Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by BilCat (talk | contribs) at 03:03, 10 December 2006 (Discussed on relevant talk page). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

NOTE: Most comments will be deleted by me after one week. Critical comments are welcome, but ones containing highly-offensive or profane material will be deleted immediately, and the overall content ignored.

Also, if you are discussing an article, I would prefer to use that article's talk page. Please limit this page to discussions not related to any particular article, those covering a wide range of articles/topics, or personal comments. Thanks.

Lufthansa 747-8 buy

The Lufthansa 747-8 purchase is not a rumor. It's a fact. Look at the table and associated links. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 19:09, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

The table contains a press release dated today from Lufthansa regarding the 747-8 order. It was there prior to your edit and the one you reverted. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 19:21, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Citing sources

Please, when creating articles, try to cite atleast one reliable source. See wp:cite, Harvard referencing may be the most appropriate for Air Craft as the reader may want to know the immediate source summary. I tend to use footnotes a lot, as it allows sources to be included often without impeding the text flow. Keep up the effort on the co-axial helis, it's an interesting subject.Alan.ca 07:41, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

-See further discussion on user_talk:Alan.ca. Alan.ca 08:13, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey Bill, thanks for citing the sources in the article Sikorsky_S-69. I noticed you had made a few syntax errors in the ref tags, so I fixed them up. You can view the changes using the history page. I also included a template that I like to use called template:citeweb for web citations. I hope you find this useful. Happy editing! Alan.ca 06:46, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Hughes Helicopters

There seems to be a problem with this going on. You'd think they'd never heard of Howard Hughes or the Apache. The same thing happened at some other pages I've been watching. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 12:32, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. I've left a comment at Talk:Hughes Helicopters. Mark83 13:57, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Looper took care of the references.

--Born2flie 16:40, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

He was FAST! And I didn't even ask him for help! :) - BillCJ 16:47, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Operation Bolo

Hi. I've had a quick look at the merits of the article and left an opinion at the talk page. I'll look into your concerns about reverting later.

Bill, I don't know how to avoid making this seem conceited - so read the following knowing I don't mean to be: You asked me for help/advice twice in the past 24 hours, I am happy to give it. However with other editors might I sugest a bit of back and fro - e.g thanks for your opinion/I disagree with your opinion etc. It will encourage others to debate with you/help you. Best regards, -- Mark83 00:35, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for the confusion. The above message was a suggestion that maybe a "thanks for the previous help" would be appropriate. But as I suggested I did not wish to appear conceited, i.e. I meant in general. As I said also in the 1st sentence I will look into reversion etc. later. Mark83 00:54, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I wasn't fishing for a "thank you" -- as suggested "I don't know how to avoid making this seem conceited" -- I was speaking in general. But thanks anyway. Sorry again for the confusion. As promised, I will have a look at the general behaviour tomorrow PM. Best regards -- Mark83 01:09, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

airlist box?

Hey Bill, I dont get what you are saying. What airlist box?--Bangabalunga 17:38, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I have no idea why this Golich guy is deleting them. --Bangabalunga 18:52, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

On a different subject, whats happening with the Boeing 737 page? Drastic changes happening there. I thought it was fine before.--Bangabalunga 19:21, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

XWB misnomer

It's Boeing PR, but it states the reason why the anonymous person added the comment to Airbus A350: http://www.boeing.com/randy/archives/2006/12/out_to_launch.html —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 19:53, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I think we should find an NPoV press article that says the same thing. Looking at the 777/787/A350 specs, you can tell that Randy is right about which models compete against which (eg. Airbus has no direct 787-3 or 787-8 competitor) but that would be original research. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 20:00, 9 December 2006 (UTC)