User talk:Ahunt

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Orphaned non-free image File:NavCanadaLogo.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:NavCanadaLogo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 20:58, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I had been expecting your note. The logo has been replaced by a newer one so this file can safely be deleted. - Ahunt (talk) 21:00, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

systemd in Ubuntu[edit]

You reverted my edit

As of December 2014 (possibly earlier), the daily builds have switched to the systemd init system instead of upstart.

With the reason

unsourced and inaccurate, systemd was used in 14.10

However, I do believe systemd was NOT enabled by default in 14.10. For example, [1] says systemd was a feature of the experimental "Ubuntu Desktop Next", which can only mean it was not enabled in non-experimental 14.10. As for sourcing, the source is in the text itself - just go try out the daily builds, as I did (in a virtual machine). As for the "unsourced", we do not require a footnote for everything, when the claim is obviously checkable by downloading freely available open source software. As an analogy, we don't require an explicit source footnote for every non-controversial statement in a Wikipedia book article summary either, since the source is obviously the book itself, which you can go read. Thue (talk) 21:02, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

I am running Lubuntu 14.10 and it has systemd, (apt-cache policy systemd systemd: Installed: 208-8ubuntu8.1 Candidate: 208-8ubuntu8.1) so yes to make a claim like this you would need a very clear ref cited. - Ahunt (talk) 21:09, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Installed by default, or did you install it manually? (Also I just noted that you made that claim without a reference, but from from installing the software yourself :P ) Thue (talk) 21:31, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Nope, it is installed by default. Here is the Launchpad ref that shows that systemd has been installed in Ubuntu since 14.04 LTS. - Ahunt (talk) 21:46, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Ok, I am pretty sure that 14.04 LTS did not use systemd as init system by default, so I think you are misreading something here. The fact that a systemd package exists in the repository is not the same as being used as the default init system. See for example here [2], [3]. Also, I think I have also been tricked :), and the 15.04 daily build does in fact not boot systemd even though some systemd components are installed; for example, journalctl has empty logs, which I don't think would be the case if systemd was really the init system. Thue (talk) 23:43, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
I think all we can tell from apt-cache policy systemd and from Launchpad is that it was installed starting with 14.04 LTS, but not what it has been used for. Is it being implemented in stages? Who knows? - Ahunt (talk) 23:50, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
This is fun, a check of LXTask shows that while Lubuntu 14.10 has 8 running upstart process, it also has two systemd process running continuously, so systemd is implemented and doing something. - Ahunt (talk) 15:35, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

A good 2015 to you and yours![edit]

Hope its happy and productive! Cheers mate Irondome (talk) 15:21, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. I am working on my first new article of 2015 as we speak! - Ahunt (talk) 15:30, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Happy New Year![edit]

Fuochi d'artificio.gif

Dear Ahunt,
HAPPY NEW YEAR Hoping 2015 will be a great year for you! Thank you for your contributions!
From a fellow editor,
--FWiW Bzuk (talk)

This message promotes WikiLove. Originally created by Nahnah4 (see "invisible note").

Hi Bill, thank you. I hope you have a great year on Wikipedia here, too! - Ahunt (talk) 03:01, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

The Editor's Trophy[edit]

Trophy.png The Editor's Trophy
You have made so much edits, Ahunt. Wosky87 (talk) 16:13, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. - Ahunt (talk) 16:15, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Cross-country skiing trail[edit]

HI Ahunt, Your thoughts on this edit, as discussed at Talk:Cross-country skiing trail#German controversy on trail fees would be welcome. Sincerely, User:HopsonRoad 13:00, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your note, I will have a look. - Ahunt (talk) 21:25, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 6[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Foxcon Aviation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vacuum molding. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Fixed - Ahunt (talk) 19:23, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Finsterwalder Comment[edit]

Thank you for adding the hat note on Finsterwalder. I appreciate you doing this...it's helping me learn by my mistakes!sinarau (talk) 22:43, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

No problem, glad that was helpful! - Ahunt (talk) 15:26, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Mailing lists...[edit]

Hey! I saw your like. You might also be interested to know that I'm about 13 of the way through writing a new userscript that may interest you. User:Technical 13/Scripts/UpdateMailingList.js collects a list of users who have edited a page, collect a list of users currently listed on the page in the {{Mailing list member}} template, check the contributions and logs of each user in the list, and return an updated list. This will make it easy to see when the user was last active or if they are blocked and will update the template accordingly.  :) Happy editing! — {{U|Technical 13}} (etc) 15:10, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your note here. I saw that, it looks useful! - Ahunt (talk) 15:11, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Direct Fly sro[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Direct Fly sro requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. — kikichugirl speak up! 21:14, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 14[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ekolot, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Korczyna (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Fixed - Ahunt (talk) 12:42, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

