User talk:Dpm64

IFR

I'm a new wikipedia user so I don't really know if editing this page is the right way to send you a message. I added a note about terrain separation in the IFR talk page.


Ottawa Wikipedia Meetup

Hey, just a quick note to let you know there is an Ottawa Wikipedia Meetup coming up this Saturday @ 2pm. If you can make it, please drop by the Meetup website and RSVP. If you can't, join up anyway, so you can find out about future Ottawa Wikipedia Meetups! --Spinboy 20:54, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Airports

I noticed you move a bunch of airports around. I reverted those edits, as the policy of WikiProject Airports is the offical name of the airport, which redirects from the other names. Hope this is clear. Burgundavia 04:54, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for checking on the edits. However, the official names of Canadian airports do include the city name, as I explained on Talk:Macdonald-Cartier International Airport; note also that the two major Montreal airports also follow the official Nav Canada usage (except that they use a dash rather than a hypen). We should use the official published names from Nav Canada's Canada Flight Supplement and Canada Air Pilot, since these are the ones used for air navigation. I am restoring my changes, and will be happy for future discussion. Dpm64 12:12, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hmm. I have a devil of a time finding the offical name for some of these airports. Ottawa simply says Ottawa Airport. A most non-informative site. That is something we are going to have work out as we go forward. Burgundavia 20:34, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I noticed you wearing an aviation headset in the photo on your user page. Do you have access to the Canada Flight Supplement? If not, I'd be happy to send you some of my expired copies of the CFS and CAP. Dpm64 20:37, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Wrong (too big!!)

Also, don't use gratuitously capitalized initial letters in section headings; see Wikipedia:Manual of Style. Michael Hardy 04:19, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

New Wikiproject

Hi there, just a quick note to let you know that we've started a new wikiproject! WikiProject Ottawa aims to expand the amount of articles in Ottawa, and of the articles that are there, take them from stubs to something worthy of being a feature article. We hope you'll stop by and sign up! --Spinboy 03:47, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hershey bar wings

Having flown both, I find that the handling differences are clear. I believe that the published cruise speed figures for the later Cherokees are somewhat inflated, at least when applied to typical aircraft in the flight line. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 22:23, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I have not flown the earlier ones, but the 160 hp Warrior II really does cruise at about 125 ktas mid-weight with the wheel fairings on at 75% power, 7000-8000 ft density altitude. I don't know if the semi-tapered wings account for any of that improvement, though. David 02:07, 2005 Apr 15 (UTC)

Airport infobox airport types

Hmm, I have been doing some thinking about this. There are a couple of different things we need to capture here: Domestic/Int, Public/Private, and Commercial/Gen. Aviation. None of these overlap really, and we do really need something official regarding this. Ideas? Burgundavia 11:28, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC)

I moved your suggestion to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports/infobox Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aviation/Infobox Airport. I think we should carry on discussions there, as it makes it easier from others to join us and discuss them. Cheers. Burgundavia 12:08, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC)

New York airports

One actual underlying issue is that of dual cats. The traditional way to avoid placing things in cats and the parent cat of that one. However, for other places, such as London Heathrow Airport violate this rule, as I feel it is more important to sort to subnational level (England) with everything, and the other cat can exist along side.

On the note of the actual New York cat, the category is quite clear on the page that is more than just New York, yet is is primarily New York (state), so that is why I left it there. So, I support 2 things -1: leave New York City as a subcat, as above 2: Add all actual New York (state) airports to the New York (state) cat. Until we get metadata, I think this is best we can do, while still making it easier to browse.

