User talk:Ahunt/Archive03

SB problm

Thanks, I'll just change it to look for "==" instead of "=". Rich Farmbrough 15:07 13 November 2008 (UTC).

Yes URLs are a pain, but I have set it to avoid URLs too. This is not a "regular" run, it's tidying stuff that's slipped through the cracks. Rich Farmbrough, 16:14 13 November 2008 (UTC).

Lycoming

Thanks, check Lycoming O-720 for nearly more navboxes than text! Cheers for the fixes, editing too fast as usual. In the back of my head these designations 'O' and 'R' are (or were) originally military designations, I feel another navbox coming on (but not too soon)! The navboxes are brilliant for 'at a glance' quality of the articles across a company and provide a very easy way of 'borrowing' pre-made infoboxes and reference sections between them. Might be time to revisit Bill's engine task force idea. Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 01:02, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just spotted your revert! I was just trying to avoid a redirect, didn't notice that it was piped. Never flown any of the Grumman GA types, must admit that I tend to avoid PA-28's, C172's etc. Did my original 'Group A' conversion training on the Tomahawk (affectionately known at the school as a 'Traumahawk', their phrase, not mine!). Anything that has three wheels the same size has got to be built for hard landings, it was cosy in there as I remember! Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 01:12, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Adam, I had a great day today, managed an hour in the Tiger dogfighting with my friend in his Jungmann (he always wins!). Very cold (-5C OAT at 4,000ft), so many layers of clothes on it was difficult to move around for a good lookout. I took the camera as the light was very good and took some opportunity snaps, got a few of the Pawnee O-540, a Continental A65, and a few gliders. A couple of books arrived today from Rolls-Royce, one on the Rolls-Royce Crecy is fascinating, the article is quite good but there were a few mysteries that are clearer now and I will try to expand that article in time. The book is keeping me off the computer!! Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 22:31, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and I haven't asked for anything from Santa yet! Maybe more books. Technological developments like the Crecy fascinate me, it had Bosch fuel injectors, still got them in my car 70 years later. Think it will be unflyable tomorrow so a day on WP ahead probably. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 00:19, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Forecasting snow, which I prefer to rain! Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 00:32, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not very good at that, managed 10 yards on tow behind a Skidoo in Norway on TDY before falling over! Do you remember Eddie "The Eagle" Edwards? 10/10 for effort. He used to practise his body position by jumping flat on to the kitchen table. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 00:46, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Birth town? Eddie was a national hero at the time, wonder what he is doing now. I am only about 50 miles from him. Got a long road ahead with the Crecy (but I like challenges), I've just had a good read through and it's not as good as I thought. Did you know that lean mixtures decrease the risk of detonation?! The article needs restructuring completely. Past bedtime here, on my way now (but might be taking a book with me!). Speak tomorrow, cheers. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 01:53, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wilco Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 13:31, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Continental Motors

Adam (and Gary too), I just had a look at the Continental Motors in preparation for making a navbox for the company. Eeek! It looks like it was written by a car fanboy! the main section is a poorly written timeline, and then it lists brands of automobiles that have used Continental engines, but no engine types, either for automobiles or aircraft. There are several aircraft engine links in the article, but not many. I'll try to get a template set up after my sleep period, but I'll definitely need help filling it out. Thanks! - BillCJ (talk) 10:19, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the list on the company page - it helps alot. Also, I just had a look at Continental C85 and Continental O-190 - they appear to be near-duplicate articles, though there are some diffences. RL created the original C85 article 2007, then moved it to O-190 soon after. Five month later, an IP restored the original C85 page without trying to undo the move, or noting it at the O-190 page, and it apparently went unnoticed. The differences need to be reconciled, and one page made a redirect to the other. Any prefences on which is the primary page? I agree with RL that O-190 seems best. If you are able to time-wise, could you do the merge? Thanks. - BillCJ (talk) 18:49, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nice piccies Adam, the ultralight thingies have always scared me and anything that uses your legs as undercarriage has got to be risky! Looks like fun though. I think there is a Rolls-Royce/Continental tie-up (produced under license in UK?). Like Bill I thought I'd got the wrong article....'although they made some aircraft engines'......!! Rolls-Royce Limited has the same problem, have a look. Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 19:30, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose the text is Ok in the RR article but the number of car images is silly and not one aircraft engine image. I posted a note on the creator's talk page but was ignored (maybe he didn't want to go back in there!). Someone is sure to cry if an aircraft engine photo was posted. There is Rolls-Royce aircraft piston engines which could be expanded, I've got a couple of RR books on the way. Are you flying any GA at the moment? Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 21:02, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't fly much now (used to do it full time), I do duty at the club glider aerotowing with Cubs, Pawnees and Robin DR400 plus dawn/dusk patrols in the Tiger Moth when I can. Have a friend in Germany, ex-F-104, F-4 and Crossair Avro RJ pilot who doesn't fly anymore. It is getting expensive in the UK, avgas £1.60 a litre. Be sure to let us know when your book is out. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 21:18, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well if you ever come to the UK I think you could cope with our Tiger Moth, any good at hand swinging propellers?!! Just had a quick look at Ruth's book, obviously a very clever lady. My son is autistic which is a different kind of disability but it's there all the time, causing great problems with schooling. I think he got it from me (organising lists of things into boxes?!) He loves reading WP, he did some 'freelance' IP editing once which was amusing, totally banned now (by me, not WP) and he abides by it. Had a little go at Continental I-1430, just formatting tweaks, could do with some cites. Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 21:57, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eclipse

