore the article to a more accurate state. If you have further concerns please feel free to let me know. Rossusna02 (talk) 02:56, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I got your message on my talk page, and replied to it there, but there have been more edits in the meantime. I've opened a discussion about the lead on the article talk page, all input is welcome. Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 14:18, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]