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 21:28, 9 February 2008 editBilCat (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers215,692 edits Undid revision 190250427 by BillCJ (talk) - reverted self-test← Previous edit Revision as of 22:00, 9 February 2008 edit undoBuffs (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers27,425 edits add request for certificationNext edit →
Line 115: Line 115:


:It's arbitrary per the MOS, whether you think it is or not. -- ] (]) 09:38, 9 February 2008 (UTC) :It's arbitrary per the MOS, whether you think it is or not. -- ] (]) 09:38, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

==Certification request==
] <span style="background-color: maroon; color: white">]</span>&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 22:00, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:00, 9 February 2008

Wikimedia Foundation
Wikimedia Foundation
This is a Misplaced Pages user page.

If you find this page on any site other than Misplaced Pages, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated, and that the user this page belongs to has no personal affiliation with any site other than Misplaced Pages itself. The original page is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/User talk:BilCat.



NOTE: I will no longer be fighting one-man, long-term campaigns against vandalism, ignorance, stupidity, corporate interests, anti-corporrate interests, anti-government intersts, nationalistic pride, anti-Western bias, anti-American language bias, inaccuracy, falsehoods, and just plain contentious interpretations. I will remove/tag such garbage on the first sight, ask for help on the second occurance, and perhaps even ask for admin intervention after that. But without support - especially admin support - I will not try to fix Misplaced Pages's damaged reputation as being a haven for mis-information and vandals on my own - it's not worth the strees. I'm sorry it has come to this, but we all have to recognize our limits, and this is mine.

NOTE: If you're here because an IP user left a message somewhere attributed to me, or has been reverting my edits wholesale, be aware that such poop was laid by a Wiki-stalker/troll. And since I can't feed the trolls, I won't be responding to your messages about its activities. Sorry if the troll has caused you problems, but rules are rules!

NOTE: Most comments will be archived about once a month. Critical comments are welcome, but those containing highly-offensive or profane material will be deleted immediately, and the overall content ignored.

NO BOTS ALLOWED!! You'll have post here yourself!

Also, talk to me like a normal person, and don't just quote Wiki guidelines to me - I'm NOT a newbie . (Policies are different). I consider it rude, and will likely just delete your comments, and ignore the point, as guidleines can be ignored. If you do it anyway, and turn out to be wrong, an apology would be the considerate thing to make.

If you want me to take your opinions and edits seriously, you ought to Register!

If I mistakenly called your edits as vandalism when I reverted them, it was probably because you did not leave an edit summary. Please realize that, in many cases, unexplained edits are indistinguishable from vandalism!

If you initiated a conversation here, I will most likely respond to your comments here, rather than on your talk page (except for certain people from Alberta or Australia!) Also, if you are discussing an article, I would prefer to use that article's talk page, unless you'd prefer not to use that page for some reason, such as commenting on a particular user's edits in semi-privacy. Please limit this page to discussions not related to any particular article, those covering a wide range of articles/topics, or personal comments.

If you wish to keep a matter confidential, you may use the "E-mail" feature (now activated!). I will respond in kind unless otherwise requested.


Thanks.

AND PLEASE SIGN YOUR POSTS!!!! The annoying SineBot doesn't work here!

Title Case May Be Used in Headings on This Page

Me, myself, and I use serial commas.


Archives

Comments

WP:Mediation Cabal

You may be interested in Misplaced Pages:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-01-31 Indian Navy; on whether the claims of the Rg Veda on Varuna have any real function in IIndian Navy. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 23:59, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll take a look. - BillCJ (talk) 00:15, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

thanks for Infobox fix

Hi BillCJ, I myself had changed old climate box to infobox, but saved it (unsigned) before realizing that it broke ref section somehow. I discovered the goof with ref and did not know how to fix it quickly, so reverted it. Thanks for the infobox fix. Chirag (talk) 21:11, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Ah, gotcha! You had changed the Infobox as an IP, and then reverted it as a Registered user without saying you were the same person, so I didn't catch the connection. What I did was to check Template:Infobox Weather. When I saw there was a date field outside of the ref tag, I just added it - simple fix. Checking the template page often, though not always, helps in finding and fixing such problems. That's the good think abour Wikipeida - we can all double-check each others' work, and help fix problems and errors. I still make pleny of error, and others fix tmine on a daily basis. - BillCJ (talk) 21:19, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Removing thumb sizes on Japanese military pictures

Hi there. Please note that I may restore some in an attempt to ensure the pictures line up properly with text, rather than have one or two lines creep in underneath. I won't do it for the moment, but when I do I hope you won't revert me - or will at least raise a discussion on the talk page. Thanks, John Smith's (talk) 11:36, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Please note that it makes a difference what resolutions you are using, and that the pics may not line up at other settings. It's probably best to move the pics to othr sections, to a gallery on the page, or to remove them. Thanks. - BillCJ (talk) 17:29, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback

My comments weren't directed at you, but only as clarification to the previous comment. You and I disagree here and there, but we both yield to consensus and remain civil. I think many others are quickly becoming uncivil in this discussion. — BQZip01 —  03:41, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I have two boys under the age of three...I have a few he can use...
Strictly for feedback, User:TomPhan weighed in on my AfD, but he has almost no edits outside my AfD. His edits are similar to CC's (misquoting me/misrepresenting what I said in order earn "points" with reviewers). Something strikes me as sockpuppety about this. Do you think I should bring it up at WP:SSP? Should I simply request a checkuser to verify? — BQZip01 —  03:53, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Mistakes

