User talk:Sp33dyphil/Archive 1

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 messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! The Rambling Man (talk) 23:57, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.-- &oelig; &trade; 01:43, 14 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Just noticed the trial ends in a couple days :P heh oh well, enjoy it while it's there. If after August 15 pending changes stays then you'll still be a reviewer anyhow. -- &oelig; &trade; 01:46, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Vietnam Airlines PR
Hello Sp33dyphil. Do you have access to an online database of archived newspaper articles? Perhaps your local library might have one. Benny the mascot (talk) 11:13, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Those archives would probably be better sources than websites. For what it's worth... Benny the mascot (talk) 21:47, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure. What exactly do you want me to look at this time? Benny the mascot (talk) 12:47, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
 * The see also section is otherwise empty. Moving the portal box seemed to be the logical step. Feel free to revert if you disagree. Benny the mascot (talk) 22:47, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

At the moment I'm waaaaay too busy in real life, but I'll try to get the review done over the weekend. Benny the mascot (talk) 11:34, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Can Tho International Airport
I've removed the stub tag you added to this article. Three points: There's a lot to learn about Wikipedia editing - welcome to WP, and happy editing! PamD (talk) 12:24, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think it's a stub article
 * It's actually got 2 subject-specific stub tags anyway, so it was inappropriate to add the "unsorted" stub
 * If you are adding a stub tag, please add it at the end, not the beginning, of the article, as set out in WP:LAYOUT.

Vietnam Airlines 3
You have asked other editors to look at the article, can I suggest that you leave a message at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airlines where most editors interested in airline articles keep an eye on messages. MilborneOne (talk) 14:25, 4 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Regarding your edits. Very well done. Liking it, although references need to be added to the Maintenance and Training sections. Tags were places in 2008, if you could get them that would be great. Also I have removed A320-200F as no such aircraft exists and the B777 freighter is named Boeing 777F no -200ERF, just F. Well done. Zaps93 (talk) 17:17, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Adoption
Greetings , I see you're up for adoption, and I'm in the market. If ever you need advice or answers, just ask me -- any question, any time. I'd like to help however I can. Happy editing - Draeco (talk) 04:02, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * How about public domain generally, or Public domain specifically? - Draeco (talk) 05:48, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * They're basically all languages that a "client" (like your computer) uses to communicate with a "server" (like an email service). POP3 and IMAP are the two most common Internet protocols for e-mail retrieval. Virtually all modern e-mail clients and servers support both. HTTP is another protocol (it's the "http:" at the start of almost all web addresses), but I'm most familiar with its use in web pages, not email. - Draeco (talk) 15:36, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
 * As for where you would find those emails on your PC, if you use an email manager like Microsoft Outlook, you would need to look at that program's settings to see where it stores all the emails it downloads. - Draeco (talk) 15:39, 16 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks very much for your help! Sp33dyphil  (Talk) (Contributions) 22:12, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Photos of HQs
Hi! I do look at Flickr to see if I can find any photos, and some of what I found was used to fulfill requests. For instance the British Airways, Air New Zealand, United Airlines, and American Airlines HQ photos are from flickr. I also check Geograph.uk - EasyJet's HQ photo is from Geograph. WhisperToMe (talk) 03:15, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * BTW, since your profile states that you are from Melbourne - I'm not sure where the Jetstar Airways building is, but if you know where it is and are able to get a photo, that would be appreciated. WhisperToMe (talk) 03:17, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you in advance :) WhisperToMe (talk) 03:46, 9 April 2010 (UTC)


 * No worries Sp33dyphil  talk 03:48, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * In Australia, do PO boxes have specific locations? The address tells me that the HQ is in Greater Melbourne, but I am not sure how to pinpoint a specific physical location... WhisperToMe (talk) 04:00, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * On Google News I found http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/02/24/1077594829582.html "A regional airport south west of Melbourne is set to become the headquarters for Qantas's new budget airline, according to a news report. The new airline, Jetstar, is set to announce tomorrow that it will base itself at Avalon Airport, near Geelong, National Nine News reported tonight." WhisperToMe (talk) 04:08, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * As a note, the building in the Singapore Airlines article is not the corporate headquarters of SQ. The SQ headquarters is Airline House, which is located at Changi Airport. WhisperToMe (talk) 20:33, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
liquidluck ✽ talk 06:15, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Gia Lam Airport
Hi - do you think you could take a look at Gia Lam Airport? I'm hoping to submit it as a DYK in the next couple of days, and was wondering if you could add anything to the article. Thanks! --dragfyre (talk 14:46, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Vietnam Airlines' former logo.gif
 Thanks for uploading File:Vietnam Airlines' former logo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 "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 images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:19, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Vietnam Airlines 4
Hi - I noticed you've requested another peer review of Vietnam Airlines. I've been looking over the article in my free time, but since my attention is in so many other places right now, It's taken me a little while to get a good idea of what could be done with the article, and I haven't been able to do much more than do some spot restructuring and copy editing—probably not as helpful as a peer review, I'm sure. Anyway, I'm no expert on airlines, but I have been editing some airport-related articles lately (e.g. Gia Lam Airport and a few others) so I wouldn't mind working with you on this article if you'd like to discuss individual changes; I'm just not sure I could get my thoughts together to do a full review of the article. Cheers :) --dragfyre_ ʞןɐʇ c 14:27, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Just go to Peer review/Vietnam Airlines/archive2, and let's discuss everything on there. Also, please do not edit the article during the next 2 days because a major edit is coming up from me. Thanks. Sp33dyphil  (Talk) (Contributions) 07:09, 14 May 2010 (UTC)