No problem, good job on the Eclipse Aviation and Eclipse 500 articles. --T*85 (talk) 06:02, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:SumatraLogo.png

That is the program icon, extracted from the executable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Toehead2001 (talk • contribs) 16:48, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Windows 7

I did not vandalize the Windows 7 page, in fact I've never been there. I have edited the Windows Vista page however regarding a completely subjective statement ("Windows Vista is better than Linux") and on top of that: the reference following that statement has nothing to do whatsoever with any comparison between Linux and Vista. 68.34.20.244 (talk) 17:18, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

F-107

The book being referenced is the 1975 edition of the Air Force Museum guidebook, which is unique among the various editions because it provides histories of the actual aircraft on display. I'm currently working with a staff member at the Museum and two other Wikipedia editors to try to find out additional information, but these guides never listed an author until the 1980's (most editions just reprinted edited versions of the information contained on the display plaques in the Museum). It's also very likely that there was never an ISBN # issued for these guides. That being the case, the only way to identify specific editions is by the year, which is printed on the bottom left corner of the table of contents page (usually), and the cover photo, which was unique to each edition (the 1975 edition has a photo of the B-70 on the cover). - Ken keisel (talk) 22:00, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ISBN

Hi Ahunt - thanks for weighing in and helping User:Ken keisel become up to speed with referencing. However, one little detail you've asked him for is a little misleading: you've identified ISBN as one of the "minimum" requirements for referencing. In fact, this isn't the case. Our How-to on the subject specifically says that "The ISBN (which is wikified automatically) is optional".

In fact, no referencing system I've ever seen demands this, and AFAIK most don't even provide for it. Why? Because it's actually not a very useful research tool. The ISBN is primarily a distribution-chain reference number, very much like the barcode on a grocery item. ISBNs are highly specific to one particular edition of a book distributed by one particular publisher and sometimes even one particular print run/cover/dustjacket design. In other words, it's over-specific. The identical book with identical pagination published by the publisher's licencee in another country will have a completely different ISBN. Identifying the publisher, location, date, and edition (where applicable) are all that's required for Verify the reference.

Cheers, and thanks again for the help – it was just this one point that appeared to be causing confusion. --Rlandmann (talk) 22:33, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - understood! :) Note, of course, that not every books has an ISBN, and this would be particularly the case for publications which are only anticipated to be sold through one outlet (as in this case) and which therefore don't need to fit in with the general "supply chain" of the industry. FWIW, none of the various editions of this book listed on abebooks have ISBNs quoted, tending to suggest (but certainly not proving...) that the Museum Foundation may not have bothered obtaining them. --Rlandmann (talk) 23:19, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Thanks for recognizing my attempts to hold back the forces of insanity! Letdorf (talk) 23:44, 29 November 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Canadian aeroengine companies

