User talk:Ahunt/Archive17

Nomination for deletion of Template:UL-Jih aircraft

Template:UL-Jih aircraft has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. The Banner talk 23:17, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Ulrich Hütter and Wolfgang Hütter aircraft

Template:Ulrich Hütter and Wolfgang Hütter aircraft has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. The Banner talk 23:18, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:US Aviation aircraft

Template:US Aviation aircraft has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. The Banner talk 23:19, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Trixy aircraft

Template:Trixy aircraft has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. The Banner talk 12:11, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Tri-R aircraft

Template:Tri-R aircraft has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. The Banner talk 12:12, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Towle Marine Aircraft Engineering aircraft

Template:Towle Marine Aircraft Engineering aircraft has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. The Banner talk 12:13, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Thruster Aviation Services aircraft

Template:Thruster Aviation Services aircraft has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. The Banner talk 12:13, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Edits of a Sock of a banned Editor

Hello, I see you have an aviation interest as do I. Thanks for your help with the rewording, I considered that option but then changed it. I should of stuck with my initial instinct. I have a dilemma with how to deal with all the edits made by a sock through a new ban evading account (now banned) and previous use of an IP as well. It would be easy to simply revert but I do not want to offend those with intermediate edits. It would take a substanial amount of time to go through each edit of the many articles affected. The real problem is the banned editor has a knack for directly lifting text from the sources, adding his own conjecture, and misrepresenting what the source stated. I am not sure if the misrepresentation is intentional, caused by as he states english is not his first language, or just plain sloppiness. The accurracy of his edits is lacking. So do I leave them stand or revert to a point prior and risk offending some? I believe it would be better for the sake of accurracy to revert but as an IP I am reluctant as some one may express the usual bias against IP editors. Most of the edits done by the sock are aviation related. 208.54.35.169 (talk) 00:21, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Here is the link to the sock investigation. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:JamesBWatson&oldid=618034898#A_Very_Strong_Probable_Sock_of_an_editor_you_permanently_banned_in_April_2014_User:IRoNGRoN

Thank you for your note. That is a curious case. If you do a lot of editing on Wikipedia is there any reason why you don't open an account? You are quite right that it does help create an editing record for yourself and thus lends credibility, since you obviously have some persistent interest in working here. - Ahunt (talk) 11:58, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:The Butterfly aircraft

Template:The Butterfly aircraft has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. The Banner talk 11:54, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

July 2014

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would ask that you assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not on Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 July 24. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. The Banner talk 12:29, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

@Ahunt, let me know if this unfailingly civil and perfectly-behaved colleague of ours causes you any personal trouble. I'll be happy to support you to the best of my ability. You will of course have seen my post at WP:ANI. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 14:39, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

SP: Thank you for your note here. Indeed I haven't seen your ANI post, but I shall read it forthwith. - Ahunt (talk) 16:14, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Man, that's a classic case of Wikipedia:Don't template the regulars. Wow. I don't think a user conduct RfC would be amiss, but everything gets decided at TfD regardless. Mackensen (talk) 00:53, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Edit to ANI

Hi, just a heads-up, your recent edit to ANI [1] seems to have accidentally removed a lot of stuff. Probably you were editing on the basis of some old revision. I've tried to fix; could you please check if your posting is now where you meant it to be? Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:33, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your note here. I am not sure what happened there, seems to have been an unresolved edit conflict in the software, so thanks for fixing it! - Ahunt (talk) 11:35, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cessna 172, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Diesel. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:50, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

 Done - Ahunt (talk) 12:19, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Schweizer SGS 1-23, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Civil Aeronautics Administration. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

 Done - Ahunt (talk) 11:44, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Ultralights

Ahunt, I just received a message from you. I have a lot of very specialized info on Ultralight Aircraft and I dont have a lot of time to figure out all the wikipedia stuff but would be glad to post good data stuff in the talk area of different subjects and let some other authors incorporate it all. Right now I would just screw stuff up and make lots of folks mad. I maintained the www.vula.org website for fifteen years before abandoning it due to costs. Is there a way I can become a volume contributor without being a well trained wikipedia ? Preventec47 (talk) 15:25, 8 August 2014 (UTC) ((( I tried the four tilda characters and nothing seemed to happen. My user name is preventec47

Thanks for your note! The ~~~~ work when you save! Sure you can always leave notes on article talk pages and people watching them will often respond there. We will need cited refs to add information to the articles though as we can't accept original research, meaning just someone saying so. If you have photos that you own the rights to to donate they really have to be unloaded on Commons by you as no one else can assign a licence. The process is pretty quick and easy, though. - Ahunt (talk) 15:42, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

WP:ANI

No problem. CBWeather, Talk, Seal meat for supper? 11:58, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Adventure SA, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Méré. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

 Done - Ahunt (talk) 17:16, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Explanation Please

Hi, I see you deleted a category addition at List of Royal Canadian Air Force squadrons as " already has parent to this cat". Can you please explain your rational. I am not sure I understand. I think I may be missing something. Thanks! --IseeEwe (talk) 17:55, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your note! Sure, I can explain! You added the article List of Royal Canadian Air Force squadrons to "Category:Royal Canadian Air Force squadrons (disbanded)", but that cat is a sub-category (a "child category") to "Category:Royal Canadian Air Force squadrons" (the "parent category") and the article is already in that category. Normally articles are not part of categories and also their sub-categories. Let me know if that doesn't make sense! - Ahunt (talk) 22:13, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Beechcraft Bonanza

______________ ///NEW/// Thanks for your comments about my edits to the Bonanza page. Aside from the curt commentary to me and the presumption of self-aggrandizement, I completely appreciate your concerns for referencing proclamations. My multiple posts were actually my poor attempts at properly editing on a wiki page, something I am obviously new at. It did further fail to validate my claim, and my lack of word precision complicated what you presumed to be my assertion. As a former career military aviator, a CFII/MEI, owner of several aircraft including a Bo, I had been approached - and bought the Bo - *not* because **this specific aircraft** was the fastest, but that the overall Model S35 variant has been _commonly known_ to be the lightest per horsepower of all the piston Bonanzas, and the fastest... With it's lightest basic weight, V-Tail, and most horsepower (with a TCM IO-520 engine), it has a Vne of 227 MPH, which exceeds the Vne and cruise speeds of the A36, newer (but heavier) models, even sporting their 15HP-higher-but-heavier IO-550 engines.