 * OK, cool. I was thinking you'd probably prefer it if I stopped, so I'm glad I asked. I'll bookmark that peer review page then. --dragfyre_ ʞןɐʇ c 13:44, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Are you still working on this article in your sandbox? Just wondering as I noticed a lot of people have been editing the mainspace article recently. --dragfyre_ ʞןɐʇ c 15:29, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * No, I've blankced it because I'm working on it on my PC. Sp33dyphil (Talk) (Contributions) 01:23, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Passing this article on in case you hadn't noticed it:
 * --dragfyre_ ʞןɐʇ c 04:25, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Found another nice little soundbite in this article (3rd paragraph): --dragfyre_ ʞןɐʇ c 14:56, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

This came after the FT broke the news on Monday that Vietnam Airlines, considered by some investors to be one of the country’s best-run state-owned enterprises (SOEs), wanted to complete a partial IPO by the end of 2012.

Talkback
--89.195.199.150 (talk) 22:20, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Non-free files in your user space
Hey there Sp33dyphil, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Sp33dyphil. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.


 * See a log of files removed today here.


 * Shut off the bot here.


 * Report errors here.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:06, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Rail transport in Vietnam
Hey—your userpage says you're a railfan. If that's the case, would you consider helping me to fill in articles relating to rail transport in Vietnam at some point? I just got List of railway lines in Vietnam through DYK, and I have a number of other articles in my sandbox, including List of railway stations in Vietnam, Rail transport in Vietnam, Vietnam Railways, North-South Railway, Da Lat-Thap Cham Railway, Ho Chi Minh City Metro, and Hanoi Metro. Thanks! --dragfyre_ ʞןɐʇ c 17:56, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the cleanup edits :) The article's up at DYK right now. --dragfyre_ ʞןɐʇ c 00:32, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Vietnam Airlines
Sure! I'll take a look at it today and tomorrow! I'll see what I can fix WhisperToMe (talk) 03:47, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

As I looked at the article, I have a question: What variety of English do you want as the standard of the article? Should it be American English or British English? Also I plan to post at the Vietnamese Wikipedia embassy and ask for someone to photograph the Vietnam Airlines headquarters. WhisperToMe (talk) 23:20, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

vi:Thảo_luận_Wikipedia:Guestbook_for_non-Vietnamese_speakers and also vi:Thảo_luận:Hãng_hàng_không_Quốc_gia_Việt_Nam WhisperToMe (talk) 23:29, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

"Let's make it British American, because I think more people speak that particular version." - It would be either British or U.S. American. Usually we pick one of the two. WhisperToMe (talk) 02:56, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I see. I'll post the British tag, then :) WhisperToMe (talk) 04:25, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Lot Polish Airlines
Re your edit summary comment about "retired", maybe the header would read better as "Aircraft formerly operated" or "Formerly operated aircraft". I note that there's an "inuse" template showing atm so I'll leave it to you. Mjroots (talk) 09:35, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Former routes
I'll take a look at your edits and the former routes stuff today. :) WhisperToMe (talk) 18:50, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

In regards to the fleet table, British Airways, a "good article," does not mention destinations, nor does it mention short haul or long haul: British_Airways WhisperToMe (talk) 21:26, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Vietnam Airlines
Hello. In March you added a citation to a book from the "Webster's Quotations, Facts and Phrases" series published by Icon Group International to this article. Unfortunately, Icon Group International is not a reliable source - their books are computer-generated, with most of the text copied from Wikipedia (most entries have [WP] by them to indicate this, see e.g. ). I've only removed the reference, not the text it was referencing. I'm removing a lot of similar references as they are circular references; many other editors have also been duped by these sources. Despite giving an appearance of reliability, the name "Webster's" has been public domain since the late 19th century. Another publisher to be wary of as they reuse Wikipedia articles is Alphascript Publishing. Fences &amp;  Windows  02:21, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Alitalia
Hi, Speedyphil, regarding your edits to the article Alitalia (blue instead of green banner) I'd like to point out that:

-The Article is not about Skyteam, it is about Alitalia. -Neither Star Alliance nor Oneworld members' articles have a uniformed colour for their tables. -Air France has a blue table because it is the theme colour of the Air France logo. -Once one of your edits has been reverted, you shouldn't simply re-edit it, instead if you don't agree you can discuss on the talk page.

