User talk:Airplaneman/Archive 37

A cookie for you!

 * Thank you; I love cookies! Airplaneman   ✈  01:34, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Invitation to a discussion: Wikipedia and legislative data
Hi, since you are interested in meetups in DC, I'd like to invite you to attend the Cato Institute's "Wikipedia and Legislative Data" events on March 14. (There's also an all day workshop on March 15; let me know if you are interested, we may be able to add more people.)

There will be an introduction to Wikipedia and open edit-a-thon in the afternoon, and a Sunshine Week Reception in the evening. I hope you can make it!


 * Please sign up here
 * Announcement on Cato's blog
 * Background from Cato sponsor Jim Harper's perspective
 * Background from Wikipedian Pete Forsyth's perspective

Hope to see you there! -Pete (talk) 18:59, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Article
Dear Airplaneman, we did not communicate in a while but I would like to invite you to join the conversation on this page because I am not sure that the person who is revising the article knows what she is doing. She started the conversation on her talk page with some other user based on unsubstantiated assumptions; she doesn’t check the facts and she doesn’t cooperate, listen or otherwise answer the major and legitimate arguments. She says that she doesn’t have to be familiar with the subject and uses wrong information in a new version. Also, she states, for example, that different poetry books (poetry collections) are not collections but a collection. A Poetry collection contains many poems so different poetry books, containing many poems each, are usually called poetry collections. I was following the protocol for other writers and books and if this is not true about poetry collections then hundreds of articles must be revised to be in accordance with her ideas. She states that Stojanovic wrote 125 poems although it is obvious that he published more than 400. She reorganized the text and moved one sentence from the opening paragraph to the style section and now the first two sentences of the Style section are redundant. She replaced this sentence, much more appropriate for the opening paragraph, with the number of poems, which is, first of all, unencyclopedic and it is not correct (the number 125). Number of poems is not the fact that should be in the opening paragraph in my opinion since the quality of poems is much more important. The other sentence was much more appropriate. She also uses a very strange format in Published Works, starting every line with the name, then comma, then the last name, although I have not seen any article with the name of the author listed in this section unless the name is a part of the title (it is obvious that the books, based on the article itself), are by the author about whom the article is, although the dates can be placed before (like in some other articles) but not with a point after the date but with a colon. She also changed Serbian-American to Serbian and now nowbody can now that this author has been living in America for 23 years.

She doesn’t want to check the Library of Congress or WorldCat and she doesn’t want to check the article published in the World Literature Today digitized by Google. Please join this conversation since you sincerely participated in the creation of this article and since you always acted in good faith. Somebody with a neutral mind would have to participate and clarify this nonsense. Thanks. Mountlovcen8 (talk) 17:10, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
 * It's great to hear from you! I'm extremely busy in real life right now, so unfortunately, I won't be of much help until I can get some free time in June. A cursory look at the situation gives me the impression that was not satisfied with sourcing, something that would especially help, as you said, recognize Stojanovic's notability. For one, I'm not fond of people using "administrator" as a title and throwing that around as if I were some high authority figure. In reality, all I'm here for is to moderate and clean up. I'm sure there are many non-administrators that know more about how to write a good article than I. To this end, I need you to work together without getting angry, something that I think is happening, because both of you want an article that is well done. The face that we're collaborating online compounds the difficulty and makes this process harder than it needs to be (also, as you said). This requires additional effort from both parties to assess each others' goals to see what is ultimately trying to be achieved (in this case, we're working towards a more comprehensive encyclopedic entry). I think you're getting there. I'd love to get into the specifics of improving this article, but in that case, I wouldn't be getting any sleep. I'll try to keep this on my radar. Best,  Airplaneman   ✈  06:13, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for responding and it is great to hear from you too. The problem here is that this lady hardly recognized even the obvious facts and still refuses to recognize other facts that would be obvious to any reasonable person. She started the conversation, after placing some tags on some articles which attracted my attention, and I noticed a conversation there with Tokyo girl about this article which is, in my opinion, against Wikipedia’s rules.

