This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
[1] Would you please have a look at the contributions made by this guy and give me a second opinion. Thanks. Wee Curry Monstertalk 10:32, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 13 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion
Hi, are you able to make it for tomorrow's 10th anniversary meetup tomorrow? We would like you to be there since you are one of our most active users from Singapore. It starts at 1100, but you can come at around 1300-1400 if you want more sleep. I personally hope that you will there as you've been a great asset to our community, being the new face of SGpedians'. Please email me and reply asap. Thanks. :) Terence (talk) 12:14, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Singapore? For real? Halfway around the world, and we're often editing at the same time UTC. That says something, though I'm not sure what. :( ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 13:30, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 13 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
The Barnstar of Good Humor
For this. Cheered me up while I was mindlessly browsing. It didn't last, but it's not like you give a fuck, right? SwarmX 08:46, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
On another note, for someone who DGAF, you have a ton of messages on this page. I mean, wow. BTW, your edit notice contains a wheel-warring policy, even though you're not an admin. SwarmX 08:58, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hey Dave, I checked in on the problem child today and found this reply. I've got a million things to say but am in no mood to do so right now; however, I'll keep tabs on the page and drop may my two cents in. I'm just concerned that, given my past negative interactions with them, I won't do any good by "siding with the enemy". Airplaneman ✈ 02:54, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 15:29, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Singapore
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello, I would be grateful if you would not remove the spaces that I have put in between parameters in references. I always put a space between each one whenever I am editing any article because the result is then much easier to follow in the edit window and also in diffs. Thank you -- Alarics (talk) 12:58, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Pants
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I dropped by to say hi, when I saw the thermometer at the top of your talk page. No pants? There was an image I didn't need :-).
Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
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, guidelines for use at WP:MINOR). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and all users will still be able to manually mark their edits as being minor in the usual way.
For well-established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. 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) 20:32, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LX, February 2011
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 21:29, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
Possible IP sock
Latest comment: 13 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion
I had a shameless hunch you might recognize him. I shamelessly hope it's proved the IP is a shameful sock, then I can shamelessly "shoot on sight" when he edits the Parliamentary republic again, as he no doubt shamelessly will! - BilCat (talk) 05:35, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
RFC
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
How do you cite sources on the size pannel. There is no place for them according to what I've seen. And you left several comments which meant the same thing on my page. The Eaton-Fuller CEEMAT is used in Abrahms tanks as an alternative for several years. I was in the United States Marine Corps for 34 years. Thank you. Route66draw (talk) 05:25, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 13 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Regarding your AIV report re. Shivanshkhare (talk·contribs), I'm a bit puzzled. We are talking about this edit which they keep trying to add, only to have it reverted as "unsourced", but it looks to me as if that statement is actually covered by the source referenced. Actually, it looks like a straight quote, which may be problematic, but that's a different issue. Favonian (talk) 16:13, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
Their actions constitute edit warring, so I've dropped yet another warning on their talk page and will monitor the situation. Favonian (talk) 16:49, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 01:31, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Answer
Latest comment: 13 years ago12 comments3 people in discussion
:p Btw, the essay's talk page makes for interesting reading - always trust incompetance to stand up for itself! ;) - BilCat (talk) 04:24, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Another good example is found here, and on the article's talk page. - BilCat (talk) 04:51, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
"...a largely ceremonial position without much influence." Wow. Try to picture a whole series of Millard Fillmores. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 08:46, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
That competence essay gets mentioned from time to time on ANI. Usually when an editor's competence is questioned. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 08:44, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 13 years ago10 comments4 people in discussion
Hi there,
In wandering the wiki, I came across your user-talk page. As you may or may not know, Wikipedia is popularly considered a hostile place for new users, and we're finding more and more quantifiable evidence that the tenor and tone of discussions with established editors makes a real difference. I wonder if you'd consider reviewing the message at the top of this page (the one that starts with Troll-by-gone) and consider the impact of that notice on a new user who might be innocently coming here to ask a question. It seems to me that's likely to frighten them away. Anyway, just a thought. Philippe Beaudette, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 00:50, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
That's Troll-Be-Gone®. Let's get our brand names straight. :) I can see where some of the phraseology could be improved to take the edge off it (that would be the Hanlon's razor's edge, most likely) or to make it a little clearer to the newbie. I must point out that I do appreciate Dave sending his excess traffic my way. It can get kind of slow in the old hutch sometimes. :) ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 01:24, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Just changing "is protected" to "may be protected" might be sufficient. It's vaguely like what I say on my talk page, whether it's currently protected or not. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 07:58, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
I would put a line break in, so that "Frankly, I can forgive..." would be on a separate line, or maybe even om a separate box, as it wouldn't apply to a genuine newbie. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 08:58, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
While I do appreciate the effort that WP spends on making new users feel welcome, it would be nice to see at least a fraction of that energy directed towards the retention of experienced users. I've seen dozens of good editors leave because of those who bend overr backwards to pretect "newbies" at the expense of allowing experienced users to endure continual harassment, esecially from regular users who abuse dynamic IPs to pretend to be newbies, but also from tenditious registered users. In doing this, WP will also be a more welcoming place to newbies, especially women, who won't have to endure the full-combat nature of many discussion pages caused by trolls and tenditiuous users. - BilCat (talk) 09:43, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Doing my best imitation of the user Cuddlyable3, I took the liberty of changing "maybe" to "may be" at the top of this page. :) "Maybe" is like an adverb. "May be" is like a verb. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 18:55, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
OK, thanks. Given that Obama spent some time in Indonesia, I had thought maybe "Krupuk" was used as a slur for Indonesian/SE Asian Muslims. The whole post is still very trollish. - BilCat (talk) 01:21, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Without wishing to influence any conclusion, I suggest you take 5 mins to peruse the history of the article, the various edits, the reverts by the parties involved and let me know your conclusions. Wee Curry Monstertalk 07:51, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
Friendly fire (Oxymoron if ever there was one)
Latest comment: 12 years ago10 comments4 people in discussion
Dave,
Beg a favour? Could you look at Friendly fire for me. We had a major problem with a sock puppet circus see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Paulioetc, which I'm pretty sure is Generalmesse another sock puppet master of mine and User:Noclador's acquaintance. Two of Paulio's IP socks are continuing to edit but seem to be adding a mixture of legitimate items with an element of wikifiddling. See Talk:Friendly fire#Recent Paulio edits. Am I being paranoid due to the past history? A sanity check would be appreciated. Wee Curry Monstertalk 21:23, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
Its OK I'm not paranoid. Get this, he thought the numbers sounded a bit high, so he guessed about half was about right. Wee Curry Monstertalk 22:19, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
Dave asked me to look into this. I note that the SPI case has led to both the IP accounts being blocked and the Friendly fire article has now been semi protected - is there still a need for admin intervention here? cheers Nick-D (talk) 07:51, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
No worries at all Dave - and I'm sorry to read about your loss. Nick-D (talk) 08:01, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Dave, personal life comes way before wikipedia and I understand completely. If you weren't aware, I went through the same thing myself a few weeks ago. Family and yourself come first at times like this and I'm so sorry to have troubled you at this time. It is resolved for now, at the time I posted, I just wanted a 2nd opinion as a sanity check.
