User talk:WDGraham/Archive 2008

Red Bull Task Force

The Red Bull task force is fairly quiet, and has a grand total of 21 articles in its scope, and 4 members. Since there are many articles in the air sports area that have no project to look after them, and since Red Bulls articles would fall under the air sports scope, would you object to the scope of the task force being expanded to include air sports, and the task force being renamed and retasked as the Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Air sports task force? - Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) —Preceding comment was added at 16:03, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine, I've voted to support. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 19:47, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

STS-400

Have I done that correctly? :S Rudget . 12:25, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I didn't move it. One minute I'll delete it and do it again. Rudget . 12:26, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Should be done now. Apologies. Rudget . 12:29, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that's great. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 12:43, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Technology Barnstar

		The Technology Barnstar
		For your numerous major contributions to articles regarding space and technology, including, but not limited to, creating the STS-400 article. Nat682 (talk) 16:47, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank-you very much. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 17:01, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merged Portal "mock up"

Hi! I would suggest to adjust the schedules of the "selected" items, after I gained some experience running the Portal:Space exploration by myself for "forever": Images are much easier to come by than articles! Cycle the "selected image" once per week, and cycle articles/bios once a month.

Also, I experimented with the "random" feature on the portal, and this may be something useful for the merged portal, as well.

HTH, Awolf002 (talk) 21:43, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for merging! Let's discuss at the talk page. Awolf002 (talk) 01:10, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: CloudSat; Helios probes; Solid rocket booster; Orbital spaceflight; Soyuz TM-16; Earth observation satellite; DSE-Alpha; STEREO; San Marco platform; CALIPSO; Shenzhou 7; Alexandr Kaleri; Tsyklon; Sputnik 3; MGM-13 Mace; Advanced Land Observation Satellite; Launch window; Cosmopolis XXI; International Launch Services

Cleanup: Geosynchronous satellite; List of rockets; Expedition 2
Merge: Monopropellant rocket; Vostok 1; Vostok rocket
Add Sources: Earth orbit rendezvous; Solar sail; Blue Gemini
Wikify: Eugen Sänger; Metal Storm; Microspacecraft
Expand: Space rendezvous; Space weapon; Orbital Maneuvering System

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 03:23, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Deletion Review for Template:Progress spacecraft/Launch

Request fulfilled. In the future it is not necessary (and undesirable) to submit a delrev before conversing with the deletion admin. A non-controversial request such as this does not require a delrev. JERRY ^talk _contribs 20:28, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I only used delrev this time because the lines of authority were unclear (two deleting admins for two pages). Thanks for completing the request, and moving the pages. Now the templates are in their correct locations, I'll go ahead and nominate the redirects for deletion again under G6. Sorry for the confusion. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 20:44, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:Redirect-acronym

Template:Redirect-acronym has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Hairy Dude (talk) 22:40, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've decided to support the proposal. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 23:44, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Space travellers WikiProject

Hi, I noticed that you are a member of the Space travellers WikiProject. A couple of weeks ago, I proposed that the Space missions and Space travellers projects, which both appear to be inactive be merged into the Human Spaceflight project. Whilst this is being done, the capitalisation of the Human spaceflight project's title would also be corrected (ie. Human Spaceflight → Human spaceflight). The projects are all doing the same/very similar things, and in my opinion, a single, larger, project would be more effective than three smaller, and somewhat inactive projects.. In light of very little response to messages on the project talk pages, I am now sending this message to all members of all three projects, inviting them to discuss the proposal on the Human Spaceflight project's talk page. I would appreciate your opinion on this. Thanks. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 22:48, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can't believe I just did that. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 22:48, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{Launching}} tag for space shuttle launches

Do you have a preference: {{Launching/STS-122}} or {{Launching/Atlantis}} or {{Launching/STS}}? (sdsds - talk) 00:52, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{Launching/STS}} is probably best. --GW_Simulations^{User Page | Talk} 00:07, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Plan for Category:Space exploration articles by quality

Subsequent to the merge of WikiProject Space exploration into Wikiproject Spaceflight, it seems there might need to be a plan for converting Category:Space exploration articles by quality and its ilk to something like Category:Spaceflight articles by quality, and perhaps similarly for importance ratings categories. These are tightly coupled to to the Template:WPSpace ratings mechanism. Is there a good place to start discussing a plan for this conversion? (sdsds - talk) 21:53, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. We'll need to check at WP:SPACE. We'll also have to drag it through CFD as well, because we are moving categories. It would probably be a good idea to leave notes on the project talk page, and Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team as well.

In reply to your comment at the CFD for the member category, I think the best way to minimise self-references would be to merge the members into the main project category, and Category:WikiProject Spaceflight seems the best place for this to go. --GW_Simulations^{User Page | Talk} 22:15, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not exactly wanting to suggest we could avoid "wiki-process", but what if the new categories were created and then the {{WPSpace}} template were changed to automatically populate the new categories rather than the old? Then it would be a "trivial" janitorial task to remove the old (and now empty) categories.... (sdsds - talk) 06:46, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's an option, but it could be seen as WP:CPM. I suppose we could try requesting a speedy move, or if we have any administrators in the project, asking for their help. --GW_Simulations^{User Page | Talk} 08:08, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

launching template

I have decided to remove the "launching" template from the NASA page. If have had doubts about this usage in the past, and have only seem them grown. I'll explain my reasons, and perhaps you can comment with your ideas.

