User:SpartHawg948

About Me
My name is William, I am 25, and I am a Staff Sergeant (SSgt) in the US Air Force Reserve. I live in Santa Clara, California, and I LOVE Mass Effect (and can't wait for #2)!!! I aim to do whatever I can to improve this site, as I feel it's a great resource. Also, I am an admin, so if anyone has any questions or needs help with anything, please just let me know!

Also, not to put too fine a point on it, but I have no patience whatsoever with crybabies, whiners, speculators, and boors. If you are going to be rude to someone else, plant purely speculative info, or insult others but then start crying when someone calls you on it, you WILL be hearing from me.

Now that the seriousness is taken care of, it's my goal to make this the most informative site possible, while also keeping it a nice, friendly environment for users. Any assistance in furthering that goal is, of course, greatly appreciated, and I try to acknowledge people for their efforts as much as possible. So I hope you all enjoy the site, and hopefully you'll be hearing from me (for something good, of course!)

Words to live by

 * "Let him who desires peace prepare for war"- Publius Flavius Vegetius Renatus (more commonly known as Vegetius) from De Re Militari
 * "An armed society is a polite society"- Robert A. Heinlein
 * "The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings. The inherent vice of Socialism is the equal sharing of miseries"- Winston Churchill
 * "The world is not going to be saved by legislation."- William Howard Taft
 * "A man has to live with himself, and he should see to it that he always has good company."- Charles Evans Hughes

Projects

 * Work on cleaning up/beefing up Port Hanshan
 * Keeping an eye on anything military related. (As a servicemember I take a great deal of interest in all things military, so it's kind of my pet project!)
 * Keeping an eye on Mass Effect 2 and all related pages. Word to the wise- Speculators beware! If new tidbits aren't sourced, I WILL remove them! If they reappear, still not sourced, they're gone again! It's a waiting game, and I've got nothing but time! :)
 * After much debate it was decided that, as commander is used as a proper noun when used to refer to a particular commander, ie Shepard, working on capitalizing all relevant uses of commander as I happen upon them. Not really a concerted effort, it's more along the lines of a few at a time, as pages needing it pop up through the wonderful 'random page' function.

Tongue-in cheek thought of the, ah, who am I kidding? I'm not gonna change this daily...