A discussion on the Linux distribution talk page[edit]

Hello! There's a somewhat lengthy content-related discussion in Talk:Linux distribution § Information on GNU/Linux that would really need input from more editors. It's about an ongoing disagreement on how should a Linux distribution be described, required level of coverage by references, and partially about the way article's lead section should reflect the article content. If you could provide any input there, I'd really appreciate it! — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 02:08, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Sure, let me have a detailed look! - Ahunt (talk) 03:24, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you very much! — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 03:28, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done - Ahunt (talk) 19:28, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you! Going through the whole lengthy discussion, and especially through the recent article history, was a quite time-consuming endeavor. :) Appreciate it! — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 06:33, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Glad that was helpful. The fact that I was at home sick for the day yesterday made it possible. - Ahunt (talk) 12:43, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Hope you're feeling better today. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 12:51, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Yes, thank you. It seems to have been just a 24-hour bug. - Ahunt (talk) 12:53, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Good to hear, such "bugs" aren't that bad. :) — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 12:56, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Thankfully this one wasn't! We have H3N2 flu going around, so I am glad this wasn't that! - Ahunt (talk) 13:00, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Those flu "mutants" are scary things, to say at least. Ugh. Glad to hear you haven't caught it. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 13:29, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Strojnik S-2[edit]

Thank you for your comment and caution.

I believe that I have exercised appropriate care with the information I've inserted into the article, as I do with all my edits and new content.

It is an interesting fine line, however, when, a) the information is important, b) I am connected to it, and c) I'm THE expert. In this case, as the pilot for the speed record flight, I am the only source of information in the world about many aspects of the flight. I'm one of two people in the world who flew the airplane--the other being Professor Strojnik--and the only one still alive!

How does one go about preserving such information for posterity (the purpose of Wikipedia) in the most direct manner possible, at a reasonable cost to one's self in terms of time and effort invested?

Having said all that, if you still believe there is some bias in my edit that is a reflection of my connection to the subject, I will gladly receive your advice!

JohnDWashington (talk) 13:37, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your note here. I just wanted you to be aware of some of the cautions involved in writing about yourself, hence the note on your talk page. The web page you cited, which looks like you wrote it and is therefore WP:SPS and not really acceptable as a ref and is missing a few keys facts about the record flight, like the pilot's name, which is why I removed those sections from the article. Ultimately Wikipedia's policy says that if information hasn't been noted in independent third party references then the information isn't notable enough to be included in the encyclopedia. Essentially we need some reliable third party sources.- Ahunt (talk) 14:21, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

By longstanding consensus the term "GNU/Linux" is considered POV and not used not used on Wikipedia[edit]

There are 1140 articles using that term, this is not a credible assertion. ~~ Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk) 21:33, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

By longstanding consensus operating systems that use the Linux kernel are called "Linux" on Wikipedia, as per WP:COMMONNAME. "GNU/Linux" is considered a minority POV term used by the FSF and its supporters. On Wikipedia the term is only used to describe distros when the distro itself is called "GNU/Linux" and then only when referring to the distro itself. If you want to change this consensus then the way to go about is not by trying to insert the term GNU/Linux into articles on distributions. You should read Talk:Linux including all the archives of that page, to get the history of the problem as well as Talk:Linux/Name as this is where past consensuses have been formed. You will also want to read GNU/Linux naming controversy and its talk page as background as well. When you have the history of the consensus read then you can present your case at Talk:Linux to try to convince the other editors that all references "Linux" other than to the kernel itself in Wikipedia should be changed to "GNU/Linux". Be advised that this has been brought up dozens of times there, including recently and has always been soundly and conclusively opposed. - Ahunt (talk) 01:07, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Also, please see MOS:LINUX, which belongs to the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Computing that lists "guidelines for creating and editing articles on computers, software, networking, the Internet and information technology". — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 11:48, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Manjaro Linux ‎ (Writing "HACKED!" means nothing to readers.)[edit]

Writing "HACKED!" is an attempt to be concise in the infobox. The explanation is evident in the footnoted links, you did not refer to them before undoing my first edit. "This site may harm your computer" is a higher level of warning. "ref provides an opinion only, no evidence" These are determined by the googlebot system, the most relied upon opinion on the internet. ~~ Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk) 21:48, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

