![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk) 13:11, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
Volume 7, Issue 1 • Winter 2014 • About the Newsletter | ||
|
|
|
Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS |
Looks to me like Ryan is back. Also note that YSSYguy has started a SP investigation on the creator of this article. ...William 20:37, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
This article was an absolute fucking disgrace, and I have no idea how it managed to fly under the radar... I only found this article by accident due to a random Google search for "fake racing drivers"! Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 01:32, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
Is a NASCAR crew chief considered a notable person. Should the answer be yes, this article needs work and I know you're familiar with the sport. If Rodden isn't notable, then an AFD should be opened. ...William 17:47, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
BR, would you take a look at Talk:Sikorsky CH-148 Cyclone#Not yet delivered, and tell me if my concerns have any merit? I'm not able to respond civilly at this point. Thanks. - BilCat ( talk) 00:44, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
I tried to bring this up over at WT:NASCAR, but there was no reply, and since you created these templates, I might as well ask you. There are templates for {{ Racing-Reference driver}}, {{ Racing-Reference crewchief}} and {{ Racing-Reference owner}}, though looking at the inventory over at RR's homepage, tracks and races also exist. Should {{ Racing-Reference track}} or even {{ Racing-Reference race}} exist as well? Zappa O Mati 04:40, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Today you deleted Immigrant Entrepreneurship following an AfD from my hand. Unfortunately, I just came across Immigrant entrepreneurship. Same article, pointing to the same AfD but due to a different spelling (only one capital) still there. Anything possible to correct this? The Banner talk 10:48, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
There's an editor [1] or two [2] (Probably the same person) who keeps taking referenced information [3] out of the article as seen here [4], here [5], and here [6]. Can you please have a word with him and or page protect the article? Thanks. ...William 03:39, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
User:DDCEX has created a few minor RAF accident articles which have all been taken to AfD but one has "White flying at 24,000 feet when the center line closure and both engine lost power." which would normally ring some sock bells. MilborneOne ( talk) 19:18, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
The 2014 WikiCup is off to a flying start, with, at time of writing, 138 participants. The is the largest number of participants we have seen since 2010. If you are yet to join the competition, don't worry- the judges have agreed to keep the
signups open for a few more days. By a wide margin, our current leader is newcomer
Godot13 (
submissions), whose set of
14 featured pictures, the first FPs of the competition, was worth 490 points. Here are some more noteworthy scorers:
Featured articles, featured lists, featured topics and featured portals are yet to play a part in the competition. The judges have removed a number of submissions which were deemed ineligible. Typically, we aim to see work on a project, followed by a nomination, followed by promotion, this year. We apologise for any disappointment caused by our strict enforcement this year; we're aiming to keep the competition as fair as possible.
Wikipedians interested in friendly competition may be interested to take part in The Core Contest; unlike the WikiCup, The Core Contest is not about audited content, but, like the WikiCup, it is about article improvement; specifically, The Core Contest is about contribution to some of Wikipedia's most important article. Of course, any work done for The Core Contest, if it leads to a DYK, GA or FA, can earn WikiCup points.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn ( talk • email), The ed17 ( talk • email) and Miyagawa ( talk • email) 19:54, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
G'day Bushranger ( now that's an evocative Australian word); in one of my regular sweeps looking for the word "aircrafts" I came across Kashi Samaddar, which was basically a heap of shit ( this was how it was before I found it). I have started to fix it up, but have been reverted or had the Cleanup template removed several times by an IP who seems to be the article's owner ( here, here, here, here and here - I really like the edit summary for this one). Could you please - if you think it's warranted - semi-protect it for a while? Cheers YSSYguy ( talk) 22:51, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
BR, would you mind keeping an admin eye on User:173.165.168.190? The IP has a history of making some highly inflammatory and racist edit summaries, and may be in need of a block soon. Thanks. - BilCat ( talk) 06:48, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
I would just like to mention that the cited source is 100% incorrect. For example, go to www.globejet.com, and you will see that an airline called Globe Jet Airlines has five Lockheed TriStars in their fleet, but are never mentioned once on the cited source. That source is unreliable and MUST be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AirportExpert ( talk • contribs) 23:38, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Updated note
Hi, I see you have been reverted my edits on the categorization of multiplane aircraft. Please reply at Category talk:Multiplane aircraft#Subcategories. — Cheers, Steelpillow ( Talk) 09:14, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
Last month, an IP ( Contributions/62.73.7.84) was blocked due to harassment and stalking of my edits. All of his edits were directly aimed at my contributions to articles I had recently edited. To try cover up his actions and avoid detection he was slyly using deceptive edit summaries (example, "worded this better" or "time table should be reconstructed"). The harassment and stalking occurred during a content dispute at the Superpower article where an IP (with remarkably similar behavior and language style to 62.73.7.84) was trying to insert nationalistic POV material into the article. The blocking Administrator suspected the IP was using proxies - which would explain the IP jumping from country to country.
