User talk:YSSYguy/Archive 2

Deprod

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Trans-Canada Air Lines Flight 861, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! Smallman12q (talk) 20:34, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]


RAPT system

"dealing with aspects of the Australian aviation industry" What are your thoughts for Tigerfish Aviation in Australia? They are turning heads here in America. I noticed you represent Australia aviation industry. --Johnnywes05 (talk) 15:50, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ryan Kirkpatrick

YSSYguy, I've gone ahead and given Mr. Kirkpatrick a bit of admonishment for proper syntax in his writings, and to generally slow down. The seeming inadvertent (or dare I say inattentive?) use of what I call spell-check malapropisms is also pointing to other issues: at worst, I found a sentence fragment that lead a run-on sentence in American Airways Flight 1 that I have since fixed as best as I can. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 15:36, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Additional note: I'm in conversation with User:A More Perfect Onion in regards to this. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 15:38, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Removed PROD on Alaska Central Express Cargo Flight 22

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Alaska Central Express Cargo Flight 22, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! This is notable information that should be merged into the Alaska Central Express article, not deleted from WP. --Mike Cline (talk) 13:56, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I also removed the PROD for the CommutAir accident. WhisperToMe (talk) 04:24, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Avianca issuses again!

Makes me wonder when they will stop using national pride over fact. Yet another editor breaches the consensus. Bidgee (talk) 09:25, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is not national pride, the facts are the facts, and 3 reliable third party sources have been presented. DG (talk) 09:01, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In fact viewing Qantas artible I may think the natianal pride is comming from your end, while declaring Qantas as the second oldest airline. It is easy to see how only users from Australia are complaining about Avianca's foundation date and it is clear that, aree using the fact of a merge between two companies to not give the proper dates to Avianca. my question now is why do we use www.qantas.com as a reliable source but do not accept Avianca's [page, Colombian Goverment pages, Boeing, and Airbus as reliable sources?. now this is not natianal pride right? DG (talk) 09:14, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
By the way here is the link used on antas article to support that fact. Qantas History —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danielg1987 (talk • contribs) 09:15, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, YSSYguy. You have new messages at A More Perfect Onion's talk page.
Message added 13:29, 2 April 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

A More Perfect Onion (talk) 13:29, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, YSSYguy. You have new messages at A More Perfect Onion's talk page.
Message added 13:51, 2 April 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Check the ed's newest article - spelling, grammar, mechanics, the usual A More Perfect Onion (talk) 13:51, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, YSSYguy. You have new messages at A More Perfect Onion's talk page.
Message added 14:22, 2 April 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

I think I'll log off WP for a bit, to spare my sanity w/r/t this ed...... A More Perfect Onion (talk) 14:22, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RE: April 2010

Hello, I am sorry you took my post in a different way that it was ment to be. but Avianca's website has been rejected several times as a source fact. but we have provided more than 3 reliable sources for this single discussion topic, but to me seems like there is a group of users not willing to let this happen. I am originally from Colombia, and I woudl like ifromation about my country to be accurate. I am also an Airplane and Airline entusiast. and therefore I look over Colombian Aviation pages, and hense I am trying to get the information straight on this page. :) I never mento to incomodate you or to be rude, I just want to be fair, and if you have askd for proper third party sources for Avianca's foundation page, why don't we require the same on Qantas page? I really did not ment to say you are using national pride, but more to "Bidgee" looks to me that he is upsate that more people is providing good information about this fact. I kinddly ask you to reconsidere looking over the sources we have provide, and then reconsidere changing the foundation date for Avianca, and there fore give Avianca the title of the second oldest airline. DG (talk) 09:39, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, YSSYguy. You have new messages at Danielg1987's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

DG (talk) 09:57, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please review the article 'Vietnam Airlines'?

G'day mate, I have been editing the article Vietnam Airlines for a while, do you mind just pop into the article for a moment, give it a brief read, and leave some comments on the page Wikipedia:Peer review/Vietnam Airlines/archive1. Please don;t change anything at the moment because a major edit is coming up. Any effort is greatly thanked, no matter how small, cheers! Sp33dyphil talk 06:20, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

JetStar

Hi! In regards to this edit

Usually when an airline moves its headquarters, reliable sources post information about it. Do you have any sources explicitly saying the HQ moved?