On the other hand, Cindy is arbitrary; she doesn’t listen to almost anything and she overlooks even the obvious facts. This article is sourced with almost the same number of references as the article about Robert Frost. The problem with her is that she did not do anything in a professional manner and did not perform due diligence before involving with this article. She did not even check the authority control in the article to make this less painful. She changes the text, making obvious factual errors, she doesn’t insert the additional resources although she placed the tags in the text and received the information. I even asked her if she wanted physical copies of the books and copies of articles written in major newspapers, weekly magazines and literary magazines and periodicals in Belgrade and she did not answer, yet continues in a completely wrong direction.

So, the problem is not with sourcing but with the lack of cooperation on her part and she does want to recognize the facts. I do not understand this kind of behavior and don’t know is this a whim, caprice or it could be something else. Obviously, she tries to prove the unprovable and continues for the sake of sticking to her “perspective” as she calls it instead of doing a real job. What she did by now made the article worse. That’s why I thought somebody like you could help to clarify this since I have everything in order already and everything could be done quickly with a good will. She is almost not doing anything except that the tags are kept there. Would you recommend that I remove the tags and fix the article just a bit with inserting these references and only one picture? Then in June you can review everything and possibly recover what is lost now although may be important. She did not prove she can do a good job with this type of work related to authors.

Based on the tag, the tag says that it can be removed after several hours if the editing work is not completed. I did not want to remove it for three days but at this point, I don’t consider her behavior responsible and I think the tag should be removed and the article fixed at least to the extent possible now. She removed all the photographs (even with the Nobel Prize winner). So I would place back at least this important photo illustrative of that section. I am sorry for bothering you with this and best regards. Mountlovcen8 (talk) 07:04, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Deleting my wikipedia user page?
Hello Airplaneman, I was wondering if you could delete my user page (not the talk one, but user page). It is empty and I created it a long time ago, but I'm not using it and don't think I'll ever do. I was not able to delete it myself, so I was hoping if you could please help me out? Thank you very much! EthemD (talk) 04:13, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
 * The deed is done. Airplaneman   ✈  23:47, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Airplaneman! If it's not too much hassle, is it perhaps also possible for you to delete these 4 sub-pages? /User_talk:EthemD/archive2010 /User_talk:EthemD/archive2011 /User_talk:EthemD/archive2012 /User_talk:EthemD/archive2013 -EthemD (talk) 18:24, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * You're awesome, thank you! EthemD (talk) 19:29, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem; it only takes a second. Best, Airplaneman   ✈  23:15, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of Whuteva page
I just realized that you deleted or had the page I was working on for Whuteva deleted. I found redible articles includeing MTV with legitimate sources to back up the article such as video footage and live interviews. I dont understand what makes you qualified to critique an article on a subject it which appears you know nothing about. I can understand if I were talking about Cessna or Boeings (of which I probably know more than you know about hip hop music).

Excuse me for taking this personal but I definitely feel you marking this article for deletion was unjust and I would like to know how to go about re-establishing the article with the content and research (time and energy) Ive already exhausted on this piece. I just hope it was never completely removed and I can still recover what was lost. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Innertainment (talk • contribs) 02:32, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey Innertainment,
 * I don't remember ever being involved in the deletion of Whuteva, but if you'd like, I can restore the page to a user subpage of yours at User:Innertainment/Whuteva for you to work on. See here for some starters. If you'd like me to restore the page, I'd be more than happy to. Make sure to take a look at the notability guidelines and good sourcing policies. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me or anyone else. And don't worry, I don't take these things personally. Cheers, Airplaneman   ✈  16:48, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Your input is requested
Greetings, ! If we have not met, I'm. I've come here to ask you to take part in the survey at User:AutomaticStrikeout/Are admins interested in a RfB?. I am trying to gauge the general level of interest that administrators have in running for cratship, as well as pinpoint the factors that affect that interest level. Your input will be appreciated. Happy editing, AutomaticStrikeout (T • C • Sign AAPT) 01:41, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

00 Agent
You protected the above page on 19 January 2013‎ for three months because of an IP vandal who keeps adding false information to the page. The vandal is back. I reverted him here. Can you please re-protect the page for the same duration? Editor time is better spent elsewhere. The IP address has been blocked several times for repeatedly and needlessly making this exact edit. link - Fantr (talk) 00:02, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Sharing cookies