Besides PWC and Orenda Engines, are there any other aeroengine maunfacturers in Canada that would be notable enough for an engine navbox? Avro Canada/Orenda Engines did not make that many engines, as far as I can tell, but I think it is significant enough historically to make a navbox for these engines. Thanks. - BillCJ (talk) 04:36, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfD nomination of Funny userboxes

Speedy deletion of Image:Quadracycling15Jul07.jpg

A tag has been placed on Image:Quadracycling15Jul07.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I8 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is available as a bit-for-bit identical copy on the Wikimedia Commons under the same name, or all references to the image on Wikipedia have been updated to point to the title used at Commons.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:Quadracycling15Jul07.jpg|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. ←Signed:→Mr. E. Sánchez ^{Get to know me!} / _{Talk to me!}←at≈:→ 13:11, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fellow Peacekeeper

I appreciate your confidence in me. I just got back from the MFO last year as the Press and Visits Officer so I have a lot of photos I can add. I'm also working on a book about the MFO to celebrate its 25th anniversary. I hope I can count on you as a primary source! (James "Doc" Crabtree) 20:04, 11 May 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Flight service station

A quick question. Currently the article says that "...pilots are required to file flight plans for non-local flights in Canada, and flight plans are opened automatically at the planned time of departure...". However, I thought that it was only within the Air Defense Identification Zone that a FP was required and that outside of that it was optional. Also the auto opening. I get calls all the time from North Bay\Edmonton Centre asking about aircraft that have not departed so is the auto opening correct? Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 15:23, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. It's only -24 today, not too bad. In that case would a FP/FI be covered by a company flight note? I can see why North Bay would call rather than auto open FPs. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 16:14, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Got it sorted. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 16:44, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your welcome

Hi! I'd like to thank you for your welcoming words and advices. I'm a great military aviation lover and I hope to do some contribution here as I can. Thanks once more.--Outisnn (talk) 16:59, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quadracycle (Human powered)

Hey there! This is an awesome article, thanks. My wife wants to buy one of these, but our city doesn't allow for it. Interesting research! ~ All Is One ~ (talk) 19:19, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It does seem possible!!! ~ All Is One ~ (talk) 21:29, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Guidance Barnstar
		Thank you for your diligent research and help with clarifying the Orlando city code concerning quadracycles!!! ~ All Is One ~ (talk) 21:29, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Citation Barnstar

Barnstar

It was very kind of you to award a Barnstar for the references to various abbreviations of Transponder (aviation), but it is really undeserved - it was a few minutes of googling and some very rudimentary referencing - much improved by you in the meantime. If anyone deserves a Barnstar here it is you, so here it is!

		The Citation Barnstar
		For taking rudimentary html links and turning them into exemplary Wiki references --TraceyR (talk) 10:22, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PUTCO - Slapsnot

Hello, Ahunt. You have new messages at Slapsnot's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Slapsnot (talk) 14:56, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Taifun

Strange I was just going to leave you a message to see if you had a Taifun image and it appears before I ask, spooky, Thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 22:18, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Faux template

Hello! I sure appreciate your diligence with staunch interpretation of Wikipedia guidelines. However, pursuant WP:IAR, I have reverted your good faith changes. Perhaps the project may benefit from your eagle eyes if you directed your attention to other more pressing issues such as: vandalism edits, potential sock puppets, the backlog in AfD, or perhaps copyright violations. As a suggestion, in the future you may want to leave a courtesy note in the talk page when editing userpages. Some editors may take your good-faith edits as a personal attack on their "personal" userpage. Thank you for your contributions to the project. --Sallicio ^{$\color {Red}\oplus$} 22:45, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (File:NCFlogo.gif)

You've uploaded File:NCFlogo.gif, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 13:46, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary edit?