It is why I bought that model, and is based on common knowledge in the Bonanza arena. That said, it is NOT rigorous to post 'common knowledge' here, without references, per your complaint to me. While I don't have time to publish a comparative aero paper on this, or even collect all the base weights, HPs, and ref those, I can look about for easy reference; and I will write to Beechcraft's front office to see if there is any comparative works on performance out there; and approach the American Bonanza Society (where threads do exist, about "the Fast One" [probably-insufficient]....). I will let you know if I get anything useful.

I also am unsure why you say I need to prove why a fastest model is interesting.... I can ask that question of every single posting in wiki; some folks would find such info interesting. Maybe not you?

I know it's easy to get exasperated with newbies wobbling imperfectly about the wiki pages, so I appreciate your patience, and just ask for a tad more patience when you make your own presumptions about the postings, however incorrect, on wiki. If you are going to to presume I am posting for gain, then I am going to ask you to have valid references for your posted assertions of same <wink>.

Thanks.... Kind regards, P.D. Shankland, PhD. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kibalicker (talk • contribs)

OBTW: though these are not rigorous refs, but while I await replies for same, you should know I didn't make up the 'fastest' moniker:

http://www.aviatortrader.com/ads/1965-beechcraft-s35-bonanza-aka-the-fast-one/

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1964-Beech-Bonanza-S35-The-FAST-One-IO-520-285hp-Garmin-530-Ready-to-GO-/141361179438

http://www.beechtalk.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=69398

http://www.racing-vehicles.com/detail/airplanes-single-engine/1964-Beech-Bonanza-S35-The-FAST-One-IO-520-285hp_141361179438.html

http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-57482.html

Thanks for your note here. As I indicated in my edit summaries the place for this discussion is Talk:Beechcraft Bonanza, so that everyone watching that page can participate, so I will move the discussion over there. - Ahunt (talk) 15:42, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Safran

Template:Safran has been nominated for merging with Template:SMA Engines. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Jax 0677 (talk) 11:03, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Walter Redfern Company, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Peter Bowers. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:49, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

 Done - Ahunt (talk) 11:11, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Help with adding images

Hello Ahunt!

I would like to upload a few images to Wikipedia (see here, here and here), but I'm not really familiar with the procedure of uploading photos. I'm not the Wikipedian who uploads photos often and thus, have little experience. I know HOW to upload but have little clue on stuff like licensing and copyright laws. Can you please kindly explain ALL I need to know to upload those photos? Thanks. -Rihaz (talk) 03:35, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

P.S. please don't send me to some WP page with the explanations!

Thanks for your note. Licencing for pictures is a very complex subject. The really short version is that if you created the image (your photos you took, or your own drawing) then you can upload and choose to licence it with any of the free licences that are offered. Those are best to upload to Commons so that they can be used on different language Wikipedias as well. If you didn't create the image and they are not under a free licence (like the ones you linked to above of Airbus aircraft, which are copyright Airbus) then there are only very limited circumstances when they can be used under the "Fair Use" provisions of US Copyright law (Wikipedia's servers are in Florida so under US law). This can basically only be uploaded if there are no other images available, free images cannot be taken and then only if the image is reduced in resolution. These have to be uploaded to Wikipedia instead of Commons as Commons cannot accept non-free images. An example of a non-free aircraft image that I uploaded like this is this one. I hope that helps. Let me know if you have questions. - Ahunt (talk) 12:06, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Can I upload them the same way this was uploaded? I'll download the images, crop out the copyright thing in the bottom and then upload with the license used there and a similar description - is that okay? Plus, why low resolution? Rihaz (talk) 10:52, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

That is a good example of how to do it. You will want to make sure that the articles that you want to insert the images into don't already have other "fair use" images, as it is very hard to legally justify using more that one per article and second ones tend to get removed. The upload wizard should allow you to choose the right licencing etc. You can enter the same justifications that the image you linked to provides. Low resolution is required to ensure that the "fair use" image doesn't impinge on the copyright holder's rights to use their own image commercially, in other words that it isn't worthwhile anyone else using the reduced size image for any reason. - Ahunt (talk) 11:30, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Alright, I have decided to upload only this one. I won't be able to put so many similar images to use, at least not now. I will use them on Airbus A330neo, an article I made. Thanks for all your help! Rihaz (talk) 15:44, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Here it is. Please check out the description. I don't think it sounds very "professional". Please improve it! Thanks! Rihaz (talk) 16:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Looks good, that should do it! - Ahunt (talk) 16:59, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Thank you for all your help in explaining how to add those images, really appreciated! Rihaz (talk) 15:48, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

- Thank you! - Ahunt (talk) 16:59, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

patrouille Suisse

Why do you delet this out again. On the photo you can see that a Targed tug pod is attached to the CL pylon of a PS F-5. Why shold a picture not be proof enoug? This is not locical. FFA P-16 (talk) 13:49, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Interpreting photos has long been considered original research and is not acceptable on Wikipedia. You have to provide a proper text ref to include this. It has already been tagged, challenged and removed so please stop edit warring to include uncited text. - Ahunt (talk) 13:51, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

