User talk:PMG

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: 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 help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! TomStar81 (Talk) 06:49, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent contribution removed content from. Please be more careful when editing articles and do not remove content from Wikipedia without a good reason, which should be specified in the edit summary. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. LittleOldMe 15:30, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Prince of Wales
Okay, sorry about that. I see your point. I will re-instate your change. Regards LittleOldMe 15:46, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

HMS Hood page move
I'm not an administrator, so moving a page to an existing page is beyond my capabilities. However, you can request page moves here. Regards LittleOldMe 16:04, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Majac za soba kilka zlych doswiadczen z takim movami, za Little Old Me polecam WP:RM. A co do USS Tennessee (BB-43) to faktycznie jakis dziwolag, trzeba skleic. Ciekawa konstrukcja tych przyciskow swoja droga, ale faktycznie niepotrzebny wysilek.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 20:20, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Varuna
Hi, check your mail. I couldn't answer through Your pl.wiki talk page because Szwedzki has blocked me :((( Krystian 09:23, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Statki
Po prostu mergeto and mergefrom, ewentualnie wartianty.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 22:25, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Re:Tylko admin
Zrobione.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 19:49, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Re:Włoskie okręty
Nie moge go zablokowac za dyskusje na it wiki w jezyku ktorego nie rozumiem. Mozesz jasniej - z przykladami z en wiki - opisac, w czym problem?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:30, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

USS Shaw
Hello, I have posted about the image in question at Wikipedia talk:Featured pictures. Conscious 17:25, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Hampton
My mistake. I didn't realize Category:USS Hampton (SSN-767) was a subcategory of Category:Submarines. Superm401 - Talk 00:33, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Bayfield template
Template:Bayfield class attack transport - why some of them are commented (that part Cancelled in September 1945) They shuld or not to be in that template ?PMG (talk)

- Sorry, I didn't understand your meaning and the penny only just dropped. You are quite right, that was just a bunch of garbage that shouldn't have been there and I've removed it. Gatoclass (talk) 19:12, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Szablony
Skasowane. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 18:03, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Image:Sam2006.jpg
Prawdopodobnie tak. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 23:38, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Category:Polish Navy ship names
Jest.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:38, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

List of German World War II jet aces
Sure, I will gladly help anyway I can. Unfortunately I don't speak Polish. So you will have to translate for me. MisterBee1966 (talk) 15:36, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Re:Hej
WP:SK - nie kojarze odpowiednika. ACMEC - wydaja sie odpowiednie, oczywiscie kazdy moze dodawac i usuwac szablony tego typu. Techniczne pytania - jasne, ale zobacz tez WP:VPT.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 06:05, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Bohe moj, popatrzylem teraz do edit. Szablon wyglada dobrze, ale kod, mammamija, oczywiscie ktos cos pomieszal. To powinno byc tak krotkie jak tu. Jeszcze nie widzialem czegos takiego... zobacz kto to zrobil i wyslij go na kurs szablonow :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 18:24, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Kent - niezbyt... notability, albo prod z ew WP:AFD.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 19:34, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Czy ja wiem... roznie bywa, zawsze jest WP:AFD, speedy, prody itp. sa nie zawsze konsekwentne (w koncu mamy kilka tysiecy adminow...).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 19:53, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Erlanger and Boone County
You said: "BUT in source there is information that they site is Erlanger. So i don`t know: you have right or source :>."

It looks that way at first, but looks are deceiving.

Punch the address (82 Comair Blvd, Erlanger, KY) into Yahoo Maps! And that location will reveal: 1. It is NOT in Erlanger 2. It is NOT in the county that Erlanger is in.

