User talk:Lommer/Archive2

Talk Archives: current, April 28, 2005, August 5, 2005, February 5, 2006, June 12, 2007, April 6, 2009

Wildfire and number conventions

Hello,

thanks for correcting my English on Wildfire. I just have one remark: you replaced the non-breakable spaces by commas on the number, and this is in contradiction with the international standard, see [1]. I know this is not the habit in all countries, but I think respecting the international standards is a way to facilitate international exchanges and to respect the NPOV. It thus reverted to  .

Regards

Cdang|write me 08:58, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

Hi, I did replace those spaces with commas, and I winced as I did it. I actually prefer the European system of decimals, etc, but the Wikipedia Manual of Style actually dictates that we use commas to separate groups of three and periods for decimal places. I agree that it's not really NPOV, but wikipedia does have to have some standard for number formats. I will revert the article back to the comma standard. -Lommer | ^talk 00:50, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

OK for your revert. I'll post a message on the Manual of style talkpage about this.

Cdang|write me 08:20, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

ATC

I was wondering what background info was used for modifying the ATC page? What country's operations was it based on... thanx...jvz

Hi, I am a Canadian pilot, so all of my experience is Canadian. Most of my modifications were just for clarity and readability though. P.S. You can can sign your edits by using four tildes, like this: ~~~~. It's useful for talk pages so that others know who left the message and how to get back to you. -Lommer | ^talk 04:35, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. I have much much to learn about this...including all the short-hand that is used in this program. My background is 34 years in the FAA as a controller and retired 5 years ... so I have been away from it a while. I was writing with the perspecive of a U.S. controller and realized that your edits may have been because you were familiar with another country's ATC system. There is a lot alike but there are also differences. This is one of the issues that comes up with an international system I guess. I did go back and discuss what we did in the US system. Hope that doesn't throw a wrench in things...

Ok so I just do Jgvanzandt 04:49, 5 May 2005 (UTC) and this helps people find me? And I thought I was computer literate...

thanx for the reply

Jack Van Zandt

Thank you

Thank you Lommer. I've always had this dream of adminship, but I really don't believe in self-nomming oneself. I'm kind of tongue-tied right now; I'm still in a state of ecstatic shock. But thanks! →Iñgōlemo← ^talk 03:26, 2005 May 31 (UTC)

Thanks Lommer

Thanks for your support on my Adminship request.Seabhcán 09:27, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

No problem. You're qualified and actually remind me a bit of myself when I applied for adminship. -Lommer | ^talk 22:31, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Ibexes

On a side note, how do I know if my picture gets nominated? Can I view the selection/voting process? Sputnik

Hi Sputnik, you probably won't know if your picture gets nominated unless you nominate it yourself. Alternatly, you can regularly check Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, where you can view the selection and voting process for all FPCs. That's actually one of my favourite pages, because there's a lot of interesting pictures that go though there (even ones that don't make it). -Lommer | ^talk 22:28, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

P.S. You may want to sign your edits with ~~~~ or ~~~ rather than just Sputnik, as those automatic sigs will create links back to your user and talk pages.

My RFA

Lommer, thank you very much for your vote of support on my recent RFA. Now that I've been promoted, I'll work to ensure that my further contributions to wikipedia demonstrate that your trust was well-justified. Regards, Fawcett5 19:04, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Did you know?

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Canadian airspace, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently-created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Images for Deletion

Greetings! I listed an image on IFD a while back that were unverified and obsoleted by better-quality GFDL pics on commons. Your edit summary removing it from the page [2] states "rm deleted images", but Image:Fagot.jpg wasn't deleted. Was this an oversight, or was there reason to keep? (The reason I'm concerned is that I suspect it's a copyvio, but cannot prove it: I'd rather it not hang around when there are better copylefted shots on Commons to replace it.) Thanks, and nice work clearing out the backlog; I know it's generally a thankless task. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 20:35, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hi, sorry about that - thanks for keeping such a close eye on it. Yes it was an oversight, that was right around the time of the server move and it was pretty difficult getting the system to delete images when it was so overloaded. I've deleted it now — I'll have to check and make sure no others fell through the cracks. -Lommer | ^talk 01:18, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! Deletion problems happened to me too over the past weeks; glad it's working better now! Happy editing, Mindspillage (spill yours?) 03:01, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Naruto Gekito Ninja Taisen

copied from User talk:Havok

Just out of curiosity - why did you tag your article Naruto Gekito Ninja Taisen for deletion? It looked like a legit article to me, do you really want it deleted? -Lommer | ^talk 02:13, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yes, the reason for me deletion is that it's spelled Gekitou not Gekito. ;) A slipp on my part. Havok 07:36, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Oh, ok. Just so you know, in future you can remedy that yourself by pressing the "move" button at the top of the page. That will move the page and its contents to another title. -Lommer | ^talk 00:13, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for the tip on moving. Stil new to this Wiki thing. ;) Havok 19:50, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Date links

Just a comment about your linking to "xxxx in aviation" (De Havilland Canada DHC-6 Twin Otter). I don't mind you doing that, because some people apparently find it useful, but I want you to be aware that it does screw up the operation of the "preferences" function. When [[May 20]], [[1965]] is linked, I see "20 May 1965", but when [[May 20]], [[1965 in aviation|1965]] is linked I see "20 May, 1965". The difference is the treatment of commas, and perhaps not really being identified as a full date which could affect future changes in preferences.

