Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by John (talk | contribs) at 12:35, 27 July 2006 (→Dates: not quite). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

'Scuse the engine noise, you'd best write a message! I will usually reply to comments (if needed) on the respective user talk pages. I reserve the right to delete any purely abusive, unsigned or anon IP comments. Thank you.

Use this link to add a new topic

PA845

Hi there, fellow SFO spotter! I left you a note on Talk:Pan Am Flight 845 that you might find interesting... Cheers, MCB 00:57, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Pregnant Guppy

Thanks for the picture! If ever an aircraft article needed a photo, it was this one. The aircraft has to be seen to be believed. --Jumbo 08:09, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

• Thanks, I'm a bit of a plane freak so I've been trying to find some pictures for all those old plane articles that are right now picturless. --ScottyBoy900Q∞ 15:01, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

User Categorization

You were listed on the Misplaced Pages:Wikipedians/Australia page as living in or being associated with the Australian Capital Territories. As part of the Misplaced Pages:User categorisation project, these lists are being replaced with user categories. If you would like to add yourself to the category that is replacing the page, please visit Category:Wikipedians in ACT for instructions. Rmky87 22:27, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

question

Jumbo, we talked a while back when you left a message on my talk page about a photo i uploaded you thought was nice, so i thought i would drop you a line since you're semi-familiar with my work. i'm currently running for an admin position so i thought i'd let you know if you wanted to check out the vote page. If you like my work and think i'm worthy, i'd appreciate you checking it out. thanks in advance and if you ever need anything drop me a message. --ScottyBoy900Q 01:33, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Aviation accident template

I like your template, I will try using it. Thats all! Lapinmies 23:07, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Luxair9642.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Luxair9642.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Misplaced Pages because of copyright law (see Misplaced Pages's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Misplaced Pages are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. Matt 13:39, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

If you are including this image under fair use rationale, then you must tag it as such using the {{fairusein|article name}} template. Also you need to provide the rationale for fair use as described at Misplaced Pages:Image_description_page#Fair_use_rationale. Further information can be found at Misplaced Pages:Fair_use. Note that I don't consider a photo from the popular press to be fair use in most articles. Some wikipedians may disagree with me. Matt 20:47, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm afraid that I don't know the answer to your question. I understand that you uploaded it in good faith, and it is painful to see it deleted. There has been a lot of problems (from my perspective) with fair use on wikipedia and you can't really be blamed for following others' example. My suggestion is that you should just use your best judgement and try to sort through the confusing and often conflicting 'legal' advice on wikipedia. Oh, and keep up the good work. Matt 02:41, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Jackson

I have made a brief page for her using the details that someone had kindly put on the redirect's talk page. Thanks for pointing out this gap.--nixie 01:44, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Missing crash infobox

Hi SuperJumbo,

I just noticed that the crash infobox template seems to be missing from Eastern Air Lines Flight 401. Since you seem to be familiar with it it would be great if you could take a look at it. Cheers, User:jpkoester1

Golden Gate Bridge article

Please refrain from making changes which go against apparent consensus. In the Golden Gate Bridge article, the picture was removed because it is one of the many which need not be in the article. Collections of pictures belong on Commons ]. In addition, putting that picture in the Suicides section is extremely morbid, and, to me, violates the NPOV policy. Please wait until an agreement is come to on the talk page for the article. Stack 05:46, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Pnatt

I'm afraid you have the wrong edit of the stick over Pnatt. He was not blocked for changing a spelling. He was blocked, as he has been repeatedly, for deliberately starting edit wars over language, posting misleading summaries and lots of other behaviour. Since he came on to WP in April he has done little but edit war all over the place, and refused appeals from many users to stop. Such has been his behaviour that his blocks have steadily climbed. He has consistently ignored all blocks and once they expire returned to fight the exact same battles the exact same way. He has been warned by various users that as he seemed to think day or even week blocks were no big deal, the length of each block would increase until he got the message. The last block for his behaviour was one month. When after all of that he still returned to his old stomping ground to try to trigger off more edit wars it was upped to five weeks, as is standard in cases of such behaviour. (Technically he was lucky only to get five weeks. Many users would have upped it to two months.) At this stage he has contributed nothing but disruption, attacks and edit wars to WP. Maybe it is time he was blocked indefinitely. Few users have been blocked so often in such a short time and not been banned from the site completely by now. FearÉIREANN\ 22:49, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