This question is one of curiousity, nothing more. I see you made this edit, but WP:MOS says spaces between the == and the heading text are optional (==H2== versus == H2 ==). These extra spaces will not affect the appearance of the heading, except in the edit window. So I'm wondering why MOS was cited if it says it doesn't matter. No big deal, just curious. Timneu22 (talk) 17:30, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. It's hard to see in the diffs that you changed "==Something ==" or "== Something==". It is annoying to see pages like that, I agree. Maybe you should suggest a bot to do such fixes? Anyway, thanks for improving WP. Timneu22 (talk) 17:45, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Watermark

You might be interested in this template Template:Watermark particularly now that the Green Hawk contributor is back! MilborneOne (talk) 20:10, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NowCommons: File:CH146Arrival06Jul1995.JPG

File:CH146Arrival06Jul1995.JPG is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:CH-146 Griffon and CH-118 CFB Cold Lake.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:CH-146 Griffon and CH-118 CFB Cold Lake.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:25, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:CH146Griffon02A.JPG is now available as Commons:File:CH-146 Griffon CFB Cold Lake 1995.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 21:07, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:UltraflightLazairSeriesIII.JPG is now available as Commons:File:UltraflightLazairSeriesIII.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 05:16, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maule articles

Thanks for cleaning up the links and adding the nav box for Maule Air. I've been meaning to finish the performance data table for the M6 and M7 models for sometime now. --Autopilot (talk) 20:35, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

G'day Ahunt, thanks very much for my second Barnstar; I am very chuffed. If only I could find a reference for the Mexican Air Force.... YSSYguy (talk) 02:39, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PiperPA-28-236DakotaC-GGFSPhoto4.JPG

Fantastic photo! I made a Piper Cherokee page on Facebook and used it as the main image, wanted to let you know. Thanks for releasing such a great photo into the PD! - CHAIRBOY (☎) 04:54, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Verification needed; sources preferable!

Adam, could you look at this diff, and see if you can find some reliable sources for theis info? I think you qualify as "anyone with Canadian Helicopter Industry background or knowledge"! Thanks. - BillCJ (talk) 23:33, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks much. After I asked for your help, I discovered you'd warned this IP last May. Very Interesting! - BillCJ (talk) 02:23, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for the reversion on the Pilot licensing in Canada page I read the Wikipedia External links policy and you are completely right. RP459 (talk) 17:27, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

I really appreciate the feedback :) --Rlandmann (talk) 20:01, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Morning Adam, Many thanks for the award of my very first Barnstar, based on the BFW/Messerschmitt sports planes. Very pleasing! With the help of Turner and Nowarra's book I hope to complete the set soon with the M.19. now if I could find some pictures ...TSRL (talk) 10:45, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the barnstar, although with regular expressions and search/replace it is not the repetitive task it first appears! Thanks again. Richard ⁰⁶¹² 22:40, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Universal Helicopters

Thanks for reverting this piece; I noticed it had become over-promotional in tone but didn't realise it had been hijacked from an earlier valid article. . .Rcawsey (talk) 15:29, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Universal Helicopters

I am not the owner of Universal Helicopters, I am his son. I am not an employee, and am in no way associated with the business, and therefore it's not a conflict of interest.
Universal Helicopters is not Universal Helicopters of Scottsdale as you have suggested, it is a flight school that spans multiple states in the U.S. and has a presence and is affiliated with multiple colleges.
With hundreds of students coming from around the world to seek training at UHI it is certainly worthy of the Universal Helicopters placement on Wikipedia.

Gjiroux (talk) 18:09, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures

How do I add a picture to my userbox? Wikipedia:Userboxes doesn't seem to be helping much... Resetti 4 Prez (talk) 21:52, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Last week, I made a Saturday Night Live-themed userbox, with the SNL title card from the article of the same name. When I logged on earlier in the week, it (the image) had been deleted. Can someone explain this? Thanks! Resetti 4 Prez (talk) 19:11, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling

Thanks for correcting my spelling errors in Stinson Detroiter just proves that checking each others articles has some value. Problem when you have been working on an article for a while is you stop reading it properly, well thats my excuse. Thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 19:05, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Photographer's Barnstar

		The Photographer's Barnstar
		Thanks for all the work you do adding photos to Wikipedia's articles on lesser-known aircraft. Rlandmann (talk) 09:38, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cessna 172

Adam, I just had to clean-up an IP's edit to the "Reims FR172J and Cessna R172K Hawk XP" section on the Cessna 172 page per this diff. Of course, rhter than click on the edit button for tha minor section, I had to scroll up to the top of the "Variants" section, and then scroll through that very over-long section a couple of times to find the right part. Even few sub-heading sections by decade would be better that what we have now! I'd put them in myself, execpt it has been the subject of debate. Did we ever settle that dispute on the section headings from awhile back? Thanks. - BillCJ (talk) 21:56, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dates in Gmail