My condolences at this sad and difficult time, if I can help just ask. Wee Curry Monstertalk 17:33, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:09, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Dave,
I just wanted so say thanks, I hope this finds you well.
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Just to let you know I've remove the speedy tag you added to Vincent Voorn and restored the content that appeared before vandalism occured. It is actually supposed to be about a Dutch Olympic competitor - Basement12(T.C) 10:24, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago14 comments2 people in discussion
Could you sanity check the intro to South Orkney Islands for me. Accusations of POV are on the talk page. Not sure if its a language confusion I did the competing sovereignty claims in chonological order; note the "also" in the second sentence. I'm buggered if I'll put bad grammar into an article just to satisfy POV pushers but a sanity check I've not inadvertently made a SNAFU would be most welcome. Wee Curry Monstertalk 18:45, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Commented on airliner v aircaft. Somewhat bizarre, was that guy for real?
Not sure I understand the argument on the second one, does the guy want alternative alphabets to be used on en.wikipedia? Wee Curry Monstertalk 23:21, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Don't worry I'm walking away, there is no point in trying to reason or explain with that guy. When you observe an editor changing his story when the history is there to refute it, you know there is no chance of reasonable dialogue. Wee Curry Monstertalk 19:08, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
But that series of articles does need some serious admin oversight. Paulio is obsessed with inserting a claim that a British FAC was responsible for a friendly fire incident. He wasn't, in fact no one was, it was just one of those things (and from experience I feel for the guy, there but for the grace of god and all that). Its a blatant BLP violation. BTW have you seen some of the sources used on that article, I mean really, WP:RS seems a not very funny joke there. Wee Curry Monstertalk 21:14, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Would you not think it odd, that a "new" editor seems to have more knowledge of arcane elements of wiki policy than an editor of 4 years experience? Wee Curry Monstertalk 21:56, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Mmm, our new editor's account was registered in 2008, displaying a familiar refusal to get the point, deploying some absurd twists of logic. Another editor with whom I have never interacted, claiming to "know my style", who also turns out to be a serial sock puppeteer. And an arbcom case launched by a serial sock puppeteer. Can you join the dots? Wee Curry Monstertalk 08:13, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hello Dave. I debated about whether to report WIshIcOUldsAywhOIhAtEOnhErE tot UAA or AIV. I chose the latter and I see that you covered the former. Hopefully that will remove this problematic user one way or the other. Cheers and have a great weekend. MarnetteD | Talk 18:43, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:20, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
Talkback
Latest comment: 12 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
Hello, Dave1185. You have new messages at LessHeard vanU's talk page. Message added 11:16, 8 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
About my revert of your edit on user Bcs09's talk page, I had misunderstood what you had done, my apologies :) G.R. Allison (talk) 17:26, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
User:Isuzu1001, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Isuzu1001 and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Isuzu1001 during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. -- 李博杰 | —Talkcontribsemail 01:29, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
Chris Lu
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Can you help me? I'm trying to clean up my Wikipedia page. I spent a good amount of time yesterday editing it to make it more accurate, and all of the changes got undone. I tried to restore the changes, and then you undid them again. This page is often used to introduce me, and there's so much in here that's not necessary or relevant. Thanks in advance for your cooperation.
Latest comment: 12 years ago9 comments3 people in discussion
As a watcher of Bugs talk page I saw your message about BambiFan101 so I thought that I would leave you this link Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Bambifan101. I have seen items by other editors that one or two people have stopped editing Wikipedia due to BF's off wiki harassment. I hope that this is of some help and, if not, my apologies for taking up your time. Enjoy the rest of your Sunday. MarnetteD | Talk 18:16, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
I took a look at the that editors talk page. I know that we have had problems with editors from the Philippines in the past. If memory serves there was an occasional crossover with BF's editing of articles about animated films and shows but I don't remember any connection beyond that. I could be wrong as some of these long term problem editors blend together in my memory so I hope that I am not giving you dud info. MarnetteD | Talk 18:34, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
Well I trust yours and Bugs tingling when it comes to these. Indeed your abilities to sense socks is one of the main reasons (the other being the sense of humor that you both share!) that I have your talk pages on my watchlist. Please keep up the good work and, by all means, keep an eye on this one. MarnetteD | Talk 18:59, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
Hah - Creepier and Creepier said Malice To paraphrase poorly Lewis C MarnetteD | Talk 19:10, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
We do sometimes tend to go against the grain, rub folks the wrong way, and get into scrapes. Which just goes to show that grate minds work alike. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 19:11, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Hey, it looks like Singapore's S-70Bs are not yet in service. Aviation Week's source book did not list any in Jan. 2011. Is that still the case? I'll keep an eye for media reports to update. -Fnlayson (talk) 18:06, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
OK, the entry has been updated with that link. Thanks. -Fnlayson (talk) 03:22, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Look: and iPads for Singapore Soldiers. GPS app was the only military use I could thin of before reading the article. Maybe some military specific apps will also be added. -Fnlayson (talk) 23:22, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
CSD rationale
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I declined the CSD on Charummoodu as it shows up here, so isn't really an A1--SPhilbrickT 11:21, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi Dave1185. Thank you for your work on patrolling new pages and tagging for speedy deletion. I'm just letting you know that I declined your deletion request for Scott Cole, a page that you tagged for speedy deletion, because the criterion you used or the reason you gave does not cover this kind of page. Please take a moment to look at the suggested tasks for patrollers and review the criteria for speedy deletion. Particularly, the section covering non-criteria. Such pages are best tagged with proposed deletion, proposed deletion for biographies of living persons, or sent to the appropriate deletion discussion. Although there are certainly a whole mess of issues, notability is not one of them; he clearly passes the "significance" test.Ironholds (talk) 14:37, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Sockpuppet/Block Evasion?
