User talk:MilborneOne/Archive 30

Beechcraft Bonanza et al

Thanks, the adults know why. :) - BilCat (talk) 22:48, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Please clarify - 2600:1002:B113:C67A:41F0:FED4:113:ED07 (talk) 22:50, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Phil M, he can tell you if he wants to. - BilCat (talk) 22:58, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks but does this indicate the persistent vandalism is actually PhilM540 who is banned anyhow. MilborneOne (talk) 20:35, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

It was only one edit. Last I checked the dictionary definition of "persistent" is not one edit. 2600:1002:B10E:8A21:5A1:DD50:C41B:855E (talk) 13:48, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Was it? are you sure or was it another block evasion account. MilborneOne (talk) 14:57, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

To this article yes2600:1002:B10E:8A21:5A1:DD50:C41B:855E (talk) 15:04, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

If the IP is concerned that they are not a vandalism only account they are welcome to make an unblock case on their talk page. MilborneOne (talk) 17:48, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Note I have blocked the IP for two weeks for vandalism so unlikely to reply unless they block evade with another IP. MilborneOne (talk) 19:16, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

What?

An editor probably associated with wikiproject aircraft has accused me of lying, whats most bothersome is that he has done this so blatantly, despite evidence being to the contrary, he has not even bothered to make an effort to go look up any of the list of aircraft operators that need fixing, I may not have mentioned specific aircraft but couldnt he just go look up a few to see if they are flawed? instead he has called my claims dubious just because i did not provide a direct link to any, isnt it his job as well to just go have a look even if not up to dealing with it? We may not agree on much but be fair as far as this editors comment and attitude is concerned, his post is at the aircraft project talk page. In real life this would probably equate to telling the police about something factual and them not bothering to look it up and calling your claims false, can you emphathise with that? this guy did not even bother about what other editors will think of his false accusation, kindly be just and let him know he is wrong and that project editors cannot say such things, no matter to whom, thanks. 139.190.175.128 (talk) 17:09, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

I didn't accuse you of lying. - BilCat (talk) 17:20, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

139 I think he was just expecting you to provide the evidence, you have to understand other editors may not have the time and inclination to go hunting around looking for problems. They are basically just trying to ask if other lists have issues then point them out and they can be looked at. "Your reluctance to do so leaves your claims in doubt." is more of an expectation that they are looking for you to find other unreferenced lists just to show that it is an issue they needs to be sorted. User:BilCat has seen your comment above and I am sure will understand that you didnt appreciate being called a liar whatever the original intent of the message and he has said it clearly wasnt his intention to call you a liar. We all have limited time and as a project it cant check all 10,000 articles so any help with finding problems would be appreciated but in the end wikipedia policy is that facts should be reliably referenced. MilborneOne (talk) 17:37, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Personal attacks

See here and here. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 19:26, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

All their edit summaries are questionable. Not likely a new user. - BilCat (talk) 19:30, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes I was just looking at that, in the end they thought they were removing vandalism when they were restoring it and you say it and posted the warning. It just needed a few words to explain rather than a rant! MilborneOne (talk) 19:34, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

KLM Cityhopper accident

I saw my edit about the KLM Cityhopper was reverted.

At pages of other airlines, accidents of subsidiaries are metioned. Therefore, I don't understand why this should not be the case for KLM. Take for example the article Lufthansa. In the introduction of "Incidents and accidents", it states "For accidents and incidents on Lufthansa-branded flights which were operated by other airlines, see the respective articles...". Beside this, the article spends lot of attention to the Germanwings crash. And there are no claims for having no fatal accidents since a certain date.

So it seems a bit unfair, that the KLM Cityhopper accident is not mentioned in this article and there is even claimed KLM did not have any fatal accidents since the Tenerife crash.

About the statement that there has never been an fatal accident after the Tenerife-accident: this depends on the definition of KLM. The company KLM did obviously have a an accident as KLM Cityhopper is part of KLM. Therefore, the statement is at least ambiguously and should terefore be removed in my opinion.

Kind regards, Lolsimon (talk) 19:20, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

They are separately licensed airlines and have their own articles. 00:06, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your reaction but you didn't answer my question. What is exactly different between the relation of Lufthansa and Germanwings and the relation between KLM and KLM Cityhopper? Also Lufthansa and Germanwings are separately licensed airlines with their own articles... Lolsimon (talk) 01:08, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

The Lufthansa article doesn't list accidents of subsidiaries which is the same as KLM. No reason why the Lufthansa article doesn't mention the time since the last fatal accident, perhaps since it was only 13 years nobody though it was worth putting, that said I don't have a problem with the time since the last fatal being removed from the KLM article. MilborneOne (talk) 13:37, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Boeing T-X

Milb1, User:Duderocks5539 keeps uploading copyrighted images to Boeing T-X. Can you help explain the seriousness of this? Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 17:42, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Y Left a polite note but I suspect they don't really understand. MilborneOne (talk) 17:48, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. They're probably very young, and that tends to hamper understanding. - BilCat (talk) 17:52, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Phil M again

See here. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 00:35, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

•  Done MilborneOne (talk) 18:52, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. Phil's apparent sock/meatpuppet is back per this. - BilCat (talk) 17:38, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

As this is rather childish behaviour it may not be PhilM who is a self-described author, researcher and far more expert than us, if it him then you would have thought he had better stuff to do with his time. ip blocked and article protected. MilborneOne (talk) 20:27, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

I agree it's unlikely it's actually him, especially as the vandal appears to type much better. :) However, the IP ranges are similar, and Phil has asked about the pages that were blocked, so there seems to be some sort of connection. Perhaps it's a juvenile relative or something. - BilCat (talk) 22:36, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Daher TBM production numbers

Why did you remove my chart??? Skiendog (talk) 00:48, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Didnt really fit as it was non-standard the information is still included the fancy bars dont really add any value. MilborneOne (talk) 16:29, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Virgin America

It always stings like hell when I'm reverted, but you were 100% correct. Thanks for pointing that out. DARTHBOTTO _talk•cont 03:08, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Mary Hamilton Scobell

The subject's connections with the royal family make the article's deletion without debate to be controversial. Please take the issue to WP:AfD. Sorry about the hassle. Bearian (talk) 15:03, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the note AfD raised. MilborneOne (talk) 15:25, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Personal attacks 2

Hello MilborneOne. Can you please take a look at this edit summary [1]? The IP seems to be used to use uncivil language, as in the recent contributions to Austral Líneas Aéreas. I already left them a warning at their talk. Thanks.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 13:29, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

What is uncivil is to undo legit, correct, sourced edits, with the false claim of "unsourced". This kind of user doesn't motivate me to continue to contribute here. Unbelievable. 188.61.3.218 (talk) 13:35, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

I suggest you not to continue if you will continue using words such as "idiot". There are other places in the internet where users insult each other.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 13:36, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Then again, don't undo obvious legit edits and you won't be an idiot. 188.61.3.218 (talk) 13:40, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

And you keep on insulting...--Jetstreamer ^Talk 13:42, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Actually I'm not. First "unsourced" and know this. Stop lying please. 188.61.3.218 (talk) 13:44, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Regardless of the topic being argued, personal attacks are never appropriate on Wikipedia, see WP:NPA. I have left the IP a warning on this. If he or she persists in personal attacks I am sure that User:MilborneOne would be happy to consider a block. - Ahunt (talk) 14:00, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Ahunt for warning the user, 188 please understand that name calling or personal attacks are not allowed whatever the excuse, thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 16:06, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

File:Chattanooga City Seal.png

Milb1, File:Chattanooga City Seal.png was deleted in 2015, after someone removed in from the Chattanooga, Tennessee article page by mistake, leaving the file an orphan. Can you see if it can be restored? Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 21:57, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Y MilborneOne (talk) 22:34, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! - BilCat (talk) 23:20, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

