User talk:HkCaGu/Archive 2010 Jan-Jun

PHX airport
Could you do something about Zhoover editing the PHX airport? He/she never reads the edit summaries so the only course of action is to keep reverting or write something on his talk page every time. Thanks --Dklep7 (talk) 04:08, 11 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I was about to add a similar comment here, and I just added a note to his talk page.. I'm not sure what his story is, except that he's been on several edit-warring rampages (not dissimilar to this one) that have resulted in bans in the past. Also, he never signs his posts, but manually adds "ATController" (I asked once, and he said he was ATController). Something very odd here. Thanks, Jasepl (talk) 04:14, 11 January 2010 (UTC)


 * He claims to have tried to sign properly using four ~, and he's supposedly been informed of using the edit summary and reading talk messages and all that. All these signs point to some kind of handicap in learning the system compared to most other editors. Blocking is the only way to go, but I'm not an admin. Are there any in WP:Aviation? HkCaGu (talk) 11:15, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

IP adding thru NRT "direct" destinations for UA
Hey! An IP apparently has been making changes to the UA "direct" flights from the US that go-thru NRT. He brought it up for discussion at WP:AIRPORTS but it has been discussed many times and i thought that we have reached a consensus and decided not to include them. Can you take a look please? Thanks! Snoozlepet (talk) 08:13, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Max Havoc: Curse of the Dragon and Albert Pyun Wikipedia pages
Thank you for your recent edits to these pages, reverting vandalism. Unfortunately, the vandal persists. Is there a way to stop this? Please keep up your good work at Wiki. Many thanks. - Digital 42 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Digitaleye42 (talk • contribs) 12:45, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Taoyuan Airport
The pronunciation there was wrong, and the politically contentious part of the edit is already toned down remarkably. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.177.66.30 (talk) 12:34, 27 January 2010 (UTC)


 * It's not, and it's not. "Taiwan Province" is still unnecessary, and "one of three airports in the ROC" is POV as it defines ROC as not the whole China. HkCaGu (talk) 17:17, 27 January 2010 (UTC)


 * See . Meanwhile it is necessary to talk about the ROC since the statement "one of the three international airports in Taiwan" fails to tell readers whether there is any international airport in the rest of the ROC. When we talk about the territory of a country in the modern sense we refer to the existing territorial extent of that country. The city/county, state/province, country format is the standard across and outside Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.177.66.30 (talk) 05:52, 29 January 2010 (UTC)


 * The dictionary you quoted has no consistency in the tone of the character "field". Also, please see WP:NC-TW on correct terminology. All currently ROC-governed airports outside of Taiwan are domestic only, so "Taiwan" is specific enough. Look at articles like Taiwan Province, it doesn't say it's the largest province of ROC. Why? NPOV. Your argument of "existing territorial extent" is not applicable to Taiwan/ROC. HkCaGu (talk) 09:43, 29 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Please look at the 桃園國際機場 or the 臺灣桃園國際機場 entry. And no. Nowhere in the article.., and perhaps rarely in other Wikipedia entries, tells readers explicitly that all other ROC airports outside of Taiwan are solely domestic. Simply saying Taiwan is apparently not specific enough.


 * In the modern world there are territorial dispute all across the world. By referring to the territorial extent of Portugal we do not normally include Olivenza/Olivença except for some certain specific occassions. The same applies for the ROC (or any other country with its own territorial existence). 210.177.66.30 (talk) 12:08, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Pacific airports
Could you explain why exactly it is so imperative that frequencies be listed in such details for these airports? The paragraph I removed (and the one you keep reinstating) firstly duplicates what is already in the table (CO is the only airline flying here, and flying to blah and blah) and secondly frequencies have long been deemed irrelevant per consensus. If you still disagree, then this is a topic for WP:Airports. should I, or will you? Thanks, Jasepl (talk) 17:15, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Airlines and destinations are not encyclopedic on their own--they are there to show what the airports are like. The Island Hopper does not deserve an article of its own, nor is it notable in Continental's. However, the Island Hopper is critically notable and relevant for small airports like these. Using standard templates only for these airports is like many of those Arizona towns which describe demographic details (i.e. 0.07% Asian) but forgetting to mention it's part of some Indian Reservation (which isn't necessarily contained in the Census data). Frequencies are definitely not supposed to be in the table, and definitely not notable for one route in a busy airport, but, again, for these small and simple airports, is critically encyclopedic. Simply putting six destinations in a table without explaining the route can also be misleading. I hope you understand the reality and the perspective. HkCaGu (talk) 17:38, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!
Your help is apprecated! --B767-500 (talk) 19:35, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

User:Crowleybeast
The user above has been indefinitely blocked for vandalism to Seventh-day Adventist Church. Jezhotwells (talk) 00:45, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

American Eagle Terminal at LAX
I can't find a real source but due to LAX construction American Eagle has moved from their remote terminal west of TBIT to UAX's old "box" remote terminal that is east of Terminal 8.

