User talk:Atticusfinch80

Hello, Atticusfinch80. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Happy editing, hajat vrc with WikiLove @ 03:21, 20 July 2012 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template.[reply]

I am using this section to lay out a proposed change to the Wiki article on XM2001 Crusader, in order to improve the article in conjunction with previous editors. I am new to Wiki editing, and need feedback from others who are more experienced before I proceed with these major changes.

1. I believe the article title should be changed from "XM2001 Crusader" to "Crusader field artillery system". This change is warranted because Crusader was the name given to the system of vehicles, which originally was envisioned to be a howitzer and a resupply vehicle based on identical chassis. It later included a wheeled variant of the resupply vehicle, which further suggests the limiting of the term "Crusader" to the XM2001 howitzer to be incorrect. My supposition that the term Crusader applies to both vehicles is supported by later text already in the article, e.g., "The Crusader was intended to replace the M109A6 Paladin Self-Propelled Howitzer and the M992 Field Artillery Ammunition Support Vehicle (FAASV)."

2. I believe the opening paragraph should be changed to the following:

Crusader was to be the United States Army's next-generation indirect fire artillery system, consisting of a self-propelled howitzer (SPH) and a self-propelled resupply vehicle (RSV) on identical chassis. The system was designed to improve the survivability, lethality, mobility, and effectiveness of the artillery as well as the overall force. United Defense was the prime contractor; General Dynamics the major subcontractor. Crusader was originally scheduled for fielding by 2008. In early May 2002, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld cancelled the $11 billion USD program because he considered it difficult to deploy and not accurate enough to support the U.S. Army’s overall transformation effort.

3. The final sentence in the opening paragraph ("The prototype SPH vehicle is on display at the cannon park at Fort Sill.") should be moved to the section titled "Eventual Fate".

My credentials for understanding the Crusader system include the fact that I was the U.S. Army officer assigned to represent the Field Artillery School, the user "proponent" for Crusader, in the United Defense plant in Minneapolis during the period 1995-2000. I will be proposing other changes to this article as I gain editing Wiki experience. Comments on my proposed change are welcome, as are suggestions on how to proceed technically with this change. Atticusfinch80 (talk) 00:41, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New answer at the Teahouse

Hello. You have an answer to your question at WP:Teahouse/Questions#Soliciting Review of a Proposed Major Change to an Existing Article's talk page. DocTree (talk) 04:10, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please fill out our brief Teahouse guest survey

Hello fellow Wikipedian, the hardworking hosts at WP:Teahouse would like your feedback! We have created a brief survey meant to help us better understand the experience of new editors on Wikipedia. You are being selected to participate in our survey because you edited the Teahouse Questions or Guests pages sometime in the last few months.

Click here to be taken to the survey site.

The survey should take less than 10 minutes to complete. We really appreciate your feedback, and we look forward to your next vist to the Teahouse!

Happy editing,

Jonathan and Sarah, Teahouse hosts 02:11, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RE: The hunter

Film plots ideally should not exceed 700 words, and my removals did not detract from the bear minimum required to understand the plot. Wiki film articles are meant to be dry summaries, not epic retellings. I hope you understand. Regards.Mariomassone (talk) 07:39, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure, but this is how I've communicated ever since I registered here, and apparently others do so as well.Mariomassone (talk) 17:43, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]