User talk:Bd64kcmo

December 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Vito Fossella has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Alansohn (talk) 03:19, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Nice catch.
Thanks for catching that glaring error on Red Tails (Major-Colonel? WTF? lol). I've read and reread the Wiki and my eyes/brain blew right past it. By your username I assume you're from the Kansas City area. If so, I wanted to extend an invite to join the WikiProject Missouri and/or WikiProject Kansas City if you're not already a member. They're just working groups that focus on improving Wikis related to Missouri or Kansas City. Have a great Wiki kind of day! Sector001 (talk) 18:20, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I used to live in KC but not for 15 years. I miss it. I appreciate your invitation. Good luck to all of you there.

July 2013
Hello, I'm Shearonink. I noticed that you made a change to an article, I Dream of Jeannie, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Shearonink (talk) 21:28, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Your addition to the article is unacceptable. You cannot cite to IMDb for this kind of material. IMDb is in many ways like a wiki in that anyone can edit it. All wikis are unreliable sources. Your persistence in adding this information may lead to a block. There is a talk back just below this where another user has started a topic on the article talk page where you can discuss this material and perhaps better understand why you can't do what you're doing. I suggest you leave the article alone and join the discussion.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:40, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Shearonink (talk) 17:25, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

IMDB, like Wikipedia, is a closely monitored site which does not allow non-factual edits by users. They review edits just like they do here at Wikipedia. So, if IMDB is NOT "user" managed, what does that make Wikipedia?

I find these reversions to be unacceptable. Specifically, what does "Shearonink" object to? I merely pointed out a technical error in the TV series. The series set astronauts' homes in Cape Canaveral. They were NOT. They lived and trained at the NASA facility in Houston. Astronauts did not come from the Army, especially from the Corps of Engineers. These are historical FACTS. Wherein lies the problem? Why is there a insistent denial of my contributions? I it is the wording I will correct it. I never encountered such resistance to a contribution in Wikipedia, especially considering that it is a TV show.

And yes, thanks in advance for dealing with this in a professional manner.

February 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=594156228 your edit] to The Tonight Show Starring Johnny Carson may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s and 1 "<>"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 05:18, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Rickles]] (~100, during the 1960s and 1970s), ,ref name = https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Rickles

May 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=609188850 your edit] to Jim Parsons may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:20, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Parsons was born at St. Joseph Hospital  St._Joseph_Medical_Center_(Houston,_Texas) in Houston and raised in one of its northern

See the talk page
See Talk:Typhoon Haiyan. You should have done so before changing it back to "her" again. Dustin ( talk ) 17:40, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Dustin, sir, I do appreciate your concern for clarity, which should have been inherent in the construction of the sentence in the first place. But it was not my entry, originally. And besides, where do I find this rule in Wikipedia, "whatever goes first stays"? Is this theirs, or your own personal rule? In any case, am I to believe then, that the following statement would be incorrect by that rule..."VS-3" and *its* S-3A antisubmarine aircraft joined USS Ronald Reagan and *her* carrier battle group.". Again, is that incorrect? I do not see it, Dustin. The sentence has two segments one referring to the ship, and the other to the airwing, VS-3. It is most likely the reason Wikipedia accepts either usage. Just about every ship in Wikipedia is referred to by a feminine personal pronoun in accordance with longstanding naval, nautical, and aeronautical tradition. That includes men o' war, merchantmen, cruise or transoceanic passenger ships, and more than a few (but nowhere near all) aircraft and spacecraft.

Thank you sir.

Bd64kcmo (talk) 23:49, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for replying. The reason for keeping the first is so that you can readily avoid having any sort of dispute between usage, similar with the different dialects of English, date formatting, etc. Dustin  ( talk ) 23:53, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Gagarin-houston.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Gagarin-houston.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 05:05, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:56, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

January 2016
Despite your assertion in this edit summary, your edits certainly do look like vandalism. Your first edit reverted 180 edits by 100 editors to a 2013 version of the article. After your reversion I made a number of edits to fix errors in the infobox, as well as numerous small errors and MOS violations in the article and to reorganise the article so that it complied more closely with the suggested article layout at MOS:TV. Despite thanking me for that I see you have now reverted all of the corrections that I have made. This looks like vandalism and has been treated accordingly. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 15:34, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=700293818 your edit] to Eric Burdon may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:23, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
 * to the Vietnam War|anti-Vietnam anthem]] "Sky Pilot", "White Houses" and the progressive cover of "[[Ring of Fire (song)

Request for arbitration dismissed
A member of the Arbitration Committee has directed that your recently-filed request for arbitration be removed as clearly [unsuitable] for arbitration. Arbitration on Wikipedia is a lengthy, complicated process that involves the unilateral adjudication of a dispute by an elected committee. Although the Committee's decisions can be useful to certain disputes, in many cases the actual process of arbitration is unenjoyable and time-consuming. Moreover, for most disputes the community maintains an effective set of mechanisms for reaching a compromise or resolving a grievance.