--Dklep7 (talk) 22:07, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarification. I was confused since those edits combined to indicate there's no more shuttle service to DL. DL's website still indicates the T5 shuttle. Here's an "unqualified" source on the new remote terminal: FlyerTalk. HkCaGu (talk) 23:25, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

北京市
不好意思在这儿写简体字；我是大陆人、所以我不会读繁体字 xP. 我不懂为什么你删除了北京的粤拼. 你可以不可以解释一下吗？北京当然不是广东的一个城市、但是请看厦门的文章. 按你的思想与道理厦门的文章应该只有拼音和福建话的POJ、可是它也有粤拼. 多谢阅读！华钢琴49 (TALK) 00:35, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Please see Manual of Style (use of Chinese language). Xiamen shouldn't really have Cantonese Jyutping. HkCaGu (talk) 03:31, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry I make mistake (edit war and talk page message)
I am back! Sorry about poor behaviors, which am realizes were mistakes. I try to make good edits. --B767-500 (talk) 18:15, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Hubs and focus cities
Well it's so nice to hear from my mother #2 again. Blocking people isn't going to solve anything! How do you know I'm not just making other accounts? This may and/or may not be my only one :) And I had a very nice discussion with someone about this and we agreed it looks way better and easier to read when the cities are listed. Just because YOU don't like doesn't mean it's wrong! And if I disagree with you or likewise, blocking isn't going to help, that will just piss people off and make it even harder to have civilized conversations w/ other editors. So if you'd like to approach this in a different, more respectful manner, be my guest, if not I won't tell you to but it will certainly show your maturity level.ZHoover123 03:02, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks like you still haven't learned Wikipedia and is threatening everyone with your refusal. (1) You talked to someone in "private" doesn't mean you can change things. There are WP:AIRLINES, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airlines, Template:Infobox airline where you get a consensus, and not act on (two of) your own. (2) You still haven't learned to sign properly. (3) You are threatening to make another account, that's evasion and sock puppetry. HkCaGu (talk) 16:18, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok first of all, did I threaten to make another account no, I simply said this may and/or may not be my only one...THAT'S NOT THREATENING MY FRIEND! Learn your vocabulary. And second, I didn't talk to anyone "in private" I said I just simply talked to someone about it...it's on Wikipedia somewhere, and since you don't seem to leave me alone, I'm sure you'll find it. And I never said because I talked to someone about it, I was going to change everything. This is another one of your problems, you are putting words in my mouth and jumping to conclusions, maybe you should read my last comment again...then try back later :) And I put four of these things: ~ after everytime I write something so why it proceeds unsigned is beyond me. ZHoover123 01:36, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Aeroméxico
Hey I really don't want to argue. This is what happened: someone else put Mexico City as "suspended" from PHX w/ a reference. And in that article, it said Guadalajara was suspended too so that's why I added it. So you say nothing is suspended this week; so just so we're on the same page, if and when does the suspension begin...if it even does? ZHoover123 22:19, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * From what I read, GDL and MEX were discontinued a while back because of market pressure. "Suspended" means something sudden and unplanned, which is apparently not the case for these two routes. Then an erroneous report suggested AM "suspended" the flights in response to the new law, when in fact they were discontinued but not in direct response of the new law, as clarified by AM itself (just go to Google News and search "Aeromexico Phoenix"). PHX-HMO is still flying daily right now, and of course HMO-MEX continuation is not suspended. Therefore both HMO and MEX are legitimate destinations. HkCaGu (talk) 00:01, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Perfect! Thank youZHoover123 00:39, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 * And thanks for correcting MEX. This thing is indeed very complicated! HkCaGu (talk) 00:40, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

United hub claimed current hub by next CEO (Smisek)
I know you revert for logical reasons: But next CEO did not make claim about combined carrier hub! Instead he make claim about current hub. So I hope your agrees, because of any CEO statement (merged or not merged) makes credibiltiy statements! Thanks you! --B767-500 (talk) 06:22, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Narita International Airport (Tokyo)
 * He is a nobody in the current United company. He works for Continental. If he speaks of hub, it is not current. HkCaGu (talk) 06:26, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, well you are role model for editor, so I didn't challenging anything further. Thanks for expalins! --B767-500 (talk) 06:38, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Can you looking this sheet and looking third page because claimed as current hub. Thanks for researching! --B767-500 (talk) 07:29, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * You've found something good. But it says "hubs and focus cities" and doesn't say which one is which. Bring it up to discussion at Talk:United Airlines. HkCaGu (talk) 07:47, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