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hello, Dave1185. You have new messages at Aoi's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Thanks re Pakistani missile research and development program
Latest comment: 12 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Thanks for having a sort-out at Pakistani missile research and development program. I'm not really "involved" - I just noticed it because of the careless move to a mis-spelling of Pakistan and the mover's apparently not noticing. :( They do seem to edit at high speed a bit. As a matter of curiosity, do you know why it's spelt program not programme, which latter is a redirect? I don't know anything about the history or about Pakistani English, or what the program(me) is officially called, if anything ... but it would be nice to get it right - however "right" can here be defined. Having said that, I am well out of my comfort zone for editing here anyway, so I might just shamble off whistling ... Thanks again, best wishes DBaK (talk) 12:05, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks very much for that. The other editor never commented so I assume they're happy ... or busy .., or something! And thanks for the fascinating link. :) Cheers, DBaK (talk) 17:30, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Well, I can't read Korean, so that didn't explain anything to me. To me, the bar for removing information from anyone's userpage other than your own is pretty high; I do assume that you're doing the removal in good faith, but I'm trying to understand what your logic is. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:34, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
As per your comment here,[2] I have no clue about this particular user, but I just had to point out that I once accused an IP-hopping vandal of being "rolling stock", and he protested that I was trying to railroad him. :) ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 05:57, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Thanks for your report at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism about Mohiobrother. I have blocked the user. However, I am somewhat puzzled by your description as "evidently a spambot or a compromised account". Recent edits seem to be of entirely of the same character as the first edits by this account, so I see no reason to suppose it was compromised. Also, the rate of editing has been well within the range of a normal human editor, and has never gone above 6 edits in a day, so I don't see why it should be thought to be a spambot. I would be very interested if you could explain your reason. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:23, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Aah, that explains something I had wondered about for a long time. Never having used Twinkle's report-to-AIV facility I didn't know it had standard messages, and I had wondered why so many editors all used particular forms of wording in their reports. With hindsight, it is so obvious that it would be due to use of an automated tool that I can't imagine why I didn't guess that ages ago. JamesBWatson (talk) 16:20, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Good humor, and lack thereof
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Greetings! Thank you for the barnstar. Yeah, I knew that new feature would get mixed reviews, but fine -- those who appreciate it will use it, those who don't won't, those who get unwanted notes of appreciation can always delete them (though I have a touch of skepticism for anyone who claims that they really don't want any notes of appreciation -- unless some of our users actually are space aliens, which is possible). Looking at other stuff on this page -- BilCat, if you are reading this, your comment on 4 May absolutely nails it, and ought to be cut out and framed. We should be doing whatever necessary to keep long-term contributors, hard as it is, as inevitably people get tired and want to do something else after a while. Oh, and once again thank you for the shout about my userspace essay. Have a great weekend! Antandrus (talk) 16:42, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago7 comments4 people in discussion
I've noticed that you reverted the move I've made on M39 cannon to Pontiac M39 cannon, and you described it as a vandalism attempt. Why have you reverted the move and why did you described it that way? --Mecanismo | Talk 18:37, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
You are needlessly rude. I don't see why do you feel the need to be rude to other fellow editors. Nevertheless, I've replied to you on Talk:M39 cannon. Feel free to reply -- Mecanismo | Talk 19:08, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
I've replied to your comment on talk:M39 cannon. And for god's sake, no one is attacking you. So, please don't go off insulting fellow wikipedians out of a whim -- Mecanismo | Talk 19:43, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago7 comments3 people in discussion
Hi Dave,
I suggest you get onto the IRC channel and request help from an admin on there so the guy impersonating you can't do any more damage. It will be quicker than waiting for an admin to check AIV.
They hard-blocked the user, so that might have taken the IP with it, but I'm not sure, so I went ahead and posted it at AIV. Forgiveness is good. That doesn't mean they don't get indef'd, though. :) My opinion is that Gogo blocked the right Dodo. :) ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 09:39, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Thanks for the revert on my talk page. I'm not sure what that is about, though the user name sounds familiar. Oh, well. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 20:44, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion
Hi Dave. Restoring the ISP template is fine, but probably best to avoid excessively poking the guy with edit summaries like "you're just helping to add to my edit count." 28bytes (talk) 12:32, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Hello Dave1185. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of File:Ethnic Groups And Languages.png, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: WP:F10 only applies to files other than image, audio, or video files. Thank you. — Malik ShabazzTalk/Stalk 20:31, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 22:43, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
Talkback
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hello, Dave1185. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Latest comment: 12 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion
See this revert, which probably belongs on the "My Favorite Reversions" list. Do you have any clue why "G280 is a more amenable number sequence [than G250] in certain cultures", and which cultures are in view here? Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 21:12, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
This blog may have a clue, but it doens't explain what the problem with "G250" was that would necessitate a change in the first place. Odd! - BilCat (talk) 21:27, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
Sounds like similar reasons for Airbus skipping A350/A360/A370 and using A380 for their double-decker airliner. -Fnlayson (talk) 22:08, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
Bingo! Per FlightGlobal, "a Chinese expert tells Flightglobal the number 250 can be translated into Mandarin as "stupid" or "idiotic"." I had a feeling there was a reason they waned to change from "250" to something else! The nose knows. :) - BilCat (talk) 19:16, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
Changing "links to redirects" to section anchor links
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hi, I noticed that you've been converting a few links to redirects into direct links to section anchors. While normally direct linking is preferred, sometimes it is not. Section headings can change, or be spun off into separate articles. By having a redirect point to a section anchor (ex. Harvest HAWK or MC-130J Combat Shadow II), we can avoid having to change all of those individual links, and instead just change the redirect. It also makes it easier to track down for changes later on, as a link to a redirect is more visible and easier to fix than a link to a section. I hope you will consider this in the future. Thanks! Ng.j (talk) 01:48, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion
Dear Sirs,
Please, note that the engine marked PS-90 has never been existed. It was marked as PS-90A from the very beginning. In support of this you can turn to the articles about the PS-90A in the annual issues of the recognized Jane’s aviation encyclopedia for the years of 80-90-s. In addition, we use the information of the engine manufacturer; see the Aviadvigatel’s edition Engine-Building Design Bureau. 50 years. History Pages, 1989, the article From M-25 to PS-90A. See also the Aviadvigatel’s website about the PS-90A engine (http://www.avid.ru/eng/products/civil/ps-90a/).
Based on the above the PS-90 title shall be changed to PS-90A, i.e. the false subject shall be removed from the encyclopedia. As the renaming I have tried to make the last time was rejected, please, give me advice what shall I do in such situation.
