Recent revert of vandalismEdit
Thanks Wingman. Good to have you on board. We haven't seen you around lately, but you did well. SouthWriter 04:40, April 13, 2012 (UTC)
no problemWingman1 04:41, April 13, 2012 (UTC)
Moving the BlogEdit
Let me know where I can put the Blog. I am going to fight this, bringing it up to the rest of the Brass, but even moving it to my sandbox might not be enough! Ganon is persistent. I am presently looking into all the other mentions of "No Cross, No Crown" to see if other blogs have been deleted for this. Guidelines don't call for deletion, but only for warnings (I tried deleting remarks with warnings and it was not well received!). SouthWriter 03:16, April 23, 2012 (UTC)
keep up the good fight. stand by.Wingman1 03:18, April 23, 2012 (UTC)
About the message -- it came to my talk page at your new wiki. As it turns out, I tried to move the blog to my sandbox for the time being and the remarks did not follow it. I spent hours putting the remarks (that show up in reverse order) into chronological order on the new pages "talk page." It is now accessable via a link from a new blog. If you read "The Lost Blog" on my blog page you will see not only the link but another argument raging from Ganon about the purpose of blogs on the wiki and how he was right to delete the blog in the first place.
Long story short, I will keep the blog in storage for now. SouthWriter 18:44, April 26, 2012 (UTC)
Edits for badges? Edit
Hey, Wingman. I know that the badges are a nice thing to build up (for some people, anyway), but if you are going to make minor edits, mark them as such. This can be done by marking the "Minor edit" box at the upper right corner of the edit page (in "Visual" mode). Some might think that you are misusing the badge incentive program if you keep this up.
Have a lovely day. SouthWriter 20:28, May 6, 2012 (UTC)
sorry about that, i just thought i would tweek my talk page/profile the keep up my concsectiuve day's on the wiki till i got to where i could do some writing on the TL i a working on. i did not think it would be a problem. but i will not do it anymore if it is.
Well, you need to remove all the spaces, lol.
Wing, at that date, ICBM's do not exist yet. Most of those nukes aren't possible. And, the USA held a massive advantage in bomber-based ones. Only parts of Europe could be hit by them at this time - not that anyone outside of the USSR knew that fact back then, lol.
There's no way that NATO could advance that far, either. Not anywhere near that fast.
Probably the biggest thing I can say is you seem to be going into Independence Day territory, and should inch away.
As for ideas.....
Well, I assume that they would need creative strategies in order to come out on top. Alternative uses for nukes, other than direct strikes, may be useful. Nuclear mines, EMP blasts, etc. There's quite a few of them, could prove interesting. Creative uses for wildfires, and even nuclear-bomb caused tsunamis.
Lordganon 06:20, May 22, 2012 (UTC)
Put more plainly, Wing, the USSR held virtually no ability to hit populated areas of North America until the 1960s. Lordganon 07:49, May 22, 2012 (UTC)
i was thinking one way trip's for bombers, i know the USAF was worred about this. also i scaled back NATO attack's.Wingman1 08:01, May 22, 2012 (UTC)
Wing, don't worry about my page, lol.
Good luck getting people to fly suicide missions.
Pretty much, the Soviets only had a single model of bomber that could reach North America - the Tupolev Tu-95. And with not being able to fly over a lot of territory, it's barely. By the time of your timeline, they had barely started production on these.
The two other kinds of Soviet bomber that could make the trip wouldn't be returning. Heck, even for a suicide run they couldn't get to most of the USA.
Lordganon 08:36, May 22, 2012 (UTC)
Only the one can manage it, Wing. The other two need to make long flights over hostile territory, at the shortest distance, to come close - and even those missions are suicide runs.
The TU-4 can't even reach the US, suicide run or not.
The pilots would be well aware it was a death mission, with no chance at all of getting out. Nor would the USSR have "talked" them into it. This is the era well past Stalin, when there was no way they would do such a thing.
Lordganon 22:14, May 22, 2012 (UTC)
The destruction of the two capitals would be more than enough to start WWIII. As for the dates, they are good. You just have to have the nukes toned down slightly xD Besides, you need your guys to be able to win against the aliens, right? It'll only help them to do that ;)
Other things that may be useful are chemical weapons of one sort or another. Not biological agents, however - not enough time to make any that would work.