last night, Contributions/64.129.10.92 returned to the talk page of the Superpower article, arguing once again for the insertion of his nationalistic POV (he wants Russia mentioned as a present-day superpower in the lead paragraphs of the article). I responded, referring to the ongoing RfC that has established a clear consensus against his nationalistic POV. I also caught him out when he falsely and deceptively presented a citation claiming it made the assertion that Russia is a superpower! As is common with POV pushing IPs, he doesn't like the fact he isn't getting his own way.
Not long afterwards (this morning to be precise), I find that articles where I have recently made edits have become targets of numerous IPs using (once again) deceptive edit summaries! (example "making some changes, better wording this way" or "Correcting cn template"). I have listed all instances with the various IPs used, the editor is clearly using proxies. In most cases a single edit targeting my contributions is made and then he switches to a different IP and repeats the process on another article I have recently edited.
The above has happened consistently within the space of roughly 2 or 3 hours. All edits specifically target my contributions and use deceptive edit summaries to try and cover it up and avoid detection. It is unlikely they are all different people, coincidences like that don't happen. This behavior is organised and specifically aimed at my edits. Antiochus the Great ( talk) 13:47, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
Haha! Harassment and stalking of my recent contributions resumed at 14:34. Note that this is happening immediately after my above post at 14:30 - where I make the observation about how the stalking and harassment miraculously ended at 13:48 after I made the initial report at 13:47.
Again, exact same behavioral characteristics: editing only to target my contributions and using the same deceptive edit summaries. Cant make this stuff up. Antiochus the Great ( talk) 14:50, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
BR, can you semi-protect Fleet Air Arm? It seem to be this same user. Thanks. - BilCat ( talk) 22:12, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
So, do you think Dylan Kwasniewski should have an article yet? I have the page written over at User:ZappaOMati/Dylan Kwasniewski right now. Zappa O Mati 19:18, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
BR, could you check User:41.109.85.21's contributions? They have been removing or changing info on several web pages without any explanations. I've reverted all his edits as vandalism, but he's now restoring them without any explanations, except to accuse me of edit warring. Quite odd, and suspicious. Thanks. - BilCat ( talk) 04:06, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
Jeff's been accused of COI by Geo Swan on Talk:Sikorsky CH-148 Cyclone. This whole thing is getting ridiculous. I'm retraining from responding at this point as I can't guarantee I will remain civil. Help! - BilCat ( talk) 04:22, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
Please give me the explanation why Douglas A-26 Invader is appear in both Template:USAF attack aircraft and Template:US attack aircraft (You previously undo its removal and said "This does, indeed, fit in this sequence") Thank you very much for your kind maintenance effort. — Julthep ( talk • contribs) 09:48, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
In this comment you wrote: "Geo, your complete failure of WP:AGF here is extremely troubling..."
WRT to my use of the term "disruptive" when I discussed another contributor's choice to reformat references -- I think that contributor's next edit to the article was a tacit acknowledgment that they had read, understood and now agreed with the points I made.
In the last year or so you participated in some {{ afd}} on articles I started on ships, and you agreed that those articles should not be deleted. Thanks.
But you have also participated in dozens of {{ afd}} on articles I started related to Guantanamo, and in other discussions related to the work I have done on Guantanamo, where I was the explicit target of ugly accusations of bad faith. Those accusations were ugly, baseless and indefensible if one were to actually examine my contribution history, and they were also indefensible lapses from the wikipedia's civility and collegiality policies and conventions. I don't recall you ever calling for those whose participation in those discussions consisted of, or included counter-policy explicit attacks on my character, motives or personal judgment to keep their participation within the policy-compliant discussion of issues.
The explicit wording of our civility policies is okay. It calls on all of us to refrain from responding in kind to comments we regard as attacks, and, instead rely on the rest of the community to speak up and tell those who lapsed from civility how to shape up. If everyone complied with those policies the wikipedia would be a far more effective, productive organization. Full compliance with the policies would eliminate almost all "dramah". Unfortunately, compliance sucks.
I don't agree I showed a complete failure of AGF. I don't agree I showed a failure of AGF at all. Contributors shouldn't insist on their preferred wording, without making a good faith effort to explain their objections to suggested alternate wording. I found the failure to explain, on Talk:Sikorsky CH-148 Cyclone, "troubling", to use your term.