User 76.95.138.32
This user has repeatedly reverted edits without giving a reason. Now, he reverted my edit at Denver International Airport's page telling me that my edit is "bullshit". Could you please monitor this user because he has shown no signs of changing. Thanks

--Dklep7 (talk) 03:23, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

User:Mehmumut
Yeah, i removed some of the entries without a start date. However, Turkish Airlines destinations page have these new services listed with only a Month and year. Shouldn't those be removed eventhough they are sourced? Snoozlepet (talk) 23:17, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

User:173.2.4.184 and User:Airtran371
This user is back again. Can you take a look? It looks like he can make up his mind on which account to stick to? Snoozlepet (talk) 23:22, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

California Pacific Airlines/OAK
Hello. Thank you for your concise, informative reasoning, in regards to CPA being taken out of the OAK table; I respect that, and your decision [to remove it for now]. I was debating whether it was worth putting it there so early, considering that I had already written a blurb about its service beginning in the "added service" chapter. Yet, decided to anyway at the time, since the table can be useful. In any case, once a date is set for it to start service to/from OAK, we can of course, enter it then; feel welcome to beat me to it if you see it somewhere first. You seem to have a big interest in airports and what goes on there, looking at your page(?) Min1Phoeb2 (talk) 11:03, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

IP User:112.204.35.67 and 112.204.20.142
The first IP, as you remember, was banned for 6 months for adding "fake" destinations on various Airport pages. Seems he may be back under 11.204.20.142. It would be worth a look to keep an eye on that IP. Sb617 (Talk) 23:18, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Hang tight...
Glad you caught me; I was just logging off. I'll put a stop to that for you. Thanks for letting me know. PMDrive1061 (talk) 03:07, 2 June 2010 (UTC)


 * You're good to go. I slapped a 72-hour block on the IP and a permanent block on the account.  I'm glad to have been able to help you.  Please don't hesitate to ask me for help like this in the future.  Gotta run, but take care and have fun.  Don't let the trolls get you down.



PMDrive1061 has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!


 * Got that second one as well. Why is it that all the damned vandals have dynamic IPs?  Anyway, I'll log off, but let me know if you have any other problems.  You can also report him to this link.  See ya!  PMDrive1061 (talk) 03:15, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

To PMDrive1061: Did you seriously investigate the content before you make such decison? I won't call it a rash decision but you know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.125.140.158 (talk) 19:31, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Please be constructive
Friend, You cannot just delete whatever you do NOT agree, regardless of factual knowledge. It is hardly belived such act is constructive at all. You should honor other people's opinion and not just be blinded by your own ideology.

PS: Before raising a user as "sockpuppet", I guess any editor may be required to show some sort of proof to show his/her intelligence.

This is a kind reminder. 128.125.140.158 (talk) 20:01, 2 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.125.140.158 (talk) 19:58, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Airports
You have deleted very good information from very reliable sources. Do not accuse me of vandalising the site. I am very annoyed at you doing this. I was just using the information from a very reliable source (www.flightstats.com) which actually shows what planes of what airlines are flying in and out of that aiprort. The day before the current day and the two days afterwards. If you disagree with some of things I put down please feel free to go and argue with flightstats because it's their information and I'm definately not imagining planes and neither are flightstats. It seems I'm not the only one annoyed at you. Don't just delete what you disagree with. Please ressolve this problem.

Regards, Danceyman, —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danceyman (talk • contribs) 07:19, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately you are misusing flightstats.com. In airport articles we have specific formats and guidelines. We list destinations (with specific disambiguation formats so that "New York" and "Washington" are not allowed) under the actual flying carrier in relation to the parent marketing airlines. Just because the same flight is listed under multiple carriers does not mean it is to be listed under multiple carriers and codeshare partners. HkCaGu (talk) 07:42, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

But on one account it was flying every day and you still deleted it surely it was flying regularly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danceyman (talk • contribs) 07:55, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Aeromexico @ PHX
Thank you for the site! And sure enough, it read ERJ. Now, you and I both know that the ERJ's are part of AM Connect's fleet...not AM mainline. I provided this link: http://phxskyharbor.innosked.com/(S(lifhpxyht3v2ni55ziuoxofv))/default.aspx

Now you can literally go on there and plug in any date and it says: Aeromexico* and the asterisk means operated by a codeshare (or regional partner i.e. AM Connect) as it says at the bottom of the page. It also reads under the "EQUIP" column: ERJ which indicates the flight is operated by AM Connect. The flight (flight #465) departs PHX @ 1:45pm daily. If you're seeing something else like Dklep7 claims, please let me know. Other than that, I don't know how to find a link that could be more clear. Thanks! ZHoover123 06:37, 15 June 2010 (UTC)