Micheal Harrens

Welcome!

Hi Micheal Harrens! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! :Jay8g [V•T•E] 03:00, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

May 2024

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to French destroyer Milan, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Padgriffin ^{Griffin's Nest} 05:45, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Yea sorry. I'm used to the Quora community where you can get away with being less formal. Still getting used to the Wikipedia environment. Micheal Harrens (talk) 01:32, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Italics for ship names

Nice to see another active ships editor. Can I remind you that ship names should always be italicised Lyndaship (talk) 18:25, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Sourcing issues and cite formats

• Please start using the same formats as the other cites in the articles. It's a requirement for featured articles and slightly less so for lesser-rated articles. If several different formats are used, match one of them. This needs to happen on all of your edits so go back and fix them all. Please read through the Manual of Style (WP:MoS) as edits to featured articles need to comply with every bit of it and lower-quality articles less so. See the A-class and good articlerequirements for their standards for compliance with the MoS. Failure to do so will cause all of your non-compliant edits to be reverted, repeatedly if necessary.
• The quality of your sourcing is difficult to assess because some of your links either do not work or do not link to a specific page. I could not access your link to the history of Johnston and, while I'm doubtful that the Yamato and Musashi Internet Photo Archive is actually a reliable source by our standards (see WP:RS), all of your links only went to the front page of the website, so I could not actually make an assessment.
• I appreciate the time and energy that you've used to add the information to the articles, but you need to start paying more attention to how the articles are formatted, our policies in general, and the nit-picky requirements of the MoS as nobody wants to spend their time and energy cleaning up after you. I'm sorry to say that you're working in an area of Wikipedia where many of the articles are already at a high standard and the bar is simply higher here than most newcomers will need to match.
• Feel free to ping me if you have any further questions.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 10:36, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

  sorry, I've only been editing Wikipedia since February, I'm new to this. I'm busy for the time being, but as soon as possible I'll get that done. Thanks for the advice. Micheal Harrens (talk) 16:11, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

I've reverted your edits to Teruzuki as I'm not sure why you prefer Hammel to more recent accounts, you added Hammel at the end of the bibliography instead of alphabetically and Nevitt's language attributing the torpedo hit to Yukikaze is more than a bit ambiguous. And you weren't matching the cite formats perfectly; no endash and other trivial issues.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:54, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

I think I should take a break from editing Wikipedia to properly research how to cite stuff. I also wanted to add a note that American records of the battle differ on who torpedoed Laffey, with some even listing Teruzuki as a possible or definitive candidate. However, as indicated by Combined Fleet Japanese records of the battle firmly credit Yukikaze for the torpedo hit (As I quote "12-13 November: First Naval Battle of Guadalcanal; Escorted Admiral Abe's Bombardment Force. Operated with NAGARA; probably engaged USS CUSHING (DD-376) and USS LAFFEY (DD-459), torpedoing the latter ". I can see your point on its ambiguity, but all their pages are like that (besides their aircraft carrier pages) and they are of of the few easily accessible sources with an insight into the battle that are primarily based on Japanese records). However, I could not for the life of me figure out how to do this, not even copy and pasting the Refn command on its template page worked.

I've kind of just figured you have the same issue of the battle off Samar where American accounts often differed on which Japanese ship hit which US ship due to primarily basing their stories on US accounts without taking Japanese records into consideration. Kongō was usually attributed to the battleship caliber hits on USS Johnston and USS Hoel before Japanese records showed she was blinded by rain squalls until 8:02, and those hits belong to Yamato and Nagato respectively.