Our policies are complicated and arcane, and a contributor might lapse from COI or some other policy, without having acted in bad faith, because they were unaware of the policy, or didn't understand the policy. Asking a contributor whose behaviour raises questions as to whether they understand a policy to actually review that policy is not an accusation of bad faith. The truly compliant contributor, who unknowingly lapsed from a policy like WP:COI, would be grateful to someone who drew that policy to their attention.
Yes, there are other explanations as to why someone might not offer an explanation for insisting on specific wording. I won't list them here. My problem was I couldn't think of any other explanations that were also policy compliant. On one level I shouldn't have to know why another contributor hadn't been complying with their obligations; I shouldn't have to care; just so long as they start to comply after all.
After you left your comment on User talk:BilCat I left a followup. I drafted a followup, to your comment -- which asked you how overwhelming the coverage of the program being described as "troubled" would have to be before you would agree not covering its troubles in the lead was a lapse from NPOV. However, when I went to save that reply to you I found BilCat had excised my first comment.
So far you are the only one who has offered an explanation for trimming "troubled", other than "no consensus". I'll be interested in your reply to my reply.
Clarification, can I look forward to you speaking up in my defense, if you see another contributor explicitly attack my motives, my judgment, my character, in the future? I'd welcome that, and I will back you up if I see you speaking up to defend someone else who is the target of a counter-policy attack. Geo Swan ( talk) 20:32, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi, The Bushranger. The category:Vessels of BP was speedy moved to category:Ships of BP Shipping. While I see the logic, it created a problems with this category. The main issue is that this category included not only ships of BP Shipping but also vessels chartered by BP (and not necessarily by BP Shipping). The most infamous example is probably Deepwater Horizon which was owned by Transocean's subsidiary Triton Asset Leasing, operated by Transocean Offshore Deepwater Drilling, and was chartered by BP Exploration & Production. There is no connection with BP Shipping; however, right now it it categorized in this category. There are other examples. One possible solution could be to restore category:Vessels of BP as a parent category for category:Ships of BP Shipping. In this case ships owned or operated by BP Shipping will stay in category:Ships of BP Shipping while other vessels such as Deepwater Horizon will be in the parent category. What you think? Beagel ( talk) 19:31, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
If you believe the 'canard' category is appropriate you need to discuss this. The reliable sources indicate that this categorization is controversial at least. You have not addressed the suggestion made to remedy this conflict.
05:02, 15 February 2014 The Bushranger (Please see WP:BRD. Please see also multiple reliable sources that describe the P180 as a "canard". If you believe the category is inappropriate you need to discuss this.)
04:59, 15 February 2014 Stodieck (Undid revision. This is a 'three surface aircraft'. A new wiki category is required. This is why the maker and others do not call it a canard which is a misleading name. I suggest reading the technical references in 'three surface aircraft'.)
01:30, 15 February 2014 The Bushranger (The "maker's convention" is not relevant. What is relevant is that the P.180 is described in multiple reliable sources as having a canard.)
01:02, 15 February 2014 Stodieck (Removed from category 'canard aircraft' as per the makers convention. The foreplane does not provide stability or pitch control on this aircraft. Both are provided by the conventional H Stab.)
02:27, 22 November 2013 The Bushranger (Reverted 1 edit by Stodieck (talk): Restoring unexplained removal of appropriate category. (TW))
01:32, 22 November 2013 Stodieck (Deleted category canard) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stodieck ( talk • contribs)
Hi, you might like to join the discussion I have started at Talk:Three-surface_aircraft#Categorising_the_canard. — Cheers, Steelpillow ( Talk) 20:22, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
Ryan is back. Here's an edit [7] of his plus a new article- 2014 England letter bomb incidents ...William 16:00, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
Another article created by Ryan- 2014 Taba bus bombing. ...William 19:52, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
The entire text of the article was my own and not the banned editor. Can u restore please? Plot Spoiler ( talk) 23:25, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
I found an uncategorised Category:Heavy attack squadrons of the United States Navy, and parented it in Category:Military units and formations of the United States Navy.
Do you know anything about this topic? Is it a viable category? -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 04:38, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Hello Bushranger, me again. Unfortunately that disruptive IP editor has returned to the Superpower article, and up to his usual tricks. Page protection literally just expired and boom he shows up. You said to give you a shout if he returned, and as your more familiar than other admins as to what has been going on I thought ask you for a bit of help. Thanks again. Antiochus the Great ( talk) 19:45, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Hello there. Please note that I've reverted the last two edits made to the article. The one you made corrected the (unreferenced) one by Gibbyboy15 ( talk · contribs). The latter should have been removed. The user has been given a final warning for their persistent addition of unsourced information into articles. Regards.-- Jetstreamer Talk 19:19, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Is BWYM ( talk · contribs) a sock of Ryan Kirkpatrick?. The HS748 crash article had lots of niggling spelling errors (to/too, heigth/height, county/country) which is one of his traits. What do you think? Mjroots ( talk) 22:19, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Hello Bushranger from Santa Barbara...