As I said to Pnatt:

It is not your (relatively few comparatively) genuine edits to articles that concern me as much as your repetetive and aggressive conduct and you absurd edit summaries. Xtra 13:39, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Xtra 23:16, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

This is not about usage. It is about unnacceptable and continual bad conduct. However, if you do want to go there I would not rely on the ABC to say what word is and is not acceptable. If you really want to look into it go to www.google.com.au - do a search under "pages from Australia" and search for "programme" - you will find many hits. Xtra 01:41, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

My dictionary has this to say:

programme

programme or (especially North American, and comput)

program

...

Xtra 02:00, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I take your point about conduct, but on looking at Pnatt's edits, it seems that he hasn't done anything since returning from a four week block to justify reinposing it. Any incivility has certainly been mild and there has been no recurrence of some early edits which are quite disturbing.

I'm inclined to agree with his call of vandalism. The Macquarie Dictionary - the standard dictionary of Australian English - lists "program" but not "programme" except as an alternative to "program". And that's from twenty-five years ago. What dictionary are you using as a reference for Australian English?

A revert with an explanation IS NOT VANDALSIM. You should read wikipedia:vandalism and wikipedia:civility. I use Chambers dictionary. Xtra 04:02, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. Chambers Dictionary is an authoritative source of British English, but for current Australian usage it can hardly be relied upon as a source, and the recognised standard for Australian English is the Macquarie Dictionary, which prefers "program" over "programme". On checking your revert with an explanation, I find this: "rvt. we do not change from so called brittish spelling (accepted australian spelling) on australian articles". If I saw that as an edit summary from a new editor, I would be inclined to think poorly of the editor. The point is that Australian English is not British English, as we can easily see by comparing standard dictionaries. --Jumbo 05:34, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I think you are unwise to back Pnatt. Please his his contribution history. I am scrutinising him more than I would scrutinise others because he has a very bad record with civility and repeat reversions and misleading edit summaries. On the spelling issue, I believe both are just as acceptable but programme is more formal. Xtra 02:42, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I am now aware of his history, for which thanks to yourself and others. However, I still cannot see why he received such a savage block - it looks as if he was being punished for his previous sins, for which he had already received four weeks. I am rather disappointed that a new editor has been treated in such a fashion instead of being encouraged towards good behaviour. His final comment that he wanted to remain in WP and make useful contributions seemed very encouraging to me. As for program/program, to be blunt, you're wrong and he's right, and making it a pissing contest over who's an admin and who's not sounds like a bad way to write an encyclopaedia. You should pick your battles, wait till you are undeniably right and he's wrong and THEN jump in. --Jumbo 06:52, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I thought that this time at least the block was premature, I gave him one warning and was willing to just sit back and wait, but someone stepped in. It is my honest opinion that it was highly likely that if not blocked then, Pnatt's conduct would have deteriorated as it did in the past. Xtra 07:58, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:MacProgram.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:MacProgram.jpg. Misplaced Pages gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Misplaced Pages, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Misplaced Pages:Image use policy
• Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. 08:06, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

barnstar

		The Rosetta Barnstar
		I award you the Rosetta Barnstar for your knowledge of Latin. Without you, the American School in London would have been said to receive its fees "per anum." Urthogie 08:02, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Gettysburg

Nice change with the Everett photo. And thanks for your kind words on the talk page. I love that article, but I think the real strength of it is Lincoln's words coming through. It's just an unbelievable speech. Thanks for your contribution. Kaisershatner 02:59, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Image:VirginEnglishRose.JPG listed for deletion