Also the airline may say its HQ is in "Melbourne, Australia" on its website, but it provides no physical address to show exactly where it is, and because the Avalon Airport is considered to be in the Melbourne area, the airline may be using "Melbourne" as an approximation.

Until/unless we can prove the HQ moved, we should continue saying that the HQ is in Avalon. WhisperToMe (talk) 05:07, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Air Bahia

Hello YSSYguy. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Air Bahia, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: If it's referered to in the reference cited, which I have to assume it is, then that's enough for A7. PROD or take to AfD where more eyes can check the quality of the ref. Thank you. GedUK  21:04, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of CommutAir Flight 4821

An article that you have been involved in editing, CommutAir Flight 4821, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CommutAir Flight 4821. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Thryduulf (talk) 11:41, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Aircraft histories in accident articles

Re your edits to 2010 Mexico Aerounion – Aerotransporte de Carga Union A300 crash, I've started a discussion at WT:AVIATION. Your comments are invited. Mjroots (talk) 17:00, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BCS Technology

Hi, I am wondering why you keep removing my Jetstar changes regarding their Information Technology department. The software development of Jetstar's applications has been outsourced to BCS Technology . Please refer to http://www.bcstechnology.com.au/industry/airline.aspx if you have any doubts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.174.147.34 (talk) 07:27, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Thanks, YSSYguy. Nobody every gives me barnstars! Cheers :) --Lester 09:41, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would also like to thank you. You gave me the first Barnstar that I've ever been awarded. It's nice to feel appreciated. :) Drpickem (talk) 01:58, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, YSSYguy. You have new messages at De728631's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hello, YSSYguy. You have new messages at O Fenian's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Continental IO-360

Thanks for finding a photo of this engine. I find that engine photos really add to what would otherwise be a dull-looking article! - Ahunt (talk) 10:37, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note. That is a great way to get engine photos! I hope you find some more that way! - Ahunt (talk) 12:45, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 18:45, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, YSSYguy. You have new messages at Bidgee's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Bidgee (talk) 06:17, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2010 Berlin Air Services DC-3 crash

The IP who contested the PROD was me (didn't realise I'd been logged out). The accident meets WP:AIRCRASH criteria A3 (first for operator), possibly could be said to meet A5 (grounds all aircraft operated by BAS), and also meets P1 (A German MP is wikinotable, even if he doesn't have an article yet on en.wiki). A lack of deaths should not be seen as meaning a lack of notability. Mjroots (talk) 06:37, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've corrected the cats above, which were wrong in my edit summary. Mjroots (talk) 06:40, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I guess we agree to disagree. While I don't use fatalities as a criterion for notability (three of the articles I PRODded today were about fatal crashes), I can't see that what is basically a forced landing of a vintage aircraft on a joyflight is notable, regardless of who is on board. I've been in exactly the situation I have just described, and it made the news and the aircraft was seriously damaged; and I have had friends and acquaintances die in warbird crashes - but I'm not going to start an article about any of those accidents. YSSYguy (talk) 07:22, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's generally agreed that GA aircraft and airliners have different notablility criteria. The size of the aircraft also comes into play too. Many large warbirds (say over 5,700kg MTOW [used as an industry standard for licencing purposes])) should be considered on a par with airliners for these purposes. I've commented at WT:AVIATION as to why I think the DC-3 crash is notable. The other three you prodded are GA aircraft and I don't disagree with you over them. Mjroots (talk) 07:33, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, so this is one of those times when I wish that were were sitting in a pub somewhere (actually I will be in the London area for a day or two in October :-)) talking, instead of relying on the written word - in other words I am not being hostile/belligerent/etc. I have worked extensively on both sides of the 5,700kg divide in GA and for airlines (I have a list of all the types I have worked on on my User page), and one of the Warbird crashes I referred to was in the plus-5700 category. As for notability, Ricky Nelson was killed in a DC-3 crash, and I don't think that it needs an article over-and-above what is on his bio; and if Alaska Central Express Flight 22 and CommutAir Flight 4821 were 1900Ds instead of 1900Cs I still wouldn't think them notable - I just think that we don't need an article about every crash of a plus-5700kg aircraft. YSSYguy (talk) 08:18, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sitting in a pub sounds good! You may be aware of the List of accidents and incidents involving the Vickers Viscount. Well, check out User:Mjroots/sandbox4. DC-3 accidents are not really covered on Wikipedia, and this could be one way to approach it. Going to have to be split at least by decade due to the numbers involved. Mjroots (talk) 08:28, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've finished the accidents since 2000, just need to work on lede (not my strong point) and sort out cats etc. then it should be ready for release. Take a look and let me know what you think. Feel free to improve if you can. Mjroots (talk) 07:34, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've covered the various designations by means of an article note. ASN ref titles altered to match those you did. Re the other lists, if necessary, a list per year can be made, but this will only become apparent once work starts on each list. I think the 1930s list will probably be the hardest to source, as there isn't much online. ASN only goes back to 1943. Mjroots (talk) 12:36, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Proudly presenting - List of accidents and incidents involving the DC-3 since 2000 . Mjroots (talk) 13:08, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wackett Widgeon