I write to say that several criticisms that led to my deletion are in error.
1. I never indicated I was A Chevalier of the Legion d'Honneur. Nor would I. Never mentioned those words. That is a serious infraction. I was made a Chevalier of the de l'Ordre Des Coteaux De Champagne in Reims, France in 1994. I can scan and send you the official decree if that would be helpful.
While it is true Nobel Prize nominations for Literature are sealed for 50 years and that anyone can be nominated, still that does not change the fact that I WAS nominated and would be happy to scan and forward on to you the official nomination letter dated June 21, 2006 from California State Univertsity placing my name in nomination.
I am quite disturbed at being removed from Wikipedia so abruptly and am delighted to cooperate in any way to reverse this situation.
Sincerely,
WILLIAM TOMICKI [email protected] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Freddymcgough ( talk • contribs) 14:35, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Could you move AdvoCare 500 (Atlanta) over the AdvoCare 500 dab page now that the Phoenix race is the Quicken Loans 500? NFLisAwesome ( ZappaOMati's alternate account) 16:12, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk) 23:16, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Can you please open up Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2011–12 Tercera División for further consideration? I think that this may have not received proper consideration, and a similar AFD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2013–14 Tercera División is not as straight forward. Further, I think the AFD failed to discuss that the page may meet WP:GNG with the significant Spanish media coverage. An examination of the Spanish version of the page ( Tercera División de España 2011/12) shows that the same page exists in no less than 4 other languages, 3 of them of relatively small size. It also shows that there are references, and that the Spanish page has been broken down to no less than 19 additional sub-pages, most of which are also somewhat referenced (though further work is needed). Nfitz ( talk) 20:54, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
The article is having vandal related problems. Could you please page protect it? ...William 02:42, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
User:PeterJags. Has lots of warnings. Thanks. - BilCat ( talk) 18:18, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
And so ends the most competitive first round we have ever seen, with 38 points required to qualify for round 2. Last year, 19 points secured a place; before that, 11 (2012) or 8 (2011) were enough. This is both a blessing and a curse. While it shows the vigourous good health of the competition, it also means that we have already lost many worthy competitors. Our top three scorers were:
Other competitors of note include:
After such a competitive first round, expect the second round to also be fiercely fought. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 but before the start of round 2 can be claimed in round 2, but please do not update your submission page until March (UTC). Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn ( talk • email), The ed17 ( talk • email) and Miyagawa ( talk • email) 00:01, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
The article is having trouble with a IP vandal. He just removed information that was referenced. Could you please page protect it? ...William 20:33, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
G'day, could you please do a admins-only hard-protect of Moldavian Spotters if you think it warranted; since I put it up for AfD about 2.5 hours ago the article's creator has moved it two or thee times and removed the AfD template seven times. Cheers YSSYguy ( talk) 23:52, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
far too late on the Squamish matter, and I do mean what I said there about me not being the problem, but the impatience of the post-literate culture which insists everything be in short phrases and sound bites; it's clear that such people don't even read the article that's at hand so whyever would they make an exception to read the details about its name....if they don't have the patience to do either, why are they even in the discussion and how can they presume to be making a useful "vote"? By citing a guideline (pick any one of several conflicting ones) without even knowing the context of the subject matter. As to the anglo-chauvinism which got us to that mess (I'm referring to the RM but also things said in the previous CfD, as well as in the current one), it's going to keep on rearing its head until a proper guideline (that people can point to, because it seems that's all they know how to do) on indigenous names is come up with; There's two other RMs at hand at the moment about this, one is at Talk:Stawamus the other is at Talk:Owekeeno people; as you can see at the Stawamus->Sta7mes RM I'm taking time to bullet my point so the "wall of text" excuse can't be used. And IMO TLDR needs a major workover as it shouldn't be used as a reason to gloss-over facts pertaining to a case just so those facts can be ignored. People don't like to hear why they're wrong....and all too typically they can't admit that they are, either. So much easier to go "la la I can't hear you".....interesting to note on the Owekeeno talkpage is Uysvdi's comment to Kwami about not doing controversial moves without discussion, I guess she's forgotten about that.... Skookum1 ( talk) 04:24, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Maybe naive...or self-sabotaging... of me to start Talk:Squamish people#Requested move 2; I should have done a multiple RM with Squamish-> Squamish (disambiguation) and