National origin of Bell 505

Hello. "Bell Helicopter Textron Canada" is just a manufacturing/assembly plant, building/assembling helicopters developed by Bell in Fort Worth, Texas, just like General Motors have manufacturing/assembly plants in Canada and Ford in Mexico, building/assembling vehicles designed by GM/Ford in the US. So claiming that the "National origin" for the Bell 505 is Canada is like claiming that GM's cars are Canadian cars and Ford's light trucks are Mexican light trucks. Or like claiming that the BMW cars built/assembled in Spartanburg, SC, are American cars and not German. And so on. Cheers, - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 16:55, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Not really the same as motorcars, you really need to discuss this on the article talk page, thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 16:59, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Copy-edits to List of Judicial Committee of the Privy Council cases originating in Canada, 1950–59

Hi, MilborneOne, you may have noticed I undid your copy-edits to this list. My reason is that the text in the "Subject" column is taken directly from the formal judgments of the JCPC. There've been some similar edits in one of the other lists, so I opened a discussion on the Talk page for that list: Talk:List of Judicial Committee of the Privy Council cases originating in Canada, 1900–09. Please feel free to participate! (That way all discussion is in one place) Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 11:23, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Vandalism-only account

Friendly reminder that IPs are not accounts, and shouldn't be blocked as "vandalism-only", see Wikipedia:Vandalism-only account#IP addresses. Best :) — MusikAnimal ^talk 21:58, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Also, I'm familiar with the LTA you are tracking. If you see any related edits get through, please email me. Thanks! — MusikAnimal ^talk 22:00, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Misguided/disruptive IP

Hi MilborneOne, If you have time can you take a look at the revision history of 2002 Tampa airplane crash? Thanks. Samf4u (talk) 12:42, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @Samf4u: I've blocked 107.77.165.0/28 for a month. That range is also responsible for disruptive edits on other articles. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 12:51, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks much NeilN. Samf4u (talk) 13:23, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Deaths in 2017

User:Islandersa just violated your stipulation in regards to Leah Adler. They had no interest in discussing the issue, just being disruptive. I think it's safe to block them. Rusted AutoParts 19:12, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

• Thanks for that User:Rusted AutoParts the user has now been blocked. MilborneOne (talk) 19:28, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

I'm tipping you off that I removed Adler from the list as she didn't achieve individual notability in the course of a month. Thought I'd let you know if you thought her removal was due to continued bickering over the entry. Rusted AutoParts 02:05, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

User:Rusted AutoParts thanks for letting me know, not a problem. MilborneOne (talk) 19:28, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

You need to stop assuming and personal attacks.

MilborneOne you quoted it yourself its referring to "your indian nationalstic edits". Its therefore not a personal attack but commenting on the edit. (refer to WP:NPA)

Please retract your accusation above and stop personally attacking me. (refer to WP:NPA) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Icanflycanu (talk • contribs) 18:17, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Just a word of advice, but accusing an admin of attacking you for removing a personal attack you made and warning you about it, is probably not a good way to proceed. You may want to edit your comment above to increase the chances of a better outcome to this episode. - Ahunt (talk) 18:47, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

If you need english lessons then I cant help you. By the way I have read the WP.NPA.

I state again. You referred to "your indian nationalistic edits". It is not a personal attack but but against the repeated comments and edits by MBLAZE Lightning you decided to attack me instead. How low is that? Please refrain from further wrongful accusations and/or personal attacks against me. You are flouting the WP:NPA by accusing me. - — Preceding unsigned comment added by Icanflycanu (talk • contribs)

Sorry, but it isn't clear whom you are addressing above, me or the owner of this user page. Regardless, your opening remark, "If you need english lessons then I cant help you" is rather insulting and some editors might consider that a renewed personal attack, in light of your recent editing history. Incidentally in English, the word "English" is a proper noun and thus is capitalized. - Ahunt (talk) 21:31, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Francis Marsham

Thanks for adding the stuff you did to Francis Marsham. I've got some sources that I can use to add more detail about his military career, which is where I feel the emphasis should be rather than on the two cricket matches he played. I wondered whether you felt that there's a case for moving to Francis Bullock-Marsham or not? The Bullock was used by others in his family as a name but never, as far as I can tell, with the hyphen other than in references to him. It would seem more sensible to do so to me - happy to do it but I thought I'd gather opinion first. Blue Square Thing (talk) 08:40, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Blue Square Thing I found it difficult to find much on him due to the changing surname! Most of the info I could find on his Army career refer to him as Bullock-Marsham but his birth registration in 1883 he was actually registered as both "Francis William Marsham" and "Francis William Bullock-Marsham". When his stepson married in 1939 it calls him Brigadier F Bullock-Marsham. In the 1911 Census he was listed as "Francis Wm. Bullock Marsham" so at different times he is listed as "Bullock-Marsham" or "Bullock Marsham" as far as I can see the London Gazettes uses "Bullock-Marsham" but his entry in the probate index says "MARSHAM Francis William Bullock of Woodside Cottage Salen Isle of Mull died 22 December 1971" Perhaps move it to the hyphenated name due to his Army service but make a note and redirects on his other names! MilborneOne (talk) 09:28, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Makes sense - the cricket stuff tends to reference him as Marsham but there's so little of it and that might come as much from the family. I'm tending towards Bullock-Marsham for the article name and then, yes, redirects from Marsham and, maybe, Bullock Marsham. Incidentally, I think the Brigadier bit was temporary as well - substantially a Colonel. And a source I have also has him dying at Maidstone in Kent rather than in Mull - any hint at that in anything you can see? Thanks. Blue Square Thing (talk) 09:57, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

I would agree with you summary, I did change the article from Mull to Maidstone, the probate index gave his address as Mull but other sources including the death index say Maidstone. MilborneOne (talk)

Ta - I can source that as well which might help as CricInfo gives it as Mull. Blue Square Thing (talk) 10:05, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Glasgow and Düsseldorf airport seasonal route disagreement with user

Hello, the user Futurepilot1999 keeps listing Eurowings Glasgow Airport to Düsseldorf Airport route as seasonal despite the fact that it only stops for one week in January. This is never normally considered anyway near enough for a route to be considered seasonal. I've had problems with this user before on the Edinburgh Airport page when they kept adding far too many pictures. I would appreciate some help with this as I've stopped undoing their edits as otherwise it would become an edit war. Thanks, VG31 16:06, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

U ser:VG31 Thanks for raising this rather then edit warring, I have blocked both articles for editing for the moment to encourage discussion, I have suggested to Futurepilot1999 to join the discussion you have started at the airport project. MilborneOne (talk) 16:44, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi, sorry to have to bother you again about this but despite other editors agreeing with me on the airports project talk page that the route is seasonal, Futurepilot1999 has changed it to seasonal again. Also after I undid the edit an IP user agreed with Futurepilot1999 and changed it to seasonal with what was their first and only edit. This seems very likely to be sock puppetry to me. Thanks, VG31 22:51, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Burnett Bullock

You added some interesting material about this cricketer's wartime and hospitality career. I have some other material to add to him, but it'd look a bit odd if I source it when your material (which doesn't contradict anything I know about him) remains unsourced. Perhaps you'd care to return to him to add a reference or two. Thanks. Johnlp (talk) 13:12, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Sorry forgot to add it, now done. MilborneOne (talk) 18:36, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks very much. Johnlp (talk) 20:06, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Discussion invite

Hello. I invite you to join a centralized discussion about naming issues related to China and Taiwan. Szqecs (talk) 04:33, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Air policing

