Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:56, 31 October 2010

I'm just taking a short wikibreak due to health problems. Hopefully, it'll only be a few days, though I may pop in various moments.

Your proposition may be good But let's have one thing understood Whatever it is, I'm against it! And even when you've changed it or condensed it I'm against it! --Groucho Marx in Horse Feathers

BilCat is suffering from physical health issues. This may affect his ability to work on Misplaced Pages. Consequently, he may not be able to respond to talk-page messages or e-mails in a timely manner. Your patience is greatly appreciated.

"Imagine a world in which every single person on the planet is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge, and in which anyone has unlimited opportunity to try to destroy that knowledge every day, wasting hundreds of hours of our contributors' time by making them serve as janitors, instead of allowing those contributors to add to the sum of human knowledge. That's what we're doing!" - What Jim Wales would say if he ever told himself the truth about what his precious dream has really become! If you leave a message for me: I will generally respond here. Either add this page to your watchlist or ask me to notify you of a response on your talk page. If I leave a message for you: Please respond on your talk page. I will add it to my watchlist, so you don't need to notify me, unless I don't respond when a response is expected (normally within 24 hours, unless the issue is urgent). This helps keep discussions in one place and makes them easier to read and follow. If you are discussing an article: I would prefer to use that article's talk page, unless you'd rather not to use that page for some reason, such as commenting on a particular user's edits in semi-privacy. If you're new, and I've reverted you, please don't revert me without at least talking to me first. I've been around a while, and I know how WP works. If I reverted you, it was for a good reason, and you need to ask me what that reason was. I usually give a short edit summary explaining my reason, but often there are other policy-related issues that are related. But if you do leave me a message, please be civil. I generally do not bother to leave messages on IP talk pages, since many IPs are dynamic, and there's no way to know the difference on the first edits. The user will more than likely never even know they received a message, so it's just a waste of time better spent on actual editing. (This is one example of how not having mandatory registration does a great disservice to IP editors. Becasue of this, IP editors really ARE second-class users, made so by Jim Wales' own non-negotiable (thus dictatorial) policies.) The main exception is vandalism warnings, which are required before most admins will block or ban for vandalism. Please limit this page to discussions not related to any particular article, those covering a wide range of articles/topics, or personal comments. Note: I reserve the right to decline or withdraw from a situation that is escalating or uncomfortable, without giving a reason, or to take further action through permissable means. (See this policy.) This may include removing your messages from my talk page. If I've done so, please DO NOT re-add the same meassage, or follow-up with another - They will be removed again, mostly likely with a edit summary about your obnoxiousness in continually hounding me. If you then follow this up wth an ANI report, you're proving that you are a real jerk, and I won't respond there either, per WP:DNFT. I may, however, file my own ANI report against your harrasment, which you may define as "public scolding", but is in reality wiki-lynching. My key points to remember about editing Misplaced Pages Telepathy doesn't work over the internet. Please use edit summaries. Unexplained edits may be indistiguishable from vandalism. Please use edit summaries. Anoyone can claim to be anyone on WP. Use Reliable, verifiable published sources. "Assume Good Faith" applies to motive, not content. I correct mistakes or errors when I see them, regardless of who made them - AGF means I don't warn for vandalism unless it's quite obvious that it was vandalism. "Don't bite the Newbies" does't mean it's OK to "eat the oldies"! Don't treat me worse than you would treat vandal if, in your opinion, you think I may have bit a newbie. I'm not the bad guy here either, and I won't be treated like one. I will fight back. Wikipeida is supposed to be an encyclopeida, not a social club. While treating people with fairness and respect is important, it's not the only factor. Let's keep the "main thing" the "main thing", and protect the content as well as the contributors.

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.

Archives

Archive 1 - October 2006 - March 2007 Archive 2 - April - May 2007 Archive 3 - May - June 2007 Archive 4 - June - July 2007 Archive 5 - August - September 2007 Archive 6 - October - November 2007 Archive 7 - December 2007 - February 2008 Archive 8 - March 2008 - May 2008 Archive 9 - June 2008 - August 2008 Archive 10 - September 2008 - November 2008 Archive 11 - December 2008 - March 2009 Archive 12 - April 2009 - June 2009 Archive 13 - July 2009 - Dec 2009 Archive 14 - Jan 2010 - June 2010 Archive 15 - June 2010 -

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

This user is one of the 400 most active English Wikipedians of all time.