Squamish, British Columbia -> Squamish. Note that the earlier RM wanted to move Skwxwu7mesh to Squamish; needless to say they didn't even know about the town until someone pointed that out, so "people" was appended as we don't use "tribe" in CAnada in the same way it's used in the US. But naive and self-sabotating because all the same old guidelines are trotted out as if they were RULES; Use English, Common Name, Reliable sources etc....yet the assumption that this word is not used in English -and that "Squamish" is an English word (?!), and what is now demonstrable in googl that "Skwxwu7mesh" is more common than "Squamish people" are being met by comments that "Squamish is common in all kinds of usages" as if it being used for the town, river et al somehow mandated it MUST be used for the people...... Exasperated? That's hardly the word. OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a way to overturn efforts to try and establish workable conventions; that was invoked in reference to the sibling directories and main articles in Category:First Nations in British Columbia. What I see in Wikipedia a lot is narrow-minded contrarianism, and this is a case in point. The notion that what the people prefer to call themselves is actually a BLP concern, but that seems lost in the firestorm of guideline-throwing. The Fifth Pillar is "There Are No Rules" and it was in fact User:Phaedriel who brought that to the table back in the mists of time in '07-08 when all these category and article titles were being straightened out and some conventions evolving. All tossed away now by lone soldiers wielding guidelines.....without thinking or even looking (or caring) at the consequences. Skookum1 ( talk) 05:44, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
BR, User:Dacblog has just registered, and posted links to blogs on airplanepassion.blogspot.com in 3 WP articles as his fisrt and so far only edits to WP. The "blog" does appear to be qualifyvas a self-published sources, and the individusl aircraft blogs I looked at don't seem to cite sources. I've issued a level 1 warning for EL spam, but it might be worth watching the user's contributions to see if they continue the linkspamming. Thanks. - BilCat ( talk) 05:37, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
BR,a user with the Ip User:86.186.183.207, and apparently some other IPs also, all from the UK, has been making some odd changes to the nationalities listed in a range of artcles, notably Airbus and Boeing airliners. Could you look into this? I and several other editors have been reverting its changes, but as they appear to have used other IPs, no one has left a series of warnings, and the user hasn't discussed his/her changes. Not sure how to best handle this. Note that they may be stalking my edits too, per their appearance at Kaman K-MAX, which isn't really a popular article. Thanks. - BilCat ( talk) 11:38, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
User:81.147.178.52 is one of the other IPs. - BilCat ( talk) 12:22, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
I'm going to stay out of it this time, but again new user, recreation of same page, I'm guessing user aviation geek is at it again... /info/en/?search=Angel_MedFlight_Worldwide — Preceding unsigned comment added by Icarus1980 ( talk • contribs) 23:27, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
BR, I just ran into the I-beam artcle, and noticed its use of Template:Ibeam at every mention of the word "I-beam" in the article, icluding the title. I checked article and template talk pages, and none of this appears to have ever been questioned there before. I can't imagine that the MOS allows this sort of thing, but perhaps it does. While I can see using such type face in the lead once to to illustrate the term's origin, using it at every mention in the article seems overkill.
However, I'm a little reluctant to stick my nose into a potential hornet's nest, especially as I strongly dislike it when other editors do the same thing on aircraft articles which they otherwise never interact with at all. I'm still ticked at "this brilliant user's" unilateral decision here, which disabled infobox photos in article history prior to the date of the change. Thankfully, the user stopped editing WP a week later, saving it from further damage. :) I was finally able to have that issue fixed just a couple of weeks ago.
Anyway, any thought on if this is an issure worth tackling? Thanks. - BilCat ( talk) 04:37, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Close request: [8] Thanks -- Panam2014 ( talk) 08:03, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
I NEVER made any type of comment that would be construed as a "legal threat" publicly calling someone like me, on Wikipedia that has as I have worked hard to improve this site an "a*s" for wanting to provide a accurate description of a subject, via a photo rather then discuss the issue on the talk page, or the users talk page a is defamation plain and simple and no rule keeps us from pointing out the obvious here, that it is what I did. All in exchange for providing a actuate photo of the Santa Ana Range. No good deed goes unpunished here?
I am an adult and do not need to call people childish names and I always yield to reason. This user refused to act/communicate in a manner that resolved this issue, simply reverted to a photo that would result in the confusion of any viewer that reads it, having them think that a range is just one peak with some snow on it, something that is not correct and NEVER happens (twice every 10 years or so).
1) I am not an A**, as that user has referred to me as 2) He has made his comment public
The user was unable to explain why his photo of trees light posts and signs depicted the Santa Ana range.