In fact I did read both your refs and, as I said, it provides no evidence or even an explanation boiler plate text, just . If pages were replaced or altered then it should be trivial for Google to show the diffs as a reason. Writing "Hacked!" in the infobox will be meaningless for most readers, is totaly unclear as to what it is referring to and therefore is not helpful in an encyclopedia. Regardless whether Google thinks the website might have been hacked, I don't believe that possible website issues are notable enough for inclusion in an encyclopedia article, see WP:NOTNEWS. - Ahunt (talk) 01:14, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Bearhawk LSA Prototype N289EH.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Bearhawk LSA Prototype N289EH.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:28, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

This image has been replaced by a freely-licenced image and so can be safely deleted. - Ahunt (talk) 01:15, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Cessna 310[edit]

Ahunt, what a strange thing. I won't quibble, but it's odd to me that project guidelines recommend standard phrasing without any regard for verification--or whether it's even true or not. There is no need for a cn tag? The way I read those guidelines they apply to every single aircraft (despite the "specific aircraft types" in the lead), even if only one was ever built. Odd. Drmies (talk) 15:46, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

It is a consensus standard wording, but is applied with some discretion and experience by the WikiProject Aircraft editors. In the case of most light aircraft built in large numbers, like the Cessna 172 or Piper PA-28 it is really analogous to a WP:BLUESKY sort of statement. For one-off aircraft, homebuilts, microlights, gliders and other types some desecration is used as it wouldn't apply. This measure was put in place a few years ago, primary to stop spamming, as we had people adding links to their small aviation companies operating fleets of light aircraft as a form of advertising. - Ahunt (talk) 14:21, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Netkiosk-CS Deletion[edit]

Trophy.png Netkiosk-CS Deletion
Not sure where to type a message for you as like with some many sites Wikipedia is also not that easy to use.

Not sure why you removed the Entire information about Netkiosk-CS as it is all factual. You have other businesses showing that also require citation. That is why I added the citation part to allow a reputable source to add a reference.

I know it is often easier to press delete then to properly verify, do some reading and checking and then edit it.

I am open to all help and assistance in making sure listing are accurate and relevant. Simply deleting a listing is not helpful to anyone.

You have this one for example

CoolNovo, called ChromePlus prior to January 2012, is a Chromium-based browser for Windows and Linux. It adds features such as mouse gestures, link dragging and IE tabs.[127] (Last version: 29 August 2013 with core version 27.0.1453.110[128]). Jtmkiosksystems (talk) 16:05, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

As you are a very experience Wikipedia Editor your help and assistance would be appreciated to make sure jtmkiosksystems and Netkiosk are listed appropriately. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jtmkiosksystems (talkcontribs)

  • Ahunt, I took the liberty of blocking this editor for their user name and their obvious intent; thanks for reverting them in the first place. Drmies (talk) 19:11, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your action on that. - Ahunt (talk) 14:17, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

And thank you...[edit]

... for your acknowledgement of my little editing milestone. Cheers YSSYguy (talk) 11:46, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

No problem, congratulations! You do lots of good work here! - Ahunt (talk) 14:08, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Happy kids' memories playing at the Manston plane graveyard[edit]

First moved to Margate in 71. I was about ten. Me and a kid called Luigi used to make Airfix kits and play on the planes in the graveyard before they were burned. I "flew" almost every front line and transport plane in the RAF inventory from the 50s and 60s. Once a complete Vulcan bomber was there. I stood on Luigi's shoulders but we still couldnt reach the underbelly hatch. We were about 11. One summer day we were "flying" when a big RAF sergeant cop turned up. He gave us a stern but not unfriendly lecture, using highly technical terms, about little boys getting their legs and arms removed by still active "control surfaces" because the "hydraulics" were still functioning. (Had to go home and look the latter up) We never went back. Then moved to Ramsgate which was even nearer, that was 74. Was sad to see the big black plumes of smoke. They would rise what seemed like miles. Sorry to clutter up your T/P, just brought it all back. Cheers mate! Irondome (talk) 18:17, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Hey those are great stories! I saw you enter your name on project list. Normally when people do that I drop them this template note I have, but you have been around the project so long and have contributed so much already that I thought that note wouldn't be appropriate in your case, so I just settled for a "like" instead just to acknowledge your official sign up. - Ahunt (talk) 18:27, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
I really appreciate that A. See you around! :) Irondome (talk) 18:35, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Face-smile.svg - Ahunt (talk) 18:41, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Re: Request[edit]