 * Happy New Year to all you lads and lasses, boys and girls, ladies and gents, Commander Shepards all!
 * Please remember people, just because you created an article, or contributed heavily to it or whatever, that does not confer ownership of that article to you! There is no such thing as "my article", there are community articles. This is a wiki, and as such, people will be editing articles, and frequently. Feeling a sense of ownership over something that you do not own only leads to trouble. If you want a pristine entry that nobody can add any speculation or whatever to, put it on your userpage, user talk page, or your user blog. See a pattern there? Your user pages are yours, the articles are for everybody. SpartHawg948 09:42, January 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * I can't believe I have to say this, but I do! One of the first things you learn as a maintainer in the Air Force is that if there's a warning on something, no matter how silly or stupid or obvious it may seem to you, the warning is there because someone, somewhere, actually attempted it. This is the same thing. Someone saying something on a talk page on this site does not constitute sufficient evidence to insert speculation into an article. Any speculation needs at least some proof, and if it concerns an upcoming game like, say, Mass Effect 2 it needs a source as well, and a comment someone made on a talk page, even if that someone is an admin here, is not a source, nor is it proof. SpartHawg948 10:10, January 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Please people, let's try and keep things civil. We're only three days into 2010 and I'm already noticing a disturbing amount of less than nice language. Lets see... don't ridicule other people's theories when explaining that speculative theories don't go into articles would suffice, don't give your opinion on something, then when someone else offers a differing opinion say 'well your opinion means nothing to me', don't use loaded phrases to mis-characterize points others are trying to make, simple and obvious stuff like that. Remember, rude or offensive language towards others can and will get you blocked. As I've said many times around here, a modicum of civility goes a long way. SpartHawg948 23:59, January 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * Watch out, or I'll poison your wells! Or is that my wells I'll poison? Or a community well? Regardless, anger me, and wells will be poisoned! Leastways, that's the word on the street... :P SpartHawg948 03:46, January 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * On a related note, please don't tell me that I'm failing to understand what you are saying after needing me to explain to you what the term "ok" means in a sentence such as "Apparently it's ok for you to ___, but it's not ok for me to do the same". The definition is pretty obvious given the usage and context. So again, don't attempt to say I don't understand after making me explain that. Or at least don't say it with a straight face. :) SpartHawg948 00:13, January 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Here's a tip kids: If for some reason someone wants to make up a lie about me, make it believable. If it isn't, I will call you on it. Admitting it was a lie is a good move then. It'll make me angry, but I'll at least respect you for coming clean. But then don't ruin it by trying to BS me... and don't keep changing the BS story. One minute it was a lie... then it was negative feelings towards me swirling around to help you convince yourself I'm a horrible person... then it's not a lie, it's something that was "misremembered". Wow. Pick a story and run with it! SpartHawg948 06:29, January 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * On a related note... I understand that sometimes I can say things on here that may paint individuals in an unfavorable light. It's not my intention to publicly demean people in any way. The purpose of this section is threefold: 1) To post little blurbs I don't really want to start a blog about (ie the Happy New Year message); 2) To provide advice and tips concerning activity I've seen recently that's not so good, such as the one on here about not assuming a sense of ownership over articles; and 3) To use my userpage to vent some of the frustrations of dealing with people who are not always the easiest to deal with. That's it. It's not to shame anyone or hurt feelings. If, however, you don't like something I've put here, I could be a jerk and yell Your feelings mean nothing to me!, or I could be willing to at least discuss it towards the possible eventual goal of removing the content. So, if there is something you object to, please shoot me an email through the handy-dandy "E-mail this user" button and we'll discuss! SpartHawg948 21:18, January 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Don't mess with me on military issues! It's not just a passion, I LIVE IT! For example: You try to tell me posthumous promotions are a common practice in the military and are traditional (never mind the fact that the so-called tradition I was disputing is that people get bumped up TWO ranks posthumously) and cite some articles from local news sites and newspapers that, despite their names, are not affiliated with the military in any legal way (as they clearly state if you read the actual paper and not the site) to prove it, well guess what? I respond with memos from the Commandant of the Marine Corps and the United States Army's website on the subject! And they say two totally different things. Now tell me, who knows more about what the military actually does? KTVZ Central Oregon, the Army Times (which as stated above, is not actually affiliated with the Army or the Department of Defense) and MilitaryCity.com (a branch of the Military times, which again is not associated with the DoD or the military), or the US Army and the Commandant of the USMC? Hmmm... think I'm going to go with the military over the journalists on this one! Say what you will about me, I know the military! SpartHawg948 09:34, January 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Which brings me to a non-ME topic I want to touch on briefly. Know your sources people. I suppose this has some ME related uses too, but my main point concerns a few other papers. I bet a lot of people thing that the Army Times, Air Force Times, Navy Times and Marine Corps Times are run by, or at least associated with, those branches of service, as well as the Department of Defense, right? WRONG!!! Don't feel bad, I used to think they were too. Then I learned better. All are in fact part of the Army Times Publishing Company, which is itself a subsidiary of the Gannett Company, which is America's largest newspaper company, and also owns (among other things) USA Today, The Arizona Republic, The Detroit Free Press, and many others. So the info you thought was the best you could get about the military in the newspaper is actually no better than what you could read in USA