I hope you'll agree that the correct colour will be green, so that I can change it back. Regards, Speed74 (talk) 14:00, 15 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi again, even though you continue to edit the Alitalia article, you don't seem to have noticed my message... If you don't have anything to say on the subject, then I think I can change the colour back without a problem. Speed74 (talk) 08:41, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your response. It's always best to stick to the normal layout for fleet tables, especially when so complcated like Alitalia's. I really have no idea why Qantas' table is light purple, but the European carriers all have colours which reflect the airline, not the alliance, see AF, BA, LX, IB etc. The abbreviations J and Y are a good idea fundamentally, but the black really clashes with the white writing of the other headings, so I think the table should be left as it is. Finally, thanks for adding the photo of an Alitalia plane, which was desperately needed. Regards, Speed74 (talk) 10:39, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Just to clear up, although the colour of airline's tables isn't always attributed to their logo colour, I definitely haven't seen any Alliance-related colour coding, and green is definitely the most natural colour for Alitalia. Speed74 (talk) 13:49, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * It seems that it was agreed in the discussion you linked me that colours respective to the airline and not the alliance would be used, not least because both OneWorld and SkyTeam have a blue logo... :-) Speed74 (talk) 10:53, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Vietnam Airlines
I'll an assessment on it. I'll read the assessment criteria and go through the article. WhisperToMe (talk) 05:36, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure why the Miss World stuff was put in the lead. It seems like a one time event, not something significant enough for the lead. WhisperToMe (talk) 06:56, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The overall future (joining airline alliances, major breakthroughs) can and should be discussed. However carrying pax for a onetime event (or not doing so) is not significant enough to mention in the lead, which is a summary of the important points of the article. WhisperToMe (talk) 07:08, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. Airlines do frequently sponsor events and organizations (Delta sponsored cancer research) - however I still do not believe that the particular event is important enough for the lead WhisperToMe (talk) 07:31, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Virgin Blue
G'day; the reason there was an awards and controversies section in the article is that numerous people complained that it was unbalanced to just have negative reports included in the article - both in edit summaries by persons removing the section altogether, and on the talk page. Since I added the positive reports, that particular part of the article remained stable for several months, whereas previously the negative information was being removed quite frequently. I am concerned that separating the info into two sections will result in the controversies being frequently deleted again. YSSYguy (talk) 02:40, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Melbourne Storm GAN
Hi, I have reviewed this article, and unfortunately have failed it owing primarily to the need for more sourcing. You can find my review here. I hope my comments can help you edit the article in preparation for another attempt. Cheers! Resolute 22:03, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Editor review
I know its late, but I have finished your requested editor review here. Hope it helps. Thanks, VictorianMutant (talk) 19:29, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

I have archived your editor review. You're free to request another one in a few months. Thank you. Netalarm talk 22:38, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Dashes
Hey, just to let you know that I've reverted (in spirit) the dash changes you made to Nintendo, because of the strange discrepancy between em and en dashes that I didn't even know before I checked today. It's picky, I know, but I thought I'd let you know. :) FMasic  ( talk ) 13:55, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Cleanup tagging
Hey, I see that you've done a lot of work throughut the 2010 AFL season on a lot of AFL-related articles and I thank you for that, but I just thought I'd let you know that when you are placing a cleanup template on an article, as you did here, you need to provide a reason on the talk page, explaining the type and extent of clean-up required so editors will know what to address, and when to remove the tag. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 13:58, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Alitalia
Hi Speedyphil, I noticed that I while back you placed a "copyedit" tag on the Alitalia page. Could you please direct me as to what exactly needs to be changed in order to remove the tag? It would also be useful to state this on the Alitalia talk page so as to speed up the process. Many thanks, Speed74 (talk) 16:27, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi again, I'm not sure if you're the one who recently edited the Alitalia talk page with "Copyedit" using an IP number, but if you are then I think the copyedit tag is inappropriately used and should be replaced with a structure related one since "copyedit" relates specifically to grammar, style, and general problems with the standard of English used. Regars, Speed74 (talk) 17:53, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Contact
Ah, I see. I thought that the anonymous user was someone else..

