User talk:Logawi

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;. Four tildes (&#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --JYolkowski // talk 21:16, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * Merging, redirecting, and renaming pages
 * If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Topical index.

Airships category
The correct form according to the wikipedia style is Airships of the United Kingdom. If you don't change it, someone will likely flag it up for deletion or renaming. GraemeLeggett 15:36, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Your comment on vandalism
Hi Willy! Whenever you see an article that complete nonsense, like Count poopula was, just it. That code will alert Wikipedia sysops that the article is chopping block material, and we can do away with it. Chow! -- user:zanimum

Arthur Miller
Are you an Arthur Miller enthusiast or is your name really William Logan. Also, what year are you in your ME degree? BA, MA, PHd? Also, where do you attend school?--Gephart 02:28, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Welcome to the SDA Project
Hi! Welcome to WikiProject Seventh-day Adventist Church. If there is any area that you feel you can improve on, feel free. Of particular emphasis at the moment is History of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, if you happen to know much about it. Happy wikiediting! MyNameIsNotBob 04:32, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

response to your comment about Surviving P-59's
I put that there. The reason I didn't add others is because I didn't know of others. I am certainly not saying that this is the most important museum that has a P-59, in fact, I intended for the list to be expanded by other editors. If you know of other locations, please add them. There aren't that many aerospace museums around that you couldn't just list all of them that have a P-59. That way if someone reads this article, they might find a place nearby where they can see one. --Rogerd 21:46, 29 November 2005 (UTC)


 * That makes sense. I'll add a few others I've encountered or heard about. Logawi 00:22, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Seventh-day Adventist Church
Hi! I have been working very hard of late on the Adventist Church article and as such have posted it for peer review here Peer review/Seventh-day Adventist Church/archive2. One of the problems with the article that has been raised is the lack of flow in the Outsider Criticisms section. Unfortunately this is something that I am not particularly good at editing. Would you be able to lend a hand on this? Please let us know your thoughts on my talk page. Thanks. MyNameIsNotBob 21:21, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Re: Inline text specifications
I converted it to inline because that's the WP:Air standard and has been for almost a year now. All that's been left out is the fuel capacities, which aren't exactly relevant to the average reader and are somewhat redundant next to range anyway. There are a half-dozen or more reasons why infoboxes are undesirable, both in terms of editability and reader accessibility, not to mention support for mobile devices or screenreaders. Sorry if it was a shock to see a pet article altered like that, but we're trying to standardize. ericg &#9992; 16:40, 22 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I wasn't aware of the discussion at WP:Air. You actually left out more specifications than just fuel capacities (including prop rpm and stalling speed). Some of those would be of interest to the average reader (although I agree that fuel capacities may not). Logawi 18:53, 22 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Hm, yeah, I'd forgotten about those. Prop RPM is not particularly relevant (it's not as if someone's going to go up and fly these aircraft, so they don't need to know them), nor is stall speed. We debated back and forth on stall speed for a while, and I felt it was sometimes worthy of inclusion, but I only see the benefit of listing them during discussion of STOL-type aircraft. I'm not watching this page, so maybe drop me a brief notice when you reply next. ericg &#9992; 01:06, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Image:Willy-luscombe-small.jpg
Please relicense this image, or it will be deleted soon --Admrboltz (T | C) 06:59, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Featured Picture
Congratulations, and thankyou for nominating it. Raven4x4x 03:39, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for nominating it. I was hoping for it to be featured picture one way or another (it failed the nomination at the Commons), and thanks to you it now is. --65.95.201.142 04:04, 31 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Glad to be of service. Logawi 04:35, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Kc-97 engines.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Kc-97 engines.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use GFDL to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Longhair 10:51, 4 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I fixed it. Logawi 01:41, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Lockheed XP-49 model number
In the ol' List of Lockheed aircraft, the XP-49 is listed twice, once as the L-522 (also stated in the article) and again as the L-23. Was L-23 chosen as the production designator, while L-522 was the prototype? That's consistent with some other aircraft, but I'm not about to make an uncertain edit like that. ericg &#9992; 18:38, 2 March 2006 (UTC)


 * The USAF Museum lists the XP-49 as the L-222. This is a nightmare! And of course, where does the XP-58 fit in all of this? ericg &#9992; 18:41, 2 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Hmm...I have conflicting sources, too.


 * Lockheed, by Bill Yenne: The XP-49 was Model 522.


 * Beyond the Horizons: The Lockheed Story, by Walter J. Boyne: The XP-49 was Model 23. I think it's reasonable to assume what you said above: the Model 23 was the production version (which, of course, never occurred); the Model 522 was the prototype. I guess I'll keep the XP-49 at 552 and add a see Model 522 above note for Model 23.


 * The Royal Air Force Museum Aircraft Thesaurus puts the XP-49 as Model 522, as well.


