User talk:Huntster/Archive 24

CAP/Member Owned Aircraft
With regards to your revert, I agree with removing if for no other reason then such calls to regulations should be cited, but I have a question regarding your personal experience on this. If I remember correctly, you are no longer active in CAP. How long as that been true? Some of the different attitudes regarding member owned aircraft have come in somewhat recently. For example, when I joined as a cadet in the late 1990s, I often did o-flights in member owned aircraft in addition to CAP aircraft. Both would be present at fly days to increase the amount of airtime available for cadets. Over at least the last half decade to decade, use of member owned aircraft has become virtually impossible to request, at least in my neck of the woods. Now, o-flight days here are corporate aircraft only. --OuroborosCobra (talk) 22:50, 8 January 2012 (UTC)


 * It's certainly been a while, though I believe two of the local squadrons regularly use member aircraft. It may be they just aren't following the national game plan, though. — Huntster (t @ c) 23:03, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Ched
Ched is walking around his neighborhood in his underwear again...he said something about Man on a Ledge. You're the only one he will listen to. Good Luck!```Buster Seven   Talk  06:19, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

DYK for MV Delta Mariner
Rschen7754 01:38, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Archives
Hey .. are you familiar with any of those talk page automatic archives tools/bots? ... IIRC you helped me set one up years ago for some article talk page thing - but I wasn't sure where. — Ched : ?  01:41, 10 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Oh .. and congrats on the DYK. — Ched : ?  01:43, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

I thank you sir. Yes, that's exactly what I was looking for. Basically I want something to archive any thread that hasn't been posted to for like maybe 3 or 5 days to a monthly archive of my talk. I'll read up on it. — Ched : ?  11:04, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

MSU Interview
Dear Huntster,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:
 * Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
 * Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
 * All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
 * All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
 * The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 07:00, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion
An important project WP:WEaPOn (about Paid Operatives) I have initiated is up for speedy. Can you assist? I want to play by the rules but they seem stacked against an honest effort to record a history of an event as it happens. Urgent. TY. ```Buster Seven   Talk  06:29, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Email....
So I just emailed you at the only email address I have of yours, an ancient Yahoo account. You still use this? Please do forward me the one you actually use if this isn't right. My email address is my first initial, last name (all one word, of course), at gmail. nf utvol (talk) 00:22, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

User:69.245.39.156
Looks like this guy comes around once a month or so and does a lot of disruptive edits. I see you already reverted some of his things on the Nashville page, and Snoozlepet knocked out some on the BNA page. Edited BNA saying Delta Connection was now flying to Paris from BNA. Right. They seem to particularly enjoy doing this, as they were warned about it back in November. nf utvol (talk) 16:36, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Looks like this user created this account, User_talk:Bennettdevlin98, which was subsequently blocked, and now they may be back as the user you just reverted on the Nashville page, User_talk:Emma_mary_devlinemma_devlin. I popped a message up on their talk page gently warning them of sockpuppetry, but an eye should be kept on their account. If it turns out to be the same person, an IP ban may be in order. nf utvol (talk) 20:12, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Evanescence at Nobel Peace Prize.jpg
Hola. I've started a discussion with Armando12 on his about the copyright status of the image he uploaded. It seems as though he's really trying to get this image "legal" for use on Wikipedia but going about it the wrong way. I'm not sure if you know the rules and policies about this any better than my quick search resulted in, but if you could give me a hand with the discussion to see if we're going about this in the right way, I'd appreciate it. Thanks! =D  ~ [ Scott M. Howard  ] ~ [  Talk  ]:[  Contribs  ] ~  01:48, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Template:ISSIB
I think this new template may be of interest to you. If you wish to respond, please use my talkpage, thanks Huntster ! Penyulap  ☏  06:12, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

DMY in Genisis I & II articles
I converted the dates to DMY, because the majority (very large majority) of space articles are in DMY. If you check all Space Shuttle, International Space Station, and ISS Expedition articles, that are all in DMY. Since these are space stations, it should follow the date format of other space stations, and they are all in DMY.-- Navy Blue84  01:12, 6 April 2012 (UTC)


 * And where is it specified that it should be this way? Last time I checked, consensus indicated that dates should be set based on region, not based on the preferences of individual projects. — Huntster (t @ c) 01:16, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Well here is my interpretation of the two rules that apply in this situation;


 * Articles on topics with strong ties to a particular English-speaking country should generally use the more common date format for that country (month-day for the US, except in military usage; day-month for most others; articles related to Canada may use either consistently). - Most space agencies are considered military, and therefore DMY is correct (ie. MIR is Russian, so DMY is used).


 * Otherwise, do not change an article from one form to another without good reason. - Pretty much all articles had both DMY and MDY when I joined. So I picked one (DMY) and started fixing articles for consistency.


 * Under section 2.4.1.1 of the MOS it reads Dates in article body text should all have the same format: - I was just trying to follow the MOS.-- Navy Blue84  11:47, 6 April 2012 (UTC)


 * I understand you were just trying to follow MOS, but I think your interpretation was incorrect, especially the part of space agencies being considered military. Neither NASA, ESA, RKA, ISRO nor JAXA are in the military chain, and I don't think even the Chinese space agency is technically military. Bigelow is a U.S.-based private company. See where I'm going with this? U.S. space articles, except those which are military programs, should be MDY. — Huntster (t @ c) 19:59, 6 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Ok, but since the other articles are already in DMY, they should not be changed. Unnecessary date changes should be avoided. Plus, I don't think you will find much support to go changing all the dates from DMY to MDY. There hasn't been any objections to the changes until now.-- Navy Blue84  23:48, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Your HighBeam account is ready!
Good news! You now have access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research. Here's what you need to know: Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasit &#124; c 20:45, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Your account activation code has been emailed to your Wikipedia email address.
 * Only 407 of 444 codes were successfully delivered; most failed because email was simply not set up (You can set it in Special:Preferences).
 * If you did not receive a code but were on the approved list, add your name to this section and we'll try again.
 * The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code.
 * To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1; 2) You’ll see the first page of a two-page registration. 3) Put in an email address and set up a password. (Use a different email address if you signed up for a free trial previously); 4) Click “Continue” to reach the second page of registration; 5) Input your basic information; 6) Input the activation code; 7) Click “Finish”. Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive.
 * If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi.  Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
 * A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate
 * HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
 * Show off your HighBeam access by placing on your userpage
 * When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