For alien vessels in orbit, there's a weapon idea you may want to consider that's been discussed for such a thing. The basic idea is to detonate a nuke underground. The cavern has a bunch of little tunnels going to the surface, through concrete/cement. At the very top of these are massive manhole covers.
The basic idea is that the pressure wave from the nuke will send these plates into orbit, at a speed far in excess of sound. Any craft above them gets turned into swiss cheese.
Lordganon 23:15, May 22, 2012 (UTC)
Well, the gun is basically what fires the nuke you list.
Really, the largest of those bombs is around 1kt. Basically no effect - these are designed for very fine demolition of a target. Alien Ships, I'd think, would be barely damaged. Might be useful against ground troops, though - it's basically a weak version of tactical nukes, and would have little to no radiation leftover.
Oh yes. It could be very easily set up and targeted. As for usefulness, yes as well. I first saw this on a show about how we'd try to fight such invaders on the science channel - physicists, military guys, etc. talking about its usefulness.
They would avoid orbital bombardment, since they want to settle here. But they'd have a bigger ship, or fleet of them, up there. Think of this as a way to get rid of them once they are forced off the surface.
Lordganon 00:37, May 23, 2012 (UTC)
I actually think that keeping in set in the 1950s is better. Past that opinion, you actually have the nukes not kill most of the developed world at that time, so that they can actually fight the aliens off. In the 1960s, not the case.
Wouldn't be hard in wartime, actually - there's a lot of caverns, with a lot of entrances. All you need to do is seal the entrances to the cave and insert the nuke. There's even a lot of these where both powers kept the nukes.
Lordganon 09:57, May 26, 2012 (UTC)
Yes, keep it in the 1950s. Lordganon 03:55, May 27, 2012 (UTC)
Piedmont edit Edit
Hi, Wingman. Thanks for the edit, I'm sorry that Ganon saw fit to remove it. I have reverted your edit and fixed the grammar myself. Next time, place a note on the talk page before making changes to the site. I can put it in without attracting attention until it becomes apparent that you are a collaborator.
Put up a little bit of a narrative concerning Ware Shoals up on the Piedmont talk page and we can work out how to get it into either the main article or, more likely, the History article. SouthWriter (talk) 20:22, June 3, 2012 (UTC)
SC 1983 DoomsdayEdit
I noticed on the page that the "doomsday" and "Aftermath" sections were blank. Since you made the page, is it OK if I add a few edits?Wegscuba 02:49, June 25, 2012 (UTC)
No, i'm not going to edit the Ware Shoals page, just the Genreal SC page.Wegscuba 03:41, June 25, 2012 (UTC)
I would be okay if you would just pick a nation and make some nice pages about it and what are the differences from OTL. And maybe sometimes, posting about it(if it would be very important) would be a good idea. Doctor261 (Talk to Doctor261) 09:04, July 1, 2012 (UTC)
When that map game ends, I'm planning to make an actual timeline according to that game. I'm planning to make it collaborative so anyone may research and contribute. Maybe then, you could help me? :D Doctor261 (Talk to Doctor261) 09:51, July 1, 2012 (UTC)
Hello, Wingman. I am afraid I do not know who you are. Would you mind to tell me?
51st State Edit
Your edits were reverted because they were copy-edits of an anon vandal's work. In order to delete the anon's work, LordGanon had to delete yours. Next time, read the history of a page for 5 seconds before accusing people of being biased. LurkerLordB (Talk) 19:48, August 26, 2012 (UTC)
if it was the first time, i would agree with you. but he has reverted "good faith" edits of mine before, even ones almost 1 year old. i "might" be wrong about the 51's state edit but they is a pattern of bias twords me and other editors that disagree with him.