 * The XP-49 was most certainly not Model 222. The P-38 production versions through P-38G were designated Model 222 (according to Bill Yenne's Lockheed). The USAFM must have gotten its facts wrong. (Is it possible?)


 * Now, the XP-58 is another matter entirely.


 * Beyond the Horizons places it under Model 22.


 * Lockheed says the XP-58 was Model 20. Beyond the Horizons says that Model 20 was, like Model 19, an unbuilt derivative of the Model 14.


 * I'm going to put the XP-58 on the list as Model 22 (italicized), until we can figure out what number actually belonged to it. Logawi 23:49, 2 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Sounds like a plan. The only reference I've got with me at school is Jane's Fighting Aircraft of World War II, a modern combination of the wartime Jane's editions. It's lacking specifics on a lot of things, and just plain missing aircraft in other cases, so it's not a particularly useful book for this type of list. ericg &#9992; 22:59, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Graham Maxwell
Hi! I am enlisting your help as one of the people listed on WikiProject_Seventh-day_Adventist_Church. The Seventh-day Adventist Church page has recently come under a protection order after an edit war to do with the theology of Graham Maxwell. As an upshot of this war, two users have been blocked. I personally do not understand the issue relating to Graham Maxwell, and as such would like your comments, regardless of whether you know much about the issue or not, on Talk:Seventh-day Adventist Church. I apologise for the mess of the talk page, it has been a very involved debate. Thanking you in advance, -Fermion 06:06, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

P-80 specs
First of, I apologize about nixing your table. Yes, the move to the template is an effort to standardize the look across all aircraft pages. Not surprisingly, any effort at standardization will be thwarted by one-offs. The general consensus on aircraft specs is that the main page should present specs for the most common or the most representative version (P-80A in this case). The differences between variants should be delineated in the description of the variants. In situations where the variants were dramatically different (e.g. Allison vs Merlin-engined Mustangs or Merlin vs Griffon-engined Spitfires, or XP-80 vs P-80 in this case), your best bet is to create a separate page, like Comparison of P-80 variants where you can present the tables and describe the variants in all the gory detail. The logic behind this is that the main page should give an overview of the aircraft (e.g. someone unfamiliar with the Spitfire would see the specs for a "typical" Spitfire, like Mk Vb). The reader seeking more in-depth information can go into the subpages. Another advantage of this is that it permits to present exhaustive information (e.g. all units using the aircraft, detailed description of the variants, etc.) without creating a monstrously big page. As always, these are only suggestions. You are encouraged to use the same formatting and wikilinks as the specs template output but I doubt that there will ever be a strong drive to standardize the sub-pages since their whole purpose is to expand beyond the standard framework. :) Let me know if you have other questions! - Emt147 Burninate!  23:44, 12 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I'll make another page. Logawi 02:25, 13 March 2006 (UTC)


 * That looks great! Thanks for being understanding. :) - Emt147 Burninate!  03:09, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Infobox
There is a consensus discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aircraft on adopting a non-specifications summary infobox for aircraft articles. Your comments would be appreciated. Thanks! - Emt147 Burninate!  18:44, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Image:Wright-flyer-smithsonian.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Wright-flyer-smithsonian.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add , without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Angr 19:05, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Zeppelin Museum renaming
I renamed the article to be Zeppelin Museum Friedrichshafen because there is more than one Zeppelin Museum. Frankyboy5 05:43, 1 January 2007 (UTC)


 * That's reasonable. (Do you know anything about the Zeppelin Museums in Meersburg and Zeppelinheim?) Logawi 15:35, 1 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi. On http://www.neu-isenburg.de and on http://www.zeppelin-museum-zeppelinheim.de you can find informations about the Zeppelinmuseum in Zeppelinheim/Neu-Isenburg. If you want, you can also write an article about this museum for the german wikipedia. If you don't want to, I can do it also. --NetCuRLi 21:12, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Wind tunnel article re-write
I'm planning a fairly major re-write of the Wind tunnel article. Since you've also expressed interest in editing that article, please look over my outline in the talk section and let me know what you think of the proposed structure. Thanks! Jeff220 12:26, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Boulder
Jimbo Herndan here. I am interested in starting a Wiki-Project on Boulder, and was wondering if you would like to add your name to the list of interested users. It is [here|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals#Boulder.2C_Colorado] Thanks- --Jimbo Herndan 02:34, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Aviation Newsletter delivery
The March 2007 issue of the Aviation WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 17:38, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Lockheed bribery scandals
Per your comments on the original Talk:Lockheed scandal page, you might want to check out Lockheed bribery scandals. It's a lot more comprehensive now than the old page, and I believe it addresses your concerns. If not, let us know ont he talk page, and we'll try to address them. Thanks. - BillCJ 03:19, 12 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Much better. Good work. Logawi 19:09, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Journal-of-a-novel cover-small.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Journal-of-a-novel cover-small.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 23:08, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Oklahoma Newsletter October 07
This newsletter was delivered to you by Okiefromokla. This is a one-time delivery as to all Wikiproject Oklahoma members to boost interest in the newsletter. In the future, if you would like to receive this newsletter in your talk page, please insert your name in the sign-up list. Thanks!