Still, I'd recommend editing Teruzuki's page. She assisted in sinking Laffey, THEN crippled USS Sterret, not the other way around (Laffey was sunk just around 2:00, while Sterett was engaged by Teruzuki after 2:15). I also firmly do not believe she helped to sink USS Monssen. Monssen was sunk by the destroyers Asagumo, Murasame, and Samidare around the same time Laffey was sunk. Micheal Harrens (talk) 17:39, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

I'd have to review my sources for Teruzuki's actions, but they seemed a reasonable account since Lundgren isn't reliable by our standards. I don't have Hammel and figured that I had enough of the more recent sources to be reasonably comprehensive. As for cites, the easiest thing is to copy exactly the format of those that are in the article already. But a good readthrough of WP:RS, WP:V and the WP:MOS would help.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Micheal Harrens (talk) 01:24, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Sullivan brothers

Please review and correct your edit with regard to italics for ship names and MOS:DATESNO Lyndaship (talk) 17:07, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

USS Honolulu

I re-did my edit on this article, correctly this time. Thanks for pointing out my mistake. Ira Leviton (talk) 13:01, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Anytime. Micheal Harrens (talk) 15:20, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Myōkō-class cruiser, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chino-Japanese War. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 08:28, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:53, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 16

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited USS Tautog (SS-199), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Supply (ship).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

The link was already there in the Wikipedia article. I just added it again to the history of raiding summery Micheal Harrens (talk) 15:37, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Page number needed in Japanese battleship Yamato

Hello there, you added a citation to the above article but directed readers to a chapter rather than a page number. Could you make that change? Thanks! Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 22:41, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

I listened to Japanese Destroyer Captain on Audible. I don't know the exact page, just the Chapter Micheal Harrens (talk) 22:43, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Ah, got it. I formatted the citation and noted that! Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 18:02, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Regarding HNLMS De Ruyter

For context, the article has recently passed both GA and DYK review. While edits to these pages were welcome, several users have verified that the status quo was satisfactory at a fundamental level regarding reliability, scope, and the use of sources

I have reverted your edits to HNLMS De Ruyter (1935) for the following reasons:

• You removed the entire ‘wreck’ section without given reason, even though the section was supported by verifiable sources from official government reports and news coverage
• Per WP:CITEVAR, you should not change the citation style of an article, and are especially recommended to not use two simultaneous methods of citations. Your edits use both rp page numbers and short citations
• You changed most of the article’s page numbers, even for prose you did not touch. As such, those sections are now supported by the wrong sections of text
• You introduce unencyclopedic language from an old version of the article, including “pesky” and “unfortunately”
• You remove verifiable sources and replace them with websites such as microworks.net and combinedlfeets with lacks citations
• You do not use inline citations, and lump every cite at the end of each paragraph, which is an issue as some sections are now supported with 5 references
• None of your shortrefs link to a respective book
• You lumped sources into a Further Reading section, even though only a few are cited
• Several citations are duplicates
• You complain that the ‘Service History’ section is all based off Rising Sun, Falling Skies: The Disastrous Java Sea Campaign of World War II which is blatantly untrue. The GA version cites
  • Cruisers of World War Two : An International Encyclopedia
  • Warship Profile 40: Her Netherlands Majesty's Ship De Ruyter
  • The Royal Netherlands Navy of World War II
  • Rising Sun, Falling Skies: The Disastrous Java Sea Campaign of World War II
  • the National Museum of the U.S. Navy
  • Java Sea 1942: Japan's conquest of the Netherlands East Indies.

Each of these are published,  high-quality sources. You praise the old version of the article prior to my edits. That version cites uboat.net (a source with dubious reliability), combinedfleets.org which lacks references, and has unsupported paragraphs

• You also state that the GA version of the article makes no mention of the cruiser as ABDA flagship, which is untrue as it was mentioned in an image caption and in the first paragraph under 'Dutch East Indies Campaign'
• You state that File:Haguro (1941) (cropped).jpg does not depict Haguro. Please provide a source for this claim, as the current image states otherwise
• Your edits expand the scope of Battle of the Java Sea to the entire battle, which is not needed as the article is about the role De Ruyter had

GGOTCC 23:44, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

+ your personal conversations with people is not a valid reason to remove refrences to a published book, especially if that book in question had not been criticized. GGOTCC 23:59, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2025 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:00, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

Japanese battleship Kirishima - GA review

You may wish to participate in the GA review of the Japanese battleship Kirishima article, which includes questions about sources (a History Channel documentary) which you added to the article.Nigel Ish (talk) 17:02, 12 March 2026 (UTC)