User talk:Schalkcity

Volkswagen Commercial Vehicles
There isnt such car as Volkswagen Commercial Vehicles Transporter it is Volkswagen Transporter, so it is not a brand or marque, its division or company of Volkswagen which makes Volkswagen commercial vehicles --Typ932 T&middot;C 19:19, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * But its meant only for real brands, there isnt Fiat Professional either which is "brand" which makes Fiat commercial vehicles, Ill bet there is lots of more those.. --Typ932 T&middot;C 19:30, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The intro says "along with the marques produced by each one" --Typ932 T&middot;C 19:34, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * "Produced by each one" means vehicle brands made by Volkswagen.. there is difference in brand and "brand" here is meant car brand not company brand every car has for example brand and model like brand=Ferrari model=Testarossa --Typ932 T&middot;C 19:48, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

DaimlerChrysler
The company has not officially made a move to change its legal name from DaimlerChrysler AG to Daimler AG. The edit is correct, since just because Chrysler was jettisoned didn't mean stockholders had the opportunity to congregate and meet on a name change immediately. The name change will occur when the stockholders approve it, but right now it's still DaimlerChrysler. KansasCity 00:01, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Volkswagen and Porsche
The acquisition of Porsche AG by Volkswagen will not be completed for almost two years. In the meantime, it's Porsche Automobil Holding SE that owns the majority of both Porsche AG and Volkswagen AG, so it should be listed in the table of manufacturers instead of Volkswagen. Tomh009 (talk) 16:42, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Volkswagen will acquire Porsche's car business from the holding company that wholly owns it. VW won't acquire the company that majority owns it. In other words, VW will acquire Porsche AG from Porsche SE. 70.91.143.209 (talk) 22:23, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

OICA
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that any information could be attached to any article whit constant subject. The word "article" that wiki use, have an abstract meaning. The subject is aboat whole world car industry. If you undo my edition again I will change the subject of article into "Automotive industry by OICA report" --Fantasizer Wiki (talk) 21:29, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * However, the article about the global automotive industry is based on information provided by OICA. Since OICA is an international independent source and organization, this article will use the OICA information. Send your complains to OICA if you do not agree with their list. Schalkcity (talk) 21:38, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

The problem is not the OICA report. Wikipedia is an free encyclopedia that collect information from different sources to project a better information. You restricting the article by your personal desire. --Fantasizer Wiki (talk) 23:58, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

KLM @ Khartoum
KL do fly to KRT; Flight 545/6 operated 3 weekly AMS-KRT-ADD and back. Jasepl (talk) 14:19, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Automotive industry
Every country has its own automotive industry, should we include every nation on earth in this article? That would make it too long. The History of the automotive industry should be about the industry as a whole, and the history of each country's automotive industry should by at Automotive industry by country. Viddea9 (talk) 14:31, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Hong Kong/KLM
This matter was discuss at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Airlines but it was decided that Hong Kong is to be listed as a independent county from PRC. It has different rules, pllicies, and it has its own flag. Which is different from PRC. While i am against this but 2 or 3 editors replied so far and said that HK was to be listed as a separate county. If you feel that HK needs to be listed under PRC, you may join in on thte discussion. Thanks! Snoozlepet (talk) 05:51, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

KLM/Chinas, the

 * Schalkcity, I know PRC, Taiwan (Republic of China) And Hong Kong are seprate places but there is nothing wrong in listing the Chinas as China, People's Republic of, and China, Republic of (Taiwan) infact its been approved, then why are you undoing this at KLM destinations?221.120.250.70 (talk) 00:00, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
 * So what's wrong with People's Republic of China and Republic of China (Taiwan)? Schalkcity (talk) 13:01, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Country name should come first to maintain alphabetical order.inspector 14:39, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Next station boxes e.g. Deventer railway station
Hi

Just to let you know, I've just started changing all these boxes to the format that I had put in place. Thanks

Chris0693 (talk) 11:44, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

SWF totals
->Yeah I added the Hong Kong - China on the SWF Insitute to the China total too that is why it was higher. Hong Kong is not a country but a special region of China should they be combined? 76.69.62.173 (talk) 19:16, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Hong Kong is a Special Administrative Region of the PRC. It is wiki policy to not combine HK things with PRC things. I do not fully agree with this wiki policy, but I'll stick to the policy, because otherwise moderators will change it back. Schalkcity (talk) 19:20, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Vloot van de KLM
Hallo Schalkcity,

Volgens mij ben je Nederlands, dus doe ik het maar even in onze taal. Maakt het wat gemakkelijker.