 * And while I'm at it, I may as well ask you your assessment of getting Outcast (Warriors) to GA.  Bramble  claw  x   18:41, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello! How are things? I appreciate the e-snack. I shared them with my friend; she enjoyed them as well! The large question about getting Outcast to GA is whether or not there are sufficient sources… I've been quite out of the loop in regards to GA standards for the past two years. I wonder if anything has changed. Airplaneman   ✈  22:07, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Cookie infestations on Wikipedia??? I've been pretty relaxed for the last month (though not editing much)... Glad to see you're still around... somewhat.   Bramble  claw  x   18:25, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, I see the criteria seem to have been reworded somewhat... I'll nominate it just to get feedback from people who are in the GA loop I guess. I have a feeling it won't pass due to shortness.  Bramble  claw  x   18:29, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

WP:WARRIORS discussion
Hello. I have started a discussion at the project talk page regarding a proposal for merging the individual book articles into list articles. You are invited to participate in this discussion, providing feedback and offering your own proposals so that we may reach a consensus decision on the course of action to be taken. Thank you,  Bramble  claw  x   15:23, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Any further comments before we proceed with the merge?  Bramble claw  x  15:05, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Butter
Butter has been semi-protected since 2010. There is no clue on the talk page or the protection log as to why permanent protection is still warranted. Before I go the WP:RFUP route, I am asking you to consider removing the protection. Thanks in advance,. 68.165.77.199 (talk) 18:56, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello! A careful inspection of the edit history prior to proection shows long-term vandalism with nearly no constructive edits from unregistered users logged. A perusal of the protection log also shows a long history of protections. Granted, it's been 30 months, so I'll unprotect the page and see what happens. Have a chill weekend, Airplaneman   ✈  04:33, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Belated thanks. 68.165.77.199 (talk) 22:53, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
 * My pleasure. Take care, Airplaneman   ✈  04:16, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

You've been mislead
I noticed that you've imposed PC1 on Wesley Warren Jr. following a request that's archived at Requests for page protection/Rolling archive. I'm afraid you've been mislead by the requester. The article is stable and does not have a history of vandalism other than a handful of edits on the nights that a British documentary film about the article subject was broadcast. What is really going on is that there is currently a thread on Wikipediocracy directed against the editors who collaborated on this article (towards which the thread is extremely personally abusive), and the request for pending changes appears to be intended to lock them out from further editing it. Not coincidentally, the requester is a regular Wikipediocracy member. The article is on several watchlists already, which should be sufficient, and it is unlikely there will be any further outbreaks of vandalism until and unless the film is shown again, at which point short-term PC might be necessary. Please lift the PC for now as it is not needed. Prioryman (talk) 06:30, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads-up. It was foolish of me, being so out of the loop, to go and make decisions such as that right away. I did vacillate on the matter for a few minutes, and in hindsight, I clearly made the wrong choice. The PC1 has been lifted. Cheers, Airplaneman   ✈  07:43, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem - thanks. If it does get vandalised again on a scale that necessitates pending changes being reimposed, I'll make a request on WP:RPP. Prioryman (talk) 07:46, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I was not misleading anyone. My statement was pretty clear that this was going to be an inevitable target for degrading vandalism of an article on a living person and had already seen vandalism. PC protection doesn't lock out any editors, but just subjects edits from newly registered or anonymous contributors to pre-approval. Those types of contributors are those most likely to make degrading vandalism of the kind the article has already seen. Suggesting that we should just wait for some more people to come in and mock this man for the fact that a procedure to reverse a seriously debilitating condition left his genitals permanently disfigured is reprehensible.-- The Devil's Advocate tlk.  cntrb. 20:48, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm hesitant to protect a page that is new and has a history of only a few instances of vandalism from two different users, none of them recent. Article traffic statistics indicate that his swollen testicles and subsequent surgery are a clearly viral phenomenon, one that has come to pass. A low-traffic page with no vandalism since the spike in interest in the subject nearly a month ago needs no protection. As per the protection policy, "Semi-protection should not be used as a preemptive measure against vandalism that has not yet occurred, nor should it be used to privilege registered users over unregistered users in (valid) content disputes." There is no case for any sort of protection for this page. Airplaneman   ✈  21:31, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Any ideas?
It appears to me that HarperCollins has decided to be ridiculous and update their Canadian site. The unfortunate problem now is that all the publication dates we cited for Warriors from there for Canadian releases now match the American ones, which is crazy because I know for a fact we got the release before the US and UK. Which is kind of weird, seeing as now, we can't even cite the publisher for the correct publication date for their own novels. Ideas?  Bramble claw  x  01:11, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Hmmmmmm I guess it'd be ok to cite reliable third party sources for publication dates, right? Airplaneman   ✈  19:07, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK RfC