NASA launches stuff every week. This opens a precedent to having the template included year round
I can see the point in having the template on payloads, sattelites, the general "Space Shuttle" article, the mission article, because those are all search terms that might lead people to wikipedia looking for that information. In my eyes anyone that looks for a "launchschedule" on the NASA page is just not using google correctly.
It needs and invites constent updating troughout the week simply to fix the "countdown" which really shouldn't be in Wikipedia at all. We say "something happens within the next" week, but we should not be "counting down".
Combined I think this is starting to violate WP:NOT in that wikipedia is not a TV guide, and it isn't a launchschedule or countdown either.

I'm interested what your opinion on this is, and what we should do address these concerns --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 01:29, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This template was only designed for use on rockets and satellites. Its use seems to have spiralled out of control. I don't really have an opinion either way on the issue, so it is probably best if you talk to Sdsds (talk · contribs). GW_Simulations^{User Page | Talk} 08:36, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Template:Launching/GLONASS

Actually I'm rather OK with deletion of {{Launching/GLONASS}}. I see it as deprecated by {{Launching/Proton}}. Every GLONASS payload is going to fly on Proton, eh? Maybe it's fine to have only launch-system-specific subtemplates of {{Launching}}. No two Proton missions are going to be on the pad at the same time. And although once more in history there will be two STS vehicles at 39A and 39B simultaneously, can't we handle that as a special case, e.g. {{Launching/STS}} and {{Launching/STS-LON}}? (sdsds - talk) 08:08, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, starting late this year, or early next, we are going to see GLONASS launches on Soyuz, and even a couple on a GSLV. There are four Proton pads, and Russian pad turnaround times are pretty fast, so it is not unusual to have two Protons going within the reccommended two week period for this template (Today's Proton launch, and the one on 28 January, for example). As for STS-400, I would advise not using a tag unless it is called up (by which time the main {{Launching/STS}} tag would have freed up. -GW_Simulations^{User Page | Talk} 09:07, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orbit data

I wonder what orbit data we should use at USA 193, since the orbit is decaying? Evercat (talk) 21:30, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure. I would say some current data (like I added), and possibly some data from around the time of launch, if any can be found. What do you think? --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 21:34, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reasonable. There's a post from January 2007 by Ted Molczan at [1]. I'm not qualified to interpret it though. :-) Evercat (talk) 21:36, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I need to check. I'll get back to you. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 21:38, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are also other posts from him on the list around the same time period. Evercat (talk) 21:46, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was looking at using something slightly less technical from JSR. [2]. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 21:49, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Made a suggestion re: this (not) being an ASAT on the USA 193 talk page. Evercat (talk) 14:23, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on Talk:USA 193 --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 22:00, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stratellite edits

They seem to be. I'm no expert on the subject, and I reverted a page blanking that appeared on Recent Changes. While leaving a message on the user's talk page, I noticed that others had also flagged concerns about inappropriate edits to the same article. However, these edits seem fine, an apparent attempt to make the article more comprehensive and factually accurate (though, unfortunately, without references, but hopefully they'll appear soon :) Does this help you? Thanks, PeterSymonds | talk 21:55, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I just wanted a second opinion because of the substantial nature of the changes he was making, linked with his history of vandalism to the page, and his username, which suggested a potential COI. I'll leave him be for now, unless he blanks it again. For the record, the other "inappropriate edits" which you mentioned seemed to be exactly the same as the one you reverted. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 21:58, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing. It's a difficult one, but I think s/he is trying to rewrite the article. I just had a look at the Stradeditor's full contributions, and his first edit summary mentioned the removal of content. Maybe s/he's just finding their feet; I'll welcome them officially, and see if s/he needs a hand. However, if I've got it wrong, then obviously further action must be taken.

I'm also concerned about the conflict of interest issue; an eye on the page to check that everything's written from a neutral point of view will be necessary. I'll add it to my watchlist (I assume you'll keep an eye on things as well) and hope that the edits were made in good faith. Any assistance, please let me know. Thanks, PeterSymonds | talk 22:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi GW, thanks for the tips! I am just learning my way around Wikipedia as a contributor, it's very interesting and seems to be very open in terms of contributors having access to each other. I'll eventually get the hang of it. Peter Symonds had written to tell me I had to sign the edits using 4 tildes. I guess I misunderstood where I had to place those tildes. Thank you again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Strateditor (talk • contribs) 23:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is. I hope you enjoy using it. I've replied on your talk page. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 09:49, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Boilerplate dispute

GW, You dropped a dispute template on Boilerplate (rocketry)#Space Shuttle OV-101, and I responded:

I agree the Enterprise is not a boilerplate. Paragraph is written from the wiki article links and sources as a "boilerplate configuration". This gives depth to the article in how NASA used the Enterprise as IF it were a boilerplate for the vibration test. Don't you agree? I have not investigated enought of Pathfinder to voice an opinion, at this time. How would you write and reference Pathfinder as a boilerplate? LanceBarber (talk) 08:46, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It was not I who came up with the "boilerplate configuration" term, but another wiki article: boilerplate test program used the term, and I built upon it, and added the necessary reference for the vibration tests.