I'll look at your requests sometime this week :) WhisperToMe (talk) 23:22, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmm, based on your reply, I'll have a look at Star Alliance and Oneworld. WhisperToMe (talk) 08:00, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Flag icons
Please stop adding flag icons to airline articles. Per WP:FLAGCRUFT, flags should not be used unless needed. Jpatokal (talk) 11:46, 9 December 2010 (UTC)


 * WP:AIRLINES doesn't say anything about flag icons, and WP:FLAGCRUFT recommends against them unless there is a very good reason, so yes, I will remove them. And there are obvious reasons against: not only does codesharing have nothing to do with nationality, but how would you flag eg. Scandinavian Airlines (which is jointly owned and operated by three countries) or Cathay Pacific (Hong Kong or PRC)?  If you think I'm wrong on this, take this to the talk page of either or both. Jpatokal (talk) 10:30, 10 December 2010 (UTC)]


 * Thanks for your comment on WP:AIRLINES. I didn't mean to attack you personally and I didn't realize how widespread the flags were already, it's just that it only takes one enthusiastic person to add stuff like flags or colored links or dancing hamsters to articles, and suddenly the entire encyclopedia is full of them... Jpatokal (talk) 03:44, 11 December 2010 (UTC)


 * So just to be clear, I'm still (strongly) opposed to flag icons, but let's let the discussion on WP:AIRLINES continue before we start changing things either way. Jpatokal (talk) 04:06, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Lufthansa
Hey Speedyphil!

The Lufthansa HQ is actually in Cologne. Even though several important company departments are at the LAC, the finance department is in Cologne.

BTW the IATA page at http://www.iata.org/membership/Pages/airline_members_list.aspx?All=true has the HQ as Cologne. WhisperToMe (talk) 03:02, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

License tagging for File:SAA's Flying Springbok Emblem 1971.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:SAA's Flying Springbok Emblem 1971.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 02:05, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

License tagging for File:SAA's Flying Springbok Emblem 1948.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:SAA's Flying Springbok Emblem 1948.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 02:06, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

License tagging for File:SAA's Flying Springbok Emblem 1934.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:SAA's Flying Springbok Emblem 1934.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 02:06, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

-Flagicons
Hello, A very Happy New Year to you. Since there is a concensus in removal of flag icons from code-share of airlines, I would like to know if it is right to use flag icons in airline destination articles such as this and this. &mdash;Abhishek191288 (talk) 04:57, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Boeing 727
Hello. I reverted your recent edit to Boeing 727. It went out of production in 1984, not 2006, and AirTran never ordered any (AirTran didn't even exist until long after the 727 was discontinued). –BMRR (talk) 01:24, 5 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Seems more like the Boeing 717, which was produced until 2006 and operated by AirTran. -fnlayson (talk) 02:22, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Template not working
The page John Leahy (executive) has a Persondata template that's not showing up. What's happening? Can someone fix it please. Sp33dyphil (Talk) (Contributions)(Feed back needed @ Talk page) 04:30, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Persondata is not supposed to show up. It's metadata. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  04:33, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Review
Alright! I'll take a look! WhisperToMe (talk) 07:14, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Qantas A330-200
Qantas A330-200 VH-EBJ was the last Domestic A330-200 that had "Mainscrean" in flight entertainment. It left the QANTAS fleet on 23/11/2010. Current domestic A330-200 aircraft(VH-EBM-EBP) have iQ installed). http://theqantassource.com/a332.html). I have re-edited the Qantas article accordingly. Printpost (talk) 13:00, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

China Southern Airlines
Hi there. I undid several edits by Markshen1985 on the article as they were all unexplained and I asked him to re-instate with proper explanation. Was I wrong? And he has posted these messages on my talk. Thanks, Abhishek191288 (talk) 05:17, 15 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks a lot for your reply. :):) Abhishek191288 (talk) 06:00, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Re: Logo / cross post from Help Desk
Hi Sp33dyphil. I saw your post on the help desk from about 9 hours ago, asking about the logo. I don't know whether you actually want to remove it, or what, but I'll leave a copy here of what I posted to you on the help desk.

"Sp33dyphil, If you wish to know how to get rid of it, or you just want a normal logo, instructions on how to replace the logo with a normal one are posted on this link. I've spoken with others who want rid of it, and felt the best action is to tell people how, since I've also done this."