 * As a listed GA participant, you are invited to contribute to a formal Request for Comment on the question of whether Good Articles should be eligible to appear in the Did You Know? slot in future. Please see the proposal on its subpage here, or on the main DYK talk page. To add the discussion to your watchlist, click this link. Thank you in advance. Gilderien Chat&#124;Contributions 02:49, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Help restoring deleted page
Hi there, I was wondering if you could help restoring the text of a deleted page. The page in question is Zopim and I want to use the text as reference for a rewrite of the article. I'm unsure if this is the correct procedure for this request. Your help is appreciated. Abhiroopb (talk) 08:38, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey Abhiroopb, the article was deleted because it was unambiguous advertising. I took a look at it, and it's nearly identical to the one you currently have at AFC. There's nothing worth salvaging, and it would be a bad reference text to use. Best, Airplaneman   ✈  16:52, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Userfication request
Could you please userfy Donkey Kong's animal buddies and Kleever for me? I feel there is helpful content in those two articles (even if the latter is poorly written). I'm trying to reserve non-copyrighted, deleted Wikipedia articles. Thanks. 2005-Fan (talk) 13:59, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Note to self: this was done by someone else. Airplaneman   ✈  13:01, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

FYI
Requests_for_undeletion. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 10:21, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Retrieving a possibly deleted wikipedia article
Is there a deleted article titled "Purple Dog Syndrome"?

2602:30B:8216:4C89:D465:9545:F88B:ECD7 (talk) 01:31, 5 November 2013 (UTC) BondageOctopus
 * Hey, sorry I missed this. I looked for Purple Dog Syndrome and Purple dog syndrome, and no deleted versions seem to exist. Best, Airplaneman   ✈  13:03, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

WP Apple Inc. in the Signpost
The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Apple Inc. for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. –Mabeenot (talk) 12:28, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Warriors role call
Hello. You have listed yourself as an active contributor of WikiProject Warriors, but as we are trying to see who is still active, we have put all active contributors under "status pending." If you are still active, go to WikiProject Warriors and move your name to "Active." Move your name to "Inactive" if you no longer wish to contribute. You may always move it back. On January, 9, 2014, all members who have not listed themselves as active will be moved to the "inactive" section. Thank you!  Bramble claw  x  22:07, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Help page : Fabien Biancalani
Airplaneman Hello, could you possible help me on a recognized artist actor and singer. Sources are reliable, Awareness is recognized, more of two major producing albums and player two films. However, a French contributor continues to unnecessary headbands. Thank you to you.--Mediasurf2 (talk) 01:20, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey Mediasurf2, it seems like Daniel has taken care of it here. Sorry for the delayed response. Airplaneman   ✈  13:10, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Mac Pro GAR
Mac Pro, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Someone not using his real name (talk) 23:02, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Can you help me retrieve content for two deleted pages?
Hi Airplaneman I found you on the "Wikipedia administrators willing to provide copies of deleted articles" page and wonder if you could help me get back some of my work that was lost. Mark Miremont and The Resurrection of Beauty

These were both deleted pretty quickly and I did not get a chance to get their content to make possible future attempts better. The person who nominated the long standing page (I think since 2006) Mark Miremont had made several deletions prior to nominating it for deletion. Anyone reading that article may not have seen all the evidence of the notability as a result. I don't have intentions to re-post or work on wikipedia for a while because this process and that editor's was rather demoralizing. Still it would be nice to be able to retrieve all that work I did for my own records. I am assuming once a decision for deletion has been made, even if only by one or two people, that it is done in stone and there are no appeals. If you get a look at the page, I would greatly appreciate your input on what myself and any other editors did wrong with establishing notability. In my field it is obvious that there is notability and I thought the references were from reliable sources. Thanks! Nynewart (talk) 22:20, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Hey Nynewart,
 * It's nice to meet you. I did some looking around just to see the context of how these articles came to be deleted. I didn't put the time in to read the entire discussions, but honestly, they are a large example of why I don't edit frequently anymore. Everything is so much of a hassle, and real life requires a lot of the energy I would need in order to participate in such discussions. I'm checking in right before I go to sleep, so I won't be evaluating the notability claims of the two articles extensively. If I have some time in the future (this is quite a nebulous statement), I'll try and make a proper evaluation. If much time passes, and I haven't yet, feel free to give me a poke.
 * You will find the two pieces at User:Nynewart/The Resurrection of Beauty and User:Nynewart/Mark Miremont.
 * Cheers,
 * Airplaneman  ✈  06:36, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