Not a problem. I sometimes get worse. While I'm here a question. Do you know much about the HWOS system? We got ours a couple of months ago and will be fully operational by 19 February. One thing is that instead of entering cloud opacity we are now entering cloud amount and that is waht will be seen on the METAR. Other than the manuals that come with it I can't find anything that state this. I want to update the METAR but another source would be good. Also I need to find out if this is a particular Canadian thing (the cloud amounts) or worldwide. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 10:23, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

I am sure at some point he will earn a block for incivility and editing against consensus.
Those are good questions. Back in the SA days we had "cloud amount", but with the switch to METAR format that changed to "cloud opacity" as mandated by WMO and ICAO, although the Canadian weather service was never 100% happy with that. As a pilot I work from the AIM as to what to expect. The current version says "All cloud layers are reported based on the summation of the layer amounts as observed from the surface up, reported as a height above the station elevation in increments of 100 ft to a height of 10 000 ft, and thereafter in increments of 1000 ft." So it looks like it has been changed and that is what pilots should be expecting. I am not sure when they changed that. ICAO makes money off their publications and tends to not make them available for free on-line, so it isn't easy to check and see what the world standard really is. The SARP for this is Annex 3 — Meteorological Service for International Air Navigation and they sell it for $165. Doc 8896 — Manual of Aeronautical Meteorological Practice also has guidance on this and they sell it for $173. As you may know any nation can deviate from ICAO SARPS just by filing a difference, although in the past we have tried to avoid that. - Ahunt (talk) 12:41, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. That should be useful. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 17:27, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Face-smile.svg - Ahunt (talk) 16:28, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

February 2015[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ultralight aviation may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • 1 November 2004), [http://www.jaa.nl/publications/jars/500969.pdf JAR 1], retrieved 7 February 2015]</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:54, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Fixed - Ahunt (talk) 12:56, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Trying of learning the english, be more patient please[edit]

I trying to learn the english by doing the good faith of edit on wikipedia, me is not doing any promotion of edit, nor of the vandelism of the article of editing. I just learn of new language and of hard to learning it. Me studying abroad, so the learn of english be very important of me. Thank you.Johnfromchina2015 (talk) 20:19, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your note here. That is good that you are studying English, but Wikipedia:Competence is required does apply. - Ahunt (talk) 20:58, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Talk page headers[edit]

Please see usage notes:

"This template should only be placed where it's needed. Don't visit talk pages just to add this template, and don't place it on the talk pages of new articles. Talk pages that are frequently misused, that attract frequent or perpetual debate, articles often subject to controversy, and highly-visible or popular topics may be appropriate for this template."

Thers is nothing controversial about this article.--Grahame (talk) 23:45, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. On the WikiProject Aircraft project we routinely put it on talk pages just for guidance. - Ahunt (talk) 03:49, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Inclusion of "Satanism" as an example of theism.[edit]

In an edit I made to the "Theism" article, I removed Satanism as an example. This edit was quickly undone. The inclusion of Satanism as an example of theism is at best extraneous and at worst misleading and detrimental to the dissemination of knowledge. Levayan Satanism is fundamentally atheistic and subgroups of Satanism also adhere to atheistic ideas. Satanism as a belief should not be confused with Devil worshipping and is only nominally "Satanic". This is not a biased view and is easily verifiable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deveretts (talkcontribs) 22:34, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your note here. This is best discussed at Talk:Theism. - Ahunt (talk) 22:48, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Password[edit]

Dear Ahunt, I am very sorry for that. But I was really intrigued by Special:PasswordReset. Even though I am logged in, the page is allowing me to request a reset of any user's password, and I was also confused with the wording there: Fill in one of the fields to receive a temporary password via email. I stupidly thought that I could get the password of any user on my email. Your username happened to be the first one I thought of. Again, sorry. SD0001 (talk) 04:20, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Oh, okay. No what it does is send me a new password via email and let me know that you initiated it. Otherwise it would make it trivial for you to hack anyone's account. - Ahunt (talk) 13:44, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Image removed[edit]

Regarding this edit of yours, can I ask why there are userboxes with coca cola's logo on them? Thanks.--Nadirali نادرالی (talk) 02:46, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

If you check the licensing on the images you will see that the Coke logos are text-only and therefore and not subject to copyright. The image you tried to use is more than text, is subject to copyright and is only allowed under US copyright law to be used in situations of "fair use", which doesn't cover userboxes. - Ahunt (talk) 13:02, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Ameri-Cana Ultralights aircraft[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svgTemplate:Ameri-Cana Ultralights aircraft has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. The Banner talk 13:40, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Pilatus PC-24[edit]