NOTES

• Due to the misbehavior of a few IPs, IPs are sometimes prevented from editing this page. If you need to discuss an article, see the previous note. If you need to discuss something else with me, register, and come back in four days. If it's urgent, use the e-mail feature; it won't work if it's been abused lately. If you chose to whine on an admin complaint board somewhere, I'll probably hear about it. And ignore you. ;) PS. if you posted the type of comments on my page that you would post on an admin alert board, they would have been ignored and removed anyway!

• 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 somewhat 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, though you probably won't since it's not policy to apologize for your mistakes. (If Jimbo wnated people to apologize for their mistakes, he'd have made it a policy, right?!)

• If you want me to take your opinions and edits seriously, you ought to Register!. Otherwise one never knows who really made the edits, especially in the case of dynamic IP addresses.

• 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! This also applies to Rollbacks.

• I reserve the right to clean up this page in any manner I chose, including the use of Rollbacks for non-vandalism, and especially if you made more than one edit. Please do NOT repost what I've removed, unless you are an admin issuing a formal warning, though I'll probably still remove it!

• If you wish to keep a matter confidential,such as disscussing personal and/or confidential information, you may use the "E-mail" feature (usually activated!). I will respond in kind unless otherwise requested. This is not for discussing routine matters regarding editing on pages - use the article talk pages for that.

Thanks.

• Title Case May Be Used in Headings on This Page

• Me, myself, and I use serial commas.

Military Historian of the Year - 2009

I posting better discussion here (Delta ≠ 368)

Thanks

For your words of support at Bzuk's talk page. It looks like MickMacNee is determined to continue this once the RFC ends in a day or so. He attacks me for my contibutions at AfD discussions as an admin, yet I have made very few administrative actions at AfDs - done a couple of procedural closes as far as I can remember, but that's about it. Obviously, I can't rais the issue at ANI at the moment, but once the RFC ends, then my hands won't be so tied. Mjroots (talk) 16:38, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the talk page revert

Odd that I have never edited the same pages as that editor and yet he attacked me. Hmmm..... - Ahunt (talk) 16:41, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Dave1185 has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can Spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

• Dedicated to all of you guys~! (Note: this radio dedication is going out to Ahunt, Mjroot, BaseballBugs, Bill, MB1 and the rest of these nice folks...) --Dave 16:45, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Mi-26 shootdown

Bilcat, you removed the details about the Chechnya shootdown. While I agree they had better figure on a separate page about that incident, I prefer to see them in the general Mi-26 article over not seeing them at all. Revert? Or will you kindly create the shootdown article? Jan olieslagers (talk) 16:46, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Not Bill, but the details were unreferenced. I don't think it'd be a good idea to start an accident article with mostly unreferenced text. Discussion on this probably belongs on the article's talk page (Talk:Mil Mi-26). That's the talk page's purpose.. -fnlayson (talk) 17:04, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

((deeply blushing)) At a second glance, the suggested specific article was found existent - and carrying the detail info. So I quite agree to Bill's action - and apologise for my over-hurried complaint. Jan olieslagers (talk) 18:37, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

No worries. - BilCat (talk) 18:51, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Guess I missed the accident artile at first there. :( -fnlayson (talk) 16:14, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

3RR

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

-- in lieu of a 3RR warning on Aviation history. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:58, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Point taken, but I was actually trying not to edit war. I've de-watchlisted the article since then, and will not be participating in any duscussion re: Whitehead from this point on, ANIs etc excepted. - BilCat (talk)

MfD nomination of User:BillCJ/UBX/atheism Is Harmful

User:BillCJ/UBX/atheism Is Harmful, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User:BillCJ/UBX/atheism Is Harmful (2nd nomination) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:BillCJ/UBX/atheism Is Harmful during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:37, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Dave 04:47, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Dyn'Aero