About the only solution I've seen is to try to link the "XXXX in aviation" links to a year which does not appear as a full date (one link for each year is probably sufficient), rather than one which is a full date, using just the year in full-date links. That isn't always possible, of course. The main thing is, I want you to be aware of this problem and to take it into consideration in making such links. Maybe someday we will have preferences whose operation is not so closely tied to linking for other purposes. Gene Nygaard 11:56, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Huh, very interesting and something I didn't know. Thanks for the info! -Lommer | ^talk 18:59, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

* adiabatic lapse *

Hi, Lommer. I tried very hard to keep every fact in adiabatic lapse rate and temperature lapse rate in the new combined adiabatic lapse article. Take a look at the end of the "Scientific explanation" section, and in the "significance in meterology" section. I did some refactoring, but by-and-large, I even kept the same wording, cutting and pasting into the article.

My motivation is that the same physics context is needed to understand all of the different flavors of lapses. This coincides with what Wikipedia:Merge recommends. So, I decided to merge them into one article which can stand by itself.

If there is some specific fact that I accidently dropped, please point it out: I'll be happy to fold it into adiabatic lapse.

Thanks! -- hike395 08:05, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

How about some discussion on the talk page of the idiotic renaming to two adjectives without a noun. Gene Nygaard 13:56, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Moved all material back to adiabatic lapse rate. -- hike395 16:51, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Ok, I'll check it out. The reason I reverted and threw a merge tag on it was that some content seemed to have been lost in the split into scientific/meteorolgy sections. I also like it much better in its new location. -Lommer | ^talk 17:34, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Induced Drag

Hey mate, I've re-written the Induced Drag article and removed some bad physics & other disproved theorys. Comments welcome. I can provide sources and answer questions if needed.

Cheers. - Molloy

edit counter

hi,

back in Feburary you asked if the edit counter could show number of edits by namespace. at the time i said it wasn't possible, but since the 1.5 upgrade it's quite easy, so it now does that. regards —kate

Wow, thanks for the note! -Lommer | ^talk 5 July 2005 22:18 (UTC)

Template flexibility

Hey Lommer - just curious about your comment about the flexibility of templates. What concerns do you have? Check out User David Newton's amazing work on the WikiProject Ship template. I now realise that we wouldn't need the dozen different templates I originally thought we would - we'd just need two (one metric-first, one non-metric first). Switching optional fields on and off (or swtiching a template between "Wingspan" and "Main rotor diameter") is a cinch, done the way he's done it. Rlandmann 01:07, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Which ship template are you referring to? I was looking around but I didn't see one that obviously paralelled our aircraft specs table (the two articles mentioned on their project page, the ARA General Belgrano + Cutty Sark, use text based specs). Can you give me a specific link? -Lommer | ^talk 01:24, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

parametrized templates with subtemplates

I just left this notice with Rlandmann and Bobblewik, but I thought you'd be glad to see this as well. I've got a variable-based template set currently working! User:Ericg/template_tests and User:Ericg/template_test2 show examples of a military jet and a civilian prop. The input template itself is fairly straightforward, although just viewing the template makes it look a mess. -eric ✈ 06:21, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Cool, thanks for the note. -Lommer | ^talk 23:05, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

You seem pretty interested in the template idea, so I figured I'd let you know. ;) Anyway, I've updated it to have all units passed through the template - it now uses "{whatever} main=" and "{whatever} alt=", rather than specifying one as metric. This way, one template (without crazy subtemplates) works for metric and imperial depending on the order they're input. Now, as a caveat, they can't be swapped later without manual shifting, which could be a disadvantage over the previous setup.

Anyway... right now I'm planning to do helicopters as a totally separate template system. If you can figure out an easy way to integrate them, that'd be swell. Also, for mixmaster hybrid types I'm a bit hung up as well. Regardless, have a good one. -eric ✈ 23:45, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Abbreviation of knots

You may not have not had cause to look at aviation weather forecasts. The official abbreviation as used by ICAO and member states in METAR and TAF etc has no 's' for the plural. Would you be prepared to reconsider your vote? Thanks. Bobblewik 13:52, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Heh. I just changed my vote. thanks for the info. -Lommer | ^talk 19:01, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

So I see. And you found another good source too. Thank you. Bobblewik 19:06, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

No problem. -Lommer | ^talk 19:07, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Nomen nudum

You deleted nomen nudum on the grounds that it was patent nonsense. However, the article was in fact quite correct (there was even a note on the talk page explaining this) and you were in error in deleting it. So I restored it. Please take more care in future. Gdr 15:32:05, 2005-07-31 (UTC)

I apologize, I've looked at the page in question and I was indeed in error. The only explanation I can give is that the speedy list was quite backed-up at the time, but I myself would shoot that down as a terrible excuse. -Lommer | ^talk 02:00, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

I understand. Don't worry too much; it was easy to resurrect. Gdr 23:24:45, 2005-08-04 (UTC)

Approach Slope

Totally puzzled by your revert on my correction to your original article.

The slope has got to ABOVE the horizontal, if it were below the horizontal the height of an object moving along the slope would increase as you travelled along the approach. (unsigned edit by: M100)

Ah, Now I think I see the source of the confusion. I mean 3 degrees below the horizontal from the point of view of the airplane. I.e. if you're flying the plane perfeclty level, you would angle your path down 3 degrees in order to fly the approach slope. Does that clarify what I mean? Should I change the article too? -Lommer | ^talk 21:18, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

P.S. you can sign your edits on talk pages by typing ~~~ or ~~~~. This will create a link back to your user page so people can find you more easily, and also helps identify who's saying what. -Lommer | ^talk 21:18, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

It just didn't read right, adding "3 degrees below the horizontal from the point of view of the airplane" I think would help - but a simple line diagram maybe with the altitude at various distances would probably be the best way to avoid confusion to future users. M100