And as far as accusing anyone of bias on that talk page i never did i just asked if he had a problem with me.
and that 5 second rule should apply to a lot more people besids me.Wingman1 (talk) 19:57, August 26, 2012 (UTC)
You did absolutely nothing of the sort to "make it better". You fixed the grammar, which does nothing to fix the blatant QSS-QAA violation of that anon edit . You outright have declared that you are accusing him of bias here, and your statement on Southwriter's page said so (yes, saying he is misusing his moderator powers against you because he has a problem with you is accusing him of bias, even if you don't use that word). LurkerLordB (Talk) 20:40, August 26, 2012 (UTC)
My question not statement to South was Did LG have a issue with me. your responce speakes for it self, i just happen to disagree with it. like i said before i will not go back to that paqge again but will concentrate on my "current project with Southwriter" and just let it go.Wingman1 (talk) 21:00, August 26, 2012 (UTC)
i got a new sig. this one will be different to each wiki i edit on. Wingman1 11:16, September 15, 2012 (UTC)
Well, no, but I have Pixlr instead. It's pretty much the same thing, as far as mapmaking goes. What do you need?
Ehh... That particular one won't work. Horrible quality, no offence. Got another one?
great, how bout you? (DeanSims: Talk) 11:34, October 12, 2012 (UTC)
cool. Im sick of everything on this wiki having to end like OTL though, I mean the Axis had WON the war with the USSR as an ally, then the mods, who is an allied player says, no, your not, and changes there government and makes the Axis lose. (DeanSims: Talk) 11:46, October 12, 2012 (UTC)
off to the Airshow tomorow!!!
will blog about it tomorow night!
Wingman1 03:52, October 20, 2012 (UTC)
The airshow was great, but i am tired i will blog tomorow. Wingman1 00:36, October 21, 2012 (UTC)
Apoclaypse - 2012Edit
Thank you for your comment Wingman on my Apoclaypse - 2012 Page. If you want to edit it, feel free but as long as you ask me first.
Thanks - User:Lewody1 10:53 GMT 02/11/2012
they fixed. Wingman1 00:12, November 15, 2012 (UTC)
Not much, how about you? (DeanSims: Talk) 12:24, December 5, 2012 (UTC)
i wont, dont worry. im gonna be either a vet or a History teacher of some sort. (DeanSims: Talk) 12:25, December 6, 2012 (UTC)
I will, that way i can say Im right on here all the time! XD(DeanSims: Talk) 12:20, December 7, 2012 (UTC)
yeah.. but then Ill have authority to back it up! XD (DeanSims: Talk) 12:26, December 10, 2012 (UTC)
thanks. (DeanSims: Talk) 12:32, December 14, 2012 (UTC)
my slide show at the top of my page here, is just some of my fav', just some pic's that catch my eye ,on the wiki. i do change the out add and subtract from time to time. Wingman1 01:25, January 21, 2013 (UTC)
"It's" vs "Its"Edit
"It's" is ONLY a contraction of "it is."
"Its" is the correct spelling of the possessive.
I write the way i talk, so i have issues, Wingman1 01:06, June 22, 2013 (UTC)
Wing, why on earth would you undo a spelling correction? I have put Eo's correction back in. Don't remove it again. Or any of his corrections like that, for that matter. Lordganon (talk) 10:23, June 22, 2013 (UTC)
i undid it because i was asking South about it. and as for any others... well it's like i said i tend to wrirt the way i talk so he can take it up with me like any othe editor, unless he has some kinda hidden rank on this wikia that i don't know about, because rules apply to him as well. Wingman1 14:50, June 22, 2013 (UTC)
...Are you kidding me?
No. You removed a "good faith" edit by someone who has taken it upon himself to fix grammar and spelling errors on this wiki. A "good faith edit" that was correct.
You undid a completely justified fix, more than once, and preceded to post that you had done such a thing on South's page.
That you did that does, quite frankly, mean I need to inform you that it was wrong for you to do that. And now you are freaking out, without any cause, about it.
You seem to be mildly misguided about what a good faith edit is, Wing. It is more or less the exact opposite of what you're thinking it is. A "good faith edit" is things like correcting grammar and spelling - not undoing those corrections.
This wiki does, in fact, have such a policy - as do all wikis. The violator of that was, in fact, you, not Eo.
And yes, I am well aware of what was going on. Easy enough to read.
Sorry to say it like this, but I tried being polite, as did Eo. Did not work, so...