Talk:SM U-65 (Germany)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles

Military history: Maritime / European / German / World War I C‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	European military history task force
	German military history task force
	World War I task force

Germany Low‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Text and citations[edit]

AchimKoerver. Hello, I created this article with the material cited in Section "Operations known to British Intelligence". It is original text frolm the British NAtional Archives, also published in a book ofmine. Therefore I signed it all as Citation. Yes; right, its a long ciation in this way. But as it was written in 1919 to 1920, it cannot be comletely convenient to nowaday Wiki standards. I friendly asks others, to respect this. Its a form of tolerance for ancient texts I ask here. I think it is great to add links to other ships or events or places in the text. Hm; dissolving abbreviations like S.S." into "sailing ships", this already causes me teeth pain.

But replacing "blown up" by "scuttling" - thats a falsification a) of the original text, and b) a falsification of facts, of history. Here only about b) : a ships swimming in the water can be scuttled (sunk by openening the vents for example) or blown up (by explosive materile etc). Then it would sink in both cases. But a ship lying for overhaul in a shipyard, means it is outside the water, it is not swimming any more, cannot be "scuttled", it can only be destroyed by other means. And exactly this was the case here: German had to retire from the AUstrian bases quickly, so the blew up all submarines on yard.

In any way: I have written some 100 articles about submarines here in the last weeks, and have some 250 more ready. But since 1 week I do nothing other, than to try to protect the ORIGINAL text and facts against things like this. Please, my friends, tell me what you think ist the gain for humanity to change the content of texts of other, like "scuttle" for "blown up". In this way I will not find time for new artickes. Wouldnt you find it more gentile to ask the creators for a discussion , before you do things like this ?—Preceding unsigned comment added by AchimKoerver (talk • contribs) 13:39, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You'd be better advised to spend less time "protecting" extensive quotations & original formatting, & more using the content to create pages, 'cause the formatting is gonna get changed. As for "scuttling", I got news for you, it applies regardless; if Kriegsmarine was trying to render her useless to the enemy, "scuttling" can apply, afloat or not, original quote or not. AFAIK, the original info (facts) haven't been changed in any of the pages you've tried to "protect".

P.S. You can (& should, BTW) sign your posts ~~~~. FYI. TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 14:49, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]