YSSYguy, thanks for tidying the new Widgeon article! Derek B 09:54, 24 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Derekbu (talk • contribs)

Qantas head office

Hi! Are you still around Sydney Airport a lot? I put out a photo request for Qantas Building A (headquarters) on Coward Street in Mascot. Would you mind photographing that building when you get the chance? Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 16:49, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dak prangs

No, but doing so will clear the history for when I start on the 1970s lists - these will probably be "per year" lists. Mjroots (talk) 18:34, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've blocked Belfast 19 as a sock, and closed the case. Your treatment of the 1980s list has caused it to be tagged as CSD R2. I should be able to finish off the 1980s list today or tomorrow. Once that list is live, I'll start on the 1970s list, working back from 1979 to 1970 as these are almost certainly going to be individual year lists. Mjroots (talk) 06:30, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
1980s list now live. Mjroots (talk) 13:37, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Heli Holland crash

The article has been de-prodded. Next step is AfD. Mjroots (talk) 05:41, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, I dont think it's you! Mjroots (talk) 06:33, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Probable sock of Ryan kirkpatrick

G'day to you, from Virginia (g'night? It's past 1 in the morning here.) I have not - not yet. I'm not that familiar with WP:SPI, and honestly haven't had the time this week to pursue it. I've noticed his activity as well, including on a couple of things today. I thought one of them looked too well-written to be his...and now I see you fixed it up some before I read it. :-)

I'll take something to them in the morning, unless you want to open an investigation in the meanwhile; if you do, I'll support it. I don't often get involved in that sort of thing, but this fellow's starting to get to me a bit. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 05:37, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So I see - thanks for letting me know. I'll continue to keep an eye on things at Special:Newpages - his style is usually pretty easy to spot. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 07:08, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bay Super V

Yes, this is an exact copy of the information in the Canadian Aircraft since 1909 from pp. 99–100, with the paragraph beginning "The five new Super Vs..." on page 100, with the specifications following. As to referencing the material, use:

  • Molson, Ken M. and Harold A. Taylor. Canadian Aircraft Since 1909. Stittsville, Ontario: Canada's Wings, Inc., 1982. ISBN 0-920002-11-0.
I would be happy to help you with formatting the references once you have an article fashioned to your liking. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 11:01, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another editor who seems suspiciously similar to Ryan Kirkpatrick

User:Aviation 191 User_talk:Aviation_191, Special:Contributions/Aviation_191 appears to resemble Ryan Kirkpatrick/Ryan Kirky/etc. It may be worth keeping an eye on him.Nigel Ish (talk) 15:19, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Persistance - see User:IrishUK , just for info they have been raised at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ryan kirkpatrick MilborneOne (talk) 20:00, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Skydrift Air Charter