This is realy bad, because it is clearly to see that it is a targedtug pod and finding text about it is not easy, also it is exaggerated how always for locical things in articles about the swiss air force such ref ar needet. and then are still are put in question. I know ref are needet but sometmes it look for mee as toomuch in the english wiki. FFA P-16 (talk) 14:03, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Most readers will not be able to recognise a target tug pod. Therefore, without a reference, they have only your word that the pod is, in fact, a target tug pod. This is why the 'truth' of a photograph is not verifiable. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 14:07, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

@Bushranger, OK. thats a point. But Ii will need time to finde some written proof i can put in as ref in wikipedia that the PS F-5 are used for this.. it is not at the top of the aviatic topics. FFA P-16 (talk) 14:50, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

No problem, take all the time you need, just please don't put it back in without a ref cited. - Ahunt (talk) 14:52, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello Ahunt. I'm stuck, because your "citation needed" by the topic " joint flyover formation". I know the Display schedule was not realy good (I was also not happy with this) I tried hard to find some written proof. But I haven't found any document not in the internet and not on paper (Books, aviatic newspaper,..). I think it is impossibel to get Documents about the display teams planning meeting flight charts or so one. So what you've just see as a useful as a reference? I am realy in a dead end with this.Please don't understand this as an attack on you, I understand the need of citations and references, but here i think it is a bit too much, the search for references is a lot more work as to write a the page it self. How ever. I did not found something written (yet, and at the moment I am not motivated for searching more) I also know that pictures and youtube often are not accepted as reference. But I don't want disturb you without something who is perhaps still useful.I have found a few pictures and youtube clips. Maybe there is something you are viewing as a useful.

• Patrouille Suisse &F-18 [2][3]
• Patrouille Suisse & PC-7 Team [4]
• PC-7 Team & F-18 [5][6][7][8][9][10][11]
• PC-7 Team& Superpuma [12][13][14][15][16]
• F18 & Cougar [17][18]
• F18 &Superpuma[19][20]

And even if all are useless, but some are nice to look at ;-)

Bye FFA P-16 (talk) 15:36, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes they are all lovely photos, but can't be used as refs, as explained above. - Ahunt (talk) 23:09, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

What would be useful as referenc and where are such things to find? what did you expect? All this photos and movies document that such joint flyover formation of differend display Teams of the Swiss Air Force (on the picture you can see that it are differend Tailnumbers, not all photos from the same event)so with all this it looks to me exaggerated to say "citation needed".FFA P-16 (talk) 18:55, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

You are making claims that needs proper refs as explained at WP:V. - Ahunt (talk) 18:58, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

But what exactly do you want. what could be better as the pictures? Where can such informations be found? Its easy to put in a "citation needed" and reject the pictures as referenc. If you want a refernce for this I need some help. FFA P-16 (talk) 23:03, 18 September 2014 (UTC) Please don't think that I am attacking you. I am just stook with this, and i don't think i can solve this problem in the next time. You are very active in many aviatic topics and may you can give me a hint,how i can finde this. I think its impossible to get flight planing documents of the patrouille suisse for a display show together with a other team.. military flightplans in the swiss air force are documents who are not realised to the public (guess this is in every air force)FFA P-16 (talk) 23:18, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

All you need to find are text refs in reliable sources that say that they have flown together in this manner. Photos are not acceptable for many reasons, one because they need expert interpretation and not everyone will agree on what they illustrate, two because they may not have been shot at airshows, but at practices, other occasions or elsewhere and also because they might be simple fakes. - Ahunt (talk) 16:49, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps you should also have a look at his articles Dübendorf Air Base and ALR Piranha. The Banner talk 15:27, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! - Ahunt (talk) 16:49, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Well, I don't think that an expert is needet to see that this photos, made from diffrend people on differend days &years show a joint flyover formation of 2 of the 4 swiss air force display teams. How ever, sercht in the internet I turned my books and aviatic newspaper upside down ( and I have looooots of books &newspaper about swiss Aviatic and Military), asked friends.. but i didn't found something written down on paper or the internet sorry. Only pictures like this actual one from Belgian Air Force Base - Kleine Brogel. (in this case PC-7Team & Superpuma Team [[21]] . I can not deliver the needet citation sorry. So if you like to remove the part about joint flyover formation, its up to you. FFA P-16 (talk) 18:39, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

The idea is to leave it there tagged, at least for a while and see if anyone else can provide a citation. There is no need to remove it now. - Ahunt (talk) 19:11, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

O.K. So lets hope someone can finde something usefull, I was not able :-( FFA P-16 (talk) 19:36, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello Ahunt. I would like to "complain". Like you knew I am unhappy that a few pages i had worked on are nominated for deleting. In my eyes here to fast something is nominated for deleting. How everthings get deletet. Well I bring up an old story, the article about the Swiss air Force F/A-18 Solodisplay team was deletet because you said single aircraft teams have no place in the english wikipedia. in the deleting process i suggestet to put it only in the swiss air force category, but you said it is still not important enough.. so it was deletet. But why is the Swiss F/A-18 solodisplay not important enough but the turkish and the greek F-16 solodisplay can stay in the english wikipedia? Well to say you straight i am against deleting them (i would vote keep it). same ruls for all? i am talking bout this 2 Solo Türk and F-16 Demo Team bye FFA P-16 (talk) 23:59, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, but I wasn't the person who nominated them for AfD. - Ahunt (talk) 12:36, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Oh sorry my error, it was MilborneOne, I will ask him. Thanks FFA P-16 (talk) 18:26, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Weslake aero-engine, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Diesel. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

 Done - Ahunt (talk) 11:25, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

L-39 photo

The Jet Class does not race with 2 pilots, as shown in Bret_Cox_L-39_-_Reno_Race_-58.jpg. I have not even started reviewing the 100 gigs of shots in detail, but a older photo such as the one you reverted to should be replaced:

Images should enhance the article in which they are placed and should also feature the subject of the article section near which they are placed.

