User talk:Independent2011

Welcome!

 * }

January 2011
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Navalised Eurofighter has been reverted. Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. I removed the following link(s): http://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-181237.html. If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 11:08, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Navalised Eurofighter do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. I removed the following link(s): http://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-181237.html. If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 11:33, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Navalised Eurofighter. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. I removed the following link(s): http://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-181237.html, http://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-181237.html, http://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-181237.html. If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 11:46, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

References etc. in Navalised Eurofighter
Please see wp:CITE for how to make a reference. Also please note that it is unnecessary to have EUROFIGHTER in capitals all throught the article. Please see the Manual of style for further information about normal Wikipedia text layout. - 220.101 User talk:220.101.28.25\ 10:52, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Navalised Eurofighter for deletion
The article Navalised Eurofighter is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Navalised Eurofighter until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. The Bushranger One ping only 16:19, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

February 2011
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. Kudpung 13:33, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 15:33, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

February 2016
Hello, I'm Chesnaught555. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to River-class patrol vessel— because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Ches (talk) 15:17, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

QE class
Hi, I was just looking at the significant addition you added to the "Design studies" section and thought perhaps you might consider spinning off some of that content from what is getting to be a lengthy article, to the Aircraft Carrier Alliance stub. Just a suggestion, not a criticism. Cheers - the WOLF  child  05:30, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Adding a link to ACA wasn't what I was suggesting. It's already linked in 2 other section. Now it's just wp:overlinking and likely to be removed. But, thanks anyway. - the WOLF  child  18:01, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Reply to Wolfchild re QE Class Carrier Article
Hi,

The bits I added are relatively short (basically referencing out to 4 x key RINA papers) and are key background to the origins and design of the ships (most of which pre-dates formation of the Aircraft Carrier Alliance).

I agree though, the article is too long. It contains a lot of legacy stuff that is no longer of any particular relevance, and needs rationalised. The bits that should be pruned back are the 'Strategic Defence Review’, ‘Capability Requirements & Ship Size’, and ‘Aircraft and carrier format selection’ sections. Some of the block quotes certainly should go. Much of 'Construction' could be decanted into the Aircraft Carrier Alliance article, with a link being added beneath the 'Construction' heading.

However, I don’t want to delete and chop & change other people's previous words without general consensus on this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Independent2011 (talk • contribs) 07:27, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * You can post this proposal on the article talk and see what other's have to say. - the WOLF  child  19:19, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

File:Successor CGI.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Successor CGI.jpg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Majora (talk) 19:03, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Reply on Successor CGI.jpg listed for discussion
Hi. The CGI image is UK Crown Copyright.

The UK National Archives manages UK Crown Copyright -  see Link to National Archives Page. This states that the default for Crown copyright is the Open Government Licence (OGL).

The following further UK National Archives Page states the terms under which such UK OGL material can be used. The main requirement is stating the source, which I have done in the proposed use of the image on the 'Dreadnought' class page.

This image has been widely published in the UK Press on this basis -  for example, see  FT article,  Daily Telegraph article,  Daily Mirror Article.

Furthermore it is one of the few official images published by the UK government for this £30bn+ submarine programme. Basic principles of Public Interest means that it would be hard for the UK government to argue that this image can't be used.

On this basis, I think it is OK for Wikipedia to use the image. Independent2011 (talk) 19:49, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:OPVinfographic.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:OPVinfographic.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F6 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

ATTENTION : This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:03, 5 August 2018 (UTC)