Yours sincerely, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Solovei777 (talk • contribs) 03:42, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
I reverted him before because he did a cut-and-paste move to PS-90A, and because the mateiral he added was an unattributed, poor translation of Russian article, with few sources. I've know real issue with moving the current article to Aviadvigatel PS-90A, provided that there was no pre-production PS-90 design (nothing I've seen precludes that), and assuming a PS-90B/C/D et al never appear! - BilCat (talk) 10:31, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
In my nearly 5 years on WP, I've seen several somewhat-good contributors degenerate into trolls and sock-masters. I sincerely hope HC doesn't follow that route. - BilCat (talk) 14:06, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion
Hello, I know you've been involved with editing the external links of Boyd Coddington. There's weird stuff going on that I don't quite understand since I know nothing about the subject. Going through the history, I'm not sure about what's correct and what's wrong. I think it should probably get semi-protected, but think someone in the know should look at it beforehand. Thanks! --CutOffTies (talk) 15:46, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
Alright, thank you --CutOffTies (talk) 17:24, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
Just an FYI, I opened a sockpuppet investigation because Boyd Jr. has yet to reply to my request on his user talk page, and more problematic behavior occurred after my request. -- Atama頭 17:14, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
Exceptions always exist, but not from that account! It's already been indeffed! Btw, I just read OWB #70, and it's so true! - BilCat (talk) 22:04, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
I've seen some exceptions too -- it's the 'devoid of content' part that's critical. Hoping I'm not giving away too much here, but back in the days I used to do a lot of troll-fighting I kept track of these. Starting pages with a dot is a giveaway. Here is an example; I was watching it, but someone nailed it with a checkuser. Here is one that's still on my sleeper watch list. So it goes ... (Oh and thanks for the shout on #70; unfortunately I really do find that to be true ...) Cheers both, Antandrus (talk) 01:41, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
I actually totally agree with the guy's point, but it ain't ever going to happen. As much as I hate it, the compromise exists for a reason, and that reason hasn't changed yet. Btw, I'm not sure what it is you think I'm thinking, but you can let me know elsewhere! :) - BilCat (talk) 22:14, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
Still, I'm convinced that if WP had been founded by a Brit, not by an American, there would be no such rule as ENGVAR, and British English would be standard usage in all articles. And we both know the Brtiish well enough to know I'm probably right! ;) - BilCat (talk) 22:31, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hi Dave, I've have been asked this question numerous times and the simple answer is that the Wiki templates (all of them!!) contain errors that are very difficult to correct, including use of second and et al. authors, full titling, multiple and first editions, location, date location. I have tried to get template designers to address the programming faults, to no avail. I can correct all of these programming errors, but it often makes more sense and less time to start out with the correct Harvard Citation or Modern Language Association (MLA) style guide employed in a "scratch cataloguing" format. Since I do Wikipedia editing as a diversion from my other work, I tend to spend little time and give articles only a cursory examination. If there is a very minor error such as a misplaced comma, I "tweak" the article and I don't usually elaborate on the change since it will show up in the history note on the article. As for citations, I rely on the MLA (Modern Language Association) style which is the world's most common bibliographic style and one that is accepted by Wikipedia. I have been utilizing this citation style in my own writing and in the cataloguing that I carried out in my other life as a librarian. I know that the standard today for library cataloguing is to simply download an entire MARC (MAchine Readable Cataloging) record form an established library but I continued to be a curmudgeon and relied on "scratch" editing which I still apply to Wikipedia work today. Basically it follows the old format of: Author. Title. Place of Publication: Publisher, Date of publication. (with variations to satisfy ordering and researching stipulations, usually ended by including an ISBN (international standard book number) and at times, page references). There are some subtle variations of the MLA style to facilitate multiple authors, articles, multimedia and other questions. Sorry for being verbose but I will make a point of stopping to clarify some of my edits but when it's merely a spelling, sentence or grammatical error, I will still give it a "tweak."
Further- the style employed for note citation is the Harvard Citation style which one other Wiki editor eons ago had begun to use and even though it works well with the MLA style, it is a separate system. Basically, the first reference is completely cited and all following references are provided in a brief format: "Author(s) Date, page." Sorry, I got off on a tangent in my earlier response, you merely wanted to know what style was being employed. FYI, my other problem is that I have a background stemming from 35+ years as a librarian and due my ancient teachings, I had gone through rigorous training for cataloguing and reference works. As you can visualize, I am an old fossil but I have in my last few years, been able to adopt newer technology. My last assignment in a high school library was eye-opening as my library technician and I simply downloaded MARC (Machine-Accessible Record Control) information from library collections where the questionable book was already cataloged. What a joy, simply copy someone else's cataloguing and paste it into our data base. To me that is like the "template" system but it isn't always the best way. I did have to resort at times to doing my own cataloguing to correct errors. As an author and editor, I have an interest in the mundane and arcane world of cataloguing and referencing.
As you may already determine, there are a number of suggested styles that are in place on Wikipedia. Many of these are based on the use of templates for editing and here is where the issue may actually be of discussion. The template guides have a number of variances that do not match the actual APA (American Psychological Association) style, which is one of the style guides used for referencing research. The APA guide was developed at a University level as a shorter, simpler guideline and intended for psychology, education, and other social sciences. University professors invariably assigned this guide to newcomers because it was considered easier to master and had the basic information required for a citation. However, the Wikipedia templates that were created by editors such as yourself or other editors used the APA style, or some slight variations of it.
I do understand the use of templates, it is merely that the catalog information that is in the "widely-used" template is based on a system that is not best adapted for research papers. I understand that many editors may prefer a template because it looks simple to use but as I indicated before; for me, it is just as fast to "scratch catalog" and if you know how to use the MLA style, it actually provides more information for the user. There have been some efforts to rewrite the templates but I find it easier to do without them and still give a source citation. Again, that's me... where I have been involved in major articles- see Amelia Earhart, North American P-51 Mustang and the Avrocar (aircraft), you will find that I have properly referenced sources of information (just not with templates). As to other's suggestion of having the template designers revise their work, I can't see challenging the whole wiki editing group when most people rely on the templates. My rewriting them to a more commonly used style would take a whole lot of explanation, as I have attempted to do for you. It's hard to summarize 30 years worth of cataloging experience for a non-librarian and make it relevant. If I didn't care what system I used, why would I change? would be the obvious reply. BTW, if you ask me the time, I will tell you how to design a clock. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 17:46, 23 July 2011 (UTC).
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Dave, I understand your frustration with non-communicative editors, especially those who are violating important rules, like Copyrights. These are very important areas and I appreciate you noticing these and tagging them. I agree though, you probably want to step back for a bit as there are only two editors editing the MEDEA Awards article, you and Syllily, and you at opposing each others editing which means it will start to appear personal very soon - maybe it already has. Although it's clear that you know what you are doing and the other editor doesn't as far as the rules go, that editor has put effort in and is probably very attached to the article. I noticed you are using rollback (both Twinkle and native) to revert without custom edit summaries, though certainly there was no vandalism by Syllilly. I'm guessing that's a sign of getting frustrated with the user and not typical but you need to be careful with that. Again, the identification of the copyright issues was very important, I think you just need to move on to another one and stop back MEDEA Awards in a week, if you really want to. Take care and please, keep up the good work!--Doug.(talk • contribs) 13:20, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
I know how that goes. I've run into you repeatedly over the last few days, looked at your contribs, saw nothing that concerns me other than your multi-page talkpage header, which can be easily remedied. Either way please consider this an awkward offer to nominate you, should you change your mind. SQLQuery me! 08:32, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello, Dave1185, and thanks for all your contributions to Singapore-related articles! You are invited to comment at Money No Enough's peer review and Xiaxue's peer review. I rewrote both articles and am aiming for both to attain GA status. Thank you. 谢谢. Terima kasih. Arigato. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 15:14, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Rollback
Latest comment: 12 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi dude! The agarwal edits has started again! He is doing the same thing. Have a look. [6]Shriram (talk) 16:53, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Needs watching
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
User:777sms has made some odd page moves of late, all undiscussed, and might be worth us both keeping an eye on, if you aren't watching it already. - BilCat (talk) 01:30, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
Over-optimistic!
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
It's quite funny the names that some vandals choose to register under. User:Havefunchangingmyedits was definitely over-optimistic, as it only made one mainspace edit before being indef blocked! ROFL - BilCat (talk) 21:03, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
Oh, I see they deleted its user page too, so that now can't as reverted editS. What a shame. - BilCat (talk) 06:47, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Familar sock?