Infobox or lead images should show the aircraft in flight whenever such a picture is available. If an in-flight image is not available then the infobox or lead photo should show the best overall view of the aircraft and not a detail close up or similar shot. Detail photos should be further down, in the sections they better illustrate (i.e. Landing gear, instrument panel).

Please use the "thumbnail" option for all images other than those inside infoboxes and the three-view drawing (where one is included in the specifications section). In accordance with Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Images, do not specify the size of the thumbnail as this is specified in user preferences.

Wherever possible use free images, preferably uploaded to the Commons.

The quality of an image is always more important than the quantity of images included — a gallery or a link to the Commons is preferable to flooding an article with images.

Any captions should be concise and not overwhelm the image.

Many existing images used in aircraft articles have been carefully selected to illustrate specific variants, angles of view or aircraft features. These images should not be deleted from articles without discussion and consensus that this action will improve the article on the article's talk page. Images may be added to the article without removing or replacing existing images without discussion. talk→ WPPilot  13:17, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your note here. Exactly, so let's discuss this over at Talk:Aero L-39 Albatros. - Ahunt (talk) 13:25, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome

If something similar happens again, I'll speak to BR or Mb1 about a long-term block. - BilCat (talk) 13:36, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for that offer, that may well be appropriate if it happens again. I appreciate your monitoring this and for the warning to that editor! - Ahunt (talk) 13:39, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Even though he reverted himself, I felt the warning was appropriate in his case. - BilCat (talk) 13:45, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Regardless of the fact that he was attacking me, yes I agree with you, if someone makes an attack on anyone and then reverts himself it still is in the records for the page and deserves a warning. In this case he didn't apologise instead his removal edit summary was "(Fixed typo)", which is deceptive as well. - Ahunt (talk) 13:48, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

FYI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic User:AdamNeira. Thank you. --Chefallen (talk) 20:04, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! - Ahunt (talk) 16:00, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

WP:INTDABLINK violation

Please do not make edits like this one. WP:INCOMPDAB explains why it is necessary to pipe intentional disambiguation links through the "Foo (disambiguation)" redirect, and why violations of this policy are harmful to the efforts of disambiguators. Cheers! bd2412 T 22:35, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Okay thanks for letting me know what that was about. And by the way WP:INCOMPDAB is only a guideline, not a policy. - Ahunt (talk) 23:07, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Actually, it is my understanding (or recollection, at least) that is is a policy, even though it is on what is otherwise a guideline page. I recall participating in the discussion where that was decided, but it was years ago and I have not been able to find it of late. A new discussion on the topic may be in order, but our great aspiration is to have zero unsolved disambiguation links in the system. Cheers! bd2412 T 23:16, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Regardless of the status of it, that is a laudable goal. - Ahunt (talk) 23:17, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Collins Dipper

Hi, I noticed your edit summary (23 Dec 2013 12:55) to the Collins Dipper article. FYI, the aircraft pictured at Aerofiles is incorrectly tagged and is actually the Aquaflight Aqua II (N74141), and some people believe that the hull of that was used (perhaps only as a glassfibre plug) in the construction of the first Collins Dipper (N25WC). No reply necessary.PeterWD (talk) 12:54, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. That makes sense, I was pretty sure Aerofiles was in error on this. - Ahunt (talk) 12:59, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Quadcopter Settling with Power

72.234.231.6 (talk) 01:48, 20 September 2014 (UTC)Cetaman72.234.231.6 (talk) 01:48, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Quadcopter operators are having problems with settling with power. The physics is available on Wikipedia, but quadcopter operators need to be directed to the information. It is listed under vortex ring state but excludes quadcopters for some reason even though the physics is the same. The vortex ring state can be replicated in quadcopters. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cetaman (talk • contribs) 01:37, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Eventually I will figure out all the requirements for this process.

It is pretty simple, as per WP:V to add substantive information to articles you just have to cite reliable sources. - Ahunt (talk) 02:45, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

OK citations, including a series replicating settling with power, have been added. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cetaman (talk • contribs) 00:26, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks I'll check that out. - Ahunt (talk) 12:36, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

I checked the refs and the text and removed WP:NOTMANUAL text and WP:SPS citations, plus moved it to a more appropriate place in the article and fixed the formatting. - Ahunt (talk) 14:57, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

I added your language to the VRS page under Radio Control Quadcopters in Pilot Reaction and signed the edit but my moniker is in the article, why?--Cetaman (talk) 23:20, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Reread the SineBOT message and deleted the signature from the article--Cetaman (talk) 23:20, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Public Domain?

Are images from this Canadian Gov't site PD, as they're are in the US? - cheers FOX 52 (talk) 05:01, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

As far as I am aware all Canadian govt photos are Crown copyright; it isn't like US govt images which are all public domain. - Ahunt (talk) 15:16, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Ok thanks FOX 52 (talk) 16:55, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Potez VIII

Thanks for the thanks! A little while ago I was wondering were the next page was coming from until it occurred that the pre-war European Salons and Exhibitions might yield some interesting, less familiar types. It turned out to be a quite productive seam and I have (to change metaphors) two more Potez on the stocks. L'Aérophile, easily searchable after a little practice is, like Flight, invaluable. Cheers,TSRL (talk) 21:06, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

No problem, you are doing fabulous work there creating quality new aircraft type articles, so "credit where credit is due!" - Ahunt (talk) 02:50, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

September 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Chinese Aviation Museum may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• The '''Chinese Aviation Museum''' (sometimes referred to as the '''China Aviation Museum''' ({{zh|s=中国航空博物馆|t=中國航空博物館|p=Zhōngguó

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:00, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

 Done - Ahunt (talk) 21:03, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Swiss Air Force Display Team

Hello Ahunt, Can you have a look at the section Display Team on the Swiss air Force page? I know that I am often put in too much informations ( and I think you will delet out some of it) But In my opinien The Banner is deleting too much out. How ever before I give up this "fight" it would be nice if a few more persons can have a look at it, and look what has to be deleted and what can be standing there. Thanks. FFA P-16 (talk) 04:56, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

