User talk:Ahunt

Chrome OS discussion

Interesting conversation in Talk. Would appreciate your take. Barte (talk) 08:01, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your note, I'll have a look! - Ahunt (talk) 12:22, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

POV edits by User:71.135.111.131

You might want to consider reverting this edit. Yworo (talk) 04:31, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Y Done - Ahunt (talk) 13:07, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Quick question

Hi, I noticed you were involved in the discussion regarding the relevance of Parabola GNU/Linux. I'm currently working on an article about Cinnarch over at my user space (translating from spanish and adding some info). Do you think it has the notability to warrant an article or shouldn't I even bother? Regards. Gaba p (talk) 03:01, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your note. It all hangs on WP:V, in other words the existence of independent third party references that show notability. Right now your article doesn't have those, just primary refs (from the Cinnarch websites) and one wiki, which doesn't make WP:SPS. I would suggest you find and add refs from third party reviews and such or wait until you can locate some of those before taking it "live" in mainspace. - Ahunt (talk) 10:38, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello, thank you for your quick reply. I have several links from popular tech-related sites commenting on this distro so I guess it should be alright, we'll see. Regards Gaba p (talk) 13:08, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

That is what you need! - Ahunt (talk) 12:47, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

User box for Editor reviewers

Hello, Ahunt. A few weeks ago I came across WP:ER. As you probably know, it is an optional step in helping on the users noticeboard. It looks like a good project to me, and I've made some suggestions for improvements in order to attract more business. (Among other things I added it to the help navtemplate.) One thought I had was to have a "Editor Reviewer" userbox. Here is their ER image File:Wikipedia Editor Review.svg. I'm thinking of a userbox that says "This Wikipedian conducts Editor Reviews." along with the link to ER project page. I would think a category of such volunteers could also be established. This would be different from the "Category:Wikipedians on editor review" (which interestingly refers to Wikipedians in editor review). I thought about working up such a userbox with tl:Template:Userbox. But my technical knowledge in the area is less than zero. Would you help please? Thank you so very much. – S. Rich (talk) 01:20, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Sure, no problem! I can do that! Do you have a picture or logo in mind that could be used in the box? - Ahunt (talk) 12:15, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Same one that the project uses for their banner. . Thanks. – S. Rich (talk) 14:30, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

How does this look?

Code	Result
{{User:Ahunt/EditorReview}}	This Wikipedian conducts Editor Reviews.	Transclusions

Let me know if you want changes! - Ahunt (talk) 00:42, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks so very much! My two-bits: The black background obscures the 'W' and 'ia' of 'Wikipedia' which extend beyond the edges of the jigsaw puzzle piece and I'd personally prefer a brighter background coloring and/or typeface. (My objective is to add some cache to being a Reviewer.) The wording is great in that we keep the proper noun capitalization of Editor Review and it looks like you've got the link built in. For me, I'm going to post it on my userpage. (I assume the appearance will change if you change the color.) You are the artist and technical craftsman for this creation, so you've got the final say. Let me know, and then we can post it somewhere on the appropriate Project pages. – S. Rich (talk) 16:42, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Let me lighten the background colour then and see what you think! It will automatically change on all transluded versions. - Ahunt (talk) 17:51, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Y Done - Ahunt (talk) 20:58, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

I like it. Next step for me is to post it on the Projects. (BTW, how are you at Barnstar creation? Care to create one for ER?) Thanks so very much. – S. Rich (talk) 21:11, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

I did add it to this page: Wikipedia:Userboxes/Wikipedia/Participation, but if it should be somewhere else as well feel free to add it there too! I have never created a barnstar - not sure what approval is needed for that! - Ahunt (talk) 21:13, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

I'll post it on some of the other ER related pages. Re a Barnstar, here's a place to look for more info: WP:WPWPA. Thanks again, ever so much! – S. Rich (talk) 21:08, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

OK, thanks! - Ahunt (talk) 01:03, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Empennage ref - thanks

Thank you very much for this. I was running out of time and furious when I saw I'd broken it and couldn't see the immediate fix. (Old dog, no tricks.) That's great - many thanks. I have another minor edit coming up but I might manage not to mess that one up! Cheers DBaK (talk) 18:12, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your note! Glad that I was able to help out! - Ahunt (talk) 18:31, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

linux libre

I finally got around to answering your questions about linux-libre: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Linux-libre#Initial_Release Jebba (talk) 20:18, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your note and for the refs - I fixed the article! - Ahunt (talk) 20:45, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Barnstar / Security article evaluations