Could you please be more specific in your dispute. Thank you. High regards, Lance.... LanceBarber (talk) 02:52, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 09:49, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:84.13.164.204 and Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism

Just to let you know I've closed your report without action at WP:AIV because I placed the site that the IP was adding on the spam blacklist. That should shut him down. If there are further problems, let me or any other admin know. Stifle (talk) 10:20, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 10:34, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Brace matching

By the way, I submitted this enhancement request, asking that brace matching be implemented on Wikipedia. I think it would make it easier to keep track of what is going on with these complex templates. Obuibo Mbstpo (talk) 22:59, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great. Sounds like it is a really useful idea. Hope they introduce it. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 23:57, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is also a link on the bottom right of that page that will allow you to vote for the bug to have priority, if you wish. However, they note that actually providing a fix is much more effective than voting for it. I guess I'll hang out in the technical IRC group sometime and try to figure out how to get involved in that kind of thing. Obuibo Mbstpo (talk) 06:42, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll vote for that later. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 08:04, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Team game of chess

Would you like to play Tparker393 and I at a nice game of chess? Obuibo Mbstpo (talk) 22:51, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, sure. I've set up a game here. Sorry for the late reply, I was in the middle of reprogramming a rather complex template. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 22:52, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work on the launching template, by the way. I guess for something temporary like that, the top-of-the-page box is better than a sidebar? Obuibo Mbstpo (talk) 00:12, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A box at the top is the traditional system for such templates. Most of the articles it is used on have infoboxes anyway, and you can't put a sidebar on an article with an infobox. I wrote most of the template from scratch, and even I don't understand it fully. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 00:18, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I had all kinds of trouble with templates until I started reading the help files (e.g. Help:Template, m:Help:ParserFunctions, etc.) Unfortunately, MediaWiki doesn't seem to be powerful enough to do all the things I want it to do. Or at least, the implementation here doesn't have all the stuff I need. Obuibo Mbstpo (talk) 00:22, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What were you looking to do? I agree that it is not powerful enough. As an experienced VB6 programmer, I get frustrated by not being able to store information in variables and then use it later on in the template. If MediaWiki had support for VB6, then I could have written {{Launching/Count}} in about six or seven lines of code. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 00:25, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's a magic word called {{CURRENTUSER}} which could be used to do all kinds of stuff, such as providing different messages to different users using #if statements. This could help automate/idiot-proof certain complex changes. This would have been very helpful for making changes to the proxy table I was working on, because it was based on individual proxy pages transcluded from different users' userspace. However, CURRENTUSER is not active here. Obuibo Mbstpo (talk) 00:38, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You could try filing a a request for it. I think that's how you get new features installed. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 01:13, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whoa! I just looked at Template:Launching/Count. That's amazingly intricate. How long did that take you? Obuibo Mbstpo (talk) 00:41, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

About 3½-4 hours from start to finish, but it was my fourth attempt (the three previous attempts didn't work). --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 01:07, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, if you ever want to collaborate on doing some MediaWiki extensions or something in Java, let me know. I could use the experience (I'm trying to become a software developer) and MediaWiki certainly does need some enhancements. I'm not sure how much leeway Wikipedia's developers (Brion Vibber et al) allow for implementing that kind of stuff, although Bugzilla notes that the most effective way to get fixes implemented is to provide the fix yourself. Obuibo Mbstpo (talk) 01:12, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm hopeless at programming in Java. VB6 and HTML are my main languages. I'm trying to learn though. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 01:15, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, Java is definitely a paradigm shift from VB. However, Java is a big improvement on C++, even though it's easier to learn once you know C++. Now the big thing seems to be this .NET phenomenon. I bought a bunch of books on .NET certification, but for some reason end up being drawn to Wikipedia editing a lot more easily than to actually cracking open those War and Peace-length tomes. I guess I better pry myself away from this thing... Obuibo Mbstpo (talk) 01:21, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I tried VB.NET, and I can write basic programmes in it, but I quickly went back to VB6. I've been using it for at least seven or eight years (possibly more, I can't quite remember), and I'm just used to it. It does pretty much everything I need, so I have no reason to change. I'm trying to pick up a bit of C++ to write a couple of specialised DLLs, but apart from that, I'm happy with good old VB6. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 01:28, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, it's your move. :) Obuibo Mbstpo (talk) 20:53, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've moved Nf3-h4. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 21:00, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SpiritWorldWiki

Hi GW, I am writing to you since you are a fellow software developer and Wikipedian. I was wondering if you would like to comment on some of my ideas at m:User:The Unknown Rebel/SpiritWorldWiki? I believe that some of the drama and fights over Wikipedia policy and culture (specifically, the great inclusionism/deletionism debate) might be rendered unnecessary by certain technological advancements. Specifically, I propose the replacement of the current model – in which the world of online, mass-collaborative encyclopedia-writing is largely dominated by a single monolothic entity, Wikipedia – by a "wikisphere" of independent but interconnected wikis. Under this system, users disenchanted with the rules and culture of Wikipedia can contribute elsewhere, and their contributions will be as accessible and crosslinkable there as if put on Wikipedia. I am reaching out to various individuals in hopes of putting together a development team to implement the technology needed to make this succeed. (For instance, we need a watchlist that can track changes to watched articles on many wikis simultaneously.) Of course, if I don't get any other skilled participants, it will be necessary to begin work on my own. Also, please let me know if there are other individuals who might be interested. Thanks, SpiritWorldWiki (talk) 05:27, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's an interesting proposal. I certainally think there should be more collaboration between wikis, and would be strongly in favour of moving deleted content to other wikis rather than simply getting rid of it. Obviously there would be exceptions - attack pages and pure vandalism, for example. I don't know whether completely linking the wikis would be a practical option or not, but if it is, then it would be a great development. If we could get Uncyclopedia involved in the project then that would be fantastic, as we could dump the whole of BJAODN onto them. We could also create a vanity wiki, and move vanity articles there. As a VB6 programmer, I don't know if I can be much help with developing it, but I broadly support the proposal. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 07:59, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Jeffrey Williams; STEREO; Shenzhou 7; CloudSat; Jeff Greason; Alexandr Kaleri; CALIPSO; Soyuz TM-16; Shuttle 2.03; Tsyklon; Advanced Land Observation Satellite; San Marco platform; Shuttle 2.01; Claudie Haigneré; DSE-Alpha; Orbital spaceflight; Spaceflight osteopenia; The Spaceship Company; Yuri Malenchenko