Hi, I don't wanna get in a revert war so I'm notifying you before I do this. If you look at the Gmail article, the dates have overwhelmingly since the beginning been in Month/Day/Year format, while it was only recently the whole article was changed to Day/Month/Year. I think it should be switched back because of historic usage in the article, as well as following Google's own formatting & am going to do so now before there're any major changes to the article. If you have reason to believe otherwise please talk to me/post on the discussion page of the article & hopefully we can find a consensus. Thanks caz | speak 22:42, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I changed it back because I thought the more changes that occurr in the article, the harder it is to change back. This isn't a major revision and we can go either way on this without much effort editing the article, so I don't think changing it was in bad faith. It seemed looking at the article's history page from the start that the predominant style was M/D/Y, changed or inconsistently altered at various points to D/M/Y. I would argue that since this is the case, that since Google uses M/D/Y in its own documentation, and that since new advances in the software come to US English before other versions[1] (and this has happened more recently with features such as the new layou, labs and text messaging contacts), the Gmail article should use M/D/Y. caz | speak 16:30, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And I don't mean to get into a fight with you over this & think there are definitely bigger things on both Wikipedia & in the world, it's just one of my pet peeves to see pages use inconsistent or badly applied styles. I agree with you that whatever way it goes, the whole article should be that way, and not have one sentence like 17 March and another April 14. Sorry if it looks like I'm trying to make trouble, I'm more just trying to come to rational on why it should be one way or another so we can apply it in the article. caz | speak 16:37, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Hi, sorry for the incident. I'm trckin how time takes to revert a vandalism change. I listen that the changes are detected in 1,3 minutes, so i try to verify. Sorry for wate your time and for your patience —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.225.85.91 (talk) 14:02, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

the move reason is...

WP:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Userboxes/Politics by country--Ipatrol (talk) 22:21, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Table Mobile telecommunications standards

Hi Ahunt, may I ask you to help out? Would be very appreciated!!! Thanks in advance.--Kozuch (talk) 10:36, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cessna 152 true/indicated air speed

Ah, so it is! Man with two legs (talk) 16:10, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Editing patterns

Welcome to the dark side. Be careful I started with just the odd edit to that page and now look at the Top 25 mainspace article edits and #10 on talk space edits. Those pages are a black hole that have sucked me in. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 05:57, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That the way it starts. It seems so simple and easy. Just a tidy edit. The next thing you know there's a bit of cleaning up and before you know it you have a full time obsession. I look at those and realise that probably 15-20 edits were cleaning up the page. The rest of it was vandalism reverting. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 14:13, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Congratulations for all the contributions you make, thank you and keep up the good work. South Bay (talk) 02:04, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

VMCG

Hi Alan. Today you made a minor edit to V speeds with an edit summary saying Vmcg ... is not in the FARs ... This puzzled me because FAR 25.149 is all about Minimum control speed, and paragraph (e) is all about VMCG, and nominates this acronym.

A year or more ago you challenged me over an unsourced edit I made to Vortex generator#Increase in Maximum Takeoff Weight. I have been highly conscious ever since of the need for citations. You might be proud of my efforts here:
Talk:Eugenics#The movement...

Best regards. Dolphin51 (talk) 00:00, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

See 'ya in the funny papers. Bzuk (talk) 16:46, 22 February 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Same old, same old, I see the cast of characters is back, see Stefano... FWIW Bzuk (talk) 16:54, 22 February 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks

		The Original Barnstar
		Thanks for all the hard work! I noticed that you created the Blue Yonder EZ Flyer page which I have been meaning to do for a while now. You have done tons of work with aviation. For that I award you this barnstar! Also thanks for creating the userbox (which I shamelessly modified and created a solo version) for the EZ Flyer. RP459 (talk) 00:30, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

King Cobra

I will see what I can do. I live about 5 miles from the Indus field and Wayne Winters taught me fly :) I will give him a shout and see if he knows where I can find one that I can take a picture of... RP459 (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I talked to Wayne Winters today and the King Cobra is still at Indus but the cowl is off right now and it is awaiting an engine overhaul. The owner is looking to sell the plane and will likely have it in flying condition in the next few weeks. Wayne will let me know when it out for a spin and I will take a picture... RP459 (talk) 07:41, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bombardier Dash 8

You appear not to like my edits; or rather you didn't like my comments (yes, I'm guilty of prodding the author). Aside from my comments, what exactly is nonconstructive about information I have provided on this plane?