Lastly, the sockpuppet comment was the results of the sudden and unexplained person that also thinks that range should be depicted with snow on it, and ONLY after I reviewed the logs of the user it looks like that user has the same confrontational style of the other user. The user then suggested that I use the talk page, something I had already done.
That is really disrespectful, and troublesome to me, what, Mr Bushranger do you suggest I do about it, just allow editors to call me childish names in return for my efforts? I notice that you have a "This user does not swear." badge on your page, I don't as well, but is it ok to call people dirty names publicly on Wikipedia? WPPilot talk 14:44, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
about the discussion opened by Onlyfactsnofiction LNCSRG ( talk) 08:04, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
BR, is Fulmer Cup really notable? Thanks. - BilCat ( talk) 05:06, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
See this diatribe. While it's total nonsense, there's a lot of real people mentioned along with addresses and phone numbers which might be real. Should this be revdel'ed? Thanks. - BilCat ( talk) 00:08, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Minor point of pedantry for your possible interest, Australia (and most of the rest of the Commonwealth) hasn't had brigadier generals since 1922 - the rank is now called brigadier. (On the other hand, this may be of absolutely no interest to you at all ... ) Cheers, Pdfpdf ( talk) 05:36, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello, The Bushranger. I see you deleted Alonso (singer); could you please restore it to User:Launchballer/Alonso (singer) because it smells an awful lot like Alonzo Holt and I'd like to see if it's the same bloke? He is also at AfD. Thank you.-- Laun chba ller 10:21, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
G'day, I reckon it's worth keeping an eye on this guy. Cheers YSSYguy ( talk) 10:27, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
... for the Bambi block. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 21:32, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Bushranger, would you mind giving me a fresh set of eyes on the discussion here? You dealt with a related page yesterday and I'm just looking for feedback on my interpretation of Mil history notability standards to see if I'm way out in left field here. Not asking for intervention necessarily, just feedback for me. I'm prepared to walk away from the situation. Watching here. Thanks! C1776M Talk 21:52, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi. I am looking to create a Wikipedia page for the company I work for, IrongmongeryDirect ( http://www.ironmongerydirect.co.uk/). However, on starting to create the page I see that a previous version had been created and subsequently removed by yourself as it failed WP:CORPDEPTH. I'd like to re-write the page to ensure it is fully compliant with all requirements, but just thought I'd drop you a quick message to check that I am okay to do this? Many thanks, Glen [talk] — Preceding undated comment added 16:09, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Thought I'd show you my efforts to mend my tendency to blather (though cogently, if you ever did read them) in "walls of text" without parag breaks or bulleted points, but instead to focus on details in response to specific votes, and also to detail particulars of file history on titles at Talk:Chipewyan people#Requested move; other RMs in the same group which have not yet similarly annotated are at Talk:Yupik peoples#Requested move, Talk:Yaquina people#Requested move, Talk:Cayuga people#Requested move. More are to follow, that so far covers almost all of Canada but only about seven US states (in terms of their respective "Native American tribes in FOO" categories. Skookum1 ( talk) 15:06, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
This article was created by a blocked user. It is also a recreation of an article that was deleted after an AFD. Maybe you want to deep six it. ...William 16:40, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
Not stirring the pot, at least not intentionally. [9] I really didn't know. And December 2013 may be "last year", but it was more like 3 months ago. For someone like me who is rarely online anymore, that's a blink of the eye. — Neotarf ( talk) 17:02, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 16:56, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Bushranger,
I removed the birthplace from the birth date section per WP:MOSBIO. Hope that explains my edit. Thank you, -- Malerooster ( talk) 18:39, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
I was wondering if you are still acting on Wikipedia and if so are you still interested in being part of WikiProject Espionage? Adamdaley ( talk) 00:30, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
Thank you very much for informing me about using move tab instead of redirect. The reason for new page title is because of naming convention, such as Type 920 hospital ship, instead of Daishandao class hospital ship, because the original Type designation is correct but the class was not, as in the case of all the articles redirected (which should be moved instead). How do you use move tab? — Preceding unsigned comment added by XdeLaTorre ( talk • contribs) 04:52, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your previous help, and I desperately need your help again because I made a mistake when using move tab: Qiandaohu-class replenishment ship has type designation as Type 903. When I made the move from Qiandaohu-class replenishment ship to Type 903 replenishment ship, I made a typo and incorrectly entered Type 905 replenishment ship instead of Type 903 replenishment ship like it should be. How do I undo the move? And how do I move it to Type 903 replenishment ship like it should be?