As another solution, do the above and then place New York (city) under New Jersey as well. Burgundavia 13:44, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC)

That's a problem with taxonomies in general -- real life is rarely neatly hierarchical. I think that currently, the majority of the airports in the category are actually in New Jersey, not New York. I suggest leaving the two as parallel, peer categories for now. Maybe we should move this whole discussion to the category's talk page. "Airports serving New York City" might be a clearer category name -- are there any parallels for other large, metropolitan areas? David 13:49, 2005 Apr 18 (UTC)

American/Int. spelling

Just to let you know, the general consensus on spelling is to keep what ever is already there and make it consistent. Thus I reverted you change to the runway title template. Burgundavia 23:40, May 3, 2005 (UTC)

SOAP

I'm not sure if you've seen the message I left on SOAP's talk page recently, but I cleaned up the article in temporary form at User:Ben Babcock/SOAP and would like some opinions before implementing it. Ben Babcock 12:28, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Lester B. Pearson International Airport

The article says that Toronto International Airport is now Toronto Pearson International Airport and the user thinks it is that, because that's what the GTAA goes by. I go by Lester B. Pearson International Airport (LBPIA) because that's the official name. What is the exact official name of the airport? There's been quite a confusion. -- SNIyer12 23:44, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hirohito

hi there Dpm64, i am trying to get a discussion going on renaming Hirohito as well as Akihito maybe you care to join in? thanks alot, appreciate your time.. Antares911 29 June 2005 13:09 (UTC)

Richard II

Hi, I've made some fairly major changes to the article about Richard II of England in response to your marking it as being of dubious neutrality. I'd be interested to hear your opinions on the edit and if you're satisfied with the changes, perhaps you'd care to remove the disputed neutrality label - I'm not sure how to do that to be honest! mattDP 20 July 2005 12:01 (UTC)

Kingston/Norman Rogers Airport

An unregistered user has added a section saying "The Above mentioned Harvard aircraft 'IS NOT' in front of the terminal building. It is in fact in front of the RCAFA (Air Force Assoc. building facing 'Hampton Gray Gate'. Not, as specified the 'terminal building' is facing another street,named 'Birchall Way'". Now I have no idea if this is correct or not so can you check. Even if it's correct that's not a good way to enter it. Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather 07:26, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Airports of the British Commonwealth Air Training Plan

Just added Brantford Airport is that the correct one? CambridgeBayWeather 06:23, 1 November 2005 (UTC) Also Centralia/Huron Airpark. CambridgeBayWeather 06:48, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's a painful job confirming each one. You can look at the diagram in the CFS, and see if there's the outline of an old airport (many short runways), and you can check the COPA Places to Fly directory, which includes an icon for airports that were in the BCATP. David 14:15, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Just thought y'all should know that airports of the BCATP are also being linked from List of Royal Canadian Air Force stations (category: Royal Canadian Air Force Stations). So, for instance, there is some duplication for RCAF Station Centralia, which is also the same location as Centralia/Huron Airpark. BrianC 21:10, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

as of

Feel free to revert my change. Here is some reading material on the topic of "As of": Wikipedia:As of Qutezuce 06:50, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reference. I read through that the debate linked to that article, and in general, I agree with avoiding words like "soon", "recently", etc. Air Canada might keep an aircraft in its fleet for two or three decades, so we probably pass the "likely to change in a year" rule. I'm not going to rush to revert the change, but if you don't object, I might fix it next time I edit the Gimli Glider article. David 14:26, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for that

I restored the notability tag. Like I say, I don't know, so I'll defer to people who know more about the development of XML, but if people agree he's notable even w/o evidence, I'd suggest just removing the tag. --Kchase02 (T) 20:48, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Non-towered airport

Thanks for all the work you put into that article! Would you check out the talk page, though, and explain a bit more why you moved the page? Thanks. —Mets501 (talk) 13:04, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lightning detector

HI,

The affirmation "In some cases, the radar will see precipitation forming before the lightning detector registers strikes, while in others, the lightning detector will find lightning before the cloud releases significant precipitation." that you have introduced in this article is misleading. Moderate precipitation will ALWAYS be viewed by the radar before lightning appear as the radar sees precipitations in the cloud, not on the ground.

