User talk:Bzuk/Archive Sep 2007

Sopwith Triplane
Have another look at this, and also the exchange on the MOS page. All good clean fun! Soundofmusicals 06:39, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Alexander Graham Bell
He became a U.S. citizen. It even says that in the same article. Canada was just Britain then, so he didn't change citizenship when he went to Canada. 69.73.110.212 05:09, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

SR-71
Thank you for your help on SR-71. I saw the talk on the destroyed aircraft and thought it was an important fact that it was never shot down. Can you assist me with siting the reference(s) that confirm the 12 accidents? 12.198.79.130 12:45, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Again
Let me say it, not you. It appears that you continue to shitting me or i miss something? The citation needed on Viggen, the last of your insults, is very funny. Obviousely, you don't find as 'supported' the fact that once swedish had a compact engine at the hands, they for OBVIOUS REASONS made smaller aicrafts as they can, since they surely don't need bulky and costly aircrafts. Obviousely i pretend too much if i'd expect that you could compare Saab 35, 37 and 39 Gripen, and tell me why of these tree fighters two are small and slim and one is large as a camion? Perhaps the 9meters-cubic engine has something to do with overall Viggen design? Suggestion, say yes.--Stefanomencarelli 19:37, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

First, it's NOT (only) my personal opinion that the things are so. Let's say that is CASUAL, that Draken and Gripen are rougly the half of the Viggen, he? So i must, to delice you, cite Andrea Nativi that, look, said precisely that the goal of swedish engeneers was always to have compact and light aircrafts as possible? You are even unable to understand even that without wing turrets P.108 had not protection by rear.above attacks, for the simply reason that there weren't any other weapons that couvered that side. I am pretty curious to understand why you ask confirms for such trivialities, and leave simpatic comments also in the cronology, but i don't think that you will never deliced me with an appropriate answer.--Stefanomencarelli 20:02, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Date format
Instead of incongruously changing every date you encounter into the European format, why don't you just change your preferences so that they display in the European format? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 21:43, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Goodbye for now
Thanks for the note BillCJ and I hope to see you again soon. Bzuk 03:36, 22 August 2007 (UTC).
 * I hope you know that last diatribe was not my note to you! I'ts from my shadow again! And THAT is why I'm leaving. - BillCJ 04:38, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Yup, I figured that was what was happening and I removed his submission from my home page. I have little time for the work of trolls and vandals. Keep your chin up! Bzuk 12:15, 22 August 2007 (UTC).

Request for assistance
As someone with whom I have reviewed or worked with on an article or talk page, I humbly request your assistance in reviewing the Aggie Bonfire page for Featured Article status. Any/all constructive input is welcomed and appreciated on the FAC nomination page, but please read the instructions for reviewing before you make a comment. Thanks in advance for your assistance. — BQZip01 — talk 05:23, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Hawker Hunter Pic
Hi again Bill.

RE: the additional Hawker Hunter image - that's OK - I only added it because it's the same aircraft pictured but from a different angle. Do what you think best. Regards, Ian Dunster 17:29, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I prefer the second of the two, BTW. The first one is very dark as a result of looking at the black (blue?) tail. Maury 17:50, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

P-38 reference: Bodie 2001
Say, Bill, does it make any difference that I'm using a 1991 edition of this book as my reference, not 2001? Thanks for spiffying up my work! Binksternet 01:01, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Bellanca Senior Pacemaker.jpg
Would you mind rechecking the information on this image? The link listed doesn't direct to the image in question and I can't see any link to a page documenting that this image has been released into the public domain. Happy editing. Valentinian T / C 15:06, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

LISTSERVs
No not normally, but since it's substantiated (with a 2005 observation) by the verifiable cite which you helpfully added later I think it's helpful to also mention where the 2004 date came from. I've tried to find it but there is so much text on that listserv referring to "2004," "Norwich," "wreckage" and so on I can't come up with any search strings that easily pull it out. I do remember reading the 2004 eyewitness remark in 2004, since it was kind of a big deal that the remaining hulk, a major landmark on the island throughout much of the 20th century, had at last broken apart into scattered debris (after almost 90 years). Anyway this is only (hopefully) to tie up our discussion on this nitpick of nitpicks. Cheers! Gwen Gale 16:06, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Fairchild Swearingen Metroliner
Thanks for picking up where I left off. I could see that the article needed more work (and still does IMO), but after spending several hours editing the Jetcraft Aviation article I had had enough. You probably know how it is; you check a link in an article you have been editing to make sure it works and you are appalled by what you see....anyway, it reads much better now. I actually took a pic of the MMSA at Bankstown back in '93, which gave me a starting point to find the reference. AFAIK it never left Australia, it was "de-modified" and then placed on the Australian register in September 1994, turned into a freighter still wearing the same paint scheme, and has been flying around full of boxes ever since.