See, the USPS has an address naming system that does NOT coincide with municipal and county boundaries. For instance there are places with Houston, TX addresses that are not in Houston. The reference is for the address of Comair; the address says "Erlanger, KY" but a map search shows that the HQ is outside of Erlanger and in Boone County. WhisperToMe (talk) 05:57, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Removing valid citations
Hi there,

While I appreciate your efforts at cleanup, please exercise caution when removing links. You recently removed an entire citation from Karen Minnis, which contained a complete citation to a newspaper article. Even though the link to the paper's web site is dead, the original article is still a valid and important citation. -Pete (talk) 23:08, 25 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Oops, that broken citation template was a separate problem, and was my fault. Fixed now. Yes, if you feel compelled to remove dead links, just removing the URL is usually acceptable.
 * However, there are times when even a dead URL may be useful. In some cases (not this one), http://archive.org may have an archive of the page; also, if there's an "accessdate" parameter in the template, it may be of some use to readers to know that the web link was active at that time (depending on context). I guess I'd suggest leaving a talk page message whenever there's doubt.
 * I guess I just don't see a whole lot of harm in dead links -- though I do agree that having a whole lot of them is sloppy. I just think it's important to be careful on removing them, to make sure that any actual valid information is preserved. Adding citations is some of the more valuable and time-consuming work that Wikipedia editors do, so past editors should often be given the benefit of the doubt. -Pete (talk) 08:19, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

-MBK004 19:26, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: USS Texas
Found some additional info on the radar system, apparently this is meant to mean the first non-prototype, non-experimental version of the radar systems adopted for use by the USN. As it happens, we have a page on the system in question, so a further link has been added and a note inserted for clarity. On the other matter, I am looking into the WWI survivor problem, but alas I am unable to handle both problems in one day, so the issue of who fought and survived WWI will have to wait. TomStar81 (Talk) 04:39, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: Kakashi
The ages given on the en.wiki article are accurate. You can see the various scans here. We sometimes have the problem of people changing ages or other pieces of character information, but they are rarely persistent enough for it to be a problem. I hope the scan proves helpful in reducing the number of times Kakashi's age is changed. ~SnapperTo 23:13, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: USS Downes (DD-45)
It seems as though you have discovered an error with DANFS since that is what each of those two articles come from. I'm unsure of which one is correct, so your best bet on how to resolve this would be to send an e-mail to the: Naval Historical Center (they would know for sure which version is correct). This is quite normal for DANFS and I believe that wikipedia editors have been successful in having corrections made. -MBK004 21:57, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: YouTube Awards
It's just a prod, if you disagree with it you can remove it (with an explanation in the edit summary). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 19:42, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Plan 9 Publishing article nominated for deletion
The Plan 9 Publishing article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy. It was nominated for deletion by Guest9999 on 30 October. Because you have edited the article, I am bringing the matter to your attention in case you would like to either comment or improve the article to address the criticisms made of it. Please share your thoughts on the matter at this article's entry on the Articles for deletion page. Netmouse (talk) 17:14, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
— Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  22:01, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVIII (February 2010)
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:38, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIX (March 2010)
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:20, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : L (April 2010)
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:35, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LI (May 2010)
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:24, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LII (June 2010)
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:39, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LIII (July 2010)
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:51, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Re: FT
Generally, an episode article is written if there is enough written on said episode to justify writing the article. For some TV shows, it may only be a handful of episodes, whereas with others, such as the Simpsons, every episode could easily be made into a GA. Wizardman  Operation Big Bear 21:44, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'm pretty much the person that runs them at this point. Wizardman  Operation Big Bear 00:42, 15 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Responding to the Star Ward note, that's being discussed for removal. I imagine the consensus would be quite obvious, so it will be delisted as soon as I get around to it. Wizardman  Operation Big Bear 05:20, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Signpost delivery on another wiki
Hi PMG, I happened to stumble over this question that you asked in 2008 - whether it is possible to subscribe to the Signpost on another wiki. Some months ago we actually set up such a service; if you are still interested you can sign up at Global message delivery/Targets/Signpost and get each new issue delivered to your user talk page on plwiki. Regards, HaeB (talk) 04:34, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference
Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to  in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being minor in the usual way.

For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. With the script in place, you can continue with this functionality indefinitely (its use is governed by WP:MINOR). If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 18:18, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

U-64
Hey PMG, I know little to nothing about U-boats and have no sources on them. I would try User:Sturmvogel 66, but otherwise, I don't know how much we have here. User:Bellhalla was the expert, but he's been gone for quite some time. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:15, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Chicago Schools
Thank you very much!