The Engine Testrun was yesterday afternoon.. so give the medias some time until the print it . A "citation needed" tag for a few days would be aceptable. How ever now I have add a referenc (unfortunatly only in german) "Neue Nidwaldner Zeitung" FFA P-16 (talk) 17:41, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for finding the refs. Normally articles don't report minor things like first engine run or first taxi tests as WP:TRIVIA, but just report first flight dates, so I suspect once it has flown this will get removed. - Ahunt (talk) 13:42, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Ah, I see several other editors have already removed this as trivia. - Ahunt (talk) 13:44, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes, my Idea was to put in the engine testrun until the first flight of the PC-24. It would have given a hint how far the project is. Well as others think differend about this, its already removed. Anyway the first flight will be next month (I don't knew the exact day yet). And so we soon can put in the first flight. Bye FFA P-16 (talk) 16:22, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 20[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited UL-Jih, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Composites (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Fixed - Ahunt (talk) 13:40, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

PZL Krosno KR-03 Puchatek[edit]

Hi. As for [4] the problem is, that this is obvious in Polish and there are no sources. There had been no word "Puchatek" in Polish, until Irena Tuwim named so Winnie the Pooh in her translation of the book (it came from adjective "puchaty" = fluffy). The only reference I could give is to Polish version of the book itself. Pibwl ←« 14:43, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

That would be fine as a ref! - Ahunt (talk) 16:01, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Schweizer 2-27[edit]

Schweizer created several design studies of new sailplanes in the mid-1950s. These included:[2][4]

Schweizer 2-27 does not constitute content!! merely a mention!--Petebutt (talk) 00:35, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Sorry that is all we have to link that to due to a lack of refs. I have the ref Schweizer, Paul A: Wings Like Eagles, The Story of Soaring in the United States. Smithsonian Institution Press, 1988 which is the complete company history and there is almost no mention of the design at all. That note in Schweizer SGS 1-29 is all we have to refer readers to until a ref can be found and even a short real article is written, but it is still better than a mainspace encyclopedia page that says "Redirected to an article with no content about the 2-27". - Ahunt (talk) 00:40, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Userbox[edit]

Recently you removed {{User:Andrei Marzan/userbox/archiveicon}} and {{User:Andrei Marzan/userbox/minibox icon}} from Wikipedia:Userboxes/Wikipedia/Miscellaneous on the grounds that it is not a userbox, however, i oppose that decision, so I am here to discuss it. My reason to include it is that in WP:UBX#Creating a new userbox, it is listed as a type of userbox also known as an mini box, so i would appreciate it if you would change your mind and let me include it. If we cannot resolve it, I will ask for a third opinion. Thanks - Yutah Andrei Marzan Ogawa123|UPage|☺★ (talk) 12:19, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

I don't really care that much about this issue as we re not talking about a mainspace article here, so go ahead and put it back in and see if anyone else removes it. - Ahunt (talk) 14:12, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

[edit]

You recently removed the Blender logo from my userbox because you said that it didn't qualify as "fair use" under US copyright law. However, Ton Roosendaal, Chairman of the Blender Foundation, said that the logo can be used by anyone as long as it's used to point to the product, which means that it has no usage restriction (at least in my userbox).

Having said this, I think the Blender logo should be used in the userbox. FerJox (talk) 19:04, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Unfortunately it is not up to me, they have released their log under an "all rights reserved" licence, which precludes using it in userboxes. If they want it used more freely then they have to licence it more freely. - Ahunt (talk) 01:38, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
Where does it say they released it under an "all rights reserved" licence? FerJox (talk) 02:25, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
Right on the image page File:Blender.svg under licencing. - Ahunt (talk) 02:30, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
It seems like the uploader of the image uploaded it in a GNU Free Documentation License, but someone (not sure who) changed it to an "all rights reserved" one. Was it a mistake or intentional? Is there anything I'm missing? FerJox (talk) 17:53, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
I tracked it down here. It seems that the logo is "all rights reserved" and cannot be used in a userbox. This is not an uncommon situation where free software has an all rights reserved logo to protect branding. Firefox's logo is in the same situation. I would suggest you use letters or a free image or something similar, as the logo cannot be used. - Ahunt (talk) 14:44, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
If Firefox's logo is in the same situation, why is it used in userboxes? Anyway, I already changed the userbox. Thanks a lot for answering :) FerJox (talk) 22:40, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Eclipse Aerospace Logo.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Eclipse Aerospace Logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:33, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Fixed - Ahunt (talk) 01:45, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Accessibility Toolkit[edit]

Hello there, I want to notify you that I have replied to your comment at User_talk:Isacdaavid#Accessibility_Toolkit --isacdaavid 05:16, 4 March 2015 (UTC).