It is not a fight, mr. FFA, just a fact that merging articles does not mean copying the old one verbatim into the new one. The Banner talk 06:31, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

 Done - I had a look over it and made a couple of small changes. Otherwise it looks good in its current form. - Ahunt (talk) 11:53, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Ahunt, by looking at the timestamps of your replay here and your eddits at the swiss air force page it looks like that The Banner had deletet out most of my text BEFORE you had a look at it. Please have a look at it in a vversion weher you can see all of it. thanks FFA P-16 (talk) 12:53, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

I did look at both versions from the page history. The current version as trimmed by User:The Banner is better, as it has less trivia and is a more concise summary. - Ahunt (talk) 13:29, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Three-surface aircraft

Hi, I started a discussion at Talk:Three-surface_aircraft#Performance_figures. You edited these figures, so I am hoping you can offer an opinion. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 09:37, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

 Done - Ahunt (talk) 19:58, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

About that revert.

I'm going to challenge that revert you did.

Read these.

Misspell ("Licence"): https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/category/glossary/proprietary-licence

Proper spelling ("License") http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Proprietary+software+license http://www.maketecheasier.com/open-source-vs-proprietary-license/ http://freeculture.org/blog/2012/08/27/stop-the-inclusion-of-proprietary-licenses-in-creative-commons-4-0/ http://www.codesynthesis.com/products/xsd/free-license.xhtml

Google this: https://www.google.com/search?biw=1366&bih=565&q=proprietary+license+example&revid=950100337&sa=X&ei=2jYzVMmbJcKvggSXjILQAw&ved=0CHkQ1QIoAjgU

This is the UK spelling: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/licence

This is the US spelling: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/license

And if you were to look at the underline red in "licence", it's spelled wrong.

Let me know what you think. King Shadeed 20:46, October 6, 2014 (UTC)

Here in Canada it is spelled "licence", WP:ENGVAR applies, this is acceptable spelling. - Ahunt (talk) 02:57, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

That's because in Canada, it uses the British spelling. You see what I'm saying? King Shadeed 08:48, October 7, 2014 (UTC)

But that is the point, either spelling is acceptable under WP:ENGVAR. On Wikipedia we don't change all the spellings to American spelling, we accept variations in English. - Ahunt (talk) 13:28, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Caudron C.362, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Flaps. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

 Fixed - Ahunt (talk) 11:49, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi

Hi, It's interesting that you have flown so many aircraft. really nice. Also, it is interesting to note that we have been editing since almost the same time. :) Hope to co edit an article with you some day, Cheers! --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 12:23, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Great to hear from you! Thanks for jumping on that vandalism on Walter Redfern Company so quickly. It is a pretty obscure article, so I am sure not many people are watching it! I look forward to working with you more in the future! - Ahunt (talk) 12:25, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Anytime. If there is vandalism when I'm around, Vandals beware. ;). --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 12:29, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

LOLZ, that is good! - Ahunt (talk) 12:57, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Crests edits, BCATP, etc.

Hi Ahunt: First let me say I really appreciate the tweaks you've done. As you can tell, I've very new at this.

It must be annoying and painful to watch me thrash around in the formatting.

It makes sense to format right images. Perhaps I should go back and reposition the two, to the right side? ACK! I see while it looked good in the subsection of "Canada", it has somehow screwed up in the overall page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Commonwealth_Air_Training_Plan#Canada. I'll try to fix it again. Oh - you beat me to it.

I have so much to learn...

Thanks again A much better place (talk) 14:05, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi back! No problem I am glad to help out anyone new. We need more help on Wikipedia and it does take a while to figure things out here. If you get stuck or have any questions you can always leave me a note here. I am "on" most days! - Ahunt (talk) 14:08, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Ahunt. I've been changing a few of my own "Gallery" images to "File" images and incorporating them into the body of articles. How does one decide when an image is important or significant enough to do that? Also, if there are existing pictures, is is acceptable to arrange in a logical, chronological order even if that means placing my own upload above existing images? see:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/409_Tactical_Fighter_Squadron as an example. I can understand how this might might raise eyebrows. Thanks for your thoughts.A much better place (talk) 20:03, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Good questions. We try to avoid galleries in general, so it is better to place images in the article as "thumbs" and on the right if possible. The rest is really editorial judgement and per WP:BOLD, so that means go ahead and do it and if anyone doesn't like it they will revert and then you go to the talk page and discuss to create a consensus as per WP:BRD. - Ahunt (talk) 22:30, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Canadian Military crests and patches

Hello again:

The issue of Military crests and patches, particularly those from the RCAF, has been a sensitive issue with me for many months. This, following an article I started on RCAF 168 Squadron which included the image of a WWII patch I own and had uploaded to Commons (File:168 RCAF Squadron Crest manufactured by Crest Craft of Saskatoon, circa 1944..jpg).

The patch was recommended for deletion as it technically infringed on Copyright even though it is my patch, my scan, is over 70 years old and both the Company under Gus Werle is defunct and the manufacturer had passed on. Long story short and 6 months later, I was allowed to keep the patch (and similar by the same Manufacturer, Crest Craft of Saskatoon) on Commons by tracking down relatives of the deceased manufacturer and obtaining a legal release as is specified in https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Permission and related links. This involved being granted a ticket number and eventually receiving OTRS approval.

For that reason, I have included a partial image of the back-stamp of most of my uploaded patches - to confirm they are indeed manufactured by Crest Craft and not made by some other producer. My personal feeling is that it takes up unnecessary space and detracts from the image but I did it to avoid every other Crest from being uploaded into this category which I feel could become the default place to put Crests in Commons. As more people discover this category, more images will be uploaded into it but I fear many patches won't in fact be made to the high quality and standards of "Crest Craft Ltd." and someone or group will end up spending time reviewing each upload and making a subjective, value judgement as to originality. This is made more complicated as nearly all patches have no makers mark on the back. Even Crest Craft stamps or labels either fade quickly or fall off with repeated washings.