I just stumbled upon Air policing, created by our Swiss "English professor". Take to AfD? - BilCat (talk) 00:28, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Its already mentioned in Swiss Air Force article and we have the Baltic and Icelandic versions already. Perhaps we need to ask some big boys about it as far as I know the role described as "Air Policing" in English only refers to QRA type activities related to NATO operations. The American-centric Air Defense articles dont really describe the "peacetime" mission. Air defense which you would expect to cover the same ground redirects to Anti-aircraft warfare which is not the same thing. Certainly the main user of the term is NATO so if the article is needed it needs to be de-swissed. Still not sure why every single item related to the Swiss Air Force however trivial has to have an article and subsequent deletion discussion as it is causing a lot of distracting work. MilborneOne (talk) 08:08, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

It was a mess, I redirected it to Police aviation. - Ahunt (talk) 11:32, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

...And the creator reverted my redirect. The article is incomprehensible, so please send it to AfD. - Ahunt (talk) 11:51, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

I would suggest a redirect to Air sovereignty but the Air policing article as it stands at the moment is damn near incomprehensible. Irondome (talk) 13:18, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

FFP should not be creating articles in mainspace, as they are all incomprehensible. It's too bad they got rid of RfC/U. From what little I've heard from a.few German WP editors, he's as much a problem there as here in En WP. He reminds me of Stephano, whose was banned on Italian WP, and then cause several years of trouble here before his reign of terror finally ended. - BilCat (talk) 13:46, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

I tried redirecting to Air sovereignty, but was reverted, as expected. Can someone file an AfD? I can't be civil enough at the moment to do it. - BilCat (talk) 14:56, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

He is edit-warring as usual. I have redirected it to Air sovereignty and started a discussion at Talk:Air policing. -Ahunt (talk) 15:01, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

If other editors would like to join us in discussion at Talk:Air policing that would be helpful. I can't really understand what he is writing. - Ahunt (talk) 15:31, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

I think we have both cultural and language issues and the inablility to realise that not everything related to the Swiss Air Force is actually encyclopedic. MilborneOne (talk) 16:40, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

I have had a go at Air sovereignty to add the NATO and Swiss Air Policing elements, it could do with some more coverage from the rest of the world. MilborneOne (talk) 17:05, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

2017 USAF Blackhawk Crash

This article consists entirely of a navigation box and hasn't one reference to it. I nominated it for speedy deletion. WOuld you like to take care of it....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:40, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

It think it is this accident, but it doesn't look at all notable from that report. - Ahunt (talk) 12:51, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

It is now at AfD. - Ahunt (talk) 13:31, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Sorry was not around last night to speedy this. MilborneOne (talk) 14:51, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Phil M again?

Milb, see this and the following diff. Note "theather". Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 15:26, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Bagged MilborneOne (talk) 15:44, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! - BilCat (talk) 15:59, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

hello and error

Hello. I see that you are an administrator. On 26 February 2011, you made an edit to the Airbus A318 article stating that the first flight was from Toulouse. This is not true. It was from Hamburg, Germany. See http://www.airbus.com/presscentre/pressreleases/press-release-detail/detail/a318-takes-off-on-maiden-flight This error has been in Wikipedia for over 6 years. I have corrected it.

You brought the Airbus A318 article from a redirect back to its own article, possibly taking sections from the Airbus A320 article. That is when the error was done. Prior to the redirect, it was a short article but there was no mention of where the first flight was. Vanguard10 (talk) 23:59, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

I bring this to your attention not to be critical of you in any way but to let you know that there are many ways for Wikipedia to improve. When I read it, I knew immediately that it was wrong but many readers didn't know. Vanguard10 (talk) 03:31, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

• Vanguard10 thanks for the correction. MilborneOne (talk) 10:30, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

New blanking sock

A slew of socks has been blanking various USN ship articles, especially the carriers. The latest one is User:Superwikibooster. Could you pull its plug? Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 07:20, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

 Done MilborneOne (talk) 07:25, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! - BilCat (talk) 07:26, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Supersonic Transport vandal

It looks like the Supersonic Transport vandal is back - Special:Contributions/2600:1002:B102:D6E9:4C52:5B29:BA25:98EF.Nigel Ish (talk) 16:16, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

• Thanks although I am not quick enough - already blocked by User:Favonian MilborneOne (talk) 16:21, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Breda-Zappata BZ.309

A user redirected an article you created, Breda-Zappata BZ.309, to Filippo Zappata. I've rescued it, but you might want to have some more sources to show notability in case they send it to AfD. - BilCat (talk) 00:27, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Bill, most of the stuff on Google are wikipedia mirrors! perhaps I will ask at project if anybody has anything. MilborneOne (talk) 13:04, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Royal Flying Corps

Please consider undoing your recent revision to List of Royal Flying Corps squadrons I know that 57 Sqn & 57 TS were different units, which is why my link directed to a specific paragraph within No. 57 Squadron RAF which is actually about 57 TS RFC If you don't like it, why not take it out of there to create a new "57 Training Squadron RFC" page ? 79.77.96.124 (talk) 10:56, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXXIII, May 2017

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 on Strategic Air Command doctrine Op-ed: Tomstar81 looks at a little-known aspect of World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 03:02, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Comac 929

Milb, per this, the IP believes the page has been protected against vandalism. Could you oblige him? Thanks. :) - BilCat (talk) 03:09, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Copyvio image

File:Tai TF-X idef 2017 concept design.jpg in the TAI TFX article appears to be copyrighted. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 19:49, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Swissair Flight 316

An editor has twice entered information that is incorrect into the article. Here[2] and here[3]. While doing so he put in a reference to that didn't corroborate what they were adding but gives the misleading impression that it does.

There are articles that say Lakshman Kadirgamar was in a greek plane crash. But it is said to have taken place in the 80's and Swissair Flight 316 crashed in 1979. I gave the editor a warning but maybe you can have a word with them too....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 14:54, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks I have added it to my watchlist, I will have a word if they do it again, not sure why any of the survivors are named as it is not noteworthy to the accident. MilborneOne (talk) 20:17, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Disruptive user

Milb, could you take a look at these contributions? They, along withb their userpage warnings, should explain it. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 19:49, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Decided a 36 hours break to read up on some of our policies would help. MilborneOne (talk) 19:56, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

I think I hear a duck quacking

The grammar in this edit[4] reminds me of the work of Ryan kirkpatrick. What do you think?...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:14, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

I would agree but we do have others that cant spel and are unable to string together a sentence. Perhaps wait to see what they do with a bit more rope. MilborneOne (talk) 14:03, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Boeing 767-611

Milb, could you userfy Boeing 767-611 for me? I'm not sure how I missed it, but I'd like to take a quick look at it, and see if anything is salvageable. I'll tag it for deletion once I'm done. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 14:11, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

User:BilCat/temp MilborneOne (talk) 15:22, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Wow, not much at all. Thanks, it can be deleted now. - BilCat (talk) 16:01, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Y MilborneOne (talk) 16:05, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Shot Heard 'Round the World (baseball)

Can you please page protect this page again. You have done so in the past[5]. The same problem, IPs adding content there is no consensus. This page is coming off 2 days and 7 days protection and those were totally inadequate. This page has been protected for six months in the past....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 19:59, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Y Sorry a bit late, I have been busy in RL. MilborneOne (talk) 15:07, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

No problem and thanks. Do you think WP:Articles for deletion/Malaysia Airlines Flight 128 can be closed as a snow?...William, is the complaint department really on the roof?

Thanks from me also. - BilCat (talk) 16:47, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:International reactions to the Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 shootdown#Does the consensus listed below which are formed from a discussion on the MH17 talk page apply to this International Reactions page as well?