For the lightning to form, there must be transport of electrically charged water drops and/or ice particles upward in the cumulonimbus. Studies done in the seventies showed that the radar intensities must at least 47 dBZ at 7 km (24 ooo feet) in order to produce lightning. This intensity correspond to 30 mm/h which is heavy rain. This might not be seen on the ground but will certainly be noticed by radar.

By the way, I'm moteorologist for Environment Canada.

Pierre_cb 2006-7-5 01:31 GMT

Thanks, Pierre -- that's interesting. I don't have your scientific background, but I have noticed in pre-flight weather briefings that Nav Canada specialists sometimes report lightning strikes where they don't see any significant precip showing on the radar. After reading your comment, I wonder if that has something to do with errors in the radar (e.g. masking) rather than a lack of precip. (L3 also claims that the Stormscope can detect a storm before radar [1], but since that's marketing material, I'll take it with a grain of salt.) David 02:57, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Blocakages is a good point, as any site has its own. That is why, if two radars are covering a certain area, a view of both might be different since one can be blocked and not the other. What level is considered on the radar and the region where the lightning comes from is important too. Lightning (generally positive) can be induced from the anvil of a cumulonimbus to the ground in an area away from the main precipitation shaft (The image on the Stormscope L3 frontpage is showing exactly this situation).
This is caused by electrically charged ice particles ejected into this areas by the updraft in the cloud. Many golfer have been hit by lighning this way thinking the thunderstorm was still far away. Strikes then appear ahead of the radar echos on Navcan 1,5 km CAPPIs but some area of precipitations should be nearby and a higher level Cappi would show higher precipitation rates. If you look at the echotop map, there should be echotop above 5 km nearby. Pierre_cb 2006-7-5 03:46 GMT
Thanks again. Do you have any suggestions for how we might change the article to take the practical side of this into account with being (a) inaccurate or (b) overly technical? David 11:53, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm thinking to use an image of the development of thunderstorms that I have imported in commons to show the radar reflectivities and I'm looking for an image of the charges in cumulominbus to contrast the position of lightning. That way, on can see right away the similarities and differences. Give me a day to add that. Pierre cb 12:04, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Good joined effort! Pierre cb 17:58, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Airports

Whatever you deem necessary. It's no problem with me. Good luck in your endeavors. Billy Blythe 01:14, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Norwood Airport

No problem. It seemed like a simple and uncontested move. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 04:24, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Air Canada Jazz and flights to YTZ

Here is the source you were asking for. For some reason, Jazz still hasnt started their flights from YOW to YTZ, but Ottawa airport lists that destinations on their web page.

Source: http://www.ottawa-airport.ca/FlightInformation/airlinesScheduled-e.php Thenoflyzone

Jazz and CYTZ update

Just spoke with a Porter Airlines pilot comming in to land at YOW, and he told me that Jazz will start flights to YTZ in January 2007. I edited all three airport sites (YUL, YOW, YTZ) to reflect this information. Thenoflyzone 00:31, 15 december, 2006

Unfortunately, that would be original research. See my reply on User talk:Thenoflyzone#Air Canada Jazz to Toronto City Centre? David 13:01, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Norwood Memorial Airport

I've responded to your comment.--Carabinieri 18:13, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Ottawa/Rockcliffe Airport

Just responded to your comment and revert of my changes on this article. I'm trying to consolidate military histories for RCAF stations and Canadian Forces Bases under the base articles. Plasma east 17:51, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Social media is better after your trim

Hello Dpm64. Thanks for shortening this slightly-dubious article. (Previously I had invited support for an AfD on Talk:Social media). I note that there is still no citation for the first use of 'social media', which I guess it is not your duty to provide. We should be sensitive to the issues of WP:NEO, and to the fact that people will cite Wikipedia for this as though it were a well-defined term. Even after your improvement, the article still does not appear to meet this WP policy criterion:

To support the use of (or an article about) a particular term we must cite reliable secondary sources such as books and papers about the term — not books and papers that use the term.