Cleanup: Tier Two; Sergei Zalyotin; Expedition 2
Merge: Vostok rocket; Vostok 1; X-51 (Deus Ex)
Add Sources: Susan J. Helms; Beal Aerospace; Blue Gemini
Wikify: Eugen Sänger; G-suit; Gregory J. Harbaugh
Expand: Sea Launch Commander; William Francis Buckley; Harpoon

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 18:06, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why hasn't this been archived? --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 15:26, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wop Wop

Hey GW Simulations. I rarely enter on en.wikipedia, and I have seen your message today. I won't run the bot in the templates, the interwikis are wrong in the most important part of the templates. Thanks for the advert. Greetings!! Rastrojo (talk) 15:48, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Collapse models

Note: This was copied from a subpage draft of Comparison of medium lift launch systems, all signatures are accurate.

I'd suggest collapsing the models down. Having breakdowns for sub-models will make the list horribly long, I fear. In a case where one submodel ends up above or below the threshold, a footnote could be added to clarify which submodels are covered. As an alternative, maybe some sort of collapsable table could be setup so taht there is a main line for the family (say Delta II), and then a collapsed table which can show all the sub-model breakouts? --StuffOfInterest (talk) 11:28, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look into that. I think models should be listed separately as they have different payload capacities. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 16:23, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adrianne Calvo

Could I convince you to withdraw your AfD nom on this article? I think it's shown sufficient notability to be kept, and I'd like to nominate it for DYK. GlassCobra 14:15, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 16:54, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Now That's What I Call Music! 70

Regarding the page Now That's What I Call Music! 70, which you tagged for speedy deletion on the basis of CSD A1 tag used, I wanted you to know that I have removed the speedy deletion tag. This page does not qualify for speedy deletion under that criterion because it does have context and albums are not normally speediable under the CSD. If you still want the page to be deleted, please re-tag it under a CSD criterion that applies, consider redirecting the article, or use the proposed deletion or the articles for deletion processes. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Redfarmer (talk • contribs) 16:39, 9 April 2008

Thanks. Personally I don't feel there was context, but I'm not going to argue about something that is subjective. I have endorsed your PROD. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 17:21, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

offend

hmm, i DID NOT MAKE ANY SORT OF THREAT AGAINST THE PERSON IN WHICH YOU SPEAK OF. you are being undeniably unreasonable. yes i said, that they have an ego. that is no reason to THREATEN ME with deletion. and you are proving my point even more that the mechanics of this site are currupting valid points idea's and information. making most here no better then the FCC. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thedevilishere (talk • contribs) 10:02, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, please calm down and stop shouting. I am being perfectly reasonable. Here are a couple of quotes from your comment on User talk:Bonadea: "what is your problem?" "your own selfish ego?". I am not threatening you, I am merely making you aware of Wikipedia policies. I never accused you of threatening him, I stated that you made a personal attack, which is supported by the two quotes above. I'm not sure what the FCC is, but with your current attitude towards the community, you will not last long here. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 10:10, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

( fyi ) FCC

alright i'll calm down and stop trying to pick fights, but im really frustrated, that i can't post info about Vision Of Mara, with out receiving protest. -sorry

        Thedevilishere (talk) 10:19, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you can show that the article meets the criteria at WP:MUSIC, then it can stay. BTW, the CFD nomination of Category:LS-Studio's Shut Down is nothing personal, I didn't realise it was you until afterwards. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 10:22, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

alright, no you can delete that LS studio's shut down, it was actaully tagged somehow on the 2004 Ukrainian child pornography raids i edited, it was a tag that didn't exist so i just briefly made it exist. i know allot more information about the "modeling agency." that i'll eventually post but right now i dont have the time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thedevilishere (talk • contribs) 10:29, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks. I'm not an admin, so I'll find one and ask them to do that. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 10:35, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Atv docked real.jpg

Thank you for the notice! I haven't seen the NASA logo, but it's logical, because the docking tests the previous day were also telecast by NASA. No need to change it back to ESA fair use ;) ColdCase (talk) 02:38, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The logo can easily be mistaken for detail on the Zvezda module unless you know what you are looking for. If you look closely, the lightest detail in the top right corner spells out the word "NASA". I've changed the licence tag on the image to {{PD-NASA}}, and suggested that it should be moved to Commons. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 08:01, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh, sorry, I thought it had already been changed. I have removed the "Image: ESA" text from the image description (which is required for ESA pictures) since its no longer ESA fair use. Thanks for your effort! ColdCase (talk) 16:46, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - No problem. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 17:46, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Orbital spaceflight; STEREO; Shenzhou 7; Tier Two; Claudie Haigneré; Molniya (satellite); Jeff Greason; Piers Sellers; Cosmopolis XXI; Soyuz TM-16; John Herrington; SpaceDev Dream Chaser; Alexandr Kaleri; ExoMars; Earth orbit rendezvous; San Marco platform; Spaceflight osteopenia; James M. Kelly; DSE-Alpha

Cleanup: Wallops Flight Facility; List of rockets; America's Space Prize
Merge: Monopropellant; Vostok rocket; Entwicklungsring Nord
Add Sources: Beal Aerospace; Vasili Lazarev; Susan J. Helms
Wikify: Eugen Sänger; G-suit; DrDish
Expand: GLONASS; Long Duration Exposure Facility; Sea Launch Commander