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:International reactions to the Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 shootdown#Does the consensus listed below which are formed from a discussion on the MH17 talk page apply to this International Reactions page as well?. Mamasanju (talk) 22:30, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Request for semi-protection

Hi Michael: We are having a lot of IP vandalism over at Aloha 27. I was wondering if you could semi it for a week or two? Thanks. - Ahunt (talk) 17:38, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

I have added it to my watchlist, tempted to wait and see what they do next rather than semi, if they have real concerns then they should be able to start an AfD (can IPs do AfDs I cant remember) or raise the issues on the talk page, as far as I can see you have cleared the reasons related to the tags. MilborneOne (talk) 19:00, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for watching it. Another editor had an admin semi it for two days. - Ahunt (talk) 01:38, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Rare SA 340 Gazelle photo

Milb, there is a nice photo of the original SA 340 Gazelle on Airbus Helicopters' website here. It's unique in that is has a traditional tail rotor instead of the Fenestron of the production SA 341/342 models. Do you think this would be sufficient for a fair-use claim in the Gazelle article? Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 06:26, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

It looks like that prototype used the whole tailboom from an Allouette! - Ahunt (talk) 11:36, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

I believe it was later modified but I dont know what happened to it in the end but it may be worth a fair-use claim as being unique and no longer existing in that configuration. MilborneOne (talk) 13:43, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

QF94

Hello. I recently made an edit in the A380 page and added the QF94 incident that occurred on 20th May, 2017 when the 380 suffered a major engine failure. Please explain to me that how is this not considered as an incident.

I am not rude here. My sentence framing may look like that. PratyakshM (talk) 17:42, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

• PratyakshM your addition has been challenged by a number of other users who do not consider it is important, you should not keep adding it as if you do it again then you will be blocked as we dont like users edit warring. If you think others are wrong then raise it on the Airbus A380 talk page and explain why you want to add it, if others agree it can be added, if they do not then you cant add it, thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 17:51, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Sorry. I am new as a Wikipedia editor so I didn't new about edit warring. Now you have explained this to me. I will no longer commit this mistake. Also my internet was lagging at the time of editing the page so that's why it got edited 2-3 times. Thanks PratyakshM (talk) 09:30, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Julia Stewart (actress)

Hello! I remember that you were trying to establish a death date for her. Any progress? All the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:15, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Renaming Gliding

There is a discussion in the talk page of the article Gliding flight talk page about renaming the featured article, Gliding. Your input would be appreciated. JMcC (talk) 12:24, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

The return of Fonte de Regaz

As you have experience with this user, who is now evading through IP 175.144.63.150 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), I am hoping you will recognize him and take the appropriate steps. Many thanks in advance for your assistance! Scr★pIron^IV 14:47, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Possibly is the same but blocked for a month for edit warring anyhow. MilborneOne (talk) 15:04, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for handling it. Happy editing! Scr★pIron^IV 15:06, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Article for deletion

Is this something you might be able to take care of AdF Future of the Bangladesh Air Force. I think the dissscussion has run its course -cheers FOX 52 (talk) 23:45, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Kaman K-MAX

Milb1, there is a dynamic IP edit warring at Kaman K-MAX. He's already reverted at least 3 regular editors, and has been warned twice tonight. Interestingly, the user claims to be a "regular contributor" to that article, but as an IP can't prove it. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 08:19, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Y a week to encourage discussion. MilborneOne (talk) 08:35, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 15:52, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

This is to inform you that an attempt is being made to overturn an RfC that you voted on

This is to inform you that an attempt is being made to overturn an RfC that you voted on (2 RfCs, actually, one less than six months ago and another a year ago). The new RfC is at:

Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#RfC: Allow private schools to be characterized as non-affiliated as well as religious, in infobox?

Specifically, it asks that "religion = none" be allowed in the infobox.

The first RfC that this new RfC is trying to overturn is:

• 15 June 2015 RfC: RfC: Religion infobox entries for individuals that have no religion.

The result of that RfC was "unambiguously in favour of omitting the parameter altogether for 'none' " and despite the RfC title, additionally found that "There's no obvious reason why this would not apply to historical or fictional characters, institutions etc.", and that nonreligions listed in the religion entry should be removed when found "in any article".

The second RfC that this new RfC is trying to overturn is:

• 31 December 2015 RfC: RfC: Religion in infoboxes.

The result of that RfC was that the "in all Wikipedia articles, without exception, nonreligions should not be listed in the Religion= parameter of the infobox.".

Note: I am informing everyone who commented on the above RfCs, whether they supported or opposed the final consensus. --Guy Macon (talk) 03:17, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Spanish Air Forces.

MilborneObe, Can You Protect Spanish Air Force as That User He/She Always Started To Insulted Me and FOX 52 And He/She Always Thinks That Im a Clone From FOX 52. We Just want To Help the Article and Picture That we Have. If You See His/Her Comment. Please Remove It. Now Excuse Me, I have To Find The Relibile Sources.Hawkeye Ridgesaw Summer (talk) 14:21, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

No need to protect the article at the moment, you really need to discuss any issues on the article talk page. MilborneOne (talk) 15:19, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Tommy the Texan book

Milb1, could you take a look at this and preceding edits and reverts? The new user adding this has the same surname as the book's author, so is a possible COI. I'm too close to 3RR to keep.reverting. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 18:16, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Please also see LauraOC and this discussion on my talk page as it directly relates. Please also see this and the previous edit (this) --TheSandDoctor (talk) 18:23, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Saw your meat puppet revert. Are you going to start a sockpuppet investigation? --TheSandDoctor (talk) 19:00, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

I probably dont have time at the moment as I have some real life stuff to do, I will see how things are when I next come online. MilborneOne (talk) 19:04, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi. No. Actually, I want the citation there. Put it there for a reason. It's a book about the T6 Texan. Thanks for your concern So far. Not all that impressed with the tattle taliness of this site and my experience with your ridiculous messaging system.

I didn't realize creating a fake name and being less honest would be better. I thought Wikipedia was about facts and information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DavidMoyle (talk • contribs) 18:36, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Replied on Users Talk Page. MilborneOne (talk) 18:48, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Added: Right. All the major authors don't have staff adding content to Wikipedia for them and being paid. Sorry I didn't pay a staff member to do it. Now I know. We need tattle tales acting like pre school babies instead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DavidMoyle (talk • contribs)

(Talk page stalker) David: No actually they don't and if they do it gets removed as WP:SPAM right away and they get blocked. Wikipedia is not a place to advertise your book and what you posted was very obvious advertising. nothing subtle there at all. We have policies against that and we enforce them here. - Ahunt (talk) 19:12, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Ok. So, if you'll excuse my supposed ignorance. I followed YOUR own instructions and found another user who posted it originally and even followed your instructions. You were then very insulting to that user. It is only AFTER that exchange that I tried posting it myself. I have a message from you telling me to find another user to post the content if I want it posted and it has been deleted two more times. So, apparently the rules are a moving target. Excuse the "confusion" on my part then. And I find it extremely naive that you think popular movies and books aren't having other people edit content. But, I'll accept your word on that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DavidMoyle (talk • contribs) 23:09, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

@Ahunt: --TheSandDoctor (talk) 00:56, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

We remove all spamming that we find. If we have missed some please remove it, or point it out and another editor will remove it. This is an encyclopedia, not an advertising website. Your book should have its own website for advertising it.

As far as the rules go, it is pretty simple: writing about yourself is a conflict of interest, it doesn't matter if your account uses your own name or another user name. Anyone, doesn't matter who, posting text promoting any product is spamming and it will be removed. Using multiple accounts to try to bypass restrictions is called sockpuppeting and results in all accounts being blocked. The rules actually work, we have a pretty good encyclopedia, with very little spam here and it gets better everyday. - Ahunt (talk) 01:02, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Qatar Airways Flight 240

I smell a duck quacking and nominated it for speedy deletion. Do you think it is Ryan k?...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 12:38, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Probably not, there was no attempt to add a copy and past infobox but it is gone now - not really notable. MilborneOne (talk) 17:08, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

User:KaplanAL

Would you mind taking a look at this user's contributions, especially this, this, and this? It seems like more than one person uses the account, and is possibly connected to Boeing is some way, per this comment and others on that page. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 01:39, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

He just added this, which appears to be something that occurred in a flight simulator program, though with the bad writing it's hard to tell. I removed it per FORUM. - BilCat (talk) 04:18, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Really strange edits, presume somebody who doesnt have a grasp of English, I will keep any eye on them. MilborneOne (talk) 21:56, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

German Wikipedia Edit Requests

I know you are the best Wikipedian in the world! I like your edits. I am not the boss of you, but I request you to revert Siwibegewp's edits on 3 articles; (TATA SIA Airlines, Jet Airways, and Air India).