EdJohnston 17:12, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I added a new comment here, then thought better of it, and moved it over to Talk:Social media. EdJohnston 01:26, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See Talk:Aviation for discuss

--Ksyrie 13:12, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Mutiny

On the Spithead mutiny page, did you mean to say that the purser's pound was a perquisite (as opposed to prerequisite)? As in perq of the job?

Thanks for catching the typo — I just corrected it in the article. David 09:57, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:List of airports by ICAO code: C

If your comment here is correct, and I assume that it is, then there are a couple of things that need fixing. The List of airports by ICAO code: K contains Norwood Memorial Airport and I suspect others on the list that should not be there. Also it means that the Template:Airport codes is not usable for most Canadian airports. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 07:28, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're right about Norwood, and there are many other similar U.S. airports. I've fixed the template so that it says "*National* LID" instead of "FAA LID" (that takes care of Canadian codes), and have added a new, optional fourth entry "GPS code" (that takes care of Norwood, etc.). David 15:14, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I was looking at it in a tab and just clicked on it to see if it could be changed and saw that you had already done it. I was checking at Eurocontrol for the ICAO codes but it gives odd results. It still lists "Cape Parry" and "Mould Bay" both of which are listed in the CFS as abandonded but does not list ones such as Vancouver Harbour Water Aerodrome (CYHC) or Victoria Inner Harbour Airport (CYWH) both of which are airports of entry. It also gives odd results for UK airports, it seems to list a lot of them even though they are not in the AIP. Later on I'll go through the Canadaian airports with AWB and fix them, along with updating the infobox. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 15:35, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Before removing any airports from List of airports by ICAO code: K, please see my comments at Talk: Norwood Memorial Airport #No IATA or ICAO code. It references two documents from U.S. government agencies. One states that the ICAO location indicator for airports in the contiguous United States is the three-letter FAA identifier preceded by "K". The other says that the FAA assigns ICAO indicators for U.S. airports and some of these are not listed in ICAO publications. -- Zyxw 01:55, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ottawa Macdonald-Cartier International Airport

Right now there are no sources to say that it is the 6th busiest in Canada. If you look at List of Canada's busiest airports the article shows 10 of the busier airports. However, Boundary Bay Airport, Abbotsford International Airport, Calgary/Springbank Airport and Toronto/Buttonville Municipal Airport all had more aircraft movements than Ottawa but there are no current passenger stats for them. So it's quite possible that those airports might have been busier. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 23:16, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think that might be splitting hairs a little too fine. Most of the airports you mention have no airline service at all (I'm not sure about Abbotsford), so their airline passenger count is 0. Even if you count passengers in general aviation aircraft, the average passenger load per plane is probably less than one (crew doesn't count), which would not let any of these come close to the top list, despite the high number of movements. David 00:33, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You might be right. Part of it was that I made a very simple caculation error. I took the number of passengers and divided by the number of movements. I forgot to multiply that by 2 which of course gives 52 passengers per aircraft and not 26. I imagine that very few 52+ seat aircraft are landing at the other airports. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 01:07, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No problem — I've been to Buttonville, and most of the planes I saw had, at most, one or two pax besides the pilot (often none). It might help if we make it clear that we're talking about airline passengers, since that's all that we have stats for. Here's a link to a StatsCan report listing the top 50 airports by airline passengers in 2005: [2] David 01:23, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the link. Now I can reference the rest of the article. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 17:31, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edit on this page