WhisperToMe (talk) 03:58, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for notifying me :) WhisperToMe (talk) 22:35, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

RE: Battlecruisers of Japan
It is my intention to eventually take the topic for FC, but at this point 50% of the articles are required to be featured, and currently only 30% are. Even with the old 1/3 rule I'd still need one more FA. I've been on an on/off wikibreak for the past five months (what with real life getting in the way and all that), but I'm hoping to take hopefully one (if not both) of the necessary articles through an FAC before the end of 2011. Cam (Chat)(Prof) 16:27, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Re: 1948 Summer Olympics Medal Table
Hi there,

Essentially the Olympic Committee of Israel has existed since 1933, when it was the National Olympic Committee (NOC) of British Palestine; however in 1948 with the emergence of the modern Israel the Arabic countries threatened to boycott the Olympics should Israel be allowed to participate and fly their flag at the opening ceremony rather than the flag of Palestine. So the technicality used was that since Israel was a new country, the old NOC wasn't recognized and therefore Israel had no NOC and couldn't participate. However, by the 1952 games, the same NOC was recognized once again and Israel was allowed to participate. Miyagawa  (talk)  17:27, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Re: Alaska topic
While the infoboxes should be fixed per your note, I don't see it as a hindrance to the topic being promoted. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 02:47, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

re: Problem on pl
for topics, any related articles would have to be good articles; simply leaving an article off because it's not at that level defeats the purpose. That being said, I don't know if plwiki has a featured list process, so where the article is now I don't know if it could be added in. It looks like more of a judgment call situation to me honestly. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 02:44, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

8"/55 caliber gun
Do you have specification data for this weapon, or was your change in response to an assumed 8 inch diameter?

United States Navy practice specified bourrelet diameter at 0.015 inch less than nominal bore diameter with a minus manufacturing tolerance such that the average maximum diameter of an 8-inch projectile (neglecting the malleable copper rotating band) was expected to be 7.988 inches. Rotating band diameter was a few thousandths of an inch greater than the groove-to-groove diameter of rifling depth typically up to one percent of caliber, and might have been as great as 8.18 inches. Bore diameters were measured land-to-land with positive manufacturing tolerances. Erosion was expected to increase that diameter over the life of the gun; but no effect on dispersion was anticipated until bore diameter exceeded 8.038 inches. Concern was greater about possible reduction of bore diameter. Copper deposits from rotating bands were common, but of less concern than the possibility of bore constriction caused by hoop slippage past a shoulder during relative movement of the elements of a built-up gun. The thermal expansion coefficient of steel limits the accuracy of 4-digit figures to a temperature range of 6 Celsius degrees and the above variation make 3-digit figures questionable. I suggest 20 centimeters may be a reasonable conversion unless you have specific information on this weapon.Thewellman (talk) 00:25, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I didn't wish to be argumentative. I was simply responding to your request that I change values I consider to be correct. I am a licensed engineer with 50 years experience converting between metric and United States customary units. I was a weapons officer aboard a heavy cruiser and taught a naval weapons course for the United States Navy at the University of Illinois. My first concern is with the number of decimal places in the official weapon description. The subject of this article was an 8-inch gun, rather than an 8.0-inch gun or an 8.00-inch gun. I believe the ideal conversion would be a 2-decimetre gun, but that might puzzle some readers. Manufacturing specifications provided more decimal places, but this article doesn't cover that level of detail. If an editor wished to provide such information, it would be appropriate to identify which of the various dimensions was being specified and what the manufacturing tolerances were for that dimension. In the absence of such specificity, untrained editors and readers tend to use too many decimal places in metric conversions. I encourage you to provide in-line reference citations if you change the values you mentioned.Thewellman (talk) 18:03, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * It is I who should apologize to you because I cannot communicate in Polish as well as you communicate in English. I have been unable to explain the difference between 8 inches (2 decimetres) and 8.00 inches (203 millimetres). It is precision rather than distance.Thewellman (talk) 18:55, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

 * Hi! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission.  I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
 * The Teahouse new editor help space
 * Wikipedia Help pages
 * -- 19:54, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:20, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

review of Draft:Jan Malkiewicz
First, don't bother with drafts, they are a trap for newbies. That said, I would concur they are not notable, because IMHO consuls general are not a position that grants automatic notability, and there's nothing else that suggests meeting WP:NBIO. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 06:32, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 28 November 2023 (UTC)