Hope this helps.  Barking Fish  13:13, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 16:10, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

China Southern Airlines
Hi, I turn to you for help. For whatever reason, the pictures that were uploaded by me are all tagged as "possible unfree use". I have alrealy explained to the administrator that all these pictures are work of my friends in China and some of mine. But he insists that I should give a much more reliablie source. The pictures' author which was tagged as Mark Shen is my own work. The others are work from my friend. What should I do in the next step? I am in Germany and all my friends (avaition enthusiasts) worked or just retired at home. How is it possible to contact all of them ? Can you give me some suggestions? Thank you for your help! Regards, Markshen1985 (talk) 08:32, 16 January 2011 (UTC)Markshen1985

Thank you
Thank you for the barnstar, it was a very pleasant surprise and heart-warming gesture. I really appreciate and am so grateful for the generous efforts of fellow editors who are improving the aviation articles. Thanks! SynergyStar (talk) 20:26, 25 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you again!!! Although I'm quite busy the wonderful encouragement makes me look forward to more future contributions to the project!!! Good luck on the article nomination efforts!! Best regards, SynergyStar (talk) 20:23, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

How do I set up IRC
I've read the page IRC already, and would like to know more about how to set up an account. Can somebody tell me how to? Sp33dyphil (Talk) (Contributions)(I love Wikipedia!) 06:50, 19 January 2011 (UTC)


 * You can connect to the IRC help channel with just this link.


 * For a more full-featured IRC, you should download an IRC client program. Web-based clients are a quick, easy way to talk to us - but rather limiting.  If you get an IRC client, it's a separate program - not part of your browser, but  another application. There's lots to choose from. Personally, I like to use mIRC.


 * In Freenode IRC, you can have channels where only 'voiced' users can 'speak'. In the help channel, we don't use that. However, we use the flag to denote 'experienced users' - just a convenience - so that the new users show up more clearly, as the non-voiced.


 * In addition, 'cloaked' users with a hostmask of "*!*@*wiki?edia*" are automatically voiced here. For info on that, see WP:CLOAK.

 Chzz  ► 07:06, 19 January 2011 (UTC)


 * If you need some more help with it, let me know -- I'm on IRC semi-regularly. --dragfyre_ ʞןɐʇ c 14:52, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Indian
Hello. I request you to look into these edits made by IPs (same person):, ,. The user is doing so cause there is only one source claiming that the complete merger of IC into AI will become a reality on Jan 29. I searched for other sources, but this is the only source that claims the same. So my question is can we consider this one source and assume that IC will be merged completely into AI on Jan 29?

Even if it's true, then in such a case what do we mention in the destination list of an airport article (since in reality the same aircraft and crew will be flying to the destinations but as a separate airline). Should it be like how the above user is doing so or do we just leave it and the day the merger is complete, we just merge the destinations of IC into AI row (or create a new AI row and write the same)? Thanks, Why so serious?  Talk to me 15:20, 19 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Ok. So should it look something like this:

Note:Indian is expected to be merged into Air India by January 29.


 * What is strange is that none of the media (both printed and electronic) have reported on this merger. I even checked well known media sites: The Hindu, DNA, Deccan Herald, NDTV, CNN-IBN, but none of them have anything to say about this issue. So do we go ahead and make these changes to appropriate articles or wait till we get some more sources regarding the merger? Why so serious?  Talk to me 10:53, 20 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Well the airline was rebranded as Indian in 2005 which is why I wrote the same. Why so serious?  Talk to me 10:53, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Feedback
Hi. I would appreciate your valuable feedback on the merger on NACIL destinations into Air India destinations here. Thanks, Why so serious?  Talk to me 11:02, 21 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Well since you do have good knowledge about airlines across the world, I thought you might want to comment on the merger. Anyways, thanks. Why so serious?  Talk to me 12:26, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Banner
I looked at the documentation.

It's fine to use the banner - Usually the banner should be kept within a few days - Maybe around 3 of 4 days. WhisperToMe (talk) 05:02, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
 * You mean put the info as a list and later convert it into prose? WhisperToMe (talk) 05:27, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's okay to put it in a list format while you are reoganizing the article. WhisperToMe (talk) 05:39, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

767
Thanks for the heads up - glad to know my comments were helpful. If you want I can take a second look at the article, but it will likely take me a day or two. Just let me know on my talk page, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 03:23, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I just looked quickly at the article and it looks better. I would go ahead and try it at GAN - I am sure the reviewer will find things, but nothing obvious popped out at me. If you do plan to take this on to FAC, I would definitely get someone to copyedit it first. Take care, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 21:24, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 14:20, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

China Eastern Airlines
Why you changed the format of the fleet? Now it seems a mass there. Don't do whatever you want!