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 10:09, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Let's hope the bot will archive this one. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 10:10, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Answer to Question

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I did not know that this had occurred. I just tried to paste a userbox format on my page. I will correct this formatting error immediately. I am sorry to bother you. -Basketball123456 (talk) 21:29, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a problem, and it wouldn't work anyway. I just found it confusing. Thanks. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 21:58, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ICO Satellite Management now ICO Global Communications

Your reversion in the article ICO Global Communications has been undone. While I know you meant well, please understand that simply having a conflict of interest is not grounds enough for a reversion, especially when the edit is not really controversial (like the company's name). Please look at WP:COI#How not to handle COI. The scenario listed there pretty closely reflects what happened in this case (including the bitter complaint at the help desk). The corporate user was playing it straight, and we bit them for it. All's well that ends well in this case, but I wanted to let you know what happened if you should ever see this kind of thing again. -- ShinmaWa^(talk) 19:53, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for picking me up on that. The user in question had previously added copyrighted and POV information (see the article's talk page), so I guess I jumped to a conclusion when I saw him editing it again. Thanks. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 20:30, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral dialect

Hey there! While I have absolutely no objection to your change at Portal:Spaceflight/On This Day/25 May regarding the name of the Apollo lunar exploration efforts, I admit to a fascination with your Edit summary comment, "Neutral dialect." Is either way of describing the Apollo effort in some way biased or inflammatory? Is it an English/American thing? Does wikipedia cover this anywhere, in Article, Talk or Wikipedia namespaces? Thanks! (sdsds - talk) 00:59, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is a similar issue to the Long March issue which we discussed last year (User_talk:GW_Simulations/Archive_2007#Variant_spellings). I have absolutely no problem with either dialect, but seeing as both are used, it sometimes looks a bit scrappy. It is always best to use a "neutral" dialect - ie. words which are spelled the same in both British and American dialect (your suggestion, I believe). I think that without realising it, I sometimes use words that are not in the American dialect, so if you notice any of those on the portal, feel free to change them to make them neutral. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 08:49, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thor-Able vs Thor Able launches and me

I spent some time poking around that massive image collection at the commons trying to find something to do that would be useful. My physics teacher (mechanics) was also a lover of rockets and rocketry -- I have two quotes from him about the subject "A rocket without a payload isn't that big of a deal" (that is paraphrased) and "It is not the sound, it is that it goes up." One of our exams involved determining the angle of the launch of a water rocket in the classroom, heh -- these were very good days for me.

I have left a half done thing at the commons. I was trying to categorize each rocket image with where they were launched from and if they were carrying a probe or some gizzmo, put the launch images with the gizzmo. NASA helped this by their letters for launches that turn into numbers upon success. And also the rocket launches from the site they were launched from.

While attempting to do this, I became a little upset with my situation lately. I spent decades with younger people around me (college and younger via being at college and also the busboys when I was waiting on tables and bag boys at the store, local kids). I was thinking that as much as I was enjoying it, the task was overwhelming and there should be plenty of others who are infinitely more qualified who would get so much more out of doing what I had been doing.

I am kind of glad that I became more involved first at the image dump -- I don't think it is an image dump but a lot of people seem to treat it that way. The mess I made isn't that messy. -- carol (talk) 01:11, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. It's not really a mess. I'm really just saying it contains too much information for commons, and would be better off here. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 08:23, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And with regard to the hyphenation, either is correct, but in my experience it is more commonly hypenated than not. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 08:29, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that one page is nice, I am not sure about the launch numbers though. I was talking more about how I tried to tackle all of the rockets and manage them via categories. I actually really appreciate that you wanted to move the launch article and not delete it. -- carol (talk) 09:05, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's a very useful page. I've been working on simmilar pages (without illustrations) here. For example List of R-7 launches. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 09:27, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I stopped responding here to think of how much I do not know about the Russian space program. The shuttle departed for the last time from the MIR right in the zenith of where I was living -- it was a star trail photograph that I should have taken (and could have). There are many more enthusiastic and knowledgable amateurs than me. The secret enemy of the 50s, 60s and 70s -- they can say anything that they want to say happened now, can't they? I stopped and thought about your table.... -- carol (talk) 13:37, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The R-7 list is really incomplete - there have been several thousand launches. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 14:13, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Spacecraft

That template is used on hundreds of pages and changes like this that break things affect all of those pages. It's not an article where a bad edit affects one page. So please at least drop a note on the talk page when making changes. Also please be sure to update the documentation when you edit the template. -Ravedave (talk) 17:35, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment. It is not standard practice with regard to anything on Wikipedia to keep a log on the talk page of every single action and change made to a page. This is the function of the page history, and frankly I have no sympathy for anyone who expects others to go out of their way to make available information which they could easily find out through other means. Talk pages are for raising issues and proposing major changes. They are not for discussing every edit before it is made. If every minor edit had to be discussed and voted on, then nothing would ever get done. Sometimes it is more important to be bold and get on with editing. I am not sure how this edit "broke" the template, however I can assure you that I did check it after making this edit, and I could find no problem in any article that I checked. Finally, I am slightly curious as to why you seem to be critisising me for not discussing changes when you don't seem to have done so yourself, in a more recent edit. Please can you clarify this. Thanks. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 18:26, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NSF