Pnatt

Jumbo,

You are missing the point with Pnatt. That user didn't simply correct an error. His past behaviour involved edit warring over use of language, spelling and Australian English usage. He had been involved in very bitter exchanges with Xtra. There are over one million articles on Misplaced Pages, yet he chose the same issue, with the same users, to start off his post-block edits. Going straight back to the very topic that had got him repeatedly warned for his behaviour, picked up where he went off and started yet another row on the issue is tactless to put it mildly. Posting an edit summary revert vandalism by Xtra sums up his approach. It is hard to believe that someone who deliberately targets the same topic after repeated blocks for his behaviour on the issue before, and who seems to target someone he had been rowing with before, is anything other than a troll. He could have edited anywhere on Misplaced Pages. He chose to go straight back to his old fighting on the same topic with the same users. That pretty much sums up his attitude and explains why he has been repeatedly banned, and going by past behaviour, why he will no doubt be banned again when he comes back.

Unfortunately those of us who have dealt with him have had the same experience over and over. He edit wars on the topic of language. He is told to cool it. He gets hotter and more provocative. He is given a series of warnings, then a final warning, then a ban. He throws a tantrum on his user page, it is locked. Then when he comes back he goes straight for the same topic and starts it all over again. He is warned, ignores the warning, gets himself blocked for longer, abuses the user page, gets it locked, comes back, picks on a word and starts edit warring again (preferably having found either a word or an article that either has an edit history with one of his "combatants"), goes in and starts it again, gets warned, gets banned . . . etc. I don' think, going by your comments, that you realise this. It wasn't a case of fixing a spelling. It was a case of finding an Australian topic, preferably language or spelling, to start another edit war. He has been at this since April. And when his block ends he will do the exact same again.

The reason why I and others, after clear warnings, have been increasing his block is because smaller blocks didn't make the slightest difference to him. Users had hoped that the month block would have got it through to him to stop the edit warring on Australian topics and in particular language, but true to form on his second edit he was off again, this time with program/me. If it wasn't that it would have been something else. It wasn't an innocent case of correcting a spelling, but just his latest gaming. Maybe this time a five week week block will get it through to him that Misplaced Pages wasn't joking. When we said stop it we meant it. At this stage I am seriously doubting his credibility as a user and wondering if he is simply one of the various users banned from Misplaced Pages. A few of them have a habit of launching sockpuppets and waging edit wars on picture locations, on spellings, or split infinitives, you name it. I can't help wonder if this is just another. If it is, and checkuser shows it, then Pnatt will be blocked permanently as per Arbcom rules, and whichever banned user is responsible will have their ban restarted as of the last pnatt edit. FearÉIREANN\ 23:52, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Image deletion?

Why is your Image:VirginEnglishRose.JPG under consideration for deletion? Some users appear to have a KGB mind in Misplaced Pages!

I think it was botted because it was orphaned. There's a crop of the nose art used in the Virgin Atlantic article, and that's almost the whole picture, certainly the most interesting part. --Jumbo 22:45, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Pnatt

He is writing provocative things on his page and I won't let them go unanswered. The solution as I see it:

1. Pnatt stays quiet and does not complain until the block expires (or complain afterwards)
2. Pnatt may edit freely afterwards, but
   1. If he is reverted he must not just revert back
   2. He may not add any abusive or stupid or totally unjustified edit summaries
   3. His editting must not turn into attacks on any group
3. I (and I am sure others) will monitor him when his block expires, and
   1. I will only revert a change he has made if I believe that it is wholly unnecessary or an attack or provocation
   2. If he adds any more BS accusations about myself or others on his talkpage or elsewhere I will take this further than just an admin.