I hope this will create some debate and open an avenue that will allow all crests, Military and otherwise to be uploaded into Commons and referenced in Wiki articles. Based on my limited experience here, I don't see how at this point.

A much better place (talk) 17:19, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for the slow response here, I missed your note! I would leave it as it is and see if anyone complains. No one seems to have done so yet! - Ahunt (talk) 17:02, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Request to split content - Kestrel JP10 / Kestrel K-350

Hello, AHunt. I'm writing to ask about how to best go about splitting out some of the content of the Kestrel JP10 Wikipedia page - specifically the content related to the current K-350 project - off to another page. The content currently on the page is primarily historic but does not give a proper "face-forward" for the current K-350 program. I would propose that, if the content should remain co-mingled, that what is currently there could remain as "historic" and that the page be retitled "Kestrel K-350" and the current details focused onto that, instead. What is the best way to approach this? I am not a savvy Wikipedia page editor but I am very familiar with the history and content of this page and would like to see it improved. Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mike.Hinton (talk • contribs) 15:57, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry that I didn't get back to you sooner on this. The article can just be split as per WP:SPLIT, but perhaps it would help if you can explain what the difference is between the two models. Was the JP10 just the prototype or a different model? - Ahunt (talk) 16:58, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Undated

Thanks, I did raise it at Help talk:CS1 errors but I suspect like all these things a slavish following of a random style guides to introduce random abbreviations over clarity is prefered. MilborneOne (talk) 16:31, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

As one of the editors who has used "undated" about 20,000 times I think this is an annoying change that provides less information to readers. I mean what does "n.d." mean to most people? "Undated" is pretty clear. Regardless I am not fighting it, but if you get it fixed that would be great! - Ahunt (talk) 16:56, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Question about Les Invasions barbares

Doesn't a film that originated in French retain its French name, i.e. Les Invasions barbares? FWiW Bzuk (talk) 18:28, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

That is a good question! It was certainly distributed in North America as The Barbarian Invasions, so perhaps that qualifies under WP:COMMONNAME. - Ahunt (talk) 19:47, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Ahunt. You have new messages at Talk:IDevice.
Message added 18:28, 4 November 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

GT-1 and GT-2 gliders

George C. Tweed Jr. was my father, and I saw that you authored/edited the Wiki entries on his sailplanes. I helped build them in our garage as a boy, and crewed for him, Gene Whigham, and Jack Green often when they flew. I have some photos he took when he was building the GT-1, and some of him and Jack Green when it was completed. I also have one of him standing next to the GT-2. I don't know how to edit the articles about him or add the pictures, but I would love to get them to you so you could add them if you think it is appropriate. Tptweed (talk) 23:10, 4 November 2014 (UTC)Tom Tweed

Hey, great to hear from you! Some photos would be very helpful, they always make the articles better. You can upload them at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Upload and then leave a link here if you like and I will put them in the articles. - Ahunt (talk) 23:14, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

--Thank you, Ahunt. I uploaded the picture of my dad w/ the GT-2 at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:DadGT2.jpg I uploaded a picture of him and Jack Green shortly after the first flight of the GT-1 at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:GTandJGwithGT-1.jpg There are many pictures of the GT-1 under construction, but I chose this one of the first time the ship was fully assembled in the backyard of our house in La Mesa, where it was built in the garage: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:GT-1_backyard.jpg I have many other images of various stages of construction of the GT-1, but these are the most relevant for the article, I think. I would offer a correction to the first line of the GT-1 article. It says "The GT-1 was built in concert with the Whigham GW-1 as both builders shared workshop space and tools." While Gene Whigham and my father started building their sailplanes around the same time, and did share some design ideas and tools, the were not built in a "shared workspace." My dad built the GT-1 in the garage of our house in La Mesa, CA, and Gene built his in one of the garages at the 4-unit apartment building he owned in the North Park neighborhood of San Diego. Best regards, Tptweed (talk) 03:41, 5 November 2014 (UTC)Tom Tweed

Hey those are great photos! Thanks for uploading them. I have added them at:

• Tweed GT-1
• Green-Tweed GT-2

and also fixed the text as you suggested. I think I read too much into the original ref when I first read through it, so thanks for the clarification. I also created a new Commons category for these gliders. Let me know if you think more photos, etc, would help tell the story of these two aircraft better. - Ahunt (talk) 13:26, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

--Thank you again, AHunt! Although I am fairly computer literate, I am new to this wiki stuff and don't really know how it goes yet--the organization and coding is foreign to me. I went to the category page you created for the GT-1 and tried uploading the rest of the photos I have of its construction and early flights to it. If you think any of them would compliment the Wiki article, feel free to add them. I digitized them last year from some photo negatives I found in his personal effects when he died in 2000, and am glad they have found some wider use than previously. I would like to try to make a Wikipedia biographical article about my father, as I think he was "notable" enough to be included on this site. Other than his sailplane building endeavors, he was an accomplished power plane and glider pilot, with multi-engine, instrument, and instructor ratings, competed at the national level in his gliders, as well as being a participant in the first Smirnoff cross-country sailplane race, and was a Director of the Soaring Society of America at one point. In his professional career, he was involved in the early Atlas missile program at Convair/General Dynamics and participated in the secret mission to broadcast President Eisenhower's Christmas message from space in 1958. https://archive.org/details/1958-12-22_Atlas_In_Orbit, and had a notable business career after that with Cubic Corporation, U.S. Elevator Company, United Technology, and several of his own companies during his life. At one time, he owned the soaring concession at El Mirage/Adelanto airport and had undertaken the construction of a third (GT-3) glider, which was designed as a two-place, side-by-side, high performance sailplane. He abandoned that project when he was able to purchase a damaged Caproni A20S from a fellow who had landed it gear-up at the airport and subsequently decided that other sports beckoned. I have an image of that sailplane in the garage at the home I built for him in 1976 in La Mesa, being repaired next to the cruising sailboat I was building there from 1976-1980 here: Caproni glider next to Frances 26 cutter. Tptweed (talk) 18:30, 6 November 2014 (UTC)Tom Tweed