Latest comment: 12 years ago7 comments3 people in discussion
Dave (or one of his lurkers), do you remember the user who keeps showing up and adding info to accident articles using socks? Haydenthegreat might be one of them, but I can't remember the username of the original sock-puppeteer. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 06:47, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll drop YSSYguy a line. - BilCat (talk) 09:55, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
User:AOCJedi is another possible candidate, as he's currently indef-blocked for adding copyvios, which in the problem in the Alaska Airlines Flight 261 article. - BilCat (talk) 10:19, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Well the spelling certainly is shithouse enough for it to be him, and one of Ryan kirpatrick's almost forty registered socks was User:Hayden Air. I'd like to see some prose edits before I would declare positively that it is him. YSSYguy (talk) 15:19, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
I included Haydenthegreat in another SPI for Ryan kirkpatrick, the checkuser says it's not him. YSSYguy (talk) 22:09, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I've just spun off Chinese aircraft carrier ex-Varyag from Soviet aircraft carrier Varyag. There is an article on Chinese wiki, but of course I can't read it. I'd be interested in they call it the Shi lang there or not. Any other help with the article would of cource be appreciated, once the Inuse header comes down. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 22:15, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
"Facepalm of the month"
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
This one is isn't in Chinese: Soko Vazduhoplovna Industrija, ro Vazduhoplovstvo. It's another gem from our resident "move first, defend your move later" user, Petebutt. Sigh. I've dropped a line on Milb1's talk page asking for help in dealing with his constant undiscussed moves, but I though your face might need palming today. :) - BilCat (talk) 07:58, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
More users to watch
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
User:Ao333 is back. Also, User talk:Vosplay needs watching, as he's using unreliable sources. See especially this gem, including calling the C919 a "jumbo jet", as in the cited PRC "news" sources. - BilCat (talk) 01:52, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
My sanity is doubted once more
Latest comment: 12 years ago6 comments4 people in discussion
If your source states that X claimed the settlement was destroyed, in his claim against the US, then it is perfectly neutral to state that is it not? I only ask as someone who has no sources has decided to change it today, after siding with two editors who having not gotten their way have been resorting to disruptive editing for months now. Am I insane, or is there something in the water round here? It may be just a single word change but caving into disruptive editing merely encourages that as a future tactic. Again does this make me insane or are the lunatics taking over the asylum? Wee Curry Monstertalk 18:06, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
See WP:RSN (Falkland Islands) as the source is not only not available for anyone to check unless they are in Germany or South Africa, it is self-published as well <g>. Last I checked, SPS sources are not utile in articles, but I might be wrong. Cheers. Collect (talk) 18:23, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
Stalking me as well, you have clearly lost your sense of perspective. Wee Curry Monstertalk 19:00, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
Just read the RSN page. I stalk no one. Cheers. Collect (talk) 19:03, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
To WCM, Dave may be on holiday, so you might want to aks an admin for help, possibly in private. To Collect, please be careful about posting on user talk pages after someone else has posted about you. They are usually post such messages because they are feeling embattled, and needs some help/advice/encouragement. When you also post there, it just increases that feeling. Give people a little space when you're having conflicts with them, and let them have room to vent a little without your interference. Otherwise it does lend to the appearance of hounding (that's the politically correct term for WP stalking). - BilCat (talk) 19:53, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 21:47, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
One ping, aye aye Comrade sir
Latest comment: 12 years ago4 comments1 person in discussion
Hello, Dave1185. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hi Dave! Welcome back -- I noticed you were gone for a while and it's good to see your name appear on my watchlist again. -- I see you noticed the French translation. There's one in Hungarian that I've seen, and I remember seeing it in other languages too (Japanese, Spanish, and maybe one other) though I'm not finding them at the moment. Honestly that's like the most flattering thing that has happened to me in seven years of Wikipedia. But if what I wrote there helps someone in some way -- that's what I want. Cheers! Antandrus (talk) 13:29, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Thanks for all your contributions to Wikipedia, especially Singapore-related articles! I have written an article about Pathlight School, a Singaporean special school for autistic children, and am aiming to make it Wikipedia's first GA pertaining to special education. You are invited to comment at its ongoing peer review; any and all constructive feedback would be most appreciated. All the best in all your endeavours! --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 03:13, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXVI, August 2011
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 17:46, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
Construcciones Aeronáuticas SA
Latest comment: 12 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Latest comment: 12 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion
User:Baneofzombies has been adding copyvio images to Commons as his own work. I have no clue, but do you think we've encountered this user before, under another name? - BilCat (talk) 16:45, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
The user is either a bit slow on the uptake, or just doesn't care. Either way, WP is not therapy, and he's going to blocked on here and Commons both if he doesn't stop. - BilCat (talk) 00:40, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
Sanity check
Latest comment: 12 years ago28 comments4 people in discussion
The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived:Enough is enough, Marshal can rot in hell for all he wants and it still wouldn't be our fault. Read → WP:ROPE.
[7] Would you share your thoughts on this guy? Wee Curry Monstertalk 21:45, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
Please don't even respond to this Dave. ;) (WQA discussion ongoing) Best regards, Swarmu / t 03:38, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Fair enough Dave, for info he spun my comments here at WQA into an allegation I was accusing him of insanity. And they swallowed it. FFS, I give up the lunatics are taking over. Wee Curry Monstertalk 09:46, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
While users like that will distort context to suit their own uses, being more precise/unambiguous will help other, more intelligent editors to avoid "swallowing it". Might I suggest the more wordy "Request for a check on my sanity", "Am I going insane??" or something comparable, for future use? :) - BilCat (talk) 12:33, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Thoughts? As usual you are entirely correct, one of the reasons I keep coming back. Its still irksome for an egregious demonstration of bad faith to pass without comment at WQA. #3 is so very true. Bill took that on board, I'll run it up the flag pole and see who salutes it. Wee Curry Monstertalk 12:41, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
But give it as unambiguous a meaning as you can, if possible. :) - BilCat (talk) 14:57, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
I'm genuinely amused [8][9], best laugh I had in ages. I pray for intelligent life on other worlds. Wee Curry Monstertalk 19:40, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
WCM, had you been willing to admit your own mistakes as Marshal had, I certainly would have given you a barnstar as well. However, WQA is a two way street. You made it clear that you were not willing to accept Marshal's self-imposed remedies, nor did you acknowledge your own mistakes. Then Dave started commenting, shortly after the apparent personal attacks above (which was a disappointment to me personally, as I've always thought Dave to an all-around nice guy). With all that in mind, I made the decision to close the thread.
I've worked at WQA quite a bit, and I can assure you that the response from Marshal was, literally, the best possible outcome that could have been achieved (i.e. "I'm sorry, I won't do it again"). The only reason it was being left open was out of the hope that you would take the same approach. That never happened. Like I said, if Marshal is lying and they continue to make personal attacks, you're more than free to proceed to WP:ANI and cite the WQA thread as a failed attempt at dispute resolution, and they'll probably be blocked. However, in the spirit of WP:AGF, I absolutely am not going to assume that's the case, and I take their remedies as genuine.