Zoals jij al te goed weet hebben wij allebei een ander inzicht hoe de vloot van de KLM is samengesteld. Zo beweer jij dat er nog 11 orders staan voor de 73G en nog 2 voor de 738. Ik weet niet hoe je aan deze informatie komt, maar echt nergens is een bron te vinden op internet dat dit bevestigt. De website van Boeing geeft bijvoorbeeld aan dat KLM 13 73G's in bestelling heeft (waarvan er inmiddels 7 geleverd zijn). Geen enkele website (uitgezonderd Wikipedia) geeft aan dat KLM meer 73G's in bestelling heeft. Natuurlijk kunnen deze extra toestellen ook geleased zijn, want dan staan ze niet onder de naam van KLM in het orderboek van Boeing. Maar geen enkele bron vermeldt dat er extra toestellen geleased worden, na de order in november 2007. Zo is er ook nergens te vinden dat er nog twee 738's in bestelling zijn.

Bovendien staat KLM er om bekend dat het vlootoverzicht op haar website bijna nooit klopt. Verschillende bronnen geven aan dat de PH-BDN nu stored is in Norwich, Engeland vanaf 20 juli jongstleden. Er is een foto van de BDN gemaakt op 21 juni in Norwich. Dit betekent dat er nog maar 5 733's active zijn. Volgens het Luchtvaartuigregister van de IVW staat het toestel PH-BDN nog ingeschreven, het toestel staat namelijk nog steeds onder die registratie in Engeland.

Op het moment van schijven zie ik dat KLM eindelijk zijn vlootoverzicht heeft herzien. Er staat nu dat er nog maar 4 733's active zijn. Dat betekent dat na de BDN op 20 juli nog een toestel, vermoedelijk de BDO uitgefaseerd is. Al zou je uitgaan van het Adobe-documentje van de KLM, zou je kunnen opvatten dat de afgelopen week maar liefst 3 733's tegelijk uitgefaseerd zijn, wat dus niet klopt.

Ik hoop dat je hier wat aan hebt!

Met vriendelijke groet,

Koen —Preceding unsigned comment added by Koentje787 (talk • contribs) 15:48, 1 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Beste Koen,
 * Op de Nederlandse wiki pagina KLM staat in de overlegpagina een stuk gepost door Shimmy. Deze beweert dat hij dat stuk heeft gecopy-paste uit de interne KLM krant 'De wolkenridder' dd 16 juli 2010. Hierin staan die cijfers vermeld. Aangezien volgens mij niemand die Wolkenridder kan lezen, behalve KLM medewerkers is de bron niet echt verifieerbaar. Als het echter klopt wat er in staat, dan zijn deze cijfers wel juist (wat betreft de bestellingen). Het lijkt mij verstandig contact op te nemen met Shimmy, misschien dat hij een verifieerbare bron kan geven (of dat stukje van de wolkenridder ergens online kan zetten, met toestemming van KLM).
 * Wat betreft de huidige vloot is het lastig te zeggen over de B737-300/-400. Ze worden uitgefaseerd, maar ik heb werkelijk geen zicht op de snelheid van die uitfasering. Uitgaande van diezelfde 'De wolkenridder' als hierboven gemeld, zou er dus eind 2011 geen B737-300/-400 meer moeten zijn in de vloot. Dat er B737-300 uitgefaseerd worden is wel logisch. De instroom van de B737-700 is namelijk al een tijdje aan de gang en als het goed is wordt er deze maand wederom 1 geleverd. En volgens de KLM site mag dat overzicht van de vloot als waarheidsgetrouw worden aangenomen. Dus het is even zaak om na te gaan welke B737-300 er wellicht nog meer uitgefaseerd is. Bedenk ook dat er 1 geleased is aan Kenya Airways voor 2 maanden (en dat die wellicht na die lease uitgefaseerd wordt, echter, dit is puur speculatief).
 * Concrete dingen die gedaan moeten worden zijn dus 1) Contact met Shimmy of dat document ergens online gezet kan/mag worden, dan kunnen de bestellingen geverifieerd worden en 2) Nagaan (bij ch-aviation / vliegtuigspotterswebsites / andere sites, in ieder geval zodat het duidelijk wordt bevestigd) of er inderdaad nog maar 4 B737-300 in de KLM vloot aanwezig zijn. Schalkcity (talk) 16:18, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Ik heb de gegevens gevraagd aan Shimmy en hier is de link: https://www2.klm.com/corporate/pci/communicatie_nl/images/20100616_tcm287-287536.pdf
 * Probleem is echter dat alleen KLM medewerkers deze kunnen lezen omdat er een login vereist is. Dus er kunnen 2 dingen gedaan worden 1)De getallen terugzetten tot de aantal die wel te verifieren zijn of 2)Deze link toevoegen en dan aannemen dat de huidige (hoge) bestellingen kloppen zonder dat die link geopend kan worden. Schalkcity (talk) 08:46, 2 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Eigenlijk vind ik het allemaal goed, als de weergegeven informatie maar correct is met behulp van betrouwbare bronnen. Zolang we geen toegang hebben tot Wolkenridder kunnen we dus niets anders doen dan vertrouwen op websites die eigenlijk allemaal iets anders aangeven. (klm.com - ch-aviation.ch etc.) Ik geef de leiding hierbij aan jou, beslis maar wat wat jij de beste oplossing vindt.