Because Type 905 replenishment ship is Fuqing-class replenishment ship, if Fuqing-class replenishment ship is moved to Type 905 replenishment ship, Qiandaohu-class replenishment ship would probably lost forever, so how do I undo the incorrect move I made on Qiandaohu-class replenishment ship and move it to Type 903 replenishment ship like it should be? Better yet, would you make the correction please if you can? — Preceding unsigned comment added by XdeLaTorre ( talk • contribs) 01:13, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
This is one that if I remember you deleted earlier as a banned user created article. It has been in user space for a while with some tweaks so I have restored it back to mainspace, just looking to see if your are OK with that, thanks. MilborneOne ( talk) 16:54, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
NEMCO Motorsports itself isn't around anymore. It's NEMCO-JRR, Identity Ventures, and JRR. So what I'm going to do is keep old information on NEMCO's page. Make a new page for the other teams. Doctornickel ( talk) 23:32, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
Heya, is there any way to salt (is that the correct terminology?) the articles that Mr. Kuhn is likely to recreate? Sonic for Hire, for instance? Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 00:01, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
I think you made a mistake with this new editor. They were trying to fix the vandalism done last week by 70.194.7.254 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS). -- Gogo Dodo ( talk) 03:55, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
![]() |
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. |
And as a bonus...
Zappa O Mati 04:04, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
Greetings
I wanted to get some input from an uninvolved admin. I am the subject of proposed topic ban on Providence (religious movement). this was recommended by Jim1138 based mostly on transgressions early in my editing career. When an uninvolved admin responded on the ANI he/she decided to escalate this to a permanent site ban. I thought that was way overkill. I am not necessarily asking you to weigh in on the ban per se but I want to know the process. Does a single admin have the power to permanently block a user ? Does it require a quorum with simple majority? I have put a lot time into that article and I want to make sure that due process is served if that is possible here at Wikipedia
thanks for your time. MrTownCar ( talk) 23:25, 23 March 2014 (UTC) PS is that Knight 2000 in the picture? MrTownCar ( talk) 23:25, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
BR, could you semi-protect Boeing 377 Stratocruiser? We have a user from multiple IPs making unnecessary or incorrect changes, such as changing the standard heading "Operational history" to "Operations", and deleting crucial info. Perhaps this will encourage them to discuss their changes. Thanks. - BilCat ( talk) 20:20, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk) 11:51, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
In your closing comment you said "Per the OP's final comment in this thread, this has ended in a flounce." I believe I am the OP, but I don't understand how the word flounce applies to my last comment. Did you mean the blocked users last comment? Gaijin42 ( talk) 22:18, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
This page was deleted because the fighter did not meet WP:NMMA but ONE FC was recently voted into the list of top tier promotions by consensus meaning that as of now Oishi has fought for the highest title of a top tier MMA organization and fought at least three (3) fights for top tier MMA organizations so he now meets enough of the WP:NMMA criteria to have his own page. Would it be possible to restore the page please? Sadoka74 ( talk) 15:06, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
I had a question about Gracie Barra Montreal. It's been deleted 3 times this month, twice by AfD and once by CSD. It was recreated, apparently without change, a day after it's last CSD removal. This time the CSD was removed by the article's creator. Is there a way this can be reviewed? I also think it may be time to salt it.
I also wanted to let you know I may have whacked a hornet's nest at WP:MMATIER. I reverted the move of One FC to top tier because it was done after a 1 day discussion and I feel that's insufficient to achieve consensus or give other editors time to comment. I have posted that at WT:MMA, but I wanted to give you a heads-up. I have nothing against One FC, I just think it should meet the same standards that the other top tier organizations had to meet. Also, it seems reasonable to me that top tier status doesn't apply retroactively. Is that in keeping with WP tradition? Things aren't usually created as the top level, they get there gradually, if at all.
I sent these questions to you because I know you're familiar with the history of MMA at WP and I've found you to be a reasonable and knowledgeable admin. Thank you. Papaursa ( talk) 05:34, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
Had a been a few minutes faster I would have added the following to the ANI discussion.
George1935, I apologize for not being quick enough on the draw there. Bushranger, I don't think undoing the close is an appropriate request, but I'd appreciate your thoughts on what George should be accomplishing before he starts thinking about an appeal. Thanks, Lesser Cartographies ( talk) 02:50, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
why did you remove tercera division 2011-12 did it hurt to have it there? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.126.130.241 ( talk) 21:57, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
![]() |
The Admin's Barnstar |
Thank you for all your fine work as an administrator over the years! Go Phightins ! 02:56, 31 March 2014 (UTC) |
Based on this edit and edit summary I have further defined what a topic ban entails for this user. [10]. Please correct if this was not the intention. -- NeilN talk to me 21:44, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
A quick update as we are half way through round two of this year's competition. WikiCup newcomer
Godot13 (
submissions) (Pool E) leads, having produced a massive set of featured pictures for
Silver certificate (United States), an article also brought to featured list status. Former finalist
Adam Cuerden (
submissions) (Pool G) is in second, which he owes mostly to his work with historical images, including a number of images from
Urania's Mirror, an article also brought to good status. 2010 champion (Pool C) is third overall, thanks to contributions relating to naval history, including the newly featured
Japanese battleship Nagato.