• Hi, I was going to offer you a barnstar for all your good work in computer-related articles, but it seems that you already have every possible barnstar there is in this field ;-)
• I've been improving some security-related articles that get a huge number of pageviews, and a new user GA-nominated one, which I think is overly generous. Much of the Computing and Security-related project space seems to be dead—most of the user names on these projects seem to be inactive users. I don't know if there is any easy way of cleaning out inactive users and encouraging new people to participate, and I'm wondering if you know of anybody who might be interested in going through the more important (most viewed) articles in this space and reviewing/rating them. I should not be reviewing/rating articles that I've substantially improved.  =Best regards  LittleBen (talk) 03:38, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
• The Internet article (which others have been working on recently) is not as popular as the Computer virus article, but I'd think that it would deserve better than a C rating. LittleBen (talk) 12:14, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your note here, it is great to hear from you. I agree that many of these articles seem to have been started and improved by editors who are no longer active these days, leaving the articles to get out of date. Part of the problem was probably some political issues in some of the associated WikiProjects a while back, which drove many users out. Personally I quit one WikiProject over silly behavior there, but kept working on the articles on my own. I think the best course of action is just to adopt an article you are interested in and then work on it. If others get interested and help out that is great, if not then you have go it alone! As far as page ratings go I never get very wound up over those. I don't think the average casual reader ever sees those or cares much about them, they are more to flag articles to project members to work on and if no one is working on them then they really don't mean much. - Ahunt (talk) 13:07, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Asking for your input on a matter

Over at the Wikiproject Aviation/Aviation accident task force page [1]. You were chosen by myself because of your past work or input on aviation crash articles. Thank you for the help....William 11:10, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your note! Let me have a look! - Ahunt (talk) 13:52, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Y Done - Ahunt (talk) 13:58, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your back up on the operator(s) – Cheers FOX 52 (talk) 03:25, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Glad that was helpful - sometimes it takes a bit of back and forth to come up with something that works for everyone! - Ahunt (talk) 11:34, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

User:Vuerqex/userboxes/Caramelldansen

I detest copyright rules. Still, I suppose I understand. -Ferocious Flying Ferrets 15:12, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Yeah they aren't my ideal way of doing things either, but, being US law, we are stuck with them here! - Ahunt (talk) 15:55, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

I believe that all files and information should be free. Why are non-free images not allowed in userboxes? Userboxes are one of the greatest innovations of all time and should not exclude anything. -Ferocious Flying Ferrets 19:37, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree with you that all information should be free, too! The problem is that using copyrighted images in user boxes does not comply with US copyright law (Wikipedia's servers are in Florida, so they have to comply with US laws). Copyrighted images can only be used in accordance with the "Fair Use" provisions of US law and the legal opinion is that using copyrighted images in user boxes doesn't come close to "fair use", making their use in userboxes actually not just against Wiki policy, but illegal. That means if people put copyrighted images in userboxes Wikipedia can be successfully sued by the copyright holder, as can the person who put the image there as well, hence the tight policy on making sure that no copyrighted images get used in userboxes. Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria explains in more detail. As I noted this is not how I would run the planet either, but copyright holders have an undue influence on the laws written to protect them, especially in the US. - Ahunt (talk) 20:28, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Air Hawks (1935 film)

See Air Hostess's follow-up film. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 14:18, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Bill, LOL, okay. - Ahunt (talk) 17:08, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

electoral fraud article edit

that was weird; I just about had my post to you complete and poof the wiki window spontaneously goes to a "?" in the URL and blanks, then tells me my internet connection isn't working (often here anyway), when I reloaded the page all was gone, which isn't usual in chrome.....anyways just to comment that "[hide]" indicates that's partly wiki boilerplate; and the claim of "fictional topics" is part of Tory trolltalk, I know it well from forumspace:

"Articles on fictional topics are likely to be marked as C-Class if they are written from an in-universe perspective."

That and "contains material that is irrelevant" are recognizably part of the talking points I've been hearing for months upon months in news space/forums; dressed up in wiki language; that "[hide]" makes me wonder if it's a bot, and the article page got misaddressed instead of the talkpage by a lazy programmer....otherwise why was this put on the article page at all? There's no CAnadian equivalent of the Wikiscanner list, not that I know of, but it's stuff like this which makes me believe it's needed, especially with what we know from the news and the newsblogs that money and staff have been assigned to get out there on the internet and "correct facts". I've seen edits on Canadian political articles from military bases, here and in the US from military contractors; and some IPs just semi-anonymous in Omaha, so it's not like a Canada-only list is what's needed. Food for thought anyway; all Canadian political articles have been having weird shit from weird IPs this last while; might be time to track/record/investigate some further? there's no such thing as real wikicops I guess? I know CHECKUSER can be used on SPAs; but some very professional edits like this one (despite its obvious flaws) come from IP-only users. Best post this before the page blanks again LOL.Skookum1 (talk) 17:30, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree, it is all odd and bears watching! - Ahunt (talk) 19:19, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Rutan Quickie discussion

