User talk:Bzuk/Archive Nov 2007

XF-104

Sounds like it would be good if we asked one of the admins in WP:AIR to take a look at the user, and see if any admin action is warranted. - BillCJ 03:49, 17 October 2007 (UTC) [reply]

AT-21 Gunner

Could you perhaps look at the AT-21 Gunner page again, dig into your reference material, and finish up the inline citations? I added what I have. Oh and please copy edit for me. There has to be something I've missed. Thanks a bunch. --Colputt 22:07, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect! Thanks a bunch. --Colputt 01:18, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration

The placement is acceptable now that you're mentioning the comment in your statement; doing so at the top of the request for arbitration, above everything else, wasn't exactly adhering to the procribed format. Also, please note that "Arbitrators or Clerks may summarily remove or refactor discussion without comment." Picaroon (t) 03:27, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hi, and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.

A few features that you might find helpful:

Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
The announcement and open task box is updated very frequently. You can watchlist it if you're interested; or, you can add it directly to your user page by including {{WPMILHIST Announcements}} there.
Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, detailed article and content review, offline publication, article improvement contests, and other tasks.
We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, periods, and conflicts.
We've developed a variety of guidelines for article structure and content, template use, categorization, and other issues that you may find useful.
The project has a stress hotline available for your use.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask one of the project coordinators, or any experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Eurocopter tigre 13:21, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

References

Hi Bzuk, I know you have fairly stong opinions on referencing styles but I don't think your change to Richard Williams (RAAF officer) is an improvement, either aesthetically or for clarity. The layout I've used is within WP guidelines and is one I've employed on many similar articles; it's also used in such FA-Class Militory History articles as Australian Defence Force. I don't think you'll ever get consensus on a universal style, so those that follow a recognised standard are probably best left alone to maintain some reasonable consistency. Cheers, Ian Rose 04:22, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Stefanomencarelli

Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Stefanomencarelli. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Stefanomencarelli/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Stefanomencarelli/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Picaroon (t) 23:54, 22 October 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Possibly unfree Image:AEG IV.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:AEG IV.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Liftarn 15:40, 25 October 2007 (UTC) [reply]

More dirty socks

I see you got the latest sock rant too. My favorite line: but the arbitrary revisions by the three named are often arbitrary. Does this mena he accepts that there were revisions that weren't arbitrary? As in:''but the non-arbitrary revisions by the three named are not arbitrary. Hilarious. With a friend like this, Stefanomencarelli won't need us as enemies any more! - BillCJ 07:19, 26 October 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Edgar Schmued.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Edgar Schmued.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:47, 27 October 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Dick Merrill.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Dick Merrill.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 19:24, 29 October 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Beechcraft Super King Air

G'day Bzuk, I've been working over in Beechcraft land for a while and have seen a couple of references to the Canadian Forces "CT-145 Super Kingair". Other than on Wikipedia I can find no evidence of the CT-145 in CAF service. Could you please confirm so I can make the necessary changes (of course you could do it yourself if you want to, there are a few different articles where the reference appears). YSSYguy 00:09, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about the site's reliability, but you might look at http://www.rcaf.com/aircraft/trainers/kingair/index.php . - BillCJ 00:39, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now this is just off the top of my head (and you know how much that can hurt) but the Raytheon/Beechcraft (Beech) C-90B King Air (replacing earlier C-90As) used in training at Southport Aerospace (Portage la Prairie, Manitoba) by the No. 3 Canadian Forces Flying Training School (3 CFFTS) is probably the only use of the King Air in the Canadian military. I'll check to see what their designation is but I always thought it went by "Beech C-90 King Air." FWIW Bzuk 02:46, 29 October 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks chaps, I did some more Google searching without having Wikipedia open (as it seems to skew the search results) and found some more info. I will be incorporating this info shortly. I have seen info about the 90 Models (and incorporated it into the Beechcraft King Air article); they appear to have never worn anything other than civil regos and all seem to be US-reg now. Are they still in use? YSSYguy 05:41, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Very much so, see above comment. FWIW Bzuk 12:06, 30 October 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Seen this?