He, I'm not registered on NSF, nor do I really want to be (it would consume too much of my time :D). But I know you are, and I was wondering if you could dump this image into the STS-124 thread: http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/shuttle/sts-124/html/iss017e008746.html One of the petals of nadir harmony is extended. Seems weird to me, since i'm not aware of any work going on at nadir Harmony. Wonder what the guys there are thinking. We couldn't figure it out in the IRC channel #space either. --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 10:44, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. I'll have a quick look through and do that later. I'm in a bit of a hurry at the moment, as I have to catch a bus. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 11:14, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I put it into the ISS thread instead, as it is more of an ISS issue than an STS-124 issue. Keep an eye out for answers.[3] --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 18:09, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Shuttle 2.01; Alexandr Kaleri; Orbital spaceflight; Vandenberg AFB Space Launch Complex 3; Little Joe 5B; Foton; Little Joe 5; Little Joe 1A; Project Daedalus; Soyuz TM-16; Beach Abort; Mercury-Jupiter; STEREO; DSE-Alpha; Little Joe 1; Little Joe 5A; San Marco platform; Launch window; Little Joe 6

Cleanup: Tier Two; Sub-orbital spaceflight; Space science
Merge: Vostok rocket; Mars 3; Bumper Project
Add Sources: Orbital Space Plane; Soyuz 15; Oleg Makarov
Wikify: Eugen Sänger; Spherical aberration; DrDish
Expand: ExoMars; Life support system; GLONASS

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:27, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of Delta II launches

Earth Observatory started my day by throwing this -> Image:Jason2 2008172 lrg.jpg on my doorstep (yay!). In the category for these big guys at commons, I found Image:SDIO Delta Star.jpg, which I think has been miss-dated and is a very high resolution image of the first launch.

As soon as I am more confident in the source information, I would kind of like to add an image column to the List of Delta II launches. Do you have any thoughts about that? Encouragement or discouragement are the thoughts I would be interested in knowing.

Also, not so important and not so worth acknowledging if you don't want to, but it is really difficult for me to imagine that the Dawn (spacecraft) was not named that way as a joke for the launch. 1970s were not that long ago. I took that song as a warning of a way not to live -- even back then.... -- carol (talk) 02:27, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I would advise not making them too big, and probably posting on the talk page first to ensure there are no objections, but it could add a lot of content to the article. I'm afraid I'm too young to remember the 1970s. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 06:54, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delta Dawn and I was too young to be allowed to control the radio in 1972. The message was to not wait for a boyfriend or girlfriend who jilted you to return, live up to promises that were made, etc. The song received enough airplay that when I read the image name "Delta II Dawn" I laughed a lot.

I really do not like images from the military with broken urls and information from globalsecurity.org that support their free-ness though. It should be good to wait on that image. More news from the seventies (I think, it might have been early eighties though). I heard this thing that made sense in its simplicity and in the stupidity of secret keeping about how the model makers (testors and the like) figured out what the first aircraft named stealth should look like. Their model was extremely different from the stuff the government released about it and the model builders pointed out how the 'govt' model was not going to fly, much less be stealthy. I am finding it difficult to reconstruct this accurately and I am sorry for the wordplay here that was not in the report I heard, but the overall parts of the memory are accurate. I don't always trust the news except when it makes simple sense. I have a healthy respect for the model makers and a distrust of how stupid the government perceives its people to be.

Thanks for the thumbs up -- carol (talk) 08:10, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nice touch

With the unhappy crew members in Image:STS400CT.svg. --ÐeadΣyeДrrow (Talk - Contribs) 09:58, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 10:19, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Editlink interaction with show in Template:Launching

It looks like somehow (using {{Launching/Ariane}} as the example) that when "show=no", the "editlink" feature doesn't work! (sdsds - talk) 22:13, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. What do you think of the new feature I added to disable transclusion? --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 22:17, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow: thanks for responding so quickly! The "show=no" approach is definitely better than the previously attempted <noinclude>...</noinclude> approach. We will probably still need to use comment markup (i.e. ) in the articles themselves explaining how to use this. Indeed, we probably will need a "procedures" page describing it all in some detail. (Sigh. Why isn't this just intuitive for people! ;-) (sdsds - talk) 03:58, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fact tag on Royal International Air Tattoo.

You have reapplied the fact tag to the RIAT article concerning the first time it has ever been cancelled. Referenced article claims "First time BOTH days have been cancelled" Article Rainfall stops Fairford air show claims time tattoo has had to cancel ONE of its days in 38 years.

Do you want the second article referenced, or are you disputing something else. e.g. Do you think another day has been cancelled, or something else in the paragraph. Martin451 (talk) 22:20, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I misread the article. Feel free to remove. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 22:33, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My apologises also, I don't think I was clear when I removed your original tag that I was also adding a reference. Martin451 (talk) 00:17, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Launching

Hi, my issue with the template, as stated in the first edit summary, is its size and complexity. Templates placed ahead of the article should be as short and concise as possible, while your {{launching}} variety has more details about the failure than the actual article. I would suggest to stick to the standard template. — Jan Hofmann (talk) 14:57, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Graphic Designer's Barnstar
		For all of the excellent launch vehicle SVGs you have created. J. Atkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 12:19, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm hoping to get a few more finished soon. Glad you like them. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 14:09, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A new task force - ESA

Hello,

I've noticed that you are active in the area of space exploration. I just wanted to let you know that a European Space Agency task force has been set up to improve the presently very poor condition of articles about ESA and related topics. If you are interested, please join the task force here. We sure could use your help. Thanks.U5K0 (talk) 11:27, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Shavit 2

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Shavit 2, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Zack Holly Venturi (talk) 23:28, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice

Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 19:31, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Spaceflight/Did you know/2008 Fortnight 19