Ah, I understand now. The edit summary could have mentioned it was covered under the Dyn'Aero MCR01 article, which didn't exist at the time I added the accident to the Dyn'Aero article (see talk:Dyn'Aero). Best, Mjroots (talk) 22:03, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes, he should have used an edit summary, but as he usually does use one, he may have simply forgot. - BilCat (talk) 22:07, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

No harm done. Mjroots (talk) 22:11, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Film plots

I've run into whole scene-by-scene dissertations and it takes a lot to get them pruned. I had some luck in It's A Wonderful Life in reducing the size of the plot section but I have been much less successful in other articles, notably Tora, Tora, Tora. Putting a <plot> tag does at least identify the issues and using the talk page as a starting point does get community support for the moves, otherwise, I have seen the plot sections get reduced then little by little, watch as incremental changes get tacked on and the plot veers out of control again. Good luck there! FWiW, I was a coordinator in the film project but the vociferousness of the arguments and vicious ] concerns just wore me down and I gave up the post. Bzuk (talk) 22:27, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Retrieval dates

Hello BilCat.

I saw that you reverted my removal of (what I called) false retrieval dates. I was under the impression that these dates were supposed to show when the actual link was added (the first time). Is this wrong? Where can I read about this? At first thought (or possibly even later on), "Verified" would be more appropriate to me, if this is all about verifying if the sources say what the article states they say.

Cheers. HandsomeFella (talk) 17:03, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Retrieved and Accessed are the common terms for when a web page in a reference was accessed. See WP:CITE#HOW. This is the assess date in cite templates like Template:Cite web. -fnlayson (talk) 17:45, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Hey.

Thanks for the input. I visited the link you provided. I can't find that the article takes a distinctive stance on either of our positions (or "theories"), except for the bullet point "the date you retrieved it (required if the publication date is unknown)", which I think supports my opinion, albeit somewhat vaguely. If the source has no publication date, and the (required) retrieval date wasn't added at the time, should the first editor who discovers it add today's date? The article doesn't say. Should the date be updated whenever the source is checked? The article doesn't say.

Or am I missing something?

HandsomeFella (talk) 20:51, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Using non-print or electronic media is fraught with problems, especially since so many editors do not identify when they have accessed the data. Whenever a "check" is made on an article and invariably, a review of any links to determine whether there are "dead links" then at least placing a marker as of the date of the check tells other editors that the reference source has been operative on that date. This is a "standard" procedure and should not be considered "false" or "misinformation"; it is merely a reaffirmation that the link is active. Every so often when an article is being revised, it is a common practice to update the non-print media links and that is why you will see the information given in two different ways, when the information was first written or created and when it was active or current. Consider my above comment as a gentle reminder to ask first or check with the appropriate group veterans when a question like this comes up again, otherwise you may incur the wrath of some of the crochety smart-aleks, like myself. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 23:35, 15 October 2010 (UTC).

Like to remove the image again

I would like to remove the image on the Thunderbird page. I didn't say it was repeated, I said it doesn't add anything that isn't already known by looking at the other images. As it stands, the list of images is longer than the body text, and most of them are redundant. Something has to go, and as this one gives the viewer little detail, and is an image of a missile already shown, it appears to be the least useful. Maury Markowitz (talk) 19:14, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Hello, hello? This thing working? *thonk thonk*. Maury Markowitz (talk) 14:50, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for the late response. It looked fine to me at the screen resolution I use, but I looked at it at a highr one, and it does overwhelm the text. I'll try to look at it later and see if I can rearrange it to keep the image, but if not, I'll remove it. - BilCat (talk) 16:38, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Elizabeth Moon article

Hi, BilCat -- thanks for the guidance on my Talk page. tgeller (talk) 19:29, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

General Electric H80

You have tagged General Electric H80 for deletion to make way for a move of another page to there. However, you gave the title of the page to be moved as General Electric H80 too. I have guessed that you meant to have GE Aviation Czech H80 moved, and have acted accordingly. If this was not what you wanted, let me know on my talk page. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:06, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