I just fixed a double redirect from further up at the "Airport infobox airport types" section. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 16:58, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. David 19:31, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

and landing weight is an order of magnitude less than take off weight

I didn't write that remark in Airport (good rv, btw) but is it worth mentioning that airplanes weigh a lot less than landing? Maybe it's not the right place, but some stats on that might be good. Touchdown Turnaround (talk) 15:13, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think that might actually be too much detail for a general airport article. FWIW, fuel accounts for up to 45% of the maximum takeoff weight of a Boeing 747-400 (assuming the passenger/cargo load is light enough to allow full fuel, and the trip is long enough to justify it). Some of that fuel would still be in the tanks on landing, so assume that in an extreme case, the plane could weight about 30% less on landing. The 747-400 is a pretty extreme case, though, since it's designed for very long range flights. David (talk) 21:14, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

In no way did I mean to imply vandalism by reverting. Ostap 19:38, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem -- I shouldn't have been oversensitive about the change. Happy holidays! David (talk) 13:04, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Flight service station and air traffic control

Yes, I was aware of the difference. However if you look at the total concept of air traffic control, there are many articles, like this one, that are associated with the total concept. If you have ideas on how to better classify that category please make the category or we can have a discussion. If you look at Category:Aviation, you will see more that need upmerging and don't have a clear target.

I think there are some natural groupings of categories to cover flight training, flight planning, weather, navigation and traffic management that really need someone to look at at reorganize. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:39, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Collectively, they're called "Air traffic services" (ATS), at least in Canada. Air traffic controllers are a subset with very specific responsibilities. David (talk) 20:42, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of Fisher Park Public School

A tag has been placed on Fisher Park Public School requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. GreenJoe 16:04, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pinecrest Public School

Please note my comments on the talk page. It is advisable to let the closing admin of an AfD know if you dispute a result so they can weigh in on any issues and amend the result if necessary - I only found this out by chance. Camaron | Chris (talk) 10:38, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WPAT

Nice add — I'm actually in the middle of doing some hatnotes and disambiguation page entries for airports too, where ICAO codes overlap with broadcast call signs.

One heads-up if you're going to add any more entries to disambiguation pages, though — each entry on a page should only have one single navigable entry, or blue link. In this case, because the article for the airport doesn't exist yet, the best choice for the blue link is the first item in where it's located. I've removed the links to ICAO code and to the other two geographical portions of the location. If the article for the airport did exist, then it should be the only thing linked.

Mlaffs (talk) 20:16, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Plain Old XML

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Plain Old XML, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

WP:MADEUP. Non-notable neologism/advert for some processing tools

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. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 19:49, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bill Mullins-Johnson

Admittedly I invoked IAR with that one. What I saw was an unsourced WP:BLP which mostly gave the details of a crime he did not commit. The way I see it, unless he was very well-referenced, then per BLP guidelines it's humane to avoid having articles on people such as that. Right now it's a minority stance, but living people biographies are something we have to be very careful with. Wizardman 00:48, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I went and restored it. I'll take your word that it was a big story in Canada; i'm not Canadian so i wouldn't know. Wizardman 01:20, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:Kenyon Clutter.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Kenyon Clutter.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Vanjagenije (talk) 12:37, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:Nancy Clutter.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Nancy Clutter.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Vanjagenije (talk) 12:37, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Commonwealth Air

I note that you have mostly done the Commonwealth Air Training page and I wondered why there was no reference to Kohler Airport which later became Cayuga Dragstrip. They call it Toronto Motorsports now? Kohler is so close to Jarvis I wondered if it was an anciliary to Jarvis but in any event I thought it would be there and it wasn't. Hotspur (talk) 23:34, 9 June 2011 (UTC) Hotspur[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Gordon Sheppard

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Gordon Sheppard requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Reichsfürst (talk) 01:47, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Rockcliffe Flying Club

The article Rockcliffe Flying Club has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:ORG, non-notable organization, tagged as unreferenced for three and a half years

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ahunt (talk) 21:39, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