It's nice to meet you too, Airplaneman. I completely understand what you are saying. I don;t know that I will be doing much editing after this negative experience. What irritated me was the wasted time I put into this jumping through the other editor's hoops. I suspect that the person who nominated the deletion must have a grudge against the subject because he went in and made 10 or 12 deletions with edit summaries like "bullshit" etc- while, admitting to not reading the references. At the same time there were also deletions elsewhere on wiki related to this subject of the article by someone using a redirected IP address. I am not saying it was sockpuppetry but it is a bit coincidental given the flurry of deletions for a page that has existed for almost 6 years.

After I updated the references and limited it mere factual statements, he then said he looked at a main reference and it was ok to use... meaning that I spent hours of research and re-editing was for nothing and he admitted his deletions were inappropriate. But he did not want to go back and restore the content. Looking at the pages that editor maintained, it was clear that he did not hold them to any of the standards he was imposing on this one. That was another clue to me that there was something odd about the deletion and tone.

I believe even this neutered version of the article you sent me showed notability; give the institutions his work has been acknowledge by and exhibited with and individuals he has collaborated with. (There are many more that were not included (as I don't think I was bold enough in the content I posted).

I am very grateful you were able to get me the deleted content to save. This may not be your area of expertise, but I would value anyone's opinion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nynewart (talk • contribs) 16:55, 29 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi Airplaneman, I wondered if, now that I was able to retrieve the content from the pages that were deleted, you could revert them to the previously hidden pages they were. As they are now, they show up in online searches and I would hate for the subject of those pages to think I were involved in them being deleted. I would appreciate that very much.


 * The editor that fought so passionately for the pages to be deleted began engaging me on my talk page again, suggesting ways to contest the deletion.  I don't now why he would do this, but  did not plan to try to reinstate the pages again.  But I would value a second opinion becasue no one commented on the improvements I made before the miremont page was quickly deleted.  If you think there might be some notability there, perhaps I would give it another attempt.  Thanks! Nynewart (talk) 02:14, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I added a line of code to each page called Noindex that will delist the pages from search engines. Airplaneman   ✈  05:25, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Pikachu protection
Pikachu has been semi-protected for almost four years now. Would it be a good time to experiment with pending changes? If vandalism resumes afterwards, it can always be reprotected. What do you think? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 14:28, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the late response – looks like it's been taken care of. Hopefully it goes well! Best, Airplaneman   ✈  01:19, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Scaly Adventures deleted page
Hi, Another administrator deleted the Scaly Adventures page that I wrote. After initially contacting them regarding why the page was deleted, the administrator did not contact me again regarding a request to reinstate the page. Would it be possible for you to get me the text from the page so that I can make the discussed changes and repost it? Thanks! Hopeliving94 (talk) 17:57, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Hey Hopeliving94, nice to meet you. You can find the content at User:Hopeliving94/Scaly Adventures. Cheers, Airplaneman   ✈  19:06, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Smithsonian APA edit-a-thon May 10, 2014
FYI, just wanted to let you know about the Smithsonian APA edit-a-thon happening May 10, 2014. There are events in NYC, DC, Los Angeles, San Diego and Austin, TX. You can also work virtually, but just wanted to let you know, since you have been active on the Asian American projects. Thanks! -- Fuzheado | Talk 20:33, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Mainland Air
Hi Airplaneman,