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Journal-of-a-novel cover-small.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Journal-of-a-novel cover-small.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 01:57, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Omniplex-logo.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:Omniplex-logo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:25, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Wings-over-the-rockies logo.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Wings-over-the-rockies logo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 03:18, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Photographs by User:Willy Logan
Category:Photographs by User:Willy Logan, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you.

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Casablanca Electra-nose.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Casablanca Electra-nose.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:37, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

An exciting opportunity to get involved!
As a member of the Aviation WikiProject or one of its subprojects, you may be interested in testing your skills in the Aviation Contest! I created this contest, not to pit editor against editor, but to promote article improvement and project participation and camraderie. Hopefully you will agree with its usefulness. Sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here. The first round of the contest may not start until September 1st-unless a large number of editors signup and are ready to compete immediately! Since this contest is just beginning, please give feedback here, or let me know what you think on my talkpage. -  Trevor  MacInnis   contribs  06:06, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:Kelly-Johnson U-2.jpg
File:Kelly-Johnson U-2.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Kelly-Johnson U-2.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case:. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 22:56, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

WIKIPROJECT OKLAHOMA
-- Steam   Iron  22:36, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Colorado
The year 2011 has brought many changes to the State of Colorado. Several users have asked us to reactivate WikiProject Colorado. We have a new Governor and other state officers, two new U.S. Representatives, many new state legislators, and a new Mayor of Denver. Many articles about Colorado need to be updated and many Colorado places, people, and organizations need new articles. Portal:Colorado needs some new featured articles.

Can you help us? Please see our list of some requested articles. If you would like to remain an active member of WikiProject Colorado, please leave me a message at User talk:Buaidh or e-mail me at Special:EmailUser/Buaidh. If you cannot help right now, you can go to inactive status and then reactivate your status later. Thanks for any help you can provide. Yours aye, Buaidh  17:54, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Colorado Wiknic
All Wikipedians are cordially invited to the Colorado celebration of the 2011 Great American Wiknic on June 25. We will meet Saturday afternoon from 3:00 to 5:00 at the D Note, 7519 Grandview Avenue in Arvada. Please e-mail Jacques Delaguerre at Special:EmailUser/Jaxdelaguerre if you plan to attend. Be there or be square! – Buaidh  00:57, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Comparison of P-80 variants


The article Comparison of P-80 variants has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Doesnt not really add any value, it is a comparison between the prototype and the first production aircraft which is not really notable.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. MilborneOne (talk) 16:18, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of The Express Line


The article The Express Line has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * can find no RS to support the notability of this play

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jezhotwells (talk) 12:34, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Suggestion for WikiProject United States to support WikiProject Colorado
It was recently suggested that WikiProject Colorado, to which you are a member, may be inactive or semi-active and it might be beneficial to include it in the list of projects supported by WikiProject United States. After reviewing the project it appears that there haven't been much active discussion on the talk page in some time and the only content updates appear to be simple maintenance so being supported by a larger project might be beneficial. I have begun a discussion on the projects talk page to see how the members of the project feel about this suggestion. Another user has added the project to the WPUS template and I added it to the list of supported projects in the WPUS main project page but before I take any further action I wanted to contact each of the active members for their input. --Kumioko (talk) 23:54, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Windecker-model WL.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Windecker-model WL.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 01:11, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:07, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Willy-luscombe-small.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Willy-luscombe-small.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. Cloudbound (talk) 21:35, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Please claim your upload(s): File:Elissa-foremast WL.jpg
Hi, This media was seemingly uploaded prior to current image polices,

However, due to changes in the copyright situation in some jurisdictions, there is a need to ensure media on English Wikipedia is correctly licensed and attributed. It would be appreciated if you were able to confirm that it was your own work, by marking it as own, Fully completeing the information block, and leaving an acknowledgement on the file description page to indicate that you've accepted the license shown (and updated the information accordingly. If you have other uploads, please consider "claiming" them in a similar manner, You can find a list of files you have created [ here].

If you don't want to keep your media on English Wikipedia, please nominate it for deletion under Criteria G7 of the Criteria for Speedy deletion

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 12:59, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Marti Sarigul-Klijn


The article Marti Sarigul-Klijn has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Nothing found here or on a search that would establish notability, essentially all the coverage is passing mentions"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Eddie891 Talk Work 00:10, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Category:Test pilots has been nominated for renaming
Category:Test pilots has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:20, 17 September 2022 (UTC)