Per this, what happens now? Having never been through an ARBCOM, I have no idea what to expect now. It doesn't seem like he is leaving en.Wiki, just the ARBCOM. I get the feeling he had no clue what really happens in the ARBCOM, but expected a quick censure of us. He's demanded apologies at least twice, and seems put out we haven't responded, or been made to apologize. - BillCJ 23:55, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All I can say is that he really has no understnading of how to interact on Wikipedia. I've always thought it was the language issue, and some of it is, but lately I'm believing it goes alot deeper than that. Persecution complexes aren't usually the sign of a healthy or mature disposition. - BillCJ 03:25, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Per Alan's suggestions on my page, I'm just going to wait and see how the arbitrators handle this development. I don't believe Stefano has done his case any good with his behavior and comments trhoughtout the ARBCOM up to this point, and this last mess may be the mail in the coffee - ifyouknowwhatImean ;) - BillCJ 03:45, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re. user:GB-UK-BI

user:GB-UK-BI is a socketpup of indef blocked vandal user:gon4z. He has a vast record of inserting unsourced nationalistic pro-Albanian propaganda and/or anti-Serbian claims into articles - especially regarding Kosovo and Albanian military forces. As sock of a blocked user I reported him to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism - in case you come across other socks of Gon4z - revert his edits and report the suspected sock to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. best regards, --noclador 22:47, 30 October 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Spruce Goose

I have plenty of experience with images, but not any with video. I also strongly disagree with having dates as "dd/mm" since people can have their Wikipedia settings make the dates automatically appear like that, but unregistered users are forced to see the date how it is written (and since it's a US based article, it should use US formatting), but I won't revert it again. TJ Spyke 05:35, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't normally edit aviation articles (I stick mainly to wrestling and video game articles), so it won't be a big deal to me. I posted a comment at Template talk:Video. If I find something out before you do, i'll post a comment here. TJ Spyke 06:13, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My talk page

Thank you for the prompt revert on my talk page - I've reinstated the comment, though, as I don't really mind what people say on the talk page unless it's blatantly offensive. My userpage is a different matter, though (hence the semi-protection!). Thanks again! Giles Bennett ^{(Talk, Contribs)} 12:54, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XX (October 2007)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter
Issue XX (October 2007)

Project news

The contest department has completed its seventh month of competition. The leader for this month, with 22 points, is JKBrooks85; Kyriakos is in second place, with 21 points, and Blnguyen is in third place, with 10 points. Overall, JKBrooks85 remains in first place, with 114 points. All project members are encouraged to submit the articles they're working on as entries.
The Biography WikiProject's military work group has now been integrated into the project as the Military biography task force.
The Romanian military history and Fortifications task forces have been created.
The popular culture content guideline has been updated.
{{WPMILHIST}} now supports short-form task force tags; see the project banner instructions for more details.
The B-Class checklist in the {{WPMILHIST}} project banner now generates categories corresponding to the areas in which an article needs attention; similar sets of categories exist for each task force as well. The available categories are:

Articles of note

New featured articles:

New A-Class articles:

Current proposals and discussions

Discussions about tagging articles by sources used and as needing attention have begun.
A discussion about re-structuring the top-level category scheme has begun.
A discussion about infobox width and font sizes has begun.
A proposal to create a formal project style guide is on the final stages of discussion.

Awards and honors

JKBrooks85 has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his diligent efforts to improve our coverage of fortifications in the American Civil War, and, in particular, his creation of a substantial number of A-Class articles.
Tony the Marine has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his considerable efforts in raising Puerto Rican- and Hispanic-related military history articles to featured status.

File:Romans MMVII.JPG

What is Tag & Assess MMVII? We'd better explain. A month or so back, we ran a script to list all the articles in categories related to military history. This gave us about 165,000 articles. Some of these are already tagged and assessed as military history; some are military history but not yet tagged and assessed; some are not military history articles at all. This huge project — working thorough 165,000 articles — is called Tag & Assess 2007. To make it manageable, the list has been broken down into 330 ranges each of 500 articles. This is where you can help.

Just... adopt-a-range from the available worklists then keep track of your tally on participants' list. The tagging is easy, just follow the simple instructions. Afterwards, as our way of thanking you, you'll be presented with service awards and barnstars based on the number of articles you process. Remember... the ranges are broken down into sub-sections of ten articles, so you work through them at twenty or thirty articles a day if you wish. To make Tag & Assess 2007 a success, we need your help. Please sign up now. Thanks.