PA-47 PiperJet Altaire

BilCat, I am the one that was trying to correct the PA-47 PiperJet Altaire page. I appologize for the sloppy updating and the uncited corrections. You can look at the Piper.com news release and I think if it is read you can see that it is just a "design improvement" on the PA-47 and because of the significant change in the design Piper thought it was appropriate for a renaming of the aircraft "The newly named PiperJet Altaire". Piper did not cancel the PiperJet, it is still working on the development of it and this is just a significant design change and is still the same program. I don't think it is appropriate that the PiperJet pages states that it was cancelled.

Piper.com statement of the renaming of the PiperJet:

Joelvds (talk) 13:10, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

I understrand about the wording of the PiperJet being "cancelled". I didn't write that, if I recall correctly, and I definitely change that wording if it's still there. By the way, the reason we went to having a separate page for the PJ Altaire is that the changes are significant enough to warrant separate cverage. The original PJ is beng treated as a proof-of-concept prototype, and we're trying to cover it that way as it has an extensive history of its own. We often do this with variants of main types, but sometimes also do it with prototypes. - BilCat (talk) 15:09, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Regarding your changes to my edit on USS Wasp

 I hope this is the correct place to put in this question, or comment.  If it is not, could you please put this in the proper place? 
 I do not know what you mean by the "text should not argue with itself." Had I written the piece (which I would have a hard time doing), I would have written it differently.  I was only trying to correct an error that has been in print, to my knowledge, since 1967.  I had seen this error on Misplaced Pages, and only wanted to do two things.  One was to "right the wrong," and the second was to make the edit with as little change to the original text as possible.  
  I hope the reason you changed my edit is not because of a lack of credible source, or that you are not sure this source says what I say it does.  I have photocopies of my sources, and would be willing to share them with you, if you need me to prove my accuracy.
  There is at least one other area that needs to be changed, I believe.  This concerns the message from Admiral Nimitz to Admiral Halsey, and the second padding.  The best historians have not written that the communications officer had the anniversary of the charge of the light brigade in mind (or however the actual part reads).  But I am willing to address that another day.  
  My main concern is the accuracy of Misplaced Pages, and whether Vice Admiral McCain changed flagships from Wasp to Lexington, and then returned to Wasp, which he did not do.  
 Regards, Scratchweaver (talk) 20:50, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

I confused a portion of one article with the article on Wasp

BilCat,

  I am sorry, one of my statements in my question regarding your editing of my changes on the USS Wasp (CV-18)article was incorrect.  I got confused, and put together a portion of the Misplaced Pages article on John S. McCain, Sr., with the one on Wasp.  (This concerns my statement about the message from Admiral Nimitz to Admiral Halsey during the Battle of Leyte Gulf. This is not in the article on Wasp.)  Sorry about my mistake.  I do hope to receive an answer from you soon.  
 Regards, Scratchweaver   Scratchweaver (talk) 01:35, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

My edits

Hello BilCat,

First off I'd like to say that I hope that your health issues are coming along in a positive manner. I can relate to how frustrating it can be when your body decides to rebel against you. Secondly I'd like to apologize for what I did not realize was a violation of Wiki policy. After reviewing my mods I did catch several typographical and grammatic errors, but I honestly did not realize that I should have produced a bibliography of my information. Although I have many books that reiterate all of what I entered, I really don't have the time or inclination to document all of that bit by bit (I was ticked off at how much time I spent doing it in the 1st place!!). I will keep that in mind for future mods, should I decide to make any. It's good to know that people are looking out!!! Get well amigo.

Sincerely, ZDanimal —Preceding unsigned comment added by ZDanimal (talk • contribs) 19:01, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Could you refresh my meneroy as to what article this is about? - BilCat (talk) 19:06, 22 October 2010

• Ahem! Try clicking this. =） --Dave 19:36, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

for the "inuse" tag, Bilcat. I will use it henceforth as a politer way of begging for elbow room so I can write.