Xtra 09:27, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Could I ask the same of you, please? We can hardly expect him to follow a higher standard than we set. I'm rather sorry I got embroiled in all this, but I'd like to see if we can get a positive outcome. --Jumbo 09:31, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

What same standard? You are trying to compare apples and oranges. Xtra 10:17, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Try to put yourself in his shoes. He sees you using words like "moron" and reverting without discussion, and that's the example being set, and then you (and others) criticise him for doing exactly what he sees you doing. He came back from a long block, apparently with a good attitude and a desire to do better, and he gets ganged up on. I can't blame him for feeling frustrated! --Jumbo 10:26, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

When I have reverted Pnatt I have given a reason Xtra 04:14, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't want to argue with you. Please put yourself in his shoes and ask yourself how he will respond. I'm hoping that we can channel his energy into constructive purposes. There's certainly enough work to do. I'm encouraged by JTDIRL's recent posts, which show he is understanding Pnatt's behaviour. As another participant in this affair pointed out, OCD explains his behaviour, but doesn't excuse it. --Jumbo 05:25, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

You may not be aware of it (I've just become so now) but you probably should be told that a user has had to protect Pnatt's talk page yet again. Pnatt used it to launch a rather strong attack on the United States and when the attack was removed by another user he reinserted it. He had since emailed users asking for it to be unlocked but they have refused and indicated that after his last actions it will now remain locked until the expiry of his block.

I know you have striven to show tolerance to Pnatt. I am glad you did. I may have sounded excessively strong to you. You were not aware that those of us who had dealt with his behaviour had been on the same merry-go-round since April: appeals to stop, warnings, blocks, abuse of talk page, locking of talk page, expiry of block, fighting again, block, abuse of talk page . . .. As you can see Pnatt is difficult to deal with. I know the block for a spelling correction seemed excessive to you. It was simply that I had been around the block so often with him, and knew from experience that the spelling correction was step one of the next round, followed hours, sometimes minutes later, by another row, then another, then more edit wars, etc. So I stepped in at step 1 to stop it because from experience I could see exactly where it was heading.

I have enormous sympathy for people with OCD — indeed with anyone with an illness that impacts on their judgment and behaviour. The problem is that I don't see how we can accomodate someone with Pnatt's behavioural patterns within Misplaced Pages. Even when he only is allowed to edit one page he misuses it in a way that, yet again, led to it being locked. If his behaviour on one page causes so much grief, one can imagine the problems he could cause (and constantly does cause) when given full access. Some users who are simple vandals cause chaos from day one. Pnatt isn't a vandal. But his behaviour is such that he had spent over two thirds of the time since he joined Misplaced Pages blocked, and the rest of the time edit warring. In the circumstances I can't help wondering if we should ask someone, perhaps the Arbitration Committee, to decide whether Pnatt should be let back at all. Clearly Misplaced Pages is not suited to someone with his health considerations. The stress of it all probably makes his situation worse. And his behaviour is such that I very much doubt if he could work within Misplaced Pages rules. Going by past behaviour, I suspect that in a matter of hours, possibly even minutes, of the expiry of his block he would be blocked again by someone else for again edit warring, fighting, starting rows on Australian pages over spellings (He had done that quite a lot), etc.

What do you think we should do? I'd hate to see someone ever denied access to WP because of an illness. But if the illness results in behaviour that is incompatible with WP's work environment, what can we do? What should be do? FearÉIREANN\ 23:31, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm chagrined to think that I didn't send him a warning when I saw that anti-US petition. Attention-seeking behaviour, and a predictable result. I won't make any protest. I warned him two or three times.

I will be around when his block expires and will look at his edits carefully. I would like to encourage him rather than punish him. Please, blocks of 24 hours if he steps out of line so that I can communicate with him and get acceptance of what has gone wrong.

He must have evolved strategies for coping in everyday life. If these strategies can be adapted for WP usage, then he may prove to be a valuable contributor. An editor with a deep-rooted interest in sources and attention to detail can be very useful.

But if he cannot work with others, then he cannot stay. --Jumbo 05:13, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

My A380 changes

Yes, I do know in fact now that SQ has not cancelled their order. I was simply changing the dates in the introduction. I apologise if this is a problem which I don't think it is!