What I would like you to fix;

1. Air India

A. The Callsign does not need a space link

Callsign (AIRINDIA)

B. How much A320 Neos?

7 in service, 7 in order, change offen to config 164 (-/12/150)

Add 7 to in service change 5 to 7.

Oh no! The bad wikipedian MBurch has protected the page! They blocked my accounts for fixing!

2. Jet Airways

A. How much A330

Change in service 6 to 5 Change 5 orders to none

B.How Much 737-700'

Change 2 to 5

C.How Much 737-800

Change 59 to 64 and add 2 for order

D.737 Max's in order

Change 75 to 79 please.

3. Vistara (Article name:TATA SIA Airlines)

Vistara 1 a320neo in service and change 1 order to 6 plus offen to actual config.

I please want that and be careful, don't let anyone block you or revert edits, I love you so much and thanks, KLM Crew

I would also like you to talk to these 3 scoundrels of the Wikipedia;

-MBurch -Siwibegewp -JiveeBlau

And block them + Protect these 3 pages to prevent them from vandalizing. I would also like you to teach them a lesson, thank Serjinh81s Edits and unblock him.

Reply In this Box;

-

Thanks for coming to this page as your first ever edit to English wikipedia, basically I dont do other language wikipedias and as you appear to have been blocked from editing at de then you need to appeal your block or wait for it to expire, thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 21:53, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

KLM Crew: Thanks for replying, but I would like you to edit the German Wikipedia, I know you can do it.

You may like me to but I am not that interested in helping you evade your block. MilborneOne (talk) 16:45, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

-KLM Crew; Thank you so much, but that is what I was trying to do but I would still like you. That doesn't mean that I do not like you, so it is only you who can do it.

Boeing Commercial Airplanes in a counterfeit

I want you to undo the summary that I made before. This specifications had been reverted on 10:58 P.M. (British Summer Time). Kevin G. McAllister cannot access BBJ specifications. So, be careful with your behavior. KaplanAL (talk) 4:50, 13 July 2017 (Indian standard time)

Sorry your message make no sense in English. MilborneOne (talk) 16:46, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Help with a page move

I made a mistake. Can you please move List of people from the Pittsburgh to List of people from Pittsburgh for me over the various redirects. Thanks....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 00:58, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

(talk page watcher)  Done I hope you don't mind. You might consider applying for Wikipedia:Page mover rights. It's very useful, and you're experienced enough that you should qualify. - BilCat (talk) 03:41, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for doing the move, BC. I don't do page moves very often. In fact when I do I usually want a mess. Do you really want me to wreak more havoc on wikipedia than I already am by becoming a page mover?...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 09:45, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

LOL, no. :) It was just a suggestion, but I'm glad you realize your own limitations. Feel free to contact me directly if you need any page move assistance, or continue to post here, as I watch this page. - BilCat (talk) 15:15, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Format change

Hello MilborneOne,

Recently you reverted changes I made to the lists of surviving Handley Page Halifaxes and Avro Lancasters. I strongly believe that the current format for lists of surviving warplanes is messy, illegible, and challenging to use. I have devised a new format that I believe significantly improves the quality of the presentation. The table I have created arranges information into separate and clear categories, and additionally, allows for the inclusion of an image of each item. I feel that this new format exponentially improves the usability of the page as well as its overall quality. For an example of another page of surviving aircraft that uses a table, see List of surviving Douglas A-26 Invaders.

As you suggested, I wrote a section in the talk page for the list of surviving Avro Lancasters. In the section, I outlined what I have written here, and asked for comments. I concluded by saying that if there were no objections, I would revert the page to my new format. I hope that you agree that my new format is an improvement over the existing one. I implore of you that if there is no objection and I change the page to the new format, you will leave it as is. If you have any comments or suggestions, please let me know.

Tsc9i8 (talk) 20:42, 16 July 2017 (UTC)tsc9i8

• Thanks User:Tsc9i8 I have replied at Talk:List of surviving Avro Lancasters with a suggestion that his should be agreed at a project level, thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 14:17, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

MilborneOne,

I added a lengthy section on the page Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aviation/Style guide/Layout (Aircraft) and explained my feelings about the current format, and what I devised as an improvement. I have reverted the List of surviving Avro Lancasters to my format in order to serve as an example, and suggested that people have a look at it and comment. Additionally, I provided a rationale for each of the fields of information I included. If you have any more comments, let me know.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Tsc9i8 (talk • contribs)

14th Quartermaster Detachment

Milborne,

Can you please look at this article. It looks to be a big copyright violation of this page[6] Copyright violations aren't my specialty....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 10:51, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

A couple of other things

• The article listed dead members of the unit and I removed them per WP:NOTMEMORIAL but the article creator, User Ehrentitle, restored it.
• User Ehrentitle per this[7] is also the creator of the website I linked to up above.

WP:COI may also be something needing looking into....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 12:50, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Precious

air force and hope

Thank you for quality articles such as Boulton & Paul Mailplane and 1967 Air Ferry DC-4 accident, for more than 100k edits, project work and admin services, for "tidy/update/tweak/add/correct" from the start more than 10 years ago, for the mantra "welcome but please take note", for 1926 Birthday Honours, for an image of hope for tomorrow, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:59, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks to Gerda Arendt for the award, and a thought and thanks to the whole supportive team particularly in the aircraft project. MilborneOne (talk) 15:50, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Samson Motorworks

Milb1, could you look at Samson Motorworks, and see if it can be restored? It's the manufacturer of the Samson Switchblade. If it isn't able to go live, but could be expanded, you can place it in my userspace or in draftspace. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 01:52, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

It has only one line "Samson Motors is a company attempting to create the Samson Switchblade. The following is the mission statement of the company." and then a copy of the misson statement. The mission statement was a direct copy from the www.samsonmotorworks.com/about and was marked as a copyright violation. MilborneOne (talk) 15:06, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

OK, thanks. - BilCat (talk) 19:43, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your advice at Wikipedia: Village pump (proposals). Yours, Vorbee (talk) 09:20, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Navbox move

Milb, now that Airbus has reorganized itself, again «sigh», could you move Template:Airbus Group aircraft back to Template:Airbus aircraft. The Swap function won't work for me, and I haven't done manual swap in a while. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 20:56, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Y MilborneOne (talk) 22:13, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 22:19, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Wataniya Airways destinations

Hi, our two edit warriors are back, see [the article history], also these diffs:[8][9][10]. What do you think should be done about it? — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 13:43, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

I have protected it again for the time being, I am a bit busy with some real life stuff at the moment so cant get to involved. MilborneOne (talk) 21:51, 3 August 2017 (UTC )

Not getting you? Why are you reverting my edit which maintains wiki article standards i.e new simplified table format list approved by consensus a few years back, former destinations included with valid reference, new destinations added, what is there to talk about or reach consensus on? Or for you guys to deliberate on? It's all black and white, new vs old, there is nothing grey anywhere. Why are you flouting your own consencus approved and set project standarads? one of which was no more text list formats and all old lists to be updated to table style, im not particularly fond of table format since it involves too many edits, can I revert some articles to old text style lists because this chap edit warring told me those lists are still allowed, so basically you people i.e project admin dont know yourself what standards to maintain despite concensus, now deliberate over what I just said. 139.190.254.44 (talk) 03:54, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

User:139.190.254.44 I am not reverting anybody I am have blocked the article for editing to stop edit warring, it doesnt matter who is right or wrong you dont edit war about it. All you need is to discuss it on the article talk page rather than reverting each other. MilborneOne (talk) 08:47, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

if you are admin, why are you allowing old text list to stay, restore the table per new wiki consensus standard. 139.190.254.44 (talk) 12:11, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

No response, why ?139.190.254.44 (talk) 12:10, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Its called real life - just to note when an admin protects an article it is always at the wrong version, also note the protection was to encourage a discussion on the talk page which so far has not happened. MilborneOne (talk) 19:59, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Death Cruiser/Mega-Death vandals

After long time off, the Death Cruiser/Mega-Death vandal socks are back at McDonnell Douglas DC-10 and McDonnell Douglas MD-11. Could you semi-protect for a few weeks? Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 01:52, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Y ten days MilborneOne (talk) 19:55, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks very much! - BilCat (talk) 20:09, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Phil M again??