At worst, Marshal admitted they were wrong. I can't fathom why that's not satisfactory to you, so I can only assume that you don't realize the WQA is just a discussion board, not a place where sanctions are handed out. In any case, I'm sorry you weren't satisfied with the result, and if the behavior continues, you're free to proceed to a higher level of dispute resolution. If you have any questions, just ask. Regards, Swarmu / t 20:20, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
"Also, you should not have given the idiot a barnstar and closed that thread as you're an involved editor now." ← I'm involved in what, and how so? And I gave an extremely detailed rationale for my closing; it was well thought out. And I've worked at WQA a lot, and, from experience, Marshal handled it in an exemplary way, hence the barnstar. It's clear you had a "side" in this conflict, but as far as I know it's resolved. What's wrong? Swarmu / t 00:08, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
Wow Dave, I think that's a bit dramatic. I'm not on anyone's side at all, and I absolutely don't see you as a rival or anything like that. I just believe in rewarding civil, positive behavior, which is what I saw at WQA. I'm sorry if you think that was a false front being put on, and for the umpteenth time, if Marshal continues to make personal attacks in spite of his pledge, I will of course, support administrator intervention and yes, I'll redact the evil barnstar-who-must-not-be-named. I'm simply not going to assume that that's going to happen before it does. Also, I assure you that I wasn't involved in this dispute (contributing in an dispute resolution role does not make you involved) and I closed it in good faith. When someone reports someone at WQA, they should be looking for an acknowledgement of the bad behavior, and a promise to discontinue it. WCM got that from Marshal! If there was something else you think the WQA could have accomplished, I'd be more than happy to hear it. Swarmu / t 00:41, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
Dave my apologies if this has cluttered up your talk page, not my intent you understand. I'm off for a cold one and to take 5. Wee Curry Monstertalk 20:42, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Would it surprise you if someone was following me around opposing any proposal I make? Could I ask you if I I am being paranoid? [10][11]. I've not responded. Wee Curry Monstertalk 16:03, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
Interesting. Perhaps a few comments/proposals on random pages neither of you frequent might be helpful in seeing if he is hounding or not? If he is, an ANI would be approriate, I would think. - BilCat (talk) 16:21, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
I'm surprised that this is still going on. Have the personal attacks continued? And what is the extent of the stalking (one of those two diffs is a page they're already active on). Why have you not proceeded with dispute resolution? WQA is an entry-level forum, not your only option. If there are still behavioral problems, I would suggest you bring this up at ANI. As an aside, I don't make it my business to judge anyone's character, and I don't think anyone should. Swarm 18:01, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
I would love to think that the editor will finally learn better, but, to be realistic, unfortunately I will not be at all surprised if this is just a step towards an indefinite block. See WP:ROPE. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:47, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Speaking of that, the Cubs are about to go into hibernation one again. At least there was no suspense this year, as they sucked from Day One. d:( ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 11:40, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Never heard of them before, but now it looks like I need to invest in their work. :) ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 11:49, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Bon chance, mes amis. I tried to politely steer them only to be accused of being rude. See the comments that lead to him being blocked. Wee Curry Monstertalk 14:41, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago16 comments7 people in discussion
You'll note that some "brilliant" admin has deleted Template:Facepalm. His resoning makes no sense, so it should be pretty esy to get the deletion reviewed ans overturned. - BilCat (talk) 13:22, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
Its about time there was a ground swell of opinion from ordinary editors who have had enough of being lectured by sanctimonious twits about civility, who are usually completely ignoring a troll or a knob to do so. We should appeal to Jimbo .... Wee Curry Monstertalk 13:47, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
....and for the avoidance of doubt, I'm thinking of sanctimonius twits in general not anyone in particular. Wee Curry Monstertalk 13:48, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
Excuse me, but that is blatantly calling myself and other admins who have attempted to address your lack of civility "sanctimonious twits". I'm sure you'll understand that, while I am perfectly fine with you removing perfectly valid sections from your talkpage, calling me names is childish and far from civil. — Joseph Fox 15:39, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
So we are not allowed to express the opinion that there are sanctimonious twits on WIkipedia, because someone who thinks it applies to them may see it as a personal attack? How much further should we extend this principal? A ban on saying that some people vandalise Wikipedia, because vandals might think it's a personal attack? A ban on saying that some people use Wikipedia for promotion, because spammers may feel personally attacked? A ban on saying that some administrators sometimes make silly decisions, because administrators with a low degree of competence may feel attacked? Are we to pretend that everyone here is perfect? There are, alas, many sanctimonious twits on Wikipedia. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:28, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
Amen. Whilst I was bored, I had a go at a template. -> Running with scissors is too dangerous for Wikipedia!Wee Curry Monstertalk 20:45, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
Many thanks to Dave for pointing out how absurd this situation is and more thanks to JamesBWatson for stating the case so well. MarnetteD | Talk 21:14, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello, Dave1185. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
The Whaling page. One of the most agenda driven pages on Wiki
Latest comment: 12 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Dear Dave, If you can take a look at the Whaling page. It is the most agenda driven page I have ever seen. The history section has only three short paragraphs! I mean this is to cover centuries of whaling and the major whaling ports and why war were fought on the subject. For get the ships, techniques of whaling or culture -- ie there is not mention what so ever of Mobey Dick even. The rest of the large article is a report card of the anti-whaling movement and nations that still whale, etc. They will say it is wrong to write about the horrid practice the extinction of the whales. That would be like saying you can not talk about German bombers on the Bomber page because of the genocide of the Jews or the B-29 because it dropped the A-bombs. I found out about this, because I came across an interesting article hunting whales off of South Africa. I could not find a section to put it one the Whaling page. And for the record I am against large scale whaling. But this is not the reason for the existence of Wiki. I hope you can get someone to look into this. Jack Jackehammond (talk) 07:31, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago8 comments3 people in discussion
The Barnstar of Diplomacy
I am not sure how many edits I have looked at today, the number has to be somewhere in the 2-3 thousand range. But none of them have made me breathe a sigh of relief like this[12] one. I suddenly find that the headache that has been building this last few hours is gone... you are better than Excedrin. Trusilver 21:22, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
All I can say is... damn... your entire talk page looks like a bigger battle ground than mine does on my worst months. Well, maybe not... there was that little cage match between ArbCom members and a handful of doctors of physics that took place on my talk page a couple years ago... Trusilver 21:37, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
I would say it's time to put the stick down and let the Vietnamese Wikipedia's answer to Che Guevara go off and live in his own world, though. :) Trusilver 21:59, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
El Che wasn't completely appreciated within his own lifetime either, I'm sure this guy will be no different. (Although his face probably won't be showing up on t-shirts sold at Old Navy.... probably) Trusilver 22:09, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
The Barnstar of Good Humor
I remember the lad when he was Bing Hitler to be doubly outrageous. I'm not convinced he was even shaving then. Wee Curry Monstertalk 21:27, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Remember being castigated for "biting" newbies? Guess who was blocked for trolling and harassment.... FacepalmWee Curry Monstertalk 20:00, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
by Continuous editing with Original research and adding statements like "But foolish taunts, statements, and open threats by senior Indian" user User:Ironboy11 has degraded the article Pokhran-II please revert the editings with possible actions against the User:Ironboy11 --dBigXray (talk) 21:55, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
article Homi J. Bhabha has also been changed by the User:Ironboy11 with Original research. :( --dBigXray (talk) 22:04, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Strange One
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Latest comment: 12 years ago15 comments3 people in discussion
Thanks for trying to tone down his aggression. Much appreciated. He's following all my edits and making complain sections in the all of the talk pages even though I am in a habit of citing whatever content I add, but this gets really annoying. He actually deleted a whole paragraph from an article and gave it a cover up of linking a wiki article to some other text simultaneously. I've been every ready for discussions on the article talk pages. --lTopGunl (talk) 11:26, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks alot. I'm trying to link articles like WP:Civility & WP:BOLD to him in replies instead of flaming. Hope it gets resolved just like that. --lTopGunl (talk) 11:37, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
yes I would have been glad and this ridiculous situation would not have arrived in the first place had lTopGunl had really followed whats written inside WP:Civility & WP:BOLD before commenting on me. just "trying to link articles like WP:Civility & WP:BOLD in comments" will not solve problems but one also needs to read and follow whats written inside articles like WP:Civility & WP:BOLD . regards--dBigXray (talk) 12:33, 12 October 2011 (UTC) sorry dave your page is not the place for all this but i added here just for the sake of context--dBigXray (talk) 12:34, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
i did not mean to disturb you. sorry but from what i have read about wiki rules i came to know that talk pages are place for discussion (not just a one on one chat), still i responded as the matter was about me.in any case this my last message here (the next if any) will be on my talk page--dBigXray (talk) 16:07, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi Dave. The text below is quite long and is infact not your problem. But since you've been mentoring him since some time, I'd like to ask you what to do. Kindly check.