 * Mvg, Koen
 * --Koentje787 (talk) 17:46, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

KLM service to Xiamen
Please familiarize yourself with WP:AIRPORTS guidelines. A full date must be provided to list new destinations for a carrier. As "mid-2011" is NOT a date. You can readd Xiamen when an exact date is announced (e.g. March 15, 2011). If you are against this, please discuss it at WP:AIRPORTS talk page and get a consensus. Thanks! Snoozlepet (talk) 19:11, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Cyprus
Cyprus isn't in Asia - it never was. It may be a member of the European Union, but it is located 100% in Asia, as the Euopre article will tell you. There are a lot of other articles that say the same thing (and none of them were edited by me). Cyprus' EU membership does not physically make it European, just as Israel's political/sporting ties have no impact on it's location. There have been several discussions on this in the past, with the conclusion that physiography is the only real criteria we can use. If Iceland (not a member of the EU) were to join the South-West Pacific Fa-La-La Union tomorrow, would we list it under Oceania? jasepl (talk) 12:53, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Cyprus is a transcontinental country. It is considered to be both in Europe and in Asia. It is in Europe not because of EU membership but because of its historical, political and sociocultural ties with Europe. It is in Asia because the landmass is part of the Anatolian tectonic plate. So, Cyprus can be listed in either Europe or Asia. Schalkcity (talk) 15:59, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

KLM cargo routes
I know KL freighter are flown by MP now, but some routes like IST are specificlly operated for KL cargo nd nor shared with MP route network, so why did you remove marked cargo destinations from list? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.155.59.74 (talk) 14:53, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Because largest part of KLM Cargo is belly cargo, flown by all KLM aircraft. The 4 freighter aircraft are now operated under Martinair AOC, so they are part of Martinair. Even if a route is 'operated for (opf)', that does not mean that KLM flies it. If you understand Dutch, please read the Dutch KLM discussion page. There it is described very well why I've removed the routes (after those complaints). Schalkcity (talk) 15:05, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I understand, many airlines do this and I have updated many articles for such, however in those cases the representative airlines does not fly in the opf airlines livery, so maybe for KLM an exception can be made since four 747s who do bulk of MP flights are in KL livery especially to moscow, almaty, which are KL routes so is IST but gets MD11F MP livery, these routes were KLM before freighters were given to MP, I think you are being too literal, only these three routes, not from MP network should be listed in there, KL now is like Emirates cargo which is flown by atlas and TNT but some aircraft in EK livery however EK cargo has its own article to benefit, KL cargo needs its own article or sub-section in main KLM article, which should explain its current situation to viewers interested in the freight division, not just link which merely redirects to KLM article with little or no info on the subsidiary no history either for it, I suggest something like for KLM asia if not page, sorry my keyboard giving problems cant sign.