Char645

Hmmm. Perhaps I got the wrong editor - there seems to have been a few reversions on that point and hard to tell who did what. It would really help if you got an account and signed your posts. --Jumbo 20:44, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Crash template

Glad to see someone taking an interest! --Jumbo 02:26, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Those multiple templates have always annoyed me, especially when I added them to Air India Flight 182, currently on the Main Page. joturner 02:27, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I just copied from the Airport template(s) and changed a few things around. I figured someone smarter and more knowledgable than me would come along and fix it up if I made a mistake. Thanks! --Jumbo 02:32, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Hmm... perhaps I'll take care of those another day. joturner 02:33, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Freedom air pic caption

Hi there, just to let you know I just minorly changed your caption on the Freedom Air page that was on the picture. I changed it from A Freedom Air Airbus 320 in Dunedin to A Freedom Air Airbus A320 in Dunedin. All I did was just change it from Airbus 320 to A320 and made a hyperlink. Thanks and I like your pics and the crash template. Jam01 03:22, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

User:Pnatt

Hi Jumbo. By the time that you posted your last message on Pnatt's talk page, I had already indefinitely blocked him as a lost cause, and at time of typing two other administrators have endorsed my decision.

The relevant discussion is here. I thought I should let you know given your involvement in prior discussion relating to this user's conduct. --Sam Blanning 23:02, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

West End streets

Too true! Tyrenius 20:22, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Rafic Hariri International Airport

I don't see what the purpose of changing the dates from Month Day, Year to Day Month Year was, nor what actual useful outcome came from doing so.. Please explain. NcSchu 00:03, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for asking. Happy to be of assistance! See WP:DATE for full details, but briefly the use of wikidates means that readers see the dates in their preferred format. Each comma is therefore a superfluous character because the software will insert it for readers who prefer the US format. As the article concerns a non-US subject, US-style (MD,Y) date formatting is inappropriate. --Jumbo 06:35, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, that makes sense. Thanks. NcSchu 14:44, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

US date formats in non-US article

Thank you for you alert! The previous editions of the article, at the time I added the subsection, it seems they were using the US date format and I followed the rule (I was not even aware of it, in spite of being from european country). Thanks again, Regards --Viriathus 13:03, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Becuz i write in US English

shouldn't or shouldn't i use the US date format? Robin Hood 1212 21:07, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Only in appropriate articles - such as those concerned with U.S. subjects. The same guidelines for use of U.S. or UK English in an article apply. Neither Lebanon nor Israel use U.S. date format. See Date format for a list of countries showing which date formats are used. --Jumbo 22:49, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

American dates

I don't know why, I reverted using popups and it changed the date format also. I've never heard of this before...Feel free to change it. Thanks, Blnguyen | rant-line 06:07, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 24th

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. --Michael Snow 04:09, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Gaza Strip

This is unsourced OR that has been discussed plenty on talk. I warned the user about 3RR. Tewfik 06:18, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Dates

You wrote "Rationalise non-US date formats in non-US article", but if your date preferences are enabled, these dates would look the same in any case. I was interested as I have been trying to take out the many linked stand-alone years in Misplaced Pages; most often they add nothing to the article. It has been fairly controversial though; some users like them in some articles and there is no coherent policy. --Guinnog 03:57, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Removing standalone wikiyears is current policy, according to WP:DATE. Complete dates should be wikilinked so that they show up correctly according to user preferences. However, those readers who have not established accounts will see the dates presented as entered, and it is preferable that U.S. format dates be kept out of non-U.S. articles. --Jumbo 04:02, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I wish it were that simple. "There is less agreement about links to years. Some editors believe that links to years are generally useful to establish context for the article. Others believe that links to years are rarely useful to the reader. Some advocate linking to a more specific article about that year, for example 2006." (from WP:DATE). --Guinnog 12:35, 27 July 2006 (UTC)