I really like the Metro. I've been working on them since 1993 and I reckon I've spent more time on them than any of the other 160-odd aircraft types I've worked on. I feel really comfortable in them, like they're a pair of old boots. YSSYguy 16:03, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Please apologize for your slander and insults
Bzuk, you slandered and insulted me while making changes to the Amelia Earhart page. For example, you wrote, "What I said, stands, removing troll's vandalism," and "revert troll's vandalism- go away! Article not well written, my foot- unsourced crap taken out," and "Revert troll's vandalism, not one citation given." These statements are slanderous and insulting. I know sometimes people get into heated debate, but there's no need to stoop to slanderous insults that degrade the quality of the Wikipedia community. I said on the Earhart talk page that I would ignore your comments until you apologize to me, and I will in fact do just that. I want to make sure you are aware of it by posting here also. We cannot permit a community where people who insult and slander one another are not called to account. I extend a cyber-hand of frienship to you and will accept your apology once it is made. Matt605 18:13, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Matt, see comment on your home page. Bzuk 19:14, 26 August 2007 (UTC).


 * Yes, apology accepted. Everybody needs a fresh start every now and then, myself included. Matt605 00:06, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Flapjack1.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Flapjack1.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 19:06, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Corrected. Bzuk 19:15, 26 August 2007 (UTC).

Amelia Earheart
Following your request on my talk page, I have submitted a few suggestions on the talk page of the article and protected the page until the dispute is resolved. I hope that the conflict can be resolved swiftly. Thanks ck lostsword•T•C 00:59, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Copy of my comments left on Gwen's page: First thanks for your patience through all this. Second, in order to resolve this by establishing clearly the consensus I believe exists, I have started a straw poll on the talk page to revert Matt's changes, back to the last version you did. Your participation would be much appreciated. Lastly, FWIW, the offending editor clearly violated my instructions to him, and I have blocked him for 48 hours.  AK Radecki Speaketh  01:24, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Glad to have been of assistance :). If you ever find yourself in another conflict that requires 'adminly' involvement, feel free to send me a little orange box. ck lostsword•T•C 23:12, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Amelia Earhart
I took a quick look at the page history of Amelia Earhart. It seems to me (but I have not checked every single edit) that this page has been subject to some standard primary-school-type vandalism, but some anon edits have not been reverted (I can't assess how useful they have been). Personally, I'd give unprotection a try. Tizio 14:38, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * For comparison, I have Robert Frost in my watchlist, and I noticed a flood of vandalism during fall, but a standard level during the other seasons. Yet, we do not preventively protect pages (WP:PROTECT). If we see an unusual amount of vandalism there, we can place protection back. Tizio 14:54, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll leave that article alone, then. Note that the protection expired yesterday at 12:00 []. Tizio 15:15, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I took a look at the article, and it seems fine to me, both on general structure and on writing. Some notices:
 * there are still a couple of "reference needed" in a section;
 * there are some sentences where two partly unrelated clauses are joined, e.g. "Irene Bolam had been a banker in New York during the 1940s, denied being Earhart, filed a lawsuit requesting $1.5 million in damages ..."; the first part (being a banker) doesn't match the rest (denoied being Earhart etc.); this can be rephrased for example as "Irene Bolam, who had been a banker in New York during the 1940s, denied being Earhart, filed a lawsuit requesting $1.5 million in damages ...", or (still better) the part about being a banker moved to an earlier sentence; I have spotted another sentence like this, I just can't find it anymore (and there are possibly other ones around);
 * cut down the popular culture! there are some facts that are just passing references (e.g., the "dinosaur/Amelia Earhart theme park");
 * I don't think it's necessay to individually mention any elementary school named after Earhart.
 * Overall, the article seems even close to featured status. Tizio 16:49, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

AE
Hey Bzuk, only a word to let you know AE's indeed off my watchlist again. I think you're doing wonderfully with the article. However, pls feel free to call me in whenever you think I might truly be of help :) Cheers to you! Gwen Gale 23:03, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Pilatus PC-12 Photo
The caption on the photo of the Pilatus PC-12, featured on the Pilatus PC-12 page, says that its a NAC Air plane. Although its not the greatest angle for identifying it from, the photo quite clearly shows the striping to be that of an RCMP plane, not NAC Air. If it was taken at Winnipeg then the plane is most likely C-GMPP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.76.29.8 (talk) 20:35, August 30, 2007 (UTC)
 * Whoops, You may be right as the photo is from a batch I made at the Winnipeg airport. I will correct the caption. Thanks. Bzuk 20:38, 30 August 2007 (UTC).

DYK
Cheers, Daniel 12:37, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Patrick Masell
I know him only as a reference in the P-40 article. Why do you ask? Grant |  Talk  05:23, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I see what you mean. I think we need better sources than that, although he will do in the short term. Grant  |  Talk  07:35, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, Bzuk, but i must tell to you something:

Nick this is an immense improvement on the section.

No i doesn't. He could do better. Electronic deserves atleast a paragraph about F-14, not be scattered in few phrases all around the 'tecnical'. It needs to be organic to be understood.

''I have highlighted small typos but otherwise, the only other concern is to provide some corroboration in the form of citing reference sources. FWIW Bzuk 12:57, 3 September 2007 (UTC).''