Georgejdorner (talk) 19:10, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

No problem. I noticed you said some of your edits were "disapearing" from the edit history. Generally that cannot happen unless an admin removes something, and there required to state whay they did it. Most likely what is happening is some form of edit conflict in which your edits aren't being save to the server in the first place. Another user has know way of knowng htat ths is happening. But f you get an :Edit conflict" screen when you try to save your edts, your verson wll be n the second edit box. You can then retreve it manually, and repaste it into the texct, and save it again. I hope that helps. - BilCat (talk) 19:17, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Best wishes

Hope you are back in "the land of the living" soon! - Ahunt (talk) 00:27, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm feeling a little better today. - BilCat (talk) 00:09, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

That is great to hear! Glad you recovered so quickly. It is amazing what a day or two away from Wikistress can accomplish! - Ahunt (talk) 00:18, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Good to see you back at it. :) -fnlayson (talk) 04:13, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Just in time too! See the lastest new poster at WT:AV#An incident I don't think we have. If he continues to interact, it might be fun to watch MMN go at him foll bore! Btw, I still have the same genreal health issues before, but add to it a chronic bronchitis or something similar, which acted up to the point that I I needed the short break this weekend. - BilCat (talk) 04:20, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Well hopefully now you are in a position to take a deep breath! - Ahunt (talk) 12:08, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

If he continues to interact, it might be fun to watch MMN go at him foll bore! - Now, that I'd like to see! Mjroots (talk) 20:25, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

I meant "full bore" btw! A few well-placed words could probably arrange the encounter, provided Jim is still watching, as MMN is quite predictable in what he'll react to. :) - BilCat (talk)

I knew what you meant, but thought it would be rude to make such a blatant correction, which is why I did a c&p with the typo included. Mjroots (talk) 10:21, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

It wasn't necessary in the end. See WP:ANI#MickMacNee. Mjroots (talk) 05:13, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Kamov Ka-50

Re: your edit of 29 September 2010, FWIW, "rebels" in the Russian media are normally referred to as "bandits". So the editor was factually correct in his terminology, although politically incorrect in WP. It's also much more satisfying to read about actions against "bandits" than against "rebels", especially in the original language! Santamoly (talk) 06:09, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

• @Santamoly: Bandits vs Rebels, Great patriotic war vs Eastern front... all these reminds me of old imperial Russia and Soviet styled propaganda machinery. FYI, Misplaced Pages (WP) operates along the guidelines of WP:NPOV, meaning we are politically neutral hence your argument/assumption that WP is politically incorrect is in itself fundamentally flawed. No offence to you but please take note, thank you and best. --Dave 11:15, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Goodbye socker!

• Bill, do you remember the guy who got my rollback rights revoked? Well, I was correct in guessing that he was a sock of a banned user, which has been confirmed by a checkuser yesterday and... I got the rollback rights restored just a while back. Isn't it a great day today? --Dave 06:57, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

• That being said, I will quote Abraham Lincoln: "You can fool some of the people all of the time, you can fool all of the people some of the time but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time."; the time will eventually come for M to leave too. But I reckoned you knew that already, eh? Best. --Dave 07:04, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

If these admins would just listen to us the first time, it would save them a lot of work! :) Btw, do you have a link to the blocked user and his sock? I don't recall who it was, but I want to brush up on his tactics. Finally, it might be good for us to keep a dedicated master list of the blocked/banned users and socks we have "encountered for future reference. - BilCat (talk) 18:59, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

• You've got mail~! --Dave 19:30, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

• M has been blocked indef, told you his time would come eventually, didn't I? --Dave 13:46, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

• Oops, I missed that one because you didn't spell out his full name, Nick-Nack Knee. :) All I can say is this wonderful phrase common in the Appalacian hills (And possibly elsewhere: "Good riddance to bad rubbish!" Of course, he has yet to understand why,m and I doubt he ever will. I look forward to spotting his socks and getting them blocked, as someone of his ilk is unlikely to go away quietly! On the other hand, he's been successful overturning blocks before, so I won't cvelebrate too much. He's propably looking for another admin to service right now! :O - BilCat (talk) 19:32, 30 October 2010 (UTC)- BilCat (talk)