This might be Phil M again, but I'm not sure. It does locate to Philadelphia. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 00:45, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

As it ticks a lot of the boxes I have blocked him for a month. MilborneOne (talk) 14:47, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

August 2017

Congratulations, MilborneOne, your edits on all pages are a brilliant success. Thank You, JV111 (talk), 15:47, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

You have an account in German Wikipedia

This might be of interest to you:

Since yesterday, you have an account in German Wikipedia, including a talk page.

You may also be interested in the vandalism report, look for #Benutzer:JV111 (erl.) on this Indian sockpuppet from the San Francisco area. --Uli Elch (talk) 09:15, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Not sure why somebody who I probably upset at some point starts a page using my name on de, naught as stange as folk as they say. MilborneOne (talk) 18:43, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Notable appearances in media

I noticed that you deleted the "Notable appearances in media" section that I added to a couple of articles that already had entries in Aircraft in fiction and moved the link to "See also." WP:AIRMOS recommends the standalone section (see section WP:AIRPOP, relevant passage quoted):

Aircraft type articles that have entries here should have Notable appearances in media sections that simply refer to this article, in a manner like Sikorsky MH-53#Notable_appearances_in_media.

I count approximately 115 (now 113) aircraft articles already have a "Notable appearances in media" section; only 7 (now 9) have that link in "See also." My personal thought is that if there is content on Aircraft in fiction, we should link to it from the aircraft page in a consistent manner, which has already been established by the MOS.

In reviewing the discussion on popular culture on the MOS talk page, I see you have participated in past discussions. Would it not be preferable for all of the aircraft pages to be consistent? Cthomas3 (talk) 19:29, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Edit: looks like you are actually one of the authors/maintainers of WP:AIRMOS. If I am misapplying it, please let me know. Cthomas3 (talk) 19:42, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Cthomas3 you are right that is what the style guide says, it just looked daft having an empty section. I will raise it at the aircraft project and see what the general feeling is, thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 18:46, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Air India

Would you cast your eyes over the Air India article, particularly edits since 2 September. 82.32.116.24 claims that their edits are good, but I'm not sure that they are - numbers appear to be changed but without new references being supplied. Mjroots (talk) 05:43, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

• Mjroots I have commented on the talk page. MilborneOne (talk) 20:59, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

• Mjroots noted comment possible socks or causing trouble, possibly connected to the plonkers messing about with List of airlines of India. MilborneOne (talk) 21:12, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Freigtcar2 posted this on the IPs talk page. Also no response at Talk:Air India. Seems increasingly that the IP is not the problem here and I'll be needing the key to my banhammer case in the very near future. Mjroots (talk) 20:44, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

I've indeffed Freightcar2 for harassment. Will unlock the Air India page and make the necessary adjustments there. Mjroots (talk) 17:23, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Agree with your move - I was just lookinga at some of there recent edits most of which appear to be nonsense or vandalism. MilborneOne (talk) 17:25, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

I think we are dealing with a sockfarm of a globally blocked editor. Have asked the admin who globally blocked the suspected sockmaster on his home Wiki for info and will probably file a SPI over the weekend.Mjroots (talk) 17:31, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXXVII, September 2017

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D and Hawkeye7 look at two recent releases Op-ed: Hawkeye7 on ANZACs in the Third Ypres Offensive Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:32, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Antonov An-2

Milb1, could you look at semi-protection for Antonov An-2. An IP-hopping user who doesn't understand WP:MILPOP keeps adding a movie reference without proper sources,and thinks I'm removing it because I'm an "American cultural supremacist"! Facepalm Thanks. - BilCat (talk)

• Y MilborneOne (talk) 21:20, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Invitation to Admin confidence survey

Hello,

Beginning in September 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Anti-harassment tool team will be conducting a survey to gauge how well tools, training, and information exists to assist English Wikipedia administrators in recognizing and mitigating things like sockpuppetry, vandalism, and harassment.

The survey should only take 5 minutes, and your individual response will not be made public. This survey will be integral for our team to determine how to better support administrators.

To take the survey sign up here and we will send you a link to the form.

We really appreciate your input!

Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.

For the Anti-harassment tools team, SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 20:56, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Basler BT-67

Milb1, could you keep an eye on Basler BT-67? An IP hopper has been continually adding dubious information, and returned yesterday after a week's semi-protection expired. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 05:21, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Paris 1981

Were you at the Paris Airshow in 1981? We seem to have shot the same airplane(s) File:IL-86 CCCP-86003 Paris Air Show 1981.jpg File:CCCP-86003-IL86-1981.jpg. I'm going through old slides and uploading scans. Acroterion (talk) 03:07, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Yes I was at Paris 1981, flew from Heathrow and back in an Air France A300 and visited a few of the local airports and airfields as well. MilborneOne (talk) 09:15, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

I was finishing up a year of architecture school in Paris. I need to go through my slides - the ones I liked at the time are in carousels, but I may have missed some things that I'd appreciate nowadays, that are still in boxes. Some of the slides are deteriorating, so I need to get them scanned in any case. Acroterion (talk) 17:00, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Shot Heard 'Round the World (baseball)

Can you please page protect this again. The IP is back again for the third time today since your last page protection[11] expired. This needs permanent protection. As soon as the protection expires the IP comes back....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 10:27, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Y MilborneOne (talk) 17:38, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Air France Flight 66

You may be aware of the accident to Air France Flight 66 yesterday. A major uncontained engine failure which damaged the wing of the aircraft and resulted in a successful diversion. Apart from the fact it was not the first major accident for the aircraft type, it has a lot in common with Qantas Flight 32 on the face of it. Would appreciate it if you and WilliamJE leave it for 5-7 days before going to AfD. Let's see how this one develops please. Mjroots (talk) 07:47, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

No problem we need to see how it developes. MilborneOne (talk) 08:35, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

TAP Portugal, TAP Air Portugal?

Hi there MilborneOne. Can you please move TAP Air Portugal back to TAP Portugal? The last name is the current one. Anthony Appleyard (talk · contribs) made the move to TAP Air Portugal but this is not an uncontroversial move and should be discussed first.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 12:33, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

• @Jetstreamer:  Done Anthony Appleyard (talk) 12:50, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
  • @Anthony Appleyard: I was actually in error, as it is TAP Air Portugal the current name appearing in the official website, so your original move was ok. My sincere apologies to both of you, I should have double checked the current name before asking for a reversion of the original move.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 13:34, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Directflight

Fair enough, I thought they would belong because they do operate scheduled flights in the Shetlands, but I understand the reasoning. Mordac (talk) 12:44, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23

Michael, could you semi-protect Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23? A series of IPs keep making changes to the cited specs for a different variant. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 17:54, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

The cited specs, however, do not match the cited source - Belyakov and Marmain doesn't quote any specifications for the MLD (although it does state a speed of Mach 2.35 (as claimed by the ip) for the similar ML. Much of the performance is in neither source. I've tagged the section.Nigel Ish (talk) 18:53, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Hmmm...