Cliftonian (
submissions), who currently leads Pool A and is sixth overall, takes the title for the highest scoring individual article of the competition so far, with the top importance featured article
Ian Smith.
With 26 people having already scored over 100 points, it is likely that well over 100 points will be needed to secure a place in round 3. Recent years have required 123 (2013), 65 (2012), 41 (2011) and 100 (2010). Remember that only 64 will progress to round 3 at the end of April. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page; if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn ( talk • email), The ed17 ( talk • email) and Miyagawa ( talk • email) 22:55, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
I think a bot is adding the AFD tags even when we don't want to. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 04:31, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Sorry about my April Fools joke here. I will try to think of a more creative one next year (the April Fools joke policies did not say anything about adding deletion tags outside of the mainspace). Passengerpigeon ( talk) 08:37, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Just occurred to me that you might have ping notifications turned off (I did, for quite a long time) so you might not have seen this. Yunshui 雲 水 10:36, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. Under the NASCAR rulebook, all cars must be of approved height to ensure that you will not win a race.
NFLisAwesome ( ZappaOMati's alternate account) 14:59, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
You totally snuck in while I was closing that. :P Basically the redirect target probably doesn't matter; Peel District School Board might actually make more sense. Epeefleche's was vague on the destination, so I just went with the first one (not having seen yours); obviously feel free to switch it to the school board one if that makes more sense. -- slakr\ talk / 05:15, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
Would it be possible to speedy keep UE Boom's AfD per WP:SK? The nominator User:The Banner is currently blocked for disruptive editing and his appeal has been denied. Thank you. Dmatteng ( talk) 12:36, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello,
I would like to bring to your attention an issue regarding the category redirect Category:Nationalism in Albania, which you created following this dsicussion. Although the content of the two categories happened to overlap, the two topics are not synonymous. "Albanian nationalism" refers to a political ideology that is bound by nationality but not geography (Albanian nationalism can and does exist outside of Albania), whereas "nationalism in Albania" refers to nationalism within the geographic confines of Albania but not necessarily tied to the Albanian nation (for example, Greek nationalism among the Greek minority in Albania). In light of this difference, I do not think that a category redirect (which will result in articles placed in one category being automatically moved to the other) should exist.
Thank you, -- Black Falcon ( talk) 04:33, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
why did you close my case on ANI, with some unclear argumentation, the file (the mirror or whatever) is in english wikipedia so if one changes the commons file the english wikipedia file would not be changed. and i somehow renember that the original file should not be overwritten, so it doesnt really matter what "consensus" it is because policy goes before consensus. 95.199.201.199 ( talk) 15:56, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
User:The Banner has been blocked for one week following disruptive editing, particularly edit warring. Just as his block has expired he has started to engage in edit warring on UE Boom article. I would propose a block for one month for the editor, as one week was clearly insufficient and didn't lead to positive changes.
Please also note his incivility that got noted on the AfD by user:Brainy J, as well as his incivility on his talk page on yet another issue: "that gang would follow me around everywhere coming up with claims of reverting and breaking the consensus-among-friends all the time." and "..but that is my personal experience with Blofeld and his gang..". In addition his incivility was also noted by user:Cassianto on Banner's talk page. Dmatteng ( talk) 07:43, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
Your comments would be welcome at Wikipedia talk:Article titles#Does WP:ENGVAR apply to disambiguators? Andy Dingley ( talk) 10:11, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for blocking the IP. In case you weren't aware, here's a discussion with a link to my concern a few months ago: Wikipedia talk:AIRPORT#Edit revisions HkCaGu ( talk) 05:13, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
![]() | On 10 April 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Boeing CQM-121 Pave Tiger, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Boeing CQM-121A Pave Tiger and CGM-121B Seek Spinner (CGM-121B pictured) were intended to disrupt enemy air defences, sometimes explosively? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Boeing CQM-121 Pave Tiger. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
— Crisco 1492 ( talk) 00:42, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
A couple of things about Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 March 5#Category:Comics written by Harvey Kurtzman:
——— Curly Turkey ( gobble) 06:18, 10 April 2014 (UTC)