Inspite of my repeated warnings, dbigxray is continuously wiki-stalking & wiki-hounding me just because he couldn't resolve the matter on the talk pages as early as he wanted. [15][16][17][18][19].
On the relevant articles, commenting is one thing (yes he might be right on some occasions, but trivially that's why a discussion on talk page is taking place), but starting sections like "edits by 'so n so user'" and then posting a copy paste of that everywhere has pushed my patience over. Yet I have not made any inflamatory remarks on any talk page against him.
You can see him continuously campaigning on the talkpage (and editing) each and every article I have edited (regardless of the fact that his comments have no relation to pages) like [20]. The 'non-reliable' sources he's mentioning aren't even being used here and in so many other pages of which I have now lost count.
Edited my talk page [21][22][23] to put up with the harassment campaign and spammed it with the same issue about pakdef.info's reliablilty which I was readily discussing on the articles to which it was cited. Infact I even let them be making no more edits since at least yesterday. Yet there's no way that I can stop him of pursuing wp:canvassing.
And then after I got tired of his repeated comments, I told him politely not to edit my talk page again soon after which he posted the same spam on my page [24]. He also disrupted the article in question [25] and added unattributed content even though a clear consensus was just established with other editors on the talk page [26].
Also, I'll like to add his hostile attitude in his initial interaction with me [27] assuming vandalism instead of good faith. At another point in the same initial interaction he warned me about removing content from my own talk page, when it is trivial that diffs are always there and I'm not hiding something [28].
I've exhausted all ways of explanations and warnings, and I'm sure he will continue to keep this campaign going since he goes for an edit war as soon as I revert & talk on page (see the references provided). I would like to report him if there's no other way to stop because I'm sure he simply stalks my contributions. --lTopGunl (talk) 23:13, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
Looks like his canvassing campaign is still full on and he's recruiting another one [29][30] (new edits). Anyway, I'll report it since I can't think of anything else to do. The break tip was already clicking my mind but you confirmed it for me, I think I really need one :-]. Thanks alot for your help and advice. --lTopGunl (talk) 01:02, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Saw an allegation of sock-puppetry from him [31] (which you already know of). Even though I don't have huge edit counts, but I've been registered since 5 years and I'm open to all verifications. I've now reported on WP:ANI. --lTopGunl (talk) 12:36, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
He's back
Latest comment: 12 years ago8 comments2 people in discussion
He's one that needs watching, that's all. Tends to add POV material based on his own writings at TMF and globalsecurity.org. - BilCat (talk) 16:24, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
As I said, he needs watching - using a placard as a ref, and non-English at that? Facepalm Not to mention the OR he added earlier on HASes and runways in response to HCobb silly news-droppings. and which he reverted the first deletion of. Facepalm - BilCat (talk) 23:56, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Did you hear about the guy who was tried for stabbing a man? He told the judge he was running with scissors, and the other guy came around a corner and ran into him. The judge said, "You mean to tell me he ran around that corner 47 times?" - BilCat (talk) 14:23, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello Dave. You're quite right, Cornell University doesn't own the word. If you're sure that there is no primary topic for Cornell, do you have time to help repair the incoming links so they point to the University again? This tool has some helpful statistics and links. Thanks, Certes (talk) 22:24, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
Contact fuse
Latest comment: 12 years ago10 comments3 people in discussion
Yes, I know it should be fuze but we have a skeleton theorist claiming that per WP:ENGVAR it should be fuse. Comment by someone with knowledge at Talk:Contact fuse to restore my faith in humanity would be welcome. Wee Curry Monstertalk 11:19, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
See the archives in Talk:Fuze, particularly past discussions about the OED. Every other wikipedia article bar this one uses fuze and its fuze throughout the document. Every time a move is tried a bunch of the non-involved come out to frustrate it. A fuse is an electronic component, the fact the yanks call it a fuze is immaterial. Wee Curry Monstertalk 17:56, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
People seem incapable of understanding there is a difference between a length of saltpetre soaked string per Fuse (explosives) and a complex device for detonating the explosive charge in a weapon per Fuze. Wee Curry Monstertalk 18:21, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
Sorry the ignorant have come out of the woodwork to claim it is a spelling difference per WP:ENGVAR and are blocking the move again. You try and explain it and they won't listen. Running with scissors is too dangerous for Wikipedia!Wee Curry Monstertalk 07:54, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
I'm waiting for the inevitiable revert of my deletions of those comments from one of the pages by some unwitting do-gooder. I think the fact that the dimwit IP spammed the question on 3 pages warrants their deletions. - BilCat (talk) 16:47, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
They seem to have similar edit histories. - BilCat (talk) 21:31, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
Yeah but why? It makes no sense at all. I still suspect there is someone else there. Wee Curry Monstertalk 21:38, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
BKM seemed very upset at you, so I assume that's why. They'll probably get blocked for abusive use of socks before long. - BilCat (talk) 21:42, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
I still don't understand the upset either, I was perfectly polite to that editor. Wee Curry Monstertalk 08:02, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello, Dave1185. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Latest comment: 12 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
Hi. You recently re-factored a talk page header I created here. I have nearly always linked headers and in this instance, I did it here, here and here too. I am always willing to learn. Would you let me know what I am doing wrong please? --Senra (Talk) 11:57, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
A talk page lurker writes. It is usual practise not to include links in titles, its probably in some arcane part of the MoS but I couldn't tell you where. Its not an egregious error but on pages like WP:WQA that are regularly archived the wikilinks expire rapidly and it causes problems with archiving. Wee Curry Monstertalk 12:04, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Prolific sock puppeteer who believes wikipedia can redeem the fighting reputation of Italy in WW2. Been plaguing me for years. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Generalmesse. Can you keep an eye out as I'll be away for a few days. Wee Curry Monstertalk 08:16, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Hi Dave, I enjoyed taking a look at this article. Was wondering if you were familiar with the earlier Bofors 57mm AA and naval guns -- they are mentioned here and here-- 1950's-era weapons. Cheers, W. B. Wilson (talk) 15:26, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
Yes, that is the weapon I was referring to. After I posted to your talk page, I found 57mm/60 modèle 1951 gun -- one of the 60-cal variants. The author (Rama) has no issue with me expanding the article to include mention of the 1950's naval and AA variants as well as moving the title to a more generic description, perhaps something like "Bofors 57 mm / L60 gun". Cheers, W. B. Wilson (talk) 19:05, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