When you get a chance, can you take a look at Special:Contributions/Elektricity? The editing pattern there is ringing alarm bells. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 05:36, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

User group for Military Historians

Greetings,

"Military history" is one of the most important subjects when speak of sum of all human knowledge. To support contributors interested in the area over various language Wikipedias, we intend to form a user group. It also provides a platform to share the best practices between military historians, and various military related projects on Wikipedias. An initial discussion was has been done between the coordinators and members of WikiProject Military History on English Wikipedia. Now this discussion has been taken to Meta-Wiki. Contributors intrested in the area of military history are requested to share their feedback and give suggestions at Talk:Discussion to incubate a user group for Wikipedia Military Historians.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:30, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

...to you and yours, from the Great White North! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 00:32, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, and best wishes to all the TPS here. MilborneOne (talk) 19:21, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

AirTanker Services

G’day from Oz, and compliments of the season to you; when you get the chance could you have a look at the AirTanker Services article - the fleet details look wrong to me, despite the G-INFO results. Cheers YSSYguy (talk) 04:46, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

A quick look FR24 for the last week shows:

• G-VYGJ is doing the Falkland Islands service
• G-VYGK is operating for Thomas Cook
• G-VYGL is operating for TUI Nederlands
• G-VYGM is operating for XL Airways France

I will tweak the article. MilborneOne (talk) 11:19, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

What about the MRTTs, what is the status of those aircraft? YSSYguy (talk) 04:15, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

They are all operated for the Royal Air Force on the military register so perhaps they should get a mention, in theory the contract has nine core aircraft and five "surge" aircraft. The surge aircraft are not needed normally for military use so these get leased out. MilborneOne (talk) 16:15, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Soviet aviation Task Force

Hi! I've noticed your contributions to Soviet aviation articles and was wondering if you would consider joining the Soviet Aviation Task Force (still a work in progress right now) one it is established?--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 15:24, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

The impending Deaths in 2018 article

Hi. Hope you had a good holiday and have a good New Year. I was wondering if we could rely on your stewardship once again (having previously had your indulgence on Deaths in 2017) in warding off the inevitable vandalism which occurs from each January 1st on an unprotected list of deceased persons of base notability. At the least I am hoping we could approach you at the first sign of negativity, or if you prefer you could of course put the (currently outline) article on your watchlist instead. That's if you are agreeable to help. Best wishes whichever you decide. Ref ^(chew)(do) 14:20, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

No problem Ref I will keep an eye on it. MilborneOne (talk) 14:26, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, on behalf of all our "regulars". Ref ^(chew)(do) 16:24, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Heads-up, not even January 1st yet! https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Deaths_in_2018&diff=817281157&oldid=817269034 Ref ^(chew)(do) 00:00, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Is it Duck season again?

Cloverfield2Y (talk · contribs) a fairly new editor who concentrates on UK and disaster articles. Could it be Ryan k?...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 13:30, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Could be, west midlands subjects is another tick but the spelling is a lot better. Latest article 1917 Southwick B.E.2c crash is a bit of a strange choice but it did kill civilians on the ground but wartime accidents were fairly common. MilborneOne (talk) 17:06, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Ryan has in the past shown the ability to spell if he put the effort in.

@YSSYguy: might want to chime in. He's another Ryan k duck hunter....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 17:57, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

BTW I opened a new Ryan k SPI investigation....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 18:11, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

That was fast. A CU confirmed it is one of Ryan's socks. I nominated 2018 Pawan Hans Dauphin 2 crash....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 18:45, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Well done for spotting the webbed footprints. MilborneOne (talk) 19:02, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Just for the record, it was obviously him even without the SPI; his bad spelling is very much in evidence in his contribution to the 2017 Nature Air Cessna 208 Caravan crash AfD discussion, which he then spent two more edits to try to fix his mistakes (he never seems to use the Preview feature). Aside from the spelling there is his usual poor grammar and misplaced punctuation, and his earliest edits were to add categories to articles (which an admin seems to have been expunging, 'cause now I can't see them in his edit history) - this is how he gets his edit count up to being autoconfirmed. I nominated 1917 Southwick B.E.2c crash for Speedy deletion. YSSYguy (talk) 20:47, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

12 years of editing

Hey, MilborneOne. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Chris Troutman (talk) 21:05, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Do you know what happened to what I just wrote?

It seems to have been deleted. Topic something re airports for antique aircraft. deisenbe (talk) 16:11, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Airports for antique aircraft was still there a few minutes ago, all I have done is propose that it is deleted. MilborneOne (talk) 17:14, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Non-free images

If you got a moment this user is on a roll uploading some copyrighted images. I've left him a stern warning, but more maybe needed - Thanks FOX 52 (talk) 00:15, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Fox, seem to think that we have seen somebody similar before. The first images are from an IPhone in Australia but then they are clearly been nicked from somewhere. If they add any more here I will act but we probably need to clear up at Commons. MilborneOne (talk) 00:35, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

FOX 52, the user has been blocked for adding more copyright images, I think all the offending images have either been tagged as speedy or nominated for deletion at commons. MilborneOne (talk) 21:11, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

many Thanks - FOX 52 (talk) 21:34, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

PhilM is back

See Consolidated PB2Y Coronado. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 16:02, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Looks like him on Northrop F-89 Scorpion also. - BilCat (talk) 16:05, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Yep, bagged, thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 18:20, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Rolls-Royce Ansty

Are you able to identify (and name it on the image) the engine in these pictures? Very grateful if you might do that. Eddaido (talk) 20:40, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Not sure Ansty in Coventry is a Rolls-Royce factory that dealt with "Industrial & Marine" solutions, User:Mason Loades who uploaded them has an email link on there user page might be worth a punt. MilborneOne (talk) 21:21, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

I wrote to Mason Loades a while ago and have not received any reply. Indications are that he himself wasn't clear. Do you know another WP editor that might have clues? Many thanks, Eddaido (talk) 21:24, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

User:Nimbus227 is pretty good with engines but it might be worth leaving a note on the aircraft project page which will be seen by others with an interest in engines. MilborneOne (talk) 21:37, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Alan Kulwicki plane crash

Concerning your addition of a Failed verification tag. Please see the eighth paragraph of given source. - Samf4u (talk) 16:51, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks my mistake. MilborneOne (talk) 17:00, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Administrator thanks: Sabina Puertolas suspected stolen image

Thank you for your comment "image removed - tagged at commons as possibly copyright violation"

I am not an administrator but I, too, am concerned about improper use of images in Wikipedia. Wikipedia used to be scrappy and new so taking some images might have seemed ok but now Wikipedia is an established giant.

The soprano's image that you removed was also removed by me a few weeks ago but I was reverted and did not want to start an edit war.

I am currently studying how Flickr images can be used in Wikipedia and if we are doing it the right way. We somehow do it without asking the photographer specifically if the image can be used. I wonder if it is a case of them not knowing to un-check a box?

Thanks for your wisdom. Vanguard10 (talk) 03:29, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Fair use

I am writing to you because I have seen your work in aviation related articles and you recently made an astute action to remove an equivocal photo in a DYK article that I created.

I am concerned that Wikipedia uses a lot of photos citing fair use but doesn't do a good effort to attribute it or ask permission. Wikipedia certainly doesn't ask permission. Newspapers routinely credit photos at the bottom but Wikipedia never does.

What is a possible solution? Discussion is probably the first step but Wikipedia has a culture that defends its greatness. Many don't want to have any sort of disclaimer, warning, or, in the case of photos, attribution. It is hidden so that you only see it if you search for it.