Portal:Spaceflight/Did you know/2008 Fortnight 19 needs someone to add entries! How is this done? (That is, how are entries for this section found or developed?) Fortnightly updates didn't seem like they would be overly burdensome, but maybe they are! Is there anyone else we can recruit to spearhead the effort on this? (sdsds - talk) 04:37, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is developed specially for the portal, based on trivia found both on and off Wikipedia. I don't know if there is anyone who would be well suited to this project or not. I originally set it to fortnightly because at the time, it looked easy (3 facts every two weeks - how hard can it be). Through the year, it has become harder to find new and interesting facts. I would recommend that we continue at two weeks for now, but change it to monthly from January 2009. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 07:42, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

spacex launch

Hi GW, do you know how to record the spacex launch? I've done it before with VLC media player but forgot how. I'm not sure if it was the same flash player setup they have now. thanks. --Duk 21:56, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you can record the feed they are using. I don't know how to get VLC to target a flash feed, and RealPlayer, which seems to be the best programme for recording flash, doesn't seem to like it. If you are desperate, I would suggest using a screen recorder such as CamStudio, but otherwise don't worry - SpaceX are usually quite good at posting their launch videos online afterwards - even if the launch fails. The feed is the same as the one they used on the last flight, but different to the two before that. Sorry I can't help much. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 22:07, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{Infobox Rocket}} edits

Hi,

You don't seem to have discussed these changes, particularly the comment that the template "broke" somehow. Can you explain what broke, and provide a test case? Your fixes have added another 10% to the size of the code, seemingly for minor aesthetic changes which move the style back towards the old, customised layout which no longer matches the prevalent style of Wikipedia's infoboxen (including the space ones). Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 13:25, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They threw the alignment of all text to the left, including titles and other elements that should be centred. I should also note that the removal of colour from the infobox was also undiscussed. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 16:15, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It was discussed on template talk:infobox Spacecraft#Header color. Given the lack of opposition there, I took the opportunity to unify the various disparate (and seemingly random) styles used in our space infoboxen. I should also note that this is the style used in {{Infobox Launch Pad}}, a template which you wrote yourself. Is it okay if I restore the styling, while attempting to fix the alignment errors introduced? Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 17:50, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mind, as long as in some way, the headers are distinct from the rest of the text. That was my main concern here. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 17:59, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Falcon 1 Flight 4

22,000 hits. --Duk 02:51, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not bad, when I started that article, I was worried that there wouldn't be many people interested in it. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 23:28, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 28 September, 2008, In the news was updated with a news item involving the article(s) Falcon 1 Flight 4, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently updated or created article, then please suggest it on the In the news candidates page.

--Spencer^T♦^C 22:02, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 23:28, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: DSE-Alpha; Little Joe 5; Soyuz TM-16; San Marco platform; Little Joe 5A; Little Joe 6; X-42 Pop-Up Upper Stage; Alexandr Kaleri; Astron (spacecraft); Lockheed X-7; Korea Space Launch Vehicle; Launch window; Orbital spaceflight; Foton; Project Daedalus; Martin-Marietta X-24; Mercury-Jupiter; Mercury-Atlas 3; Shuttle 2.01

Cleanup: List of rockets; Sub-orbital spaceflight; Long March 5 rocket family
Merge: Vostok rocket; Bumper Project; Mars 3
Add Sources: Europa rocket; Sikorsky Piasecki X-49; Luna 9
Wikify: Eugen Sänger; Metal Storm; Gregory J. Harbaugh
Expand: Arianespace; GLONASS; ExoMars

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 22:25, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect deletions

I see you've been following rapidly behind my deletions! Sorry I omitted to delete the associated Talk pages - not concentrating, I guess. Isn't there a problem with the move to Saturn II, though, since that name also refers to Saturn's second moon? (Please reply here - I'll be watching) —SMALL JIM 13:47, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help. The talk pages were probably my fault, I should have tagged them. Saturn II shouldn't be a problem, as the use of this designation for Enceladus is fairly uncommon. I think the best course of action is to use the same approach as on Saturn I, and have the rocket as the main article, with at disambiguation link to the moon. There are only two items, so that should be okay. I've already put a disambiguation link on Saturn II (rocket). I can't see a problem, but if you'd prefer me to take this through AFD or PROD, that's fine by me. If you get a chance, could you please take a look at R-12 (missile) and R-12 Dvina. Is there a way to move the latter, whilst retaining the histories of both pages, as they were merged a while back. Thanks. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 13:53, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem with following Saturn I - you obviously know what you're doing :) I see someone else has deleted the page anyway. I'll look into your other question, but I'm not an expert. Cheers, —SMALL JIM 14:02, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 14:04, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh damn. Followed instructions here. Was looking good till I clicked rollback at the end and have apparently lost the lot in an infinite redirect loop. Will urgently see what can be done. Very sorry :-(((( —SMALL JIM 14:42, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's fixed. Perhaps you'd better get someone more competent to help in future ;) —SMALL JIM 15:22, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your help. I should be able to do the rest without admin assistance. Thanks. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 15:35, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