War of 1812

Hello, I have reverted your last two edits on the War of 1812 article. You need to be more specific with your references than an entire book. I have read the excellent book by Alan Taylor, The Civil War of 1812: American Citizens, British Subjects, Irish Rebels, & Indian Allies, and I can assure you that chapter 14 "Honor" does not support your comment. Please be more careful with your references and take your suggested edits to the talk page at the War of 1812 article if they are extensive. Dwalrus (talk) 04:29, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    • I disagree with your reading of the chapter -- I won't patronize you by asking you to be more careful with your readings, because I accept that honest disagreements of interpretation can exist among intelligent people. I'll look forward to starting this discussion on the Talk page the next time I have time for Wikipedia contributions outside my consulting work. In the meantime, I find it disturbing that the article almost entirely omits the role of US domestic politics in the war -- what do you think would be the best way to introduce that topic into the article? I'm happy to take a different approach, as long as we find a way to get away from the oversimplification of the US political situation. David (talk) 19:49, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a difference of opinion about the interpretation of a chapter. Chapter 14 does not support your comment and if you continue to claim it does then provide a quote with a page number from that chapter that supports what you said. You and I know that you cannot do that since chapter 14 is about the fighting on the Niagara front in 1814. The chapter title "Honor" comes from the views of General Jacob Brown and there is no reference in the chapter to support your comment that there was a "political conflict between the American Democratic-Republican Party and Federalist Party over national honour and co-operation with Great Britain."

No matter how offended you are you do need to be more careful with your references. The fact that U.S. political parties had serious disagreements is true and if you know the proper sources you can easily document it. The article does need some work on the role of U.S. political parties but you need to do some serious reading if you want to contribute. And I don't mean just reading on the internet. Dwalrus (talk) 00:12, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Judging by your answer I take it that you are indirectly admitting the truth of what I have said. I will repeat that if you want to edit about the role of U.S. political parties in the U.S. decision to go to war in 1812 then you do need to do some research or reading. Sorry if that offends you but pointing that out is not a lack of civility. Dwalrus (talk) 18:23, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • You are right, Dwalrus, that's not the chapter I thought it was. When I have time again for more Wikipedia contributions, I will go through my Kindle edition of the book carefully and find specific citations, as you suggest. In the meantime, if you agree that the lack of discussion of the Republican/Federalist domestic background is a serious omission in the article, please go ahead and add that information yourself, and I will look forward to reading it. Thanks again for the review. David (talk) 11:16, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I may add something on this to the article if I have time. You may be interested in reading Bradford Perkins important work Prologue To War: England and The United States, 1805-1812. Although it is 50 years old it is still considered a valuable work. It is freely available here. Dwalrus (talk) 16:12, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Elmdale Public School for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Elmdale Public School is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elmdale Public School until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Dennis Brown (talk) 01:14, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited SS Narragansett, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Narragansett (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:13, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Anthony Hanemaayer for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Anthony Hanemaayer is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthony Hanemaayer until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 13:09, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Petty France, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jane Austin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Airport of entry for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Airport of entry is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Airport of entry until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. David Condrey log talk 10:25, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:18, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Dpm64. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Dpm64. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

RfC on Business-agile enterprise

Dear David an RfC is open on an article you once showed some interest in. I'm letting you know in case you want to share your opinion. Yours, Dryfee (talk) 18:07, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Dpm64. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Dpm64. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Dpm64. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:04, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of List of airports in the Delaware Valley

Notice

The article List of airports in the Delaware Valley has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

We could have hundreds of lists of US airports covering any arbitrary region or metro area, but to avoid such excessive overlapping organization, we just do it by state, as in Category:Lists of airports in the United States. No need for one covering this region when we have List of airports in Pennsylvania, etc.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Reywas92Talk 02:34, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

comment

I'm glad you're editing about literature in Wikipedia, including by starting After Blenheim which I came to from the battle of Blenheim article as a matter of my perusal of glorious battle stories, and which I feel enriches. I visit Ottawa sometimes, btw. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 16:32, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @Doncram! That was 15 years ago -- I'd forgotten about it. David (talk) 22:34, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]