Please begin by explaining your aesthetic vision to me, because this article appears ad-hoc and disorganized and I only intend to add to its completeness, but my edits having been repeatedly reversed. For example, the article titled "2007 Dash 8 landing gear incidents" linked in the LG incidents section of this article is arbitrary in that LG incidents in 2007 were not *all* of notable contrast to the history of LG incidents of this plane. Further, a record number of issues in one year is entirely coincidental. Organizing information based on subjective delimiters is only useful if *all* information similar to it is organized by the same delimiters. Which it is not the case in this article. Feel free to organize all incidents this way, otherwise I see no argument here. I think the "Bombardier Dash 8" LG section should contain a complete LG incidents summary with links to notable individual incidents and we should forget about the ill conceived "2007 Dash 8 LG..." article and let it rot into obscurity. My opinion is further strengthened for 2 entirely separate reasons. First, web browsing has evolved into a vertically scrolling activity so a web page can grow considerably in vertical length before it becomes cumbersome; this article is far from it. And second, forced quantity limitations would be necessary in a printed book, but are not necessary here.

Either accept that I have a point and work with me on a compromise, or admit my comments in the Bombardier Dash 8 article LG incident section about the author being on Bombardier's payroll were spot on and he/she is in violation of Wikipedia policy.

Additionally I would appreciate it if you post my words on this issue as part of your historical "talk" section when you post a reply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.118.209.176 (talk)

Piaggio P.180 Avanti

Adam, thanks for reverting the recent additions on the Piaggio P.180 Avanti page. I have been procrastinating trying to clean up that section. My usual response to theis editors posts is a simple revert, and that generally produced a firestorm that ultimately lead to the editor being banned for 1 year. If he gives any problems regarding this article or others on the same issue, we should probably contact one of the Arbcom members that banned him the first time, and see what they recommend. Thanks. - BillCJ (talk) 03:44, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conventional landing gear

Please see that article's talk page. Paul Beardsell (talk) 00:54, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Now Commons

File:UltraflightLazairSeriesIII.JPG, an image uploaded to Wikipedia from this account in November 2007, is now File:UltraflightLazairSeriesIII.jpg (Commons:File:UltraflightLazairSeriesIII.jpg). — Athaenara ✉ 05:03, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Thanks for helping greatly with 'Wikifying' two recent new articles on SIPA aircraft - I just dont have the 'know-how' to use the various aircraft templates - they are a mystery to me! RuthAS (talk) 22:04, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the link to the aircraft template - will try to use it in my next new article - but its not easy to teach 'old girls new tricks!' RuthAS (talk) 22:15, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Light aircraft

Thanks! Paul Beardsell (talk) 00:41, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Just dropped by to say thank you for the help with Cessna and List of Cessna models. It looks much better now!! Captain n00dle ^T/_C 13:52, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Canadian ultralight aircraft 1990-1999

For every category you create, you should specify parent categories to which it belongs. You can do this by listing the parents near the bottom of the page, each enclosed in double brackets like so:

[[Category:Canadian ultralight aircraft]]
[[Category:Canadian civil aircraft 1990-1999]]

I am a human being, not a bot, so you can contact me if you have questions about this. Best regards, --Stepheng3 (talk) 00:01, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

funny story

looking at your page it remnds me I think I almost shot down a plane once when i was little.. about 10 my dad took me and my brother to an air show, and one of the display things (i think it was army trying to recruit) there was this big round radar control thing with a computer attached to it and joystick and I played around with it... and I think it locked onto one of the planes or somethin... after that the other thing with a sphere "head" with a big eye on it nearby with what looked like missiles jerked suddenly to turn and point slowly following it like a person would hold a gun... one of the soldiers came over and took control, lol, I guess they forgot to put it totally in safe mode or whatever:) --Kittins floating in the sky yay (talk) 16:25, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