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

Delivered by grafikbot 15:22, 3 November 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Hi Bill

Hi again, Bill. Yup, we were going to talk. I would have gotten an email here and everything a long time ago too, but you see I have some health issues these days, of unknown seriousness, so I kinda don't make any promises about anything right now. When I get better we'll definitely talk. Manxruler 16:09, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I appreciate it. Keep up the good work. Manxruler 16:58, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

B-25 Mitchell citation change?

Hello. Just curious as to why you changed [1] a reference in the B-25 Mitchell article out of the existing citation template? Thanks, Kralizec! (talk) 16:10, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the speedy reply. I did not add the citation in question; I just noticed your change on my watchlist this morn. Perhaps we should consider updating the article to MOS:DATE, as otherwise this issue will crop up any time citations are added via the standardized templates. --Kralizec! (talk) 16:46, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aeritalia G.91

Bill: I saw your tags on Aeritalia G.91 and thought I could help out with some copyediting. I did so and removed the tags, but do take a look and see if I was thorough enough? Hope that was helpful? - Ahunt 03:07, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good job, I was hoping someone would step up. Bzuk 03:20, 9 November 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I thought it might move the issue forward rather than reverting and waiting for the ARBCOM to rule. - Ahunt 12:00, 9 November 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Thanks again for riding "shotgun"

71.62.216.87 has been trying to insert himself into an ARBCOM, working diligently to try to provoke reactions from parties. You again came to help. Bzuk 15:56, 10 November 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Heh, Thanks! You really should warn him when he does personal attack, though -- see WP:UTM, I believe that has all the user warnings you shall ever need. Gscshoyru 16:18, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is it prudent to get into a discussion with a disruptive individual who is looking for a response? That was the underlying reason for my not reacting with a caution or note on the editor's home/talk page. FWIW Bzuk 16:23, 10 November 2007 (UTC).[reply]

If you don't warn him, he won't get a final warning so he can be blocked. It's a personal attack, and thus he should be warned, and blocked if he persists, and then you no longer have to worry about him. It's not a discussion, it's a revert and warn and ignore (much like WP:RBI). If he's using a dynamic ip, you can always get an admin to semi-protect the page he keeps hitting, or rangeblock if the range is small enough. Or am I missing something? Gscshoyru 16:35, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If I may answer: yes, you're missing this: Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Wikzilla. When a user users IPs over a widely varying range, the only recouse is to semi-protect pages (which has been done on the F-22 Raptor and Eurofighter Typhoon pages), and to basically ignore him, which is what BZuk has been doing. - BillCJ 16:52, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Western Air

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Western Air, and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Western Airlines. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot 10:58, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Western Air

Just a quick heads up, I redirected the page to Western Airlines. Cheers. --slakr^\ talk / 11:02, 12 November 2007 (UTC) [reply]

commas

Oops, yes should have spotted that it was completely unnecessary, rather than focussing purely on the fact that it was inside when it should have been outside. David Underdown 14:25, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, that's not the Wikipedia standard. Unless the punctuation is part of the quoted text, it's supposed to go outside the quotes (which does seem most logical to me). See WP:MOS#Quotation marks as I mentioned in my original edit summary. David Underdown 14:54, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dieppe Raid

I'm not quite sure why you changed all the references. It doesn't seem to have made any difference to the appearance on the page. And if there is no standard, why is there a Wikipedia cite book template? I can't claim any great knowledge here so haven't a clue what MLA or scratch formatting is. Regards Stephen Kirrage^{talk - contribs} 14:52, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ask a silly question.....Thanks! Stephen Kirrage^{talk - contribs} 16:43, 13 November 2007 (UTC) [reply]

the "reference" heading

I can not find the "WP:Air format" item that you referred to in an edit summary on the "B-17" page. I found "Wikipedia:WikiProject Aircraft/page content", which includes a section on references. This is in regards to "bibliography" being a sub-heading of "references". Snowman 15:29, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Dear Bill: Thanks for the wikiwings - I appreciate that - Ahunt 18:13, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]