Markshen1985 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Markshen1985 (talk • contribs) 17:26, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2011 WikiCup!
Hello and welcome to the 2011 WikiCup! Your submissions' page can be found here and instructions of how to update the page can be found here and on the submissions' page itself. From the submissions' page, a bot will update the main scoresheet. Our rules have been very slightly updated from last year; the full rules can be found here. Please remember that you can only receive points for content on which you have done significant work in 2011; nominations of work from last year and "drive-by" nominations will not be awarded points. Signups are going to remain open through January, so if you know of anyone who would like to take part, please direct them to WikiCup/2011 signups. The judges can be contacted on the WikiCup talk page, on their respective talk pages, or by email. Other than that, we will be in contact at the end of every month with the newsletter. If you want to stop or start receiving newsletters, please remove your name from or add your name to this list. Good luck! J Milburn and The ed17 22:36, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 January newsletter
We are half way through round one of the WikiCup. Signups are now closed, and we have 129 listed competitors, 64 of whom will make it to round two. Congratulations to, who, at the time of writing, has a comfortable lead with 228 points, followed by , with 144 points. Four others have over 100 points. Congratulations also go to, who scored the first points in the competition, claiming for Talk:Hurricane King/GA1, , who scored the first non-review points in the competition, claiming for Dognapping, and who was the first in the competition to use our new "multiplier" mechanic (explanation), claiming for Grigory Potemkin, a subject covered on numerous Wikipedias. Thanks must also go to Jarry1250 for dealing with all bot work- without you, the competition wouldn't be happening!

A running total of claims can be seen here. However, numerous competitors are yet to score at all- please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. The number of points that will be needed to reach round two is not clear- everyone needs to get their entries in now to guarantee their places! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 22:42, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Airbus A330
First, congratulations for your excellent contribution! I think a few words of explanation is in place. The reason I was adding and changing something in your recent text is that I was doing simultaneously the same thing! When I was happy with my text, I returned to Wikipedia, and oops!, somebody else had already done it! Reading through your text it was obvious that your version was superior to mine. It was much more comprehensive. So, comparing our texts I found some details that were missing from yours and couldn't resist the temptation to add them, because I had done quite a lot of work in preparing my version. Doing so required some reworking and some deletions of your sentences to avoid repeating the same things. I completely understand your reaction of reverting my edits after all the work you have done.

We are both aviation enthusiasts! Let's be friends :) I think the chapter I added is an interesting small detail of the history of A300 derivatives. It is part of the Airbus story that they were actually planned and studied before the first Airbus even flew. In your source it seems to be stated that the B9 is a derivative of the production model A300B2, which isn't exactly true. As for the TA12, you are right, it came in 1982; my bad.

Now, I haven't got your source (Norris & Wagner) in my hands so I don't know what is written there, but I'll describe my source: "Airbus, the Complete Story, second edition, 2009" is written by Bill Gunston, who was a consultant in the original launch of Airbus, which required him to visit Toulose regularly. He is the Editor-in-chief of the Aero-engine division of Jane's and assistant compiler for Jane's All The World's Aircraft. He is the author of more than 380 books on aviation. I have the feeling that he knows what he is talking about.

So, a direct citation from page 85: "Irony is not uncommon in big aerospace programmes. Long before the first Airbus A300 flew, the project engineers had identified nine possible variations on the basic A300B design, known as the A300B1 to B9. Apart from the original production models, the B2 and B4, not one of these variations were built. The irony is that the only derived aircraft to become reality is a tenth variation, studied in 1973, as the A300B10 and later called the A310."

From page 183: "In 1973 Phil Smith at Hatfield said, 'the A300B no longer seems 'too big', and I would like to see the stretched B9 get the go-ahead. A year later Beteille said, 'the B9 remains our most immediate prospectfor several potential customers" "Thus, to lay the cards on the table, right back in the early 1970s Airbus saw the B9, B10 and B11 as the A300 derivatives, which it then thought would complete its wide-body family"

From page 185: "But it should not be thought that the long delay was in any way a disaster for Airbus, because a handful of project engineers kept on refining both the '9' and '11', and by the late 1980s they were markedly superior to their original conceptions, besides being more closely related. Advanced technology keeps on happening"

Could we both agree on a chapter like this?:

Background

When Airbus designed the Airbus A300 during the 1970s, it envisioned a broad family of airliners with which to compete against the might of US manufacturers such as Boeing and the Douglas Aircraft Company. Airbus started studies into derivatives of the Airbus A300B to work on its goal. Actually long before the first Airbus A300 flew, Airbus engineers identified nine possible variations. These were known as A300B1 to B9. The tenth variation (from 1973), the first to be actually built, dubbed the A300B10, was a smaller aircraft which eventually evolved into the long-range Airbus A310. Airbus then focused its efforts on the single-aisle market, coming up with the revolutionary family of aircraft, later to be known as the Airbus A320, which was the first fly-by-wire commercial aircraft. The decision to work on the A320, instead of a four-engine aircraft proposed by the Germans created divisions within Airbus. As the SA or "single aisle" studies (later named A320) underwent development to challenge the successful Boeing 737 and Douglas DC-9 in the single-asile, narrow-body airliner market, Airbus again turned its focus back to the wide-body aircraft market.

