User talk:ItsAlreadyTaken123

Welcome!
Hello, ItsAlreadyTaken123, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page British Airways fleet did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to  The Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Introduction tutorial
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Introduction to referencing
 * Help pages
 * Simplified Manual of Style
 * Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need personal help ask me on my talk page, or. Again, welcome. 10mmsocket (talk) 18:21, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, but you need to read WP:RS, WP:SPS and WP:UGC. Planespotters.net is not a reliable source for wikipedia articles. Please provide a reliable source or leave the information on the page as-is. --10mmsocket (talk) 18:26, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

G-YMMU
The plane had been in Cardiff since the 31st of March for the cabin refit and is now in service currently flying to Doha, seen on Flight radar 24. ItsAlreadyTaken123 (talk) 18:29, 5 May 2023 (UTC)


 * That has nothing to do with Wikipedia if there is no reliable source that can be provide to verify that. WP:RS, WP:V. It's hard for many new editors to comprehend and accept, but the truth counts for nothing on Wikipedia. All that counts is what can be referenced. 10mmsocket (talk) 18:33, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
 * The 48/24/203 config has been completely removed from the British airways website, showing that no aircraft have the config. https://www.britishairways.com/en-gb/information/about-ba/fleet-facts/boeing-777-200 ItsAlreadyTaken123 (talk) 18:37, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Good. That's half the story. Is there anything that shows status of YMMU? 10mmsocket (talk) 21:38, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

May 2023
Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at British Airways fleet, you may be blocked from editing. ''Why do you persist in changing this when you already been in discussion about the need for references? Please stop.'' 10mmsocket (talk) 11:03, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

May 23
It’s not vandalism if I’m updating old, incorrect data. I have looked on Planespotters.net and that has said it’s been changed, Flightradar24 had shown it’s been in CWL for a month, British airways have removed the old cabin configuration from their website AND I have confirmation from a BA representative via their social media. Apart from physically viewing the cabin, how many more references do I need. ItsAlreadyTaken123 (talk) 16:27, 15 May 2023 (UTC)


 * You need verifiable references WP:V from reliable sources WP:RS. The truth counts for nothing WP:NOTTRUTH. If you can't prove it, it isn't true. Sorry but a few editors can't accept that and so end up leaving, which is a shame. 10mmsocket (talk) 17:05, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
 * So is none of the four references plausible? Even if one of them is from someone at British airways themselves and one is from their own website? ItsAlreadyTaken123 (talk) 17:09, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
 * No, either because they can't be verified, or they're unreliable (WP:RS) self-published sources / user generated content like forums - see WP:SPS and WP:UGC 10mmsocket (talk) 17:17, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
 * So how is this sort of thing able to be verified? Because in my book, two sources of information from the company themselves would be the best source? As they’re not unverified, nor self-published or a forum. ItsAlreadyTaken123 (talk) 17:21, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
 * They would have to be published online, or in a newspaper or magazine, essentially in some form that another editor or reader - any editor or reader - could check for themselves. 10mmsocket (talk) 17:23, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
 * But then its leaving incorrect data... And on the BA website people can check and verify that the config no longer exists. ItsAlreadyTaken123 (talk) 20:21, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Incorrect doesn't matter on Wikipedia. Truth doesn't matter on Wikipedia. Only what can be referenced and verified matters. 10mmsocket (talk) 21:42, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
 * But it is verified. What’s the point if it’s not correct and up-to-date. ItsAlreadyTaken123 (talk) 21:46, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
 * How is it verified? Where is the reference for that specific aircraft to show its status is not as per the existing reference? Like I say, this can be difficult for some editors to grasp. If you cannot then I suggest you just let it be and focus on something else. 10mmsocket (talk) 21:54, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
 * On the BA website, confirmed to be corrected by a BA representative! Every other reference I have provided ties in with this.
 * https://www.britishairways.com/en-gb/information/about-ba/fleet-facts/boeing-777-200 ItsAlreadyTaken123 (talk) 22:08, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Someone else used the website as a source on here so I’m not sure why when I do it it’s not a good enough source? ItsAlreadyTaken123 (talk) 13:19, 20 May 2023 (UTC)