Can you send me a copy of this recently deleted (8 May) article to me so I can work on it to improve it so it can be resubmitted for inclusion in wikipedia. It was deleted by GED UK the reason was A7 but it has been on wikipedia for many years so don't know why it was deleted all of a sudden. Thanks in advance CHCBOY (talk) 12:06, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Nice to meet you, CHCBOY. I've got the article in your userspace, at User:CHCBOY/Mainland Air. The article did look a little sparse in terms of reliable sourcing, and it will indeed need work to firmly establish notability. I'm tagging User:Ged UK. Let's see if this nifty tagging function works. Cheers, Airplaneman   ✈  12:38, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi there, it works! I did reply on my talk page, but essentially there was nothing in there about why the ariline was notable. It desparately needs some external sources that talk about the company (a profile piece in an airline magazine, NZ newspaper etc) would probably be enough. Ged  UK  12:52, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah, I'm sorry! I missed your note when I checked your talk page a few minutes ago. I should pay more attention. Good to know the tagging system works. Airplaneman   ✈  12:55, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Airplaneman I will have to do some researching for it, will take some time I guess. CHCBOY (talk) 16:27, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi Airplaneman do you think the article at User:CHCBOY/Mainland Air is fixed up now with the new refs I found for it. Would it be ready to submit it for inclusion in Wikipedia now? CHCBOY (talk) 07:07, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I submit the article and it was accepted how do I attach all the view history section as its left behind on my userspace.CHCBOY (talk) 03:22, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Hey CHCBOY,
 * I'm sorry it took me so long to respond! I don't log in regularly these days. I would say that the information and references that you have added are a good start towards a solid article. The referenced sentences clearly stating the purpose of the airline, as well as an additional history section, help establish notability. This is good. I would continue to move in that direction if any more information is available. The article that you recreated is under the title Mainland air. For correct capitalization, I will move it to Mainland Air, where the article once was, and perform a history merge of your userspace and the article that you just created. To prevent this in the future, use the move function to preserve the page history when you finish working on an article in your userspace and want to put it back in the mainspace. I'll perform the moves in about 12 hours when I got home. Cheers, Airplaneman   ✈  15:05, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the fix up and putting all the history back too. I will keep that in mind the MOVE function for next time. There is still lots of new things for me to learn here on Wiki.Bye for now. CHCBOY (talk) 09:49, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
 * My pleasure. I'll see you around! Airplaneman   ✈  19:51, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Just a quick question how can a I get the airline logo (free image) for the article as would like to add it in. CHCBOY (talk) 23:57, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
 * First off, I highly doubt the image is free-use, as it is a company logo. It's probably copyrighted or trademarked or under some other sort of intellectual property ownership. As such, an airline logo would be under the category of non-free content; yet, as the page explains, you may indeed use it because there is no suitable free-use alternative (a logo can't really be substituted). You can see what a correctly cited non-free image is here, for example. It's a cumbersome process, but something that's in place so Wikipedia doesn't get sued. I'm sorry that there's no quick way to do this. Here's a link to the upload wizard that will help you upload. Remember, the image is not "free," per se. Take your time, Airplaneman   ✈  02:51, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks once again for your detailed instructions it worked successfully for the article and I also used it the method to attach the logo on my other article called Air Safaris. CHCBOY (talk) 11:18, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Cool! It seems like you've uploaded 4 files using the wizard:
 * File:Airwork Brand image.gif


 * File:Fly My Sky logo.gif


 * File:Air Safaris logo.jpg


 * File:Mainland Air logo.gif
 * It seems that the fair-use rationale (FUR) template of choice for those four files is Template:Non-free use rationale 2. You're missing some fields in each file that I suggest you complete in order to finish the upload process. Also, you will need to add an additional template to the file for each unique page that you use the file on. Yes, it's cumbersome. For example, the File:United Airlines Logo.svg has two FUR templates because it's used on two articles. On a side note, I think Wikipedia prefers logos to be loaded as SVG images. Best, Airplaneman   ✈  14:55, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Request for comment
Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

photo removal
Hello Airplanman, Im new here and its taking a while to get the hang of!

I am trying to remove a photo that i mistakenly posted on GEORGIE SMITH wiki page ( georgie_smith.jpg ), now ive had the time to read up on all the rules. I had a message saying its been flagged for removal, and thats fine. Ive tried to remove it myself but it still appears to show on the live page. Please can you help me remove it? Thanks! Scoobiunderground (talk) 00:18, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
 * (Note to self) Looks like it was taken care of the very day you posted here. Airplaneman   ✈  03:59, 3 February 2015 (UTC)