Here are possible examples to consider if used with permission or used without permission

Tupelov Tu-144, Russian International News Agency, used with permission

Tupelov Tu-144, credit: Russian International News Agency

Vanguard10 (talk) 23:35, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

We dont need to credit the image thumbnail in the article as it appears on the image page so we would not use either of your examples. Also note they are not actually fair use in this context as they are licensed CC-BY-SA 3.0 MilborneOne (talk) 00:47, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Not only don't we not need to but it's not the Wikipedia way. However, I wanted to your opinion on how Wikipedia can be more honest and give credit, rather than hiding it. Newspapers routinely credit photos in small print right under the photo. That is more honest, I believe. Vanguard10 (talk) 02:51, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Per WP:WATERMARK, "All photo credits should be in a summary on the image description page". As policy, MilborneOne can not change this on his own. In order to change this policy, you need to raise the issue at Wikipedia talk:Image use policy, make your case their, and see if you can build a consensus to support your case there. - BilCat (talk) 06:53, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

India

This is regarding your India page and middle and great power status. India is a middle power as can be read here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_power (section: overlap between great powers and middle power) Some regard India as a great power too, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_power (section: Hierarchy of great power) Passage of the above section is reproduced here: "The United States is still preeminent but the legitimacy, effectiveness, and durability of its leadership is increasingly questioned worldwide because of the complexity of its internal and external challenges. ... The European Union could compete to be the world's number two power, but this would require a more robust political union, with a common foreign policy and a shared defense capability. ... In contrast, China's remarkable economic momentum, its capacity for decisive political decisions motivated by clearheaded and self centered national interest, its relative freedom from debilitating external commitments, and its steadily increasing military potential coupled with the worldwide expectation that soon it will challenge America's premier global status justify ranking China just below the United States in the current international hierarchy. ... A sequential ranking of other major powers beyond the top two would be imprecise at best. Any list, however, has to include Russia, Japan, and India, as well as the EU's informal leaders: Great Britain, Germany, and France."

India's status as a potential superpower can be read here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potential_superpowers

I have quoted all wikipedia articles on the basis of which I had made these amendments. I believe wikipedia is a 'reliable source' for wikipedia. I, therefore, request you to kindly reinstate my added sentences. If you want I can also furnish further references from other authors, websites, etc.

Thank you. shitansh sinha 15:39, 7 February 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shitansh (talk • contribs)

Thanks but Wikipedia is not a reliable source/reference. You need to provide reliable sources, perhaps raise it on the talk page and see if you get a consensus to add. MilborneOne (talk) 15:55, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Ok, I will edit it tomorrow with another set of reliable source. Thank you for your response. shitansh sinha 16:02, 7 February 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shitansh (talk • contribs)

Navbox question

Hey, I noticed you removed the navbox I added from RAF bases that were also USAF bases, since the USAF navbox didn't directly link to them. Do you have an MOS section I could read that would provide that guidance? Thanks! Garuda28 (talk) 19:26, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

User:Garuda28 its WP:BIDIRECTIONAL that deals with this. MilborneOne (talk) 19:29, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the link. I personally think that information is useful enough to negate WP:BIDIRECTIONAL, but I'm gonna start a discussion on WP:MILHIST so we can get a broad consensus, which I really would like you to participate in. Thank you!Garuda28 (talk) 19:33, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

No problem, i will desist removing them until the discussion is concluded. MilborneOne (talk) 20:29, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

As any exception to BIRECTIONAL was not agreed on then I will continue to remove such cats from articles again, thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 19:49, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Aeroflot Flight 3843 crew list

Can I please ask you to review this edit? - Ahunt (talk) 00:28, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Looks like it has been removed, we dont normally list the crew the one exception is the names of the pilots as they appear in the official reports when describing the accident. MilborneOne (talk) 17:46, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

It seems to be back again, complete list of the crew, including cabin attendants. - Ahunt (talk) 16:59, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Chinnuabhiram600

This user keeps changing the name of the airport in the infobox by adding the word "international" like here. Could you keep an eye on them? They don't seem to be listening to the warnings. — LeoFrank  ^Talk 10:59, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

I have semi-protected the article as there seems to be many IPs involved, see if that encourages them to discuss it. MilborneOne (talk) 11:10, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

HAL Tejas

Hello Mod

How are you? Hope you are doing good. Before I rant let me introduce myself, I am a simple web enthusiast who loves to add stuff to Wikipedia and learn from it, I have learnt a lot about wiki ways over the time but I don't seem to understand how irrational moderators are at Wikipedia. I don't contribute for any privileges, heck I haven't even created my own page nor edited my Talk page but I digress.

You know, I am really perplexed by the logic mods had used overtime and then retracted it again and again. I created an article for Stealth Inc 2 and it was denied despite mod agreeing to my logic it over email, now the same article exists using the exact same format, it was recreated Stealth Inc 2: A Game of Clones. Off lately, I had an altercation with @Adamgerber80: where he schooled me not to use a social media posts as a source even if it comes from a verified account of a government entity. Whats intriguing is he ended up doing the same, quoting a social media link as a reference for Mk. III LCU decommissioned vessel. I didn't revert it because that was the only source at that point and it was coming from a verified entity so there was no need for me to be grumpy. Whats right should be supported.

Now coming to you sir. I did not change the reference because that is the only quintessential source used in the whole article (multiple times), the page is there since the website started (2011). Now you are saying that a user has updated the ref., regrettably, you did not heed my comment nor did you check the changes that user made. The ref. is still the same, the user has only changed the date to March 2018 for a page that existed since 2011. I am not sure how the reference was unworthy before and how it gained relevance now by merely changing a date for a page which existed since 2011.

My only point is to kindly check the changes thoroughly before jumping the gun. It hurts users who when irrational logic and decisions are made.

I hope this repertoire hasn't put you off.

JM2C.

Regards

User:Shashpant It is really simple the reference said it had been accessed in December 2017 which could possible support information from March 2018. If you have looked at the website and it the same address you still have to update the accessdate, thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 17:34, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Protection request

G'day Michael, could you please consider protecting FlyPelican; some IPs are constantly changing the fleet numbers. The problem is that five aircraft are registered to the company but one, VH-OAM (ex O'Connor Airlines and de Bruin Air) was bought purely for spares, never flew a single inch on revenue service, and has been cut up. The AOC lists four aircraft, these being VH-NTL, 'OTD, 'OTE and 'OTQ, and it is the AOC that I have shown as the source for the fleet numbers. The airline will be taking on VH-ACV, ex A3-SKY with Royal Tonga, but that aircraft is still registered to another owner and has to be fitted with WAAS GPS and ADS-B transponders first. Cheers YSSYguy (talk) 15:04, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Y two weeks MilborneOne (talk) 11:11, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Stephen C. Ananian

Stephen C. Ananian meets notability as a Wikipedia article because he is one of the few pilots to shoot down Me-262 and as pilot of Armenia hertiage, is entitled for notability like other Armenian-American USAAF officers like Carl Genian and Ray Melikian. Hence, please reconsider in removing it from AfD. Bookish Worm (talk) 10:27 AM, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

I have not moved it anywhere or nominated it for deletion, although he clearly is not noteworthy so it wouldnt be a bad idea. MilborneOne (talk) 17:07, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Seeker of great wisdom

O man of great wisdom, I come with a message. I have seen many astute comments from you on aviation related Wikipedia articles. On the talk page of United Airlines, I find it concerning that I have a difference in opinion with you. It is about the pet dog dying in the overhead compartment. Please see the talk page. Perhaps, you will come to agree with me or disagree and present a demonstration of your great wisdom? Vanguard10 (talk) 01:51, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

ANI on your conspiracy theory with time travelling Russians (as per talk page on Su-25)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by B01010100 (talk • contribs) 04:25, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Note that this was already closed as post election Russian trolling. - Ahunt (talk) 11:53, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

And now for something completely different, but still the same: An ARBCOM filing. Facepalm - BilCat (talk) 14:32, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

And I note they have been blocked indef which should slow down the arb request. MilborneOne (talk) 15:01, 21 March 2018 (UTC