Content deleted Content added
Line 238:
:7. Do You know what [[arithmetic|arithmetic]] mean? If so, please use it! Yes, I've read the article and have seen ''a pair of torpedoes''. How many years must elapse before correction of this trash? Example: anyone can not be named as historian after saying that Ohio is a territory of Canada. 'Cause the state authorities say that it's a state of USA. So only <''put the right epithet''> are able to talk in theirs articles, books etc about ''pair'' torpedoes after Soviets' sole claim of '''four'''! So cut this crap off (and the other '''Your''' reliable sources confirm the claim about four trps).
:7-2. There are no ''hits on the battleship'' in Soviets' Navy initial documents, just explosions (but I'm sure You will say that it's ''not'' respected). So, please stop post Garzke & Dulin's ('''only''') version and just read another books mentioned by '''You'''.
:11. I'm ''trying to string together from fragments of several sources'' posted by You, 'cause there are no sources with complete consideration of the accident in the Your list above. If You have, please give us the links and continue the discussion with adequate sources. (Maybe You prefer to draw the K-21 attack scheme and to investigate the incident by yourself? Or historians' role is to copy-paste from one source to other with [[logic|logic]] switch off? I really don't know - I'm a physicist.)
:11-2. Are You kidding?! I'm using Your (read: Y-O-U-R) sources to avoid charges in bad sources' usage and '''have found''' confirmations (not '''my''' interpretation!) that there are at least one blunder in the article (2/4 trps) and the other strange moment with explosions.
:11-3. Read once more: my claims dial with a) 4 torpedoes; b) two explosions - not with results of attack, drop it! My line of argumentation is clear: use sources posted by You - all of them, not the single book [36-37].
| |||