Bzuk, i have already an hard day today. So i would'n be harsh, but overall what kind of reference do you need still? Must i start with Nico Sgarlato? Or Baugher is enough?

I know you don't like me or atleast my works, and no matter if you say it's not true. Some things and comments speaks alone, sorry. But try to not provoke mi patience over all the reasonable levels. It's unfair collaborate with someone that consider you a trouble instead a worth.--Stefanomencarelli 20:09, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

F14 contributions
Hi, I wish to point your attention on this edit on it.wiki where stefanomencarelli pratically boasts his style on en.wiki F-14 article. This user is an old it.wiki acquaintance where he was banned for three months for personal attacks and systematic article writing rules elusion, (Yes! On it.wiki also) in spite of numberless attempt to give him help. I think it could be useful to highlight this type of behaviour to an en.wiki admin following aviation project, so he can better understand the situation as it is. I translated his post and I will point out to whom you will suggest to me in this way:

... they blocked me three days after I put 6kb of technical details on F-14 page (obviously overprotected and allowed to Americans only), quickly cancelled (like when I first posted as a start 20 kb on Macchi 202, vaporized in a glance!). Obviously I complained and I got three days more from another admin, I appealed (there it is possible) and it was rejected. Then I went back on the F-14 page and as they cancelled my 6kb contribution, I placed other 16, plus an hand made artwork. Poor boys, they are still correcting, but now the article is a lot of better.

I posted this warning in User talk:Attilios and stefanomencarelli promptly did an attempt to cancel the post. Moreover he started to insult me in my en.wiki page as he was banned again on it.wiki, just the first day after his return from the previous ban. I am curious to know your opinion. Bye EH101 (it.wiki) --EH101 23:49, 3 September 2007 (UTC)--EH101 19:15, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

F-101B
The infrared system on the F101-B was not retractable. I "undid" the change because I "fatfingered" the description of my edit and wanted to redo it. (besides being new to Wikipedia, I'm one of the world's worst typists). It looks like the word retractable was deleted after all.

I was a Weapons Control System tech on the MG-13 fire control system from 1961 thru 1965 and spent a lot of time troubleshooting the infrared system when they were first installed. The system was Nitrogen-cooled and the slighest leak would cause them to "freeze up".

Ray Yorizzo (Formerly) 87th Fighter Interceptor Squadron Lockborne AFB, Ohio —Preceding unsigned comment added by RYorizzo (talk • contribs) 01:11, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * See my response on your talk page. Fatfingered? harumph, you don't know fatfingered. [:¬} Bzuk 01:18, 4 September 2007 (UTC).

F-4
thanks you to me warning from F4 user making his better article. know I was taking a arcitel of my listwatch, so funyou do had yourself allby! - BillCJ 23:41, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

B-58 Hustler
Hi, I'm using cite series templates to add detail to references section. I noticed there are duplicates and plan to remove them but only after I've finished adding cite templates. If you'd like to edit for a while that's fine, just let me know when you'r done and I'll resume then. Thank you. Conrad T. Pino 03:24, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I'm replying to your comment on my talk page. I understand your concerns and I'm happy to comply.  I believed I was making a positive contribution but obviously I was mistaken.  I've stopped editing this article.  If you'd like some assistance in the future please update your comment on my talk page.  Best regards.  Conrad T. Pino 03:53, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XVIII (August 2007)
Delivered by grafikbot 15:02, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Bold
Yeah it's ok not bolded and does look friendlier :) Gwen Gale 19:36, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh and maybe you could archive some of those threads? Ta! Gwen Gale 19:38, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Erm sorry I muddled those two searches :/ Gwen Gale 14:08, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Oops, we both started editing at the same moment. If you have a concern I've missed, pls speak up! All the best. Gwen Gale 02:39, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Your email
G'day Bill, hope you're having a good weekend; you have raised a few issues(!) I'm still thinking about them. Regards, Grant  |  Talk  04:53, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Tankers?
Hey, Bill, I came across your image of the B-26 air tanker over at Commons...as I've been working on a number of aerial firefighting articles (some done, some on my sandboxen), I was wondering if you had any other images of older air tankers in your collection?  AK Radecki Speaketh  03:18, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Saab 37 Viggen
Bill can you take a look at the discussion over STOL of Viggen. Towpilot has removed the STOL comment three times now and I think it's time to get someone else involved in the issue. I base my facts on this webpage (using swedish books) linked from Saab 37 Viggen wikipage where there are numerous places where Saab were looking at STOL performance. T96 grh 09:54, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Henschel HS 123.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:Henschel HS 123.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Shell babelfish 00:26, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Howland Island and Fred
Hey Bzuk, I'm not trying to be all that hard to work with but Howland Island can't be quickly cut and pasted into a new organizational structure. As for Fred, we don't disagree too much, but to add a formal disappearance theories section (which I do think is a misnomer anyway) would be on the edge of WP:FORK, for starters. All the best to you. Gwen Gale 03:16, 14 September 2007 (UTC)