You managed to fix my dumb M61 mistake and fix the Sea Harrier thing I missed today. I can miss things sometimes. I got an account on the Plane Spotting site a week or so ago. Haven't really done anything there except start building up a watchlist. -Fnlayson (talk) 06:18, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, you're pretty good at catching a lot of my mistakes too. I think you cought a couple n the last few days even. The Harrier thing was easy to confuse, you were just copying what the other guy wrote. I was suspicious about the 6 vs. 10 losses tho, so I looked at the source, and realized the user was missing that fact that there were both Harriers and Sea Harrriers in the numbers, and that he didn't realize the difference. I know there are plenty of times you've caught similar mistakes of mine. We do make a good team tho. On the M61, I believe I made a similar mistake some months ago, and someone else corrected me; GE is the only producer I had known of to that point. - BillCJ (talk) 06:30, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Sure. I checked that Harrier reference page and thought the 6 vs. 10 losses was accident/ground fire mismatch thing. The good thing about an editor messing up something in good faith is you notice where clarifying is needed. I'm doing some work on the F-15N page on the plane site, btw. -Fnlayson (talk) 21:42, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

IL-76 AWACS in Iran

I'm afraid that the person who said that Iran has the AWACS modified by Iraq is correct. Here is a picture of one of them, taken in 2007 http://www.airliners.net/photo/Iran---Air/Ilyushin-Il-76-Adnan-1/1315765/M/ Hudicourt (talk) 01:15, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I never said it was a "mistake" - I said that "such an extaordinary claim certainly needs reliable sources". A photo site is not a reliable source - photos can be retouched, and captions can say anything. - BillCJ (talk) 01:32, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

VZ-9-AV

My first book was actually a ghost-writing project that I undertook with a researcher who owed his publisher a "first refusal project" that he wanted to devote to the VTOL flying saucer designs of Avro Canada. I knew nothing about the secret projects and had to rely on his extensive knowledge and exhaustive files based on a 30-year search through UK, U.S. and Canadian sources. Eventually, through the use of Freedom of Information Act requests in both countries as well as separate searches through UK sources, author/researcher Les Wilkinson obtained the original documentation on all of the Avro Canada "black" projects dating from 1952-1961. These projects included spade-shaped tail-sitters and disc-shaped "flat risers" that eventually culminated in the WS-606A supersonic fighter program that was funded by the USAF. The VZ-9-AV Avrocar which was initially considered a "proof-of-concept" test vehicle for the supersonic fighter was also funded by the U.S. Army as an entry in the "flying Jeep" sweepstakes. All the manuals, and every official document including company, government and military correspondence refers to the "VZ-9-AV" which was a reference to the project's Avro Canada origins. The project office was at USAF Dayton AFB and most of the material that was obtained came from USAF sources.

Only after its demise did the VZ-9 designation become standard in referring to the Avrocar. I can elaborate further but I will have to resort to the dreaded "original research" to pull out the company manuals and other corroborating material. After Les' untimely death during our collaboration, I received 30 boxloads of his research, of which approximately 1/3 has now been donated to a museum that acted as a depository for research on the Avro Canada company history. FWIW Bzuk (talk) 04:18, 8 February 2008 (UTC).

Bill, I did discuss this apparent discrepancy in my book: Avrocar: Canada's Flying Saucer (p. 69) as the "official" designation that was established by the Project Office was not always carried through but there are numerous other sources including Bill Rose and Tony Buttler's recent Secret Projects: Flying Saucer Aircraft (p. 76) that correctly identify the project as "VZ-9AV" (note the slight variation). From interviews with the engineering staff responsible, it was a designation that was made by the USAF WS606A Project Office to recognize the orgins of the project. It did not seem to be a requirement from the company as by that time, nearly 100% of funding was coming from the U.S. military, but it was acknowledged that the "AV" code was nonstandard. FWIW Bzuk (talk) 14:56, 8 February 2008 (UTC).

Canadian roundal

(moved comments from User talk:BillCJ/UBX/GWSun to here) - Fnlayson (talk) 18:31, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Hey Bill,

I have to apologize for not realizing to document my edits, I am very new here.

But, I was until recently a former member of the Canadian Forces and the roundel that is on the Canadian C-17 is commonly known as the RCAF roundel. The current roundel was introduced in 1965, simplifying the former roundel to match the maple leaf on the new Canadian flag. It has to my knowledge, training, and experience and in several references been referred to as the RCAF roundel, more of a tribute than anything else. This policy is in keeping with recognizing pre-unification items, such as the RCAF tartan and the RCAF March Past, as official 'issue'. Yes, the RCAF has been gone 40 years now, since 1968, but something’s do remain! ;-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimsim22 (talkcontribs)

Arbitrary?

Don't assume anything I do on Misplaced Pages is arbitrary, please. —Quicksilver 09:35, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

It's arbitrary per the MOS, whether you think it is or not. -- BillCJ (talk) 09:38, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Certification request

Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_comment/Cumulus_Cloud#Users_certifying_the_basis_for_this_dispute — BQZip01 —  22:00, 9 February 2008 (UTC)