Today. So remember, people, know your source. It might turn out to be far less than it sells itself as. SpartHawg948 09:50, January 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but I have to! If the person referenced in this bit really wants this gone I can remove it, but this was just too funny! Please, if you want to use a colloquialism, or a saying or something in a debate, and especially if the intended usage is to make the other person appear gullible or naive, please make sure you get the saying right! For example, were you to say to me you have some "waterfront property in Arizona" to sell me, know what I'd say? GREAT! Waterfront property in Arizona (especially along the shores of Lake Havasu) is a great investment, as developers will pay top dollar to get their hands on it! Waterfront property in Arizona most certainly does exist along the various lakes, rivers, streams, reservoirs, etc, although it can be hard to find it up for sale. The proper phrase is, of course, oceanfront property in Arizona, as Arizona is landlocked. Big difference there, especially when the person you misquoted the saying to lived in Arizona for six years and has firsthand knowledge of the subject! :P SpartHawg948 22:03, January 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Again (I can't believe I have to repeat things like this), you can't call someone wrong on a matter that is 100% purely an opinion matter. There is no textbook standard or Rosetta Stone for what is and isn't elegant. It's an opinion thing. While you may find an F-22 elegant and an A-10 not so much based solely on looks, someone else may point out that, as both are airplanes, whose intended function is to fly, the A-10 is much more elegant because it doesn't spend most of it's time stuck on the ground for ridiculous reasons such as not being able to get rained on without shorting out. Telling someone that something they think is elegant is not, is like me telling you that your favorite ice cream is really not your favorite flavor. It's not semantics, it's pure opinion. SpartHawg948 04:09, January 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * I love it when other people, while seeking to prove me wrong or negate/lessen something I said, help make my point for me. For example, when I pointed out that America fought two wars simultaneously in WWII (one against the Japanese in the Pacific, and another in Europe against Germany and Italy), someone said, "While you did beat the Japanese by you're selves. the USSR beat the Germans more than you did. They did reach Berlin first after all". This is, of course, true. But it also leaves out the facts that: A) The Soviets couldn't have made it to Berlin first without US help (in the form of Lend-Lease, more on that in a sec) and B) It's much easier to march a huge army overland to Berlin than to ship a huge army across the Atlantic, stage a massive amphibious assault on a fortified coastline and then march the huge army overland to Berlin. But again, without us, the Soviets couldn't have done it. Fact: During the war the United States supplied the Soviet Union with: over 400,000 trucks, over 12,000 tanks and other combat vehicles, 32,000 motorcycles, 13,000 locomotives and train cars, 8,000 pieces of anti-aircraft artillery, 135,000 sub-machine guns, 300,000 tons of explosives, 40,000 field radios, 400 radar systems, 400,000 pieces of heavy industrial equipment, and millions of tons of food, steel and other metals, oil, gasoline, and various chemicals. Not to mention the fact that approx. 20% of the Soviet aircraft used were Lend-Lease, most from the US, but some also from the UK. 20% of their bombers, 23% of their fighters, and 29% of their naval aircraft were provided to them by the US and UK. They literally couldn't have stayed in, much less won, the war without us. So thanks, anon user, for helping me make my point! SpartHawg948 07:30, January 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * I've said this here before, and sadly I get the sneaking suspicion I'll have to say it again in the future, but people have to understand that I have no idea how much experience people have making edits to wikis other than this one. As such, when I see someone new to this wiki doing something that isn't really kosher, I try to go about it nicely, explaining whatever it is and giving background info as to why I am making the request/statement that will hopefully be sufficient to the situation. Sometimes the person I'm talking to already knows the info and is experienced with wikis, but more often than not this is not the case. If I put something like this on your talk page, please don't answer back that you already know it and have plenty of experience like it's something I should have known going into this. I have to do things like this far too often to do comprehensive checks on every new user's editing background on other wikis. I'm just trying to do my job. SpartHawg948 08:58, January 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * Please don't insult people by labeling an entire group of people by a derogatory name for voting for someone you don't like. I don't take kindly to insulting other people anyways, but, having served as the Federal Voting Assistance Program representative for Davis-Monthan Air Force Base for 3 years (which basically made me the Supervisor of Elections for a city of town of about 15,000), I take a keen interest in stuff like this. Thanks, SpartHawg948 21:07, January 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry if this one sounds more pointed than usual and hearkens back to the more unpleasant moments of last month, but this one is a straight-up gripe, primarily aimed at one or two individuals. As an admin, it's part of the job to inform people of the site policy when they do something wrong, caution them when they do something inappropriate, or question them when they make suspect claims in articles. This is done using the user talk pages. There are few things more frustrating than seeing people delete these comments while labeling them as "junk" or "garbage". I'm just trying to help. If you delete it, maybe just say "deleting old content" or something like that? Don't call the messages I left in an attempt to help you and better this site as junk or garbage. SpartHawg948 23:48, January 17, 2010 (UTC)
 * Please people, it's not much to ask, but I still seem to need to ask it: Can you please spell my username right? Please? Especially if you have asked me to do something like "stay quiet and out of your way". It's 9 letters- Spart (as in Spartan, as in Spartan-II) Hawg (as in Hawg, short for Warthog, an affectionate nickname for the Fairchild Republic A/OA-10A/C Thunderbolt II attack aircraft) followed by 3 numbers, 948 (as in the last three numbers of my old jet, 81-948). SpartHawg948. Not hard people, especially when it appears right above the post you are adding. You just need to duplicate it. You can even cut and paste! It's not hard! SpartHawg948 00:54, January 19, 2010 (UTC)