IMO number
Hi. Thanks for fixing the cut and paste move of IMO ship identification number → IMO number. Would you restore this, one of the revisions that you deleted G6? If one examines (it should work after the restore), User:Dandv changed a few sentences to fit the more general title. Flatscan (talk) 04:29, 28 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Sure, I'll take care of it when I get home. This is, of course, yet another reason why copy and pasting is a bad thing! — Huntster (t @ c) 04:57, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

WP:WikiProject Stargate
I propose a conversion of this Project into a task force. You may improve a consensus by clicking WT:WikiProject Stargate and discussing a proposal. --George Ho (talk) 17:17, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Pennant numbers in ledes
You reverted a series of my edits to re-insert a ship's pennant number into the lede (eg here). This directly contradicts WikiProject_Ships/Guidelines. Since I pasted the link into the edit summary, I assume you actually bothered to read it. There is very little ambiguity, since the section header is "introductory sentence", but since you have mis-interpreted it, allow me to signpost you also to WP:BEGINNING, which talks in general about lede paragraphs and says "Similarly, if the title has a parenthetical disambiguator, the disambiguator should be omitted in the text". Don't bother replying - every time I turn my computer on I get a new IP address, and I'll never see your response. 212.139.253.62 (talk) 21:35, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Handling an issue...
Heya...got a question. How do you normally handle users who, while they try to make productive good faith edits, continually make edits that fly in the face of the style of the article and do not make useful citations, but just get defensive when you ask them to do such things (and continue to make edits that eventually start to detract from an article due to the lack of proper verifiable citations)? There's been a bit of a, ahem, discussion over on the Nashville International Airport page about this... Feel free to chime in if you have anything to add. :) nf utvol (talk) 03:48, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Hi Huntster. Wonder if you might take a look at a photo request and see if something might be done. Cheers. N2e N2e (talk) 04:01, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

hey ...
OK ... I need some advice and someone to talk to. Would you have time to exchange a few emails over the next few days? Chedzilla (talk) 04:36, 12 July 2012 (UTC)


 * You know it. You've got my email, so fire away at your convenience. Forgive me in advance if I'm slightly tardy with responses, though. — Huntster (t @ c) 09:09, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * For that matter, I'm pretty sure you have my phone number, so you're welcome to use that as well. — Huntster (t @ c) 09:09, 12 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I promise .. I'll explain. Chedzilla (talk) 21:22, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Allure and Oasis
Hi. While you're working on the articles about Allure of the Seas and Oasis of the Seas, could you move the inline citations from the infobox to the article body whenever it is possible (e.g. general characteristics)? There's no need to cite them in both places as it would make the infobox look clogged. Thanks. Tupsumato (talk) 05:12, 20 July 2012 (UTC)


 * While I do plan on replicating all infobox material in the article body when I have time, I see no reason to not source the infobox material as well. It's just as important to do so there, as it makes any inappropriate changes made in the infobox more transparent (vandals love to hit an infobox for just this reason, in my experience), and I also believe all pieces of information need to be backed up, no matter where they are placed. I also do not see a clogging occur, especially since I limit to a single citation per data point. That said, I can examine methods to minimise any such clutter, since greater efficiency can always be found. — Huntster (t @ c) 06:34, 20 July 2012 (UTC)


 * According to the guidelines of WP:SHIPS and consensus stemming from past discussions (e.g. here), the ship infobox should generally be treated like the lead section of the article for purposes of citation. This means that, by default, information cited elsewhere in the article should not be cited again within the infobox. It's okay to keep the citations in the infobox until you finish adding the information to the article body, but after that duplicate citations should be purged.Also, on a completely unrelated note, I think you should check some of the terms you've used in the infobox (like "max moulded") and perhaps weigh different sources — personally I consider a classification society database to be a more reliable source for information than the company website which might have been made by someone not intimately familiar with the ship in question (or even ships in general).Anyway, keep up the good work. The quality of cruise ship articles varies considerably and is generally weighed towards "not very good at all", so it's nice that someone is, for once, improving them. Tupsumato (talk) 07:47, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

possibly need some assistance
The user "Veriditas" seems to have begun following my comments on the 2012 Aurora Shooting article Talk Page, inserting some sort of personal ... vendetta? ... into other sections of the TP that are not discussing his gun-control agenda, and also constantly leaving TP-discussion comments on my (almost unused) User Page TP - which I delete immediately w/o comment, as the editor seems to be assuming a level of Wiki admin-like authority that he does not have. I'm asking that you have a look, and perhaps nudge him to keep the comments impersonal, and within the proper section of that article's TP. I've not had any interaction with him before. He seems to be a bit testy. :-)  Thanks. HammerFilmFan (talk) 23:17, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I think you are mad because he has given you advice. United States Man (talk) 23:51, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * No, I don't let Wiki get under my skin. :-) I would like the personal asides to stop on that article's TP, and to focus on the discussion of the information itself.HammerFilmFan (talk) 01:44, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Huntster, a simple look at all of his reverting lately will show that something sure is under his skin. United States Man (talk) 01:48, 31 July 2012 (UTC)