The A300B9, a larger derivative of the A300, had been developed by Airbus from the early 1970s on at a slow pace. This slow pace gradually increased speed until the official launch of the project in 1987. The B9 was essentially a stretched A300 with the same wing, coupled with the most powerful turbofan engine at the time. It was targetted at the growing demand for high-capacity, medium-range, trans-continental trunk routes. The B9 would offer the same range and payload as the McDonnell Douglas DC-10, but use between 25% percent to 38% less fuel. The TA9 was considered the replacement for the DC-10, and Lockheed L-1011 Tristar.

If it is OK for you, I'll put it in Wikipedia. 88.114.220.99 (talk) 17:05, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

GA
Yes, that sounds like a very good possibility! I've nominated articles that I've worked on to be GAs, and the key to them is to get well-fleshed, well rounded sections of articles. WhisperToMe (talk) 02:41, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * For pics, have you tried looking on Flickr? Even if it says "Copyrighted," you can contact the author and see if he/she is willing to relicense it/them. WhisperToMe (talk) 02:51, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * For info on air frame materials, you could try typing in key words at Google Books and see if anything comes up. If you find that there are books that may have that info, you could arrange to check them out of your local library. WhisperToMe (talk) 03:36, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Singapore Airlines Flight 380 for deletion
The article Singapore Airlines Flight 380 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/Singapore Airlines Flight 380 (2nd nomination) 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. Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû (blah?) 14:06, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Price list
http://www.airbus.com/presscentre/corporate-information/key-documents/?eID=dam_frontend_push&docID=14849 seems to be a redirect to the actual file.

I am not sure how to get the "real" URL - But I will ask the question at Reference desk/Computing - Reference_desk/Computing WhisperToMe (talk) 02:31, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Accept this page
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tahir-ul-Qadri —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.234.251.71 (talk) 16:06, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Airbus A330
See my response to request for help. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 16:52, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Item 1 Explanation: The "garbage in, garbage out" syndrome is derived from computer nerds who soon realized that if your data is flawed, no matter how you manipulate it, it comes out flawed. It's a precept of Wikipedia that any and every one can edit so it also follows the adage of "too many cooks..." Basically, having numerous editors working on an article can actually create a negative result, much in the way of a committee product, although with judicious review, a levelling can take place in terms of style, grammar and syntax.
 * Item 7 Explanation: The canard that you must have citation templates no matter how flawed they are, and all of them, to one degree or another, are malformed, was because editors were told that their meta data would be more easily manipulated by some miraculous future programed bot that would set about Wikiwonderland, standardizing everything. If you believe that, I do have some prime swampland in Florida for you to consider, or perhaps the Brooklyn Bridge may be to your liking. Not to be facetious, but there is no magic bot out there, just a whole bunch of semi-trained researchers/editors plinking about and since they have no training in cataloguing or reference systems, the best way for them to proceed is to use a "fill-in-the-blanks" template. Now, a full disclosure, I am not a Luddite, having been a reference Librarian for 30 years, and lately an author and editor at various publishing houses and film companies. I can use the templates, even in the form they presently appear, but they have to be adapted in order to accept second and third authors, publication data such as location and require a plethora of different citation templates for documents, news articles, media, books, and journals (periodicals). I have, along with many other experienced editors, simply ditched the messy template system entirely and write out the data in an clearly "scratch" cataloging/referencing system used for all citations, notes and bibliographical notations. FWiW, to allay any other concerns, I have been editing Wiki articles since 2006, and have countless articles accepted as FA and GA articles, without any of the citation templates that reviewers seem so intent on preserving. Bzuk (talk) 21:56, 1 February 2011 (UTC).
 * The Boeing 777 is a particularly egregious example of an editor overwriting perfectly good references with the @#$%^ templates. I backed off when I saw what was happening, but this editing phenomenom is all too familiar. FWiw< I hope I'm not talking about you?! Bzuk (talk) 22:01, 1 February 2011 (UTC).
 * Hi! It seems like other users want some additional changes to be made before it is re-nominated. Is there anything you need help with in the process? WhisperToMe (talk) 00:26, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
 * See if you can try a Google site search of Airbus.com ( http://www.google.com/advanced_search - enter airbus.com as the domain) - I would recommend checking Google Books. Maybe Google News too. WhisperToMe (talk) 00:41, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I have done a preliminary cleanup of just the references, but so many errors existed that I was loathe to spend three hours re-writing citation and bibliographic templates that are so messed up, that after the FA review, I would suggest dump the whole mess and start all over with the correct formatting. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 04:32, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I will try to explain why editing changes occur as there appears to be non-standard editing and stylistic issues that have to be addressed. Do not hesitate in asking for the reasoning for an alteration. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 13:06, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
 * The citation templates are still a mess, but there have been "patches" placed over nearly all of them. I have tried for years to get the designers to rewrite the templates to no avail, so if you continue to use a template system, you will have to learn how to manipulate the template parameters and unless you have a background in cataloging or reference librarianship, it may be too daunting a task. Nevertheless, I can teach anyone how to cite in MLA or even APA, Chicago or other referencing styles that eliminates all the malformed template errors. Bzuk (talk) 14:28, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I have now addressed all the stylistic issues of dates, names, overlinking, use of foreign words, and other than providing a notes section, there are no significant concerns to deal with; I will take one more sweep to spot any superficial or minor problems, but otherwise, I think it is ready at least, for peer review. As you may note, I have made no revisions as to content which is relatively accurate. In terms of FA reviews, a reviewer will look for consistency in style, format, stability, detailing and indications that a comprehensive, authoritative and thorough account is present. Illustrations are also considered in the  overall review. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 14:28, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I am not the reviewer, merely an editor getting the article ready for review. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 07:08, 6 February 2011 (UTC).