Thanks for adding all those GT-1 photos, those are great! I added one more from teh gallery to the article and the rest are all linked form the commons link. You will have probably already noticed that I created a Category:George_Tweed gliders on Commons to bring the two designs together. Regarding a Wikipedia bio of your father the key thing is that everything has to be cited to reliable, published references, so if those exist it might be possible to put together a bio article. You also will want to read WP:NOTMEMORIAL and WP:BIO for notability information. - Ahunt (talk) 21:47, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Assessment

Hi Ahunt and thank you for your new article AirLony. I notice you rated the article B-class, although it only has one reference and three sentences. This is nowhere near the B-class criteria. Please take a look and familiarise yourself with it before awarding B-class to other articles. Looking forward to seeing more updates and info at your new article! Thanks, C679 07:33, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your note here and for re-assessing it. - Ahunt (talk) 13:16, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

FileZilla

Anhi, thanks for contacting me, appreciated. The paragraph I added to Filezilla I deemed relevant as it is refusing people who have certain email addresses. If you deem in destructive instead of constructive, ah well! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elbmek (talk • contribs)

The text you added was a rant that cited no sources and was written in a non-encyclopedic manner. Wikipedia is not a blog or forum where you can make complaints about a topic. - Ahunt (talk) 13:16, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rud Aero, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Composite. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:20, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

The 2015 Canadian federal election

Why are you doing this? I don't understand. Look, previous two articles went something like this: The 2011 Canadian federal election (formally the 41st Canadian general election) was held Monday, May 2, 2011, to elect members to the House of Commons of the 41st Canadian Parliament." So why revert instead of just changing TWO LETTERS? Why make up bizarre and silly reasons as Harper declaring himself dictator or a "hoof and mouth disease" epidemic or the discredited "World War III" scenario? 14:45, 21 November 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ericl (talk • contribs)

Please keep this discussion at Talk:42nd Canadian federal election so other editors may participate. - Ahunt (talk) 15:20, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Apparently the reason the title hasn't been changed is to have some "fun" with me. Infantile bullying. If you look at the discussion, they mention deliberate "quibbling" and laying of "traps." Not nice. and I think an apology is owed. Ericl (talk) 20:11, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

You are completely wrong. Check the page history, it is you who has been making uncivil edit summaries and editing against consensus. - Ahunt (talk) 22:54, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Jabiru J430

I've made a comment on Talk:Jabiru J430#Crash regarding a reversion which you, quite correctly and in accordance with guidelines, made. I'm not proposing to do anything further, and probably won't comment further on Talk: I don't think I have anything to add. I thought I'd better let you know. Best wishes, Pol098 (talk) 16:21, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. - Ahunt (talk) 17:42, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	You are welcome! DesmondW (talk) 20:31, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! Aviation articles almost always need grammar improvements! - Ahunt (talk) 20:51, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:FL Technics logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:FL Technics logo.png. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:24, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

It has been superseded and so can be deleted. - Ahunt (talk) 16:43, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Canadian spelling

Adam, I reverted this revert here, but on second thought, I'm not which spelling is correct for Canada, or if even both forms are correct. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 20:33, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

We use a "z", but call it a "zed"! - Ahunt (talk) 20:37, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Apologies

Apologies for editing the 2011 Canadian Election page. I didn't know about the consensus. My bad. DestinationAlan (talk) 12:42, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

No sweat, collaboration works! - Ahunt (talk) 13:06, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Indeed it does. Indeed it does. How would I know about such collaborations next time? Talk page right? DestinationAlan (talk) 13:11, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Well, yes talk page, but really the best way is WP:BRD, in other words make the change anyway and see who objects! - Ahunt (talk) 15:49, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Showstopper Deletion

You have indicated that you would like to see changes made to the Showstopper article. As I understand it, you complain that it is blatent advertising, and I am to prove that it is not. You appear to be an intelligent person, so you must be aware that one cannot prove a negative--that is, the article I have written is not an advertising pitch. Any mention of anything, probably at some level consists of some degree of advertising. I'm assuming what you mean is that you don't care for this book, and if anyone says it has some good in it, then they must have little other interest than to promote it. You have also stated that it would be a good idea to stop the edit warring, and I'm all for that. However, how about dusting off that big brain of yours and giving me a few pointers on how I may omit those portions that you believe are promotional aspects to this article? --and please, please don't send me any more links to Wikipedia policy pages. I've read them, and it doesn't help.

Also, you have indicated a lack of citations. That's because they were formerly included in a section entitled "Resources". I have now converted each of these entries to footnotes, so hopefully now they are in an acceptable format to be deemed citations. I'd also like to bring to your attention each of these nationally-syndicated, network shows that I have footnoted consisted of the host interviewing the author about this particular book. Actually, only three were from a national network and the forth one is from a very popular Internet source, VICE News. These interviews are not the result of some promotional splash concentrated over a short period of term, but rather span several years indicating long term interest in this work.

If your true intent is to help me improve this article rather than merely to heap ridicule on it, then any comments you may have will be most welcome. Dr.apricot (talk) 02:00, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your note but it looks like this discussion has been overtaken by events. A admin has assessed Showstopper Lifestyle and deleted it as "G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion". - Ahunt (talk) 01:40, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Ubuntu (typeface)

Re: [22], I think it's fairly widely known/recognized, although I can't find many mainstream newspaper articles. There is some material around though (along with a few dozen similar ones):

• "How to create a "Bitcoin accepted here" button?". 17 September 2014. The font is Ubuntu Bold Italic for the text.
• "What font does Bitcoin use?". Retrieved 12 December 2014. The logo Bitcoin uses the Ubuntu Bold Italic font.