I still believe that an airline is important, even if it's a very tiny operation as you say this one is; if it has a few relevant sources (even if they're not significant coverage), I really don't want to speedy delete the article. Why don't you just take the article to AFD? Nyttend (talk) 00:30, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dakota war losses

Hmmm, what I had in mind was military - military action where a state of war had been declared between two or more countries. Thus an RAF Dakota being shot down by the Luftwaffe wouldn't qualify. A BOAC aircraft being shot down by the Luftwaffe would however, as military on civil. What do you think? Mjroots (talk) 08:07, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Second opinion please - I'm working on the '73 list in my sandbox. Re the entry for 5 Feb, does this confirm it was a military - military incident, and therefore outside the scope of the list. (maybe Dakota war losses could be covered in a separate list or series of lists). Feel free to remove the entry if necessary. Mjroots (talk) 06:41, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sharjah

Re this edit, does the other airport have an article? Mjroots (talk) 09:04, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

G'day; no it doesn't. I came across a redlink for RAF Sharjah in the HS Andover article, which got me to searching for info and led to the realisation that the WP article was quite wrong! There is a fair bit about RAF Sharjah on the internet, and I was thinking about taking a stab at starting an article. It was RAF for most of its history: established in '32 as a stop on the Kangaroo Route for Imperial AW, taken over by the RAF in 1940, and the RAF left in '68, handing it over to the UAE. It was presumably closed on 31 December 1976, but I haven't verified that yet. Apparently it was built over and the main runway is now a city street. YSSYguy (talk) 09:22, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've wikilinked RAF Sharjah in the lede of the Sharjah International Airport article. Mjroots (talk) 09:29, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Righto; I have just put the seeds of an article on my Sandbox. Despite it being an RAF base for most of its history, I'm not sure about the name; perhaps Sharjah Al Mahatta airport or aerodrome or some such would be better. I guess we could always have redirects anyway. There is now an aviation museum on the site; among other things it has a DH Heron (ex Royal Navy Sea Heron and Heron Airlines VH-NJP) that I helped to dismantle in Sydney. YSSYguy (talk) 10:03, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If it was a RAF base for the majority of its life, then RAF Sharjah is a good title, with redirects from other names - Al Mahatta Airport, for example. Mjroots (talk) 10:06, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

32nd TRS and 38th TRS

157 TRS became the 32 TRS, 160 TRS became the 38 TRS.

Me bad typo :) Fixed and thank you !!! Bwmoll3 (talk) 00:56, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Qantas Flight 74 for deletion

A discussion has begun about whether the article Qantas Flight 74, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Qantas Flight 74 until a concensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. -- Atama頭 16:53, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Pendulum 79

Have a look at ATI flight 12 - is it just me, or does it look like User:Ryan kirkpatrick is back again? --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 16:31, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind - I've opened an SPI. That look OK? I've never done one before. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 16:47, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed - he's starting to get on my nerves as well, and I'm not one to usually get annoyed at such things. I think it's the lack of improvement in quality, honestly - though you have to admire his stick-to-it-iveness... :-)
I'll run him through SPI again if I suspect I see him on newpage patrol. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 02:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Way did you black me I did not do anything wrong and it don't say on my talt page that I am blocked so I can not unblock myself. I am not Ryan kirkpatrick and used this references that are used by other pages to fined out accidents. So can you plaese unblack me and let me put on again ATI Flight 12 becasue that has notable I made sure of that so there was no reason for it to be deleted. Thank you. User:Pendulum 79 (talk) 01:13, 10 September 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.3.141.114 (talk) [reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Lion Air Australia

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

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

A tag has been placed on Lion Air Australia requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject of the article is important or significant: 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 you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} at the top of the article, immediately below the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate), and providing your reasons for contesting on the article's talk page, 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. You may freely add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

You may want to read the guidelines for specific types of articles: biographies, websites, bands, or companies. Ansett (talk) 08:30, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]