WikiCup/History/Submissions/Sp33dyphil
That will be fine to claim for, but you can't claim until it has been closed. J Milburn (talk) 01:05, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:25, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Reflinks
How come everytime I type in "Aeroflot" on this page and press "Run reflinks", it says that I'm not logged on? Sp33dyphil (T • C • I love Wikipedia!)  12:09, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Runs fine to me. Aeroflot's refs don't need fixing it seems. Except for one ref which has no title: http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?frd/cstdy:@field%28DOCID+su0388%29 . Are you sure you were logged in at the time?-- Obsidi ♠ n Soul  13:01, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Archiving "generated" PDFs
Remember those pesky "generated" PDFs like the ones on the Airbus website.

I know just how to archive them.

Go to http://www.webcitation.org - Go to "Archive" (at http://www.webcitation.org/archive ) - Enter the URL of the document and your e-mail address, and the website will archive it for you

It's useful in case the document is taken down from the original site. WhisperToMe (talk) 23:02, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

List of Boeing 777 operators
Have you had a chance to address the comments I left for you last month? Just wondering if the nomination has stalled for some reason. Cheers, and all the best. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:55, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, if you don't respond in the next 24 hours I'll fail the nomination and remove it. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:01, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Wikiwings

 * Note, please feel free to add this to your user page, citing diff . Thanks again! SynergyStar (talk) 02:12, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:13, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Justin Boren/GA1
Please review Talk:Justin Boren/GA1.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:05, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Did you get sidetracked. You seem to have only partially passed the article. Please complete the standard procedures outlined at WP:GAC.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:39, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 08:13, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

List of heads of state of the Soviet Union
Hi Sp33dyphil. About a month ago, you indicated on the FLC of the above list that you would review it. Do you still intend to do so? Dabomb87 (talk) 23:47, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
 * In addition, are you still following your own FLC, Featured list candidates/List of Boeing 777 operators/archive1? Dabomb87 (talk) 23:47, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Airbus A340
Nothing is different from the Airbus A330 article, and I will not be interested in doing any work on this as it involves again, rewriting almost every template. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 17:11, 15 February 2011 (UTC).

Vietnam Airlines
Please note that there is an established standard for Airport/Airlines articles, and all such articles follow it. I have had to revert your edits yet again for said reason; please do not change to suit personal preferences again.
 * There are also additional faults with your edits (eg: "Mumbay" does not exist, China must be spelt out in full as People's Republic of China, etc etc).

Project guidelines are available at WP:Airlines and WP:Airports - please familiarise yourself with them. Should you wish to deviate from consensus, please bring up the matter for discussion at the WP:Airlines talk page where other editors can weigh in. Thanks, Jasepl (talk) 07:07, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Also
The correct place to send a message to another user is the user's talk page; not the user page itself. Thanks, Jasepl (talk) 07:12, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 20:26, 18 February 2011 (UTC)