Hope that's useful! —Sladen (talk) 14:08, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your note here. Feel free to add it back in then with the refs. - Ahunt (talk) 14:10, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

For the second, sentence, I'm less familiar with that, but there seems to be some confirmation at:

• "I'm working on a Transistor theme for Android, tell me what you think!". 24 May 2014. Yea, there's 3 fonts used in the game. The terminals use Raleway and Ubuntu Mono, and the big OVC at the top uses Julius Sans One.
• "For anyone curious, the UI typeface is called Raleway". 28 May 2014. the OVC text is written in Ubuntu Mono: … Use of Ubuntu Mono is a really cool detail, considering that in real life Open Voting Consortium terminals are running on Linux.

Per WP:BRD, WP:COI and general good practice, it would be preferable if you were comfortable doing a self-revert. I've formatted the references here, so they should be easily dropped in if they meet a sufficient threshold. —Sladen (talk) 14:20, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

 Done Let's see if anyone is unhappy with those refs. - Ahunt (talk) 14:25, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Beechcraft Model 18

See what looks to be a brewing edit war. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 14:31, 17 December 2014 (UTC) (BTW, I agree with your edits, the others, not so much ...)

Thanks Bill, I'll check it out! - Ahunt (talk) 17:33, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

The mind boggles; also see American Aviation and Village pump. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 02:26, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

I guess that is a new editor who doesn't understand yet how Wikipedia works. Hopefully he will sort it out in time. - Ahunt (talk) 13:37, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

A little help please

I can see that you created a number of userboxes (not to mention the number). And way too many to answer this question perfectly.

Lately am trying to create a userbox where you can put 'N', N being the variable the user puts. Like this one

42This user once made 42 edits in one day.

Where the value of "N" is 42. Please help me. DtwipzBTalk 17:47, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. All you have to do is use {{#if:{{{1|}}}| '''{{{1}}}'''}} where you want the number to be. If that doesn't make sense let me know where the box is you are working on and perhaps I can help there. - Ahunt (talk) 18:50, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Merry Merry

To you and yours

FWiW Bzuk (talk) 14:21, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi Bill: Thank you for that cheery thought! All we need here is some more snow to get back to skiing. - Ahunt (talk) 14:35, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

GA article review for Cross-country skiing?

Hi Ahunt, Thank you for your counsel on the subject article. Your involvement in the upgrade seems to be sufficiently minimal that you should be eligible to review its candidacy for GA. Of course, in doing so, you would be welcome to be bold and make any needed changes! Happy skiing! Sincerely, User:HopsonRoad 16:46, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the note. Unfortunately it is raining here right now so skiing is on hold. In general I stay out of GA reviews, but thanks for the invitation. - Ahunt (talk) 16:48, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Yuneec International, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Yuneec Power Drive. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:32, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Actually in this case it was done intentionally. - Ahunt (talk) 12:53, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Ariel Ace

Hi, I've started a page on the Ariel Ace, which you may care to peruse. Arrivisto (talk) 12:23, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! I will have a look! - Ahunt (talk) 13:11, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for sorting out the R1100S references. I know it's about time I learned to do it myself, and I promise to do it soon; but I'm just going spare marking yards and yards of tripe from semester 1. If User:Dennis Bratland had any idea of the crap I have to read and assess, he wouldn't give me such a hard time!! Arrivisto (talk) 23:15, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

No problem, that was easy work. Glad it was helpful! - Ahunt (talk) 23:39, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Global account

Hi Ahunt! As a Steward I'm involved in the upcoming unification of all accounts organized by the Wikimedia Foundation (see m:Single User Login finalisation announcement). By looking at your your account, I realized that you don't have a global account yet. In order to secure your name, I recommend you to create such account on your own by submitting your password on Special:MergeAccount and unifying your local accounts. If you have any problems with doing that or further questions, please don't hesitate to ping me with {{ping|DerHexer}}. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 00:04, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Okay, thank you! - Ahunt (talk) 00:05, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

@DerHexer: Okay I tried it and it said that the process was not completed as it couldn't locate all the other accounts I don't have on wikis I don't use, like species, etc. None of the instructions or help pages offered any guidance. - Ahunt (talk) 01:27, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

As these accounts had no edits, I've usurped all of them. Your global account is now completed. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 01:31, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

@DerHexer: Super, thank you very much!- Ahunt (talk) 02:58, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Pegasus EDA 100 Flamingo

hi,

why on earth are you requesting me to back up data I entered from flight testing with data from web page? There is none at this moment, since plane is still under development. I sent you a video proving stall speed. You also deleted some data I entered and which are from pre-production documents. On the other hand, you insist on data which is published only on wiki (i.e. size, engine etc...), BUT YOU HAVE NO PROOF that this are true! BTW, they are, but would you agree that we are talking about double standards here? You are editing information you can't prove, but I can and I did. If WIKI is only about cross-referencing, then by god I understand why there are so many passive contributors. Because they are fed up with "editors". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daliborsky (talk • contribs) 14:02, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your note here. All substantive information entered into Wikipedia articles must be referenced to cited reliable sources or else it cannot be verified, as explained in Wikipedia policy. You could enter any numbers you like to sell aircraft and no one could check it against any source. If the manufacturer has data from the test flying then why don't they publish it on a website and we can then update the article from it? The standard for inclusion is not whether anything is "true" but whether it can be verified from reliable sources. In the meantime all we have is what was published in the World Directory of Leisure Aviation and that is all we can cite and quote from. - Ahunt (talk) 15:18, 30 December 2014 (UTC)