• And another one bites the dust, see Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Doc Quintana. Reminiscent of a scene from the Godfather: "he sleeps with the fishes now", eh? --Dave 17:03, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Ah, noW this edit makes sense! It's part of one of Docquin's POV pushing campaigns that did earn him a short-termblock for edit warring. It's a bit strange that a user would voluntarily "retire", then come back as socks to make controversial edits, but I'm not surprised in his case. Now tha;ts he's earned a one-week block, if he continues to use socks to edit, he can be blocked for a longer term - hopefully an indefinite one! :) - BilCat (talk) 19:18, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Gant/Hrbek issue

Hey BilCat. It was never my intention to attempt to mask my identity, and I reverted thinking that this was a settled issue, forgetting that it was argued on the Hrbek article, rather than the Gant article. I believe there was also some sparring other places long before that as well. As always, in Wikiwars, the battles tend to merge together, and only the outcome remains clear, and that was the case here. My apologies for any confusion my bad memory caused, and I want to be clear that I'm not trying to be hostile in any way. The frustration is mine and I have no right to bite you simply because you weren't involved in discussions 6 and 12 months ago. Hope there isn't any ill will and that we can continue this in gentlemanly fashion. Rapier (talk) 02:02, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

No problem, and I understand. I'm also trying to remain cool here. I think 6 months is long enough to revisit this issue, as consensus does change. I'll be happy to take it up at another location if needed, such as the NPOV noticeboard. - BilCat (talk) 02:20, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Ouch

Well that sounds like no fun at all - get better soon! - Ahunt (talk) 18:53, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! - BilCat (talk) 19:02, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Sikorsky S-97

On 28 October 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sikorsky S-97, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 00:03, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Persistance award

Thought you may be interested Lancer (Helicopter) has just been created! MilborneOne (talk) 13:11, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

AFD then? - BilCat (talk) 14:12, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

I redirected it to Aérospatiale SA 315B Lama. - Ahunt (talk) 17:48, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

OK, thanks. We probably need to check the sources he added, and see if we can use them to add some info on the Lancer to the Lama page. That mught keep him from trying to recreate it again! - BilCat (talk) 18:57, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Just wondering...

...What was remotely constructive about this edit? If you persist in that kind of behaviour, I'll block you. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:20, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

I was testing you, and you failed. Thses were Mick's words, the naughty parts verbatim, as in this diff, yet you didn't warn him. No doubt where you bias lies. - BilCat (talk) 21:27, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Was just in the process of querying your comments at Mick's talk page myself, but HJM got here first. They do seem deliberately provocative, and HJM is quite correct in warning you that you are well on the way to attracting some sacntions of your own. It may be wise if you stayed clear while others try to resolve the situation in a constructive manner. Regards, _wjemather 21:34, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

And thank you proving my point yet agian. I was not being serious - I was repeating Micks comments verbatim, modified for context. HJM, and you, are proving yourself biased towards Mick,. in that neither of you have warned him for his words yet. I'll take the mop of the next admin who steps in here without warning Mick first. - BilCat (talk) 21:38, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

I admit to making a point, but I don't feel I was being disruptive. I'm sorry you don't get the joke, but it is on both of you! - BilCat (talk) 21:45, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Making tests and threats of taking the tools and your input has resulted in nothing but added disruption, congratulations. Off2riorob (talk) 21:47, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

My apoligies all, but please be real. Nothing I've said or done comprares to what Mick has repeatedly done, and is doing. As to "threats, obviously I can't take someone's mop, but I can appeal, and challenge their being an admin, which I fully inted to do. I will not intervene on Mick's page again, so please, don't comment here again - it will only be dusruptive, and further escalate this situation. - BilCat (talk) 21:53, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

My apologies to all, but please be real. Nothing I've said or done compares to what Mick has repeatedly done, and is doing, nad I wasn't even being serious. I will NOT intervene on Mick's page again, so please, don't comment here again - it will only be dusruptive, and further escalate this situation. - BilCat (talk) 21:53, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

October 2010