Delta Air Lines fleet
I spent 2 hours tidying the current fleet table and you have reverted it. Like the background:darkblue is not required at each and every place. Placing it just before the column titles is enough. And to center align text in a fleet table you have to mention style="text-align:center;" as I have done. Adding too much of html code unnecessarily increases the page size. When you can achieve the same outcome with one code why use many right? And please do not add the code colum as these codes are not exclusive to the delta fleet but are universal codes for the aircraft. Please take a look at other airlines' fleet (British Airways, Jet Airways, Singapore Airlines, Kingfisher Airlines, etc). I have tidied the delta fleet as per them. &mdash;    Abhishek    Talk to me 10:32, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The main reason for undoing your edit is because the fleet numbers do not match with the IFE and notes columns. Also, the fleet changes that are occurring (installation of new seats and so on) are all gone in your version. Also the deferred orders you have removed, as well as the details of the 757-200 and 767-300ER fleets and the orders for the MD-90's. If you want to tidy up the page using less codes, that's fine, but don't delete information. Schalkcity (talk) 11:58, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Your reverts just purely show that you are unaware of WP:AVIMOS. If any order is deferred, it should be mentioned in the notes and not under orders column. And besides, I haven't deleted any info. I have only interchanged the IFE and Notes column. I have clealry explained what I have done in the talk page. Your reason for revert is just not acceptable. I'll ask an admin to look into it. &mdash;    Abhishek    Talk to me 12:11, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You might want to take a look at this. &mdash;    Abhishek    Talk to me 12:37, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * There you go again. It only shows your lack of knowledge on airlines/airports. JetKonnect is a low-cost brand of Jet Airways and not a separate airline. No two airlines will have the same IATA code! &mdash;    Abhishek    Talk to me 15:04, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Read my comment. Similar situation as with Aeromexico and Aeromexico Travel --> same IATA code. Schalkcity (talk) 15:09, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * That's what I said, you just don't know much about airlines/airports and also the manual of style you have to follow for aviation related articles. Instead you just revert to the fleet table that looks like a garbage can. &mdash;    Abhishek    Talk to me 15:24, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I revert to a page that contains more information than your version. If you want to remove the codes, go ahead, but also update the IFE and Notes columns. But don't remove any orders (MD-90's) or any announced updates of the aircraft (and so a change of seats). Schalkcity (talk) 15:27, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I will revert to the changes I have made, then you tell me what is missing, I will add them. Per what is said at WP:AVIMOS, I don't think the IFE column is worth keeping. A para or two below the fleet table about IFE is noteworthy. &mdash;    Abhishek    Talk to me 15:30, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Besides i your revert, you are adding redundant HTML codes for background color and center aligning text in each column. &mdash;    Abhishek    Talk to me 15:31, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You can remove the whole IFE column, that's fine. But if in the Notes column any codes are present, also remove those. And read what I just wrote: DON'T remove the orders for the MD-90's! Schalkcity (talk) 15:33, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Will re-add that! &mdash;     Abhishek    Talk to me 15:34, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * 17 used MD-90 of which airline? &mdash;    Abhishek    Talk to me 15:47, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The used MD-90's are acquired from several airlines, not just 1 airline. I don't know by heart which airlines, but it can be found on wikipedia, I've read it some months ago. Schalkcity (talk) 15:56, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The used MD-90's are coming from, among others, China Southern, China Eastern, JAL, SAS, Hello Airlines. Still missing some. Schalkcity (talk) 16:21, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Are you ok? JetLite is a subsidiary of Jet Airways, but Jet Konnect is just a brand of Jet Airways. It's not a separate airline. Guess an admin intevention again is needed. &mdash;   Abhishek   Talk 14:55, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Read my comment previously mentioned on the talk page of SkyTeam. Schalkcity (talk) 17:00, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

July 2011
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at SkyTeam, you may be blocked from editing. &mdash;   Abhishek   Talk 12:40, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You are removing correct information on the page of SkyTeam. JetKonnect SHOULD be in that list, because it is a BRAND of Jet Airways, as I've mentioned on the talk page. I've given several examples of similar situations and all those airline BRANDS are also in the respective lists. So you stop removing correct information! Schalkcity (talk) 13:30, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
 * It's only a brand. It's the name given to the all-economy class service of the airline. So it is obvious you are adding false info and are SHOUTING unnecessarily. Jet Konnect ought to be removed as it's not a subsidiary. &mdash;   Abhishek   Talk 13:37, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Read my comment on the talk page of SkyTeam. Several 'brands' of airlines, that are fully part of the airline and not a subsidiary, are also listed on the SkyTeam, Oneworld and Star Alliance pages. These brands are distinctive from the mainline, because they are marketed separately, also JetKonnect. And yes, those brands operate under the same IATA code as the mainline. I've given several examples on the talk page of SkyTeam, place your reactions their if and why you don't agree with all those examples. Schalkcity (talk) 13:43, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Dude. It's of no use telling you anything. You just want to have your way, that's it. Despite another editor agrreing with what I've mentioned, you just want to have your way. All you are doing is tryin to WP:OWN SkyTeam. It does not belong to you nor anyone in particular. &mdash;  Abhishek  Talk  17:01, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Just see how intricate you've made the Delta Air Lines fleet article even this despite being told by the admin that it is redundant. Go through project standards WP:AIRLINE and WP:AIRPORT cause you fail to understand certain aspects. &mdash;  Abhishek  Talk  17:05, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

October 2011
This is your last warning. The next time you disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. You've been informed at least in September 2010 and July 2011 that aviation articles have a format standard and you should bring up and discuss any disagreement to those projects, WP:AIRPORT AND WP:AIRLINE. However you continue to act on your own ignoring other opinions. This is why I'm giving you a Level 4 Warning. HkCaGu (talk) 17:34, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Newark flights and other related matters have been discussed here and here . As HkCaGu said, bring up any disagreements you have to the WP:AIRPORTS and WP:AIRLINES talk pages and gain consensus. Snoozlepet (talk) 18:14, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

"Top 20 motor vehicle producing companies in 2007" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Top_20_motor_vehicle_producing_companies_in_2007&redirect=no Top 20 motor vehicle producing companies in 2007] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 20:49, 30 November 2023 (UTC)