Jump to content

User talk:John Pouliot

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

League of Copyeditors participation drive!

[edit]

Dear League member,

We've started a participation drive for the remainder of February. If you can, please help clear the backlog by adopting the following goals each week:

Thanks for your help! BuddingJournalist 01:55, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:LoCE template note

[edit]

Hi there! While proofing Head-up display, I noticed that there was a bit of weirdness with the copyedit template on the talk page.

You had this code:

==Copyedit== {{WP LoCE |{{subst:february}} {{subst:2007}} |[[User:John Pouliot|John Pouliot]] 13 February }}

Which resulted in this:

{{[[Template:WP LoCE |WP LoCE ]]}}

You don't have to enter the current month and year in the template, it will do it automatically. Just paste the handy code from the League page in and you're set to go! (I fixed Head-up display, so no worries.) Thanks! Galena11 18:41, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:C-130J Image Deletion Question

[edit]

It's fine now. enochlau (talk) 14:10, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Commercial HUD Discussion

[edit]

This was my first nose dive into the Wiki community so I ran face first into the "don't grab an image off the net and use it" policy :)

I'm a bit confused also about:

Systems have been approved which allow reduced-visibility takeoffs and landings, and Category IIIc ILS landings[citation needed].

What is appropriate citation for this? I could, with a lot of work, obtain the FAA approval documents, however as these are not generally available to the public I'm not sure what utility that would be. I could point to a specific aircraft type approval, but that would require a link to a website - a practice which appears to be discouraged. Even if I said something like "the Q4000 has received FAA approval for Category III a landings" that itself would require some citation. And also clarification as some aircraft of this type may not have a HUD installed, or if installed the operator may not have obtained the necessary approvals to use the HUD in this manner (for a CAT III landing both the aircraft and flight crew require approvals)

I could point off to an industry magazine or journal, however I don't subscribe to them. I'm not at all sure how far this needs to be taken - or the amount of time that is appropriate to put into this. All of this is very non-controversial, generally free of opinion, and I can write what I know or just let it go.

Same for the discussion on synthetic vision (which I've been associated with for about 5 years.)

I saw an opportunity to expand on a field that I am familiar with; however it appears as if there is limited use of "expert testomny" and that only references to prior published material are acceptble- which in this field is very limited as there are limited players.

For example in the picture shown there is a symbol called a "flight path vector." Apparently I can't discuss what this is without being able to provide a citation? Or make the comment "the Flight Path Vector symbol, while originating as a HUD unique symbol, is being incorporated into new head down displays as it is a very useful means of informing the pilot where the aircraft is really going and not where it is pointed."  ?? <sigh>

I've read the "attributed to a reliable source" material but fail to grasp the finer points. Guidance would be appreciated.

Brian —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ZazenCID (talkcontribs) 21:11, 28 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Hi. I'm sorry to bother you, but as a LoCE member, I just wondered if you would be willing to have a look through the Kent article. It is currently a Featured Article Candidate and needs a copy-edit for grammar by someone who hasn't yet seen it. Any other ways to improve the article would also be welcome. Thank you very much, if you can. Epbr123 21:00, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from the League of Copyeditors. Your name is listed on our members page, but we are unsure how many of the people listed there are still active contributors to the League's activities. If you are still interested in participating in the work of the League, please follow the instructions at the members page to add your name to the active members list. Once you have done that, you might want to familiarise yourself with the new requests system, which has replaced the old /proofreading subpage. As the old system is now deprecated, the main efforts of the League should be to clear the substantial backlog which still exists there.
The League's services are in as high demand as ever, as evinced by the increasing backlog on our requests pages, both old and new. While FA and GA reviewers regularly praise the League's contributions to reviewed articles, we remain perennially understaffed. Fulfilling requests to polish the prose of Wikipedia's highest-profile articles is a way that editors can make a very noticeable difference to the appearance of the encyclopedia. On behalf of the League, if you do consider yourself to have left, I hope you will consider rejoining; if you consider yourself inactive, I hope you will consider returning to respond to just one request per week, or as many as you can manage. Merry Christmas and happy editing, The League of Copyeditors.

MelonBot (STOP!) 17:56, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please confirm your membership

[edit]

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Wikify at 19:51, 22 December 2010 (UTC).[reply]

File permission problem with File:Derrick - Glover and Eckman.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Derrick - Glover and Eckman.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 04:15, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Derrick Comedy1.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Derrick Comedy1.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 04:16, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]