←Thanks for the recognition. It might be smart to check those things out next time like the prompt after a successful move suggests (it took a while to find everything wrong; 20 double redirects and 2 triple redirects) -MBK₀₀₄ 23:40, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I intended to after I'd finished moving the lot of them, but then I got sidetracked. I don't think the triple redirects are my fault, I didn't move anything more than once. If they're a result of my moves, then they must've already been doubles. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 07:59, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

an humbly request

Dear editor GW_Simulations, please allow me to request your attention to the following brief lines comment of mine at the Wikinews: [4]. I have noticed your latest words at the news community at the time you wrote them and through them I realized the difficulty I would face in having my news article published. In spite of my comment at the above link, bitter words rooted in the sorrow I felt when confronted with the unwillingness of the review editors in publishing those news; I come here to humbly request your experience and valuable efforts in order that you may somehow Aid in the publication of those news [5] which, being not offensive to anyone, may be able to bring Joy to many anonymous individuals of Good Will dispersed worldwide.
I am aware it is an unusual strange request but let me assure you that it intends no promotion but only to spread good news into the very troubled world we currently dwell in. Also, your user page is very interesting; I am somewhat familiarized with aerospace engineering (avionics) [6]; as such let me suggest your attention to some innovative brief words by an aerospace engineer [7] and to those challenging ones by a retired elderly British electrical engineer [8], whose published work, going through more than a half century, I have found to be most valuable to the advancement that Science (i.e. physics, cosmology and technology fields) is currently looking for. Thank You in advance. Best regards, --Tekto9 (talk) 22:54, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If I understand you correctly, you want to know how to get the article The Rosicrucian Fellowship announces its 13th International European Conference published on WikiNews. It seems that three major concerns have been raised over the article. Firstly, newsworthiness. To address this, you need to discreetly state why this event is notable (eg. size of the organisation, number of people affected, etc). Secondly, there is the question of point of view. You need to try and give an impartial viewpoint; even if you feel really strongly about something, you need to give a balanced view - try and distance yourself from the subject, and stick to reporting facts not opinions. The style issue can be resolved by removing the "external links" section, and either deleting the link that is contained in it, or turning it into a reference. I would also suggest you ask for help on the talk page, as other editors might be able to give you better advice. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 23:07, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am truly Grateful for the attention and the orientation you gave to me. Though I have yet to learn how to be discrete :) I have followed your advices the best I was able. Let us wait and see... Thank you once more, best unto your efforts. --Tekto9 (talk) 12:16, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh mighty template guru

~*Curtsy*~ Hello dear! Could you take a look here and see if you can work your awesome magic, to see if we can get this template to allow for mission-specific time zones? Thanks! Ariel♥Gold 13:09, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've had a quick look, and I'll see what I can do tomorrow morning. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 23:20, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry for this error, it was my fault. I did not check (but should have) whether it worked with all projects. Thank you for fixing the error. Ruslik (talk)

Thanks. No problem now. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 18:50, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Beam riding; Boost phase; Korea Space Launch Vehicle; ExoMars; Fractional Orbital Bombardment System; Nike Orion; Alexandr Kaleri; Missile tank; RUM-139 VL-Asroc; Soyuz TM-16; Thermograph; Sunshine recorders; Barking Sands; List of weapons of military aircraft of Germany during World War Two; TE-416 Tomahawk; Project Daedalus; Molniya (satellite); Disdrometer; MGM-1 Matador

Cleanup: List of rockets; RT-2; Expedition 2
Merge: Global Rocket 1; Mars 3; Mars 2
Add Sources: Liquid rocket; Terminal High Altitude Area Defense; Anti-satellite weapon
Wikify: Eugen Sänger; Operation Clear Area; Metal Storm
Expand: GLONASS; Arianespace; Long Duration Exposure Facility

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 04:03, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:HSF Taskforces Proposal

Hey GW, just a quick request - I've put up a proposal at Wikipedia:WikiProject Human spaceflight/Taskforce proposal as to as possible structure for some taskforces for WP:HSF. If you could take a look and see what you think, I'd very much appreciate some feedback! :-) Thanks in advance! Colds7ream (talk) 18:48, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

date formats

My humble apologies. I don't make that mistake often when using the script. If you'd let me know, I'd have saved you the trouble of manually changing them back, with a click of the mouse. I've removed the long-winded, standard part of your message, which is for newbies, I presume. I've done a little fixing up at the top of the article by way of apology. Tony (talk) 12:25, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Sorry for sending the long winded note, I should have realised that you weren't a newbie. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 13:57, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Timeline and R-7 launches

Thanks for fixing that, I thought something might be up with that. I intend to continue expanding List of R-7 launches based off of the Timeline, but an issue that I am encountering is the fact that there have been so many R-7 launches. Because of the size of the article and what it would be when complete, we need a way to break-up the table (to make it easier to edit) and even possibly split the page. Any suggestions? -MBK₀₀₄ 22:20, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I forgot to thank you for expanding upon my recent creation: Template:Baikonur Cosmodrome launch sites as well as the creation of the articles for the active launch sites. Now all that is left is filling in the inactive sites as well as the whole thing for Plesetsk. -MBK₀₀₄ 22:30, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays!

A special message, just for you! → → → →

Happy holidays, GW!

May your holidays be filled with family, friends, and fun, and may the new year bring you much joy. Ariel♥Gold 21:30, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As with many designs on Wikipedia, this one was of course, inspired by the wonderfully talented Phaedriel, the "design Obi Wan".

Thanks for the Christmas greeting - I didn't even need to read the signature to know who'd sent it! :) Merry Christmas to you as well, and good luck in the new year. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 21:44, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ROFL am I that obvious? :D ~*hugs*~ Ariel♥Gold 21:48, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No...You're just the nicest person around... :) --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 21:49, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Awwww, ~*Blush*~ Thanks, but you're pretty darn cool yourself, y'know! Plus, you're super-uber with coding stuffs! :) Ariel♥Gold 21:50, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks....are you hinting that you want a template looked at?.... --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 21:53, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, just stating facts. :) Ariel♥Gold 22:19, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 22:27, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]