I see your note on my talk page; I have been on wiki-break for some two weeks. I do not believe that I have ever blocked an editor as a confirmed sock; I lack checkuser ability. And I do not understand what problem you have, unreported by any other user over the past six years, with my signature which, I would confidently stipulate, does not need fixing. --Anthony Bradbury"talk" 17:23, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
Checking back I see that, some weeks ago, I did interact in respect of this block; but only to ask for an explanation (not yet given) as to the apparent similarity of edits from editors aledged not to be the same person. --Anthony Bradbury"talk" 10:11, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 02:02, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Abusive IP edits
Latest comment: 12 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion
[32]You were, and remain, a fucking idiot, You're a despicable liar and And bullshit was it sincerely meant, by the way. It was just a lame post-hoc justification for your lame behaviour. But I'm supposed to try and discuss the "good faith" changes on the talk page with this guy [33]? Wee Curry Monstertalk 10:16, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
I thought there was someting odd about the edits - and I don't believe that it was as it claimed [34] "a university professor in weapons science".Nigel Ish (talk) 10:23, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago10 comments4 people in discussion
I'm curious about something. Notice this diff.[35] Nothing to do with the issue at hand. Just wondering how it is that an established user still has the sinebot kick in. Is that an option you can select? If so, where? I'd like to activate it for myself, for those rare and red-face occasions where I forget to sign. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 03:00, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) - Yes, you can add {{YesAutosign}} to your User page or User talk page to re-enable SineBot. It stops signing after 800 edits because "it assumes that they should know better by that point." Acps110(talk • contribs) 03:07, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
Yipe! Talk about "red-faced". I definitely need to see my eye doctor. Thanks for the autosign tip. I'll give it a try. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 05:13, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
Don't worry about needing to eat more carrots for the old eyesight - he had copied Dave's signature and directed it to Dave's page! Supreme facepalm of destiny - The BushrangerOne ping only 06:49, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
He had both the user and me fooled. The dead giveaway was that he had to explicitly zap the no-sign stuff. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 08:57, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
I think that template needs another variant which simply says "D'OH!" I don't know how to change the template without screwing it up. Meanwhile, the YesAutosign seems not to be working. Perhaps I'm using it incorrectly. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 09:15, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Sock One, Sock Two, Sock Three, Sock Weird all blocked, request for the heads of cross-wiki socks on a platter made. - The BushrangerOne ping only 10:07, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 08:01, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
User:Chinese Homosexual
Latest comment: 12 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
Hi Dave, I'm not sure if this is a violation of the user name policy. He or she hasn't used the account for trolling on a related topic, and it might simply be a statement of fact. Nick-D (talk) 07:11, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
Hey Dave, I appreciate your removal of that image on their user page, but a more proper edit summary would include something about the improper use of non-free files--improper because it's in user space. BTW, I have to agree with Nick-D's comments, and I don't really see how the user is stereotyping others by naming themself "Chinese Homosexual." Thanks, Drmies (talk) 17:25, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
GD's talkpage
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I've deleted the discussion at my talkpage, sorry your post got zapped. I fear that Mais oui! is gonna stalk me, from now on. GoodDay (talk) 05:38, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I was having a look at the Singapore Army page and I felt the divisions and non divisional assets could be organised under a table with separate pages to the respective divisions since there's probably sufficient reference sources about them. At the moment, it pretty much looks like it was lifted out word for word from Tim Huxley's book - Defending The Lion City. I created 2 sandbox pages to play around with the concept - 3rd Division & 2 People's Defence Force. Let me know what you think before I commit any more time to it. - Rgds. Planenut(Talk) 02:25, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
Ba-ding-ding-ding-ding
Latest comment: 12 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion
Someone's back and already edit warring with me on the Malaysia page. Is it that hard to learn? --Chipmunkdavis (talk) 15:18, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
I don't think they're stalking, but it is rather annoying to have an edit war on that page while it's being reviewed. It'll be interesting to see if they post on the talkpage without reverting again. And huh, warning me about 3RR. Sadly, this means any action I take to reverting Singapore to the prepuff version now could well be construed as vindicative. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 16:33, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
I will, and leave you to ponder if Smilingfrog has managed to efficiently convey exactly how British the straits settlements were. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 16:52, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hi Dave, I've just reverted this edit you made to the Philippine Air Force article. The story was only about the potential F-16 purchase, so seems entirely relevant. Regards, and merry Christmas! Nick-D (talk) 23:36, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
--Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 13:37, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
--Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 06:29, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
--Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 16:12, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi Dave1185. Thank you for your work on patrolling new pages and tagging for speedy deletion. I'm just letting you know that I declined your deletion request for Scott Cole, a page that you tagged for speedy deletion, because the criterion you used or the reason you gave does not cover this kind of page. Please take a moment to look at the suggested tasks for patrollers and review the criteria for speedy deletion. Particularly, the section covering non-criteria. Such pages are best tagged with proposed deletion, proposed deletion for biographies of living persons, or sent to the appropriate deletion discussion. Although there are certainly a whole mess of issues, notability is not one of them; he clearly passes the "significance" test. Ironholds (talk) 14:37, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Looks like a duck to me... his first here on Wikipedia was a giveaway... うるさい~！！！ --Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 03:43, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
Done 
idiote!"
Facepalm... --Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 20:05, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
At least the file still exists. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 13:49, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
Running with scissors is too dangerous for Wikipedia! Wee Curry Monster talk 20:45, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
Although newbies may be delicious served with some Fava beans and a nice Chianti, taking a nibble is actively discouraged. Wee Curry Monster talk 20:56, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
Facepalm - BilCat (talk) 23:35, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Supreme facepalm of destiny... Good gravy! The two chaps you two admin had blocked was listed in almost the same time slot in my watchlist and I saw wrongly... my bad. Correction done~! --Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 17:44, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