For grievances about the conduct of a Wikipedia editor, you should approach the user (in a civil, professional way) on their user talk page. However, other mechanisms for resolving a dispute also exist, such as raising the issue at the administrators' noticeboard for incidents. In all cases, you should review Dispute resolution to learn more about resolving disputes on Wikipedia. The English Wikipedia community has many venues for resolving disputes and grievances, and it is important to explore them instead of requesting arbitration in the first instance. For more information on the process of arbitration, please see the Arbitration Policy and the Guide to Arbitration. I hope this advice is useful, and please do not hesitate to contact a member of the community if you have more questions. For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin ( aka L235 ·&#32; t ·&#32; c) 02:56, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

January 2016
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at Independence Day (1996 film). Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose editing privileges. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 04:10, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Air New Zealand shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. HkCaGu (talk) 22:50, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Robert Ben Rhoades, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pasadena. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:31, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Hemispherical combustion chamber copyright problem
Some of the material you included in the above article was copied from http://mgaguru.com/mgtech/twincam/tc300.htm, a copyright web page. Copying text directly from a source is a copyright violation. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, the content had to be removed. Please let me know if you have any questions or if you think I made a mistake. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:51, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Good Day

Diannaa I believe you made a serious error of presumption. As a result my contribution was stripped down to the point that it renders nothing about the history of the engine. Yes, the referenced work by Barney Gaylord is copyrighted, but looking deeper in, Barney elaborates: "Permission is granted to not for profit entities (primarily intended to reference vintage car clubs and vintage automobile hobby enthusiasts) to reproduce any information in this web site, either in electronic form or in printed newsletters, subject to the conditions that credit to the source is noted, and that this information shall not be sold or redistributed for profit. "

I have been in communication with Barney and other MGA Twin Cam enthusiasts for permission to use additional images, as well as the ones I previously displayed. I have permission to show all of them, but I need to know what proof Wikipedia needs. Emails? Barney can be reached at barneymg@mgaguru.com, if you need to directly communicate with him. Meanwhile, I will send whatever is needed here. Please review his web page for copyright exceptions, and let me know. I will refrain from reverts until I hear from you within a reasonable time, say, a couple of weeks?

Thanks and have a blessed day.

Brian Daly Mobile bd64kcmo@aol.com

All right then, ball is in their court.

BD — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.58.147.225 (talk) 20:14, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

August 2017
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article, Hemispherical combustion chamber. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. However, keep in mind that even on the talk page of an article, you should limit your discussion to improving the article. Article talk pages are not the place to discuss opinions of the subject of articles, nor are such pages a forum. Thank you. Dennis Bratland (talk) 18:39, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Ok Dennis, so where was I to answer Dianna, other than here, where she addressed my changes to the article?


 * Go to Talk:Hemispherical combustion chamber. You can add a new section at the bottom of the talk page, or click the "New section" tab at the top of your screen to start a new thread. See Talk page guidelines for more.Be aware that while mgaguru.com might allow copying for non-commercial use, Wikipedia only accepts donations of content that has a CC-by or similar license that allows commercial use and derivative works. See WP:FREECOPYING. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 23:42, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message
What or whose "consensus" is referred to here? ANd you use the term "modern", yet in your own statement you say. { "maiden" is the traditional term, carrying over from the nautical term }. THe "nautical" term is from time in memorial, so what has "modern times" have to do with anything? In my own experience I have heard feminine personal pronouns used for aircraft, spacecreft, and even hurricanes. Most recently, Hurricane Sally, striking the Gulf Coast 15 September 2020, was referred to as "she" and "her" by CBS This Morning anchor Gayle King. Named storms are referred to that way, and quite often, including masculine personal pronouns. I've heard the Space Shuttles and other space vehicles up to and including Apollo, Skylab, and the Shuttle, referred to as "she and her". I have heard it used often by Rod Serling, Scott Pelley of CBS, and others. Aircraft have often been referred to as "ships", particularly among those who have flown them. Some years ago a DC-3 crash landed in Fort Lauderdale, and the pilot owner said "she did her job well", referring to the behavior of the airplane. I believe I heard CAPT Sullenberger also say "she did her job" of his A320 he landed in the Hudson, as he was quite pleased with the performance and short fused establishment of watertight integrity of the airplane when they landed in the river. Besides, who or what "consensus" defines "modern times"? And how does "consensus" count incidents of personal pronoun use with ships, aircraft, spacecraft, or anything else, occupied by humans or not? Therefore, I consider the argument that in "modern times" aircraft are "rarely" referred to "like ships", is untenable, whether or not by "consensus", which stated "maiden" has been used for millenia (Okay, centuries). Thus I STILL I have no idea of why "maiden" should apply to something that is going to be considered as gender-neutral. I don't use the term "its maiden drive" driving a brand new car or motorcycle out of the dealership. "It's maiden" makes no sense to me. It should be one or the other. Bd64kcmo (talk) 22:27, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Maiden vs. first
I just want to let you know that consensus is that there is no reason to prefer "first flight" over "maiden flight". While some people view "first" as more gender neutral, "maiden" is the traditional term, carrying over from the nautical term maiden voyage. - ZLEA  T \ C 16:20, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I think you've misunderstood. In modern times aircraft are rarely referred to as "her" like ships. -  ZLEA  T \ C 22:05, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