!

haha that's cute :) loved the bit about keep dark chocolate on hand in case of dog Lol and global recession not affecting catfood... if it does maybe we can find a use for all those dogs ahaha

i dont have a cat i play with friends instead (i get followed around lol) means i don't have to do work;) --Kittins floating in the sky yay (talk) 17:00, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ha heard that one before maybe;) I don't really believe in past lives tho, it just seems like too much wishful thinking - one of those things that would be nice if it were true but I haven't seen any evidence of an afterlife so far sadly.. it's somethin i'm interested in I have an open mind but I try not to let hope cloud my judgement --Kittins floating in the sky yay (talk) 17:55, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:BellCH135135TwinHuey.JPG and File:BellCH-135TwinHuey135127.JPG

Just to let you know that I recently copied the above images that you uploaded to Wikipedia over to WikiMedia Commons, the Wikimedia central media repository for all free media. The images had been tagged with the {{Copy to Wikimedia Commons}} template. Your images are now available to all Wikimedia projects at the following locations: Commons:File:BellCH135135TwinHuey.JPG and Commons:File:BellCH-135TwinHuey135127.JPG. The original versions of the images uploaded to Wikipedia have been tagged with WP:CSD#F8. Cheers! --Captain-tucker (talk) 18:42, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Help with table alignment

Hi, Ahunt. I'll take you up on the offer you made a while back to provide some help... I'd posted a {{helpme}} request on my talk page, which you'll find here: I'm trying to align a floating table with the right margin, underneath an image that appears at the top right corner of an article. My original attempt appears here.

User:Michael93555 responded to my {{helpme}} by altering the sandbox page to place both the image and the table in a containing table; the result is here. This in some way solves the problem, save for the single border that encloses both the image and table, which isn't especially attractive. (The laterally uncentered alignment of the image is a bit off, too.) While leaving a note for him on this topic, I noted that he and I share a similar degree of newbieness to WP. Time to ask an old soul.

So, do you know how stack these objects along the right margin so that the image appears on top, the table independently underneath?

And while I'm distracting you, here's an unrelated question: Can an internal link refer explicitly to an old version of an article, or must one use an external link to do so (as I did above)? Thank you. Jim Ward ^{(talk·stalk)} 18:52, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, Ahunt, and thanks for the assistance and feedback. One curiosity about your modification to my sandbox page is that the caption that used to appear under the image has gone missing. Any idea how to make it appear, shy of explicitly adding a new row and moving it there? Feel free to leave a reply here or on your talk page; I'll see it either way. Thanks, as always, Jim Ward ^{(talk·stalk)} 04:50, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aha! Much closer to the desired result. I think I'll add a white row between the image and the table, which I intend to appear as discrete objects in the article. The row will have exterior borders, but I'll just live with that. Thanks, too, for the advice about the externally linked "diff". I'm grateful for your help. Jim Ward ^{(talk·stalk)} 15:25, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Friendly note regarding talk page messages

Hello. As a recent editor to User talk:Mynam690, I wanted to leave a friendly reminder that as per WP:USER, editors may remove messages at will from their own talk pages. While we may prefer that comments be archived instead, policy does not prohibit users -including anonymous editors- from deleting messages or warnings from their own talk pages. The only kinds of talk page messages that cannot be removed (as per WP:BLANKING) are declined unblock requests (but only while blocks are still in effect), confirmed sockpuppet notices, or IP header templates (for unregistered editors). These exceptions only exist in order to keep a user from potentially gaming the system. Thanks, — Kralizec! (talk) 12:02, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

American Eagle and Eaglet articles

Thank you for improving these articles! The Eagle company used a very oddbeat scheme for model designations from 1929, starting with the A-129. '29' means 1929! The chronological order of model goes by the last two numerals. Thats why the Eaglets seem to be spread randomly. Actually the first are the '230's and the '31s' follow in logical date order. I think therefore that it would be a good idea to group all the Eaglet models together - but what do you think? I tried to use the Eaglet link to aerofiles a couple of minutes ago, but couldnt get it to work - is it the link or me, I wonder! RuthAS (talk) 21:14, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]