Misplaced Pages

User talk:BilCat: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 02:04, 1 October 2023 editDolphin51 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers31,481 edits →Reverting to show disapproval of an edit summary: new sectionTags: Reverted New topic← Previous edit Revision as of 02:26, 1 October 2023 edit undoBilCat (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers215,711 edits →Reverting to show disapproval of an edit summary: Reply, and it might be best if you don't respond backTag: RevertedNext edit →
Line 101: Line 101:


Misplaced Pages has an article titled ]. This expression appears to be used many hundreds of times throughout Misplaced Pages. Are you proposing a project to erase the word “aircraft” every time it is used in this expression, on the grounds that “widebody” is not unencyclopaedic? Presumably not. Similarly, are you proposing to erase the word “engine(s)” everywhere it is appended to “turbofan”? Again, presumably not. What message, if any, can we derive from your revert? ] ''(])'' 02:04, 1 October 2023 (UTC) Misplaced Pages has an article titled ]. This expression appears to be used many hundreds of times throughout Misplaced Pages. Are you proposing a project to erase the word “aircraft” every time it is used in this expression, on the grounds that “widebody” is not unencyclopaedic? Presumably not. Similarly, are you proposing to erase the word “engine(s)” everywhere it is appended to “turbofan”? Again, presumably not. What message, if any, can we derive from your revert? ] ''(])'' 02:04, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

:The message that you should derive from my recent and summary is that you are being needlessly picky, and that your edits didn't need to be made in the first place. I don't generally make reverts solely to disagree with the edit summary, and that certainly wasn't the case here. I was disagreeing with your edit, and with your stated reasons. I didn't think it needed to be elaborated on at the time. Captions should be fairly short, and in context, we don't need to repeat what should be fairly obvious. Both words are linked, if there's any question about what they refer to. Btw, ] is the title of the article, in line with ], ], et al. I do hope you won't be proposing to rename all of these to include "engine" in the title, but if you do, you can be sure of my "Extremely strong oppose" ivote. Also, the other title is ], not ]. ] (]) 02:25, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 02:26, 1 October 2023

This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.

Welcome to my user talk page
Before posting, please read and follow the notes below.

  • For matters related to article content, "use the article's talk page" (most likely on my watchlist), or use the relevant Wiki project talk page (use these for questions, requests for help or advice, etc). That's the intended purpose of these pages and will get more attention from others. Out of place posts may be removed or moved to a more appropriate talk page. Please use this page only for personal and general comments.
  • (Note: If you insist on posting a comment here instead of an article's talk page, please at least do me the courtesy of linking to that article. I make hundreds of edits per week, and I can't recall most of them without a direct link to the relevant article or talk page. I'm not going to spend my time trying to figure out what article you're commenting about, especially as you already know which one it is, and could've easily told me, but didn't.)
  • Keep conversations together - I will reply to posts on the talk page where the conversation starts.
  • Do not take offense if I make changes to edits you've made to articles. Note the warning on each edit screen: "If you do not want your writing to be edited, used, and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here." I may revert unexplained (no edit summary) edits that appear unhelpful. To prevent this, provide edit summaries with understandable reason(s) to explain your intent or purpose.
  • Edits where cited text is changed may be reverted, since that violates Misplaced Pages's Verifiability Policy. Please provide a reference when you make additions or changes.
  • Personal attacks will be removed. Unfair and improper criticism will be ignored or removed. Do your best to make your point without writing paragraphs and paragraphs of text. Excessively long posts will probably be ignored and removed to save space. Retaliatory warnings will be removed and reported as harassment.
  • If your posts here are removed, please do not restore them for any reason.
  • Experienced editors are welcome to reply to posts here if they do so nicely. They are also welcome to remove vandalism or non-constructive posts. If I disagree, I'll simply restore them, so don't take that personally.
  • Add posts to the relevant section or start a new section at the bottom. Thanks.



Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 14.5 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 2 sections are present.

Edit of https://en.m.wikipedia.org/Helicopter_Interdiction_Tactical_Squadron

Hello Bill. You recently did an edit to the Coast Guard HITRON page I had edited and you stated no source stated. The problem is, the “only” source available are the actual people, such as myself, that actually built the unit up from ground zero. Their were only 10 of us, be happy to have a “second” of one of the other plank owner members back me up on any and all info I add to this page, as, not to boast, I am a subject matter expert on. Please do me the courtesy and contact me direct on this request. I anm older now annd a dinosaur when it comes to a lot of computer and Wiki protocols so please, not to excuse my lack of this knowledge, but trying the best I can do as I always do through a 32yr military career. Appreciate your time. Charlie H10Plank (talk) 02:07, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Oops

Mixed up the before and after on the Gimli Glider edit. Mea culpa, thanks for the fix. –IagoQnsi (talk) 05:38, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

No worries. I've mixed up diffs plenty of times myself. At first I wasn't sure what had happened, but once I looked at you userpage, talk page, and recent contributions, I figured it was probably a mistake. I just made my edit as clear as possible (on then second try!), and moved on. I'm glad that you realized your mistake, and that you let me know. Take care. BilCat (talk) 07:23, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Reverting to show disapproval of an edit summary

Hi BilCat. Around 30 September I edited the caption of an image on Boeing 767. I changed “widebody” to wide-bodied aircraft to match the title of the article; and I added the word “engines” to “turbofans” to make the expression “turbofan engines”. In my edit summary I foolishly used the words “colloquial” and “unencyclopaedic”. Understandably, you disagreed with these descriptors and you objected to my use of these words in my edit summary. You showed your disapproval by reverting my edit.

Are you aware that at WP:BADREVERT it says Do not revert an edit as a means of showing your disapproval of the edit summary?

Misplaced Pages has an article titled Wide-bodied aircraft. This expression appears to be used many hundreds of times throughout Misplaced Pages. Are you proposing a project to erase the word “aircraft” every time it is used in this expression, on the grounds that “widebody” is not unencyclopaedic? Presumably not. Similarly, are you proposing to erase the word “engine(s)” everywhere it is appended to “turbofan”? Again, presumably not. What message, if any, can we derive from your revert? Dolphin (t) 02:04, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

The message that you should derive from my recent and summary is that you are being needlessly picky, and that your edits didn't need to be made in the first place. I don't generally make reverts solely to disagree with the edit summary, and that certainly wasn't the case here. I was disagreeing with your edit, and with your stated reasons. I didn't think it needed to be elaborated on at the time. Captions should be fairly short, and in context, we don't need to repeat what should be fairly obvious. Both words are linked, if there's any question about what they refer to. Btw, Turbofan is the title of the article, in line with Turbojet, Turboprop, et al. I do hope you won't be proposing to rename all of these to include "engine" in the title, but if you do, you can be sure of my "Extremely strong oppose" ivote. Also, the other title is ], not Wide-bodied aircraft. BilCat (talk) 02:25, 1 October 2023 (UTC)