I doubt I misunderstood anything here. For one, "Modern times" is a relative term. Wikipedia is a public domain and "no good reason" is also a relative term. I edited the article merely for consistency in community parlance. I already presented some examples I heard with my own ears. Maiden refers to females, therefore, her maiden flight, ot its first flight, inaugural flight, shakedown flight, etc. Maiden just *does not fit* a gender-neutral reference. So, if we're going to use certain words, let's ensure consistency.

As for feminine personal pronouns, admittedly these references are more like preferences, but I doubt the objection to my edit has any evidence as to hard data, indicating how the language is spoken. Their personal opinion is that I had no good reason to edit. I disagree. However, here are other references for my evidence for using "she" and "her" with aircraft, in MODERN times.

I will start with Wikipedia.

1. "'She' is used when the referent is female, or is an object personified as female... this is *common* with vessels such as ships and airplanes, and sometimes with countries." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_in_English (Under "Personal Pronouns")

2. "...Aircraft are usually referred to as "she", just like ships..." https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/46807/what-is-the-gender-of-an-aircraft#:~:text=Aircraft%20are%20usually%20referred%20to,Automobiles%20follow%20the%20same%20principle.&text=As%20a%20pilot%2C%20the%20aircraft%20is%20definitely%20a%20she.&text=Each%20aircraft%20has%20a%20personality,idiosyncrasies%20as%20different%20personality%20types.

"...Much of aviation has a history in Nautical terms, lore... and law..." https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/49230/why-are-airplanes-called-she

"...From my point of vue (sic) an ac (aircraft) always has some kind of personality...so using "it" when referring to an ac is terrible." https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=670509

“Modern times” is not as hard and fast as you presented to me.

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (May 2)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by DoubleGrazing was:

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Bd64kcmo/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to User:Bd64kcmo/sandbox, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "Db-g7" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
 * If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
 * If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=User:Bd64kcmo/sandbox Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DoubleGrazing&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=User:Bd64kcmo/sandbox reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:25, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

My effort to review the beef DoubleGrazing had is sorta moot...everything referenced to it: before and after edits, etc., disappeared, and I can't find what the problem is. I was trying to alert the author of the article that I found a factual conflict in their Wiki article and another, and could it be resolved in some way? If I submit several comments or corrections in one day, how am I to backtrack and find out what it is? So forgive me for screwing up, but there seems to be an element of intolerance here that leaves me disillusioned about it all.

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Bd64kcmo/sandbox


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. A tag has been placed on User:Bd64kcmo/sandbox requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:25, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. 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 2022 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 to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:35, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

CS1 error on Ted Cassidy
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Ted Cassidy, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:Qwerfjkl/Botpreload&editintro=User:Qwerfjkl/boteditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:Qwerfjkl&preloadtitle=Qwerfjkl%20(bot)%20–%20Qwerfjkl_(bot)&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 23:26, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ([//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ted_Cassidy&action=edit&minor=minor&summary=Fixing+reference+error+raised+by+%5B%5BUser%3AQwerfjkl%20(bot)%7CQwerfjkl%20(bot)%5D%5D Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:Qwerfjkl%20(bot)/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F1156653792%7CTed%20Cassidy%5D%5D Ask for help])

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. 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 2023 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 to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:29, 28 November 2023 (UTC)