Hello,

Rutan quickie includes 2 models : Q1 and Q2... please leave Q1 caracteristics , especialy because this is the "true" Quickie ; Q2 is the derivate... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.137.192.110 (talk) 11:26, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your note here. By WikiProject consensus we only put one set of specs. I don't have a problem if you want to remove the Q2 specs and replace them with Q1 specs, but your Q1 specs were unsourced (the refs were copied from the Q2 specs and were not valid for the Q1). To make a major change like that you should gain consensus on the article talk page first and show the refs you would use. - Ahunt (talk) 12:47, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:DragonFlightBadge.JPG

Thank you for uploading File:DragonFlightBadge.JPG.

This image is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such images would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a screenshot of a computer game or movie. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original image must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.

While the image description page states the source and copyright status of the derivative work, it only names the creator of the original work without specifying the status of their copyright over the work.

Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the original image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other derivative works, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. Thanks again for your cooperation. Kelly ^hi! 16:37, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Sona's charges

Just saw your addition and am reading the CBC ref......it doesn't say that it's the calls that these charges are for.....Sona was the guy who came into the student polling booth area of the SUB at Guelph and tried to carry away a ballot box......that could be what the charge is about, it's like the CBC is saying they're to do with the voter supression calls, which Sona says he had nothing to do with.......should be interesting when he hits the stand, as he's made it clear he's got nothing to hide, but other people do......I know it would never last but List of people thrown under the bus by the Harper Tories would certainly be a fun page. Damn it would be a long list.....Skookum1 (talk) 01:51, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

You make a good point there about what the charges are all for. I guess we will see! I like your red link, too, As soon as you wrote that article there would be calls to split it due to excessive length. - Ahunt (talk) 15:37, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

I can't begin to tell you what fun we had with Erik Bornmann and Mark Marissen and BC Legislature Raids, and Bornmann's article is still empty, really, and it's watched; so's Marissen's and there's an article for his brother Mike Marissen; two other red-flag redlinks I'm keeping a twenty-yard pole from, though they're very necessary, are Dave Basi and Patrick Kinsella. Too much stress/warfare and silly games; Sona himself I don't think will be a problem; as this case unfolds and he says more I'd think it's those who have more to hide/suppress are the ones who are going to be trouble; Bearcat's right, IP posts are a nuisance; but any of these, especially any new one like Sona's, whoever writes it, needs at least a semi-protect or like the Bornmann article it's going to get ugly......Skookum1 (talk) 16:19, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Oh sorry, just got your joke right now about people complaining such a page would be too long; my previous ramble was thinking maybe I'd redlinked Michael Sona and I know I linked RackNine. All the stuff about US teleconferencing companies and call centres isn't directly related to the title but it's not like it's not connected....somehow; but this is not a tribunal I guess huh? But is avoidance of pertinent facts not POV?Skookum1 (talk) 16:38, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

It is editors like you that make working on Wikipedia such lively fun! - Ahunt (talk) 00:33, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Czerwinski-Shenstone UTG-1 Loudon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Spar (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) 14:06, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Y Done - Ahunt (talk) 14:48, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Cessna 172TD Skylane (Diesel)

Hi. Thanks for the welcome. Regarding the Cessna_172TD Skylane, which I labeled as outdated, I found these for sale here, with 8 results from two different sites. Would you mind having a look, perhaps these are fake ads? Mikaelwikman (talk) 16:05, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi thanks for your note. These are all model years from 1975-82 and so far predate even the incomplete prototype work on the 172TD, which wasn't started until 2007. From looking at the ads themselves they seem to be Centurion engine conversions using the STC as described in the Cessna 172 article text and not real "TD" models. As noted the TD was never certified and none were never sold, but you can take an older 172 and put the Centurion engine in it to produce something similar to what the TD would have been. As it is currently written the article text seems to cover all this and is as up to date as refs currently allow. As is typical, Cessna announced when it was starting development, but never indicated what happened, whether the project was suspended, is progressing slowly or just canceled. - Ahunt (talk) 16:38, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Empire State Aerosciences Museum

There's more oddball stuff at commons:Aircraft at Empire State Aerosciences Museum, with one light aircraft that I can't yet confirm, and some features similar to a Thorp T11: File:Empire State Aerosciences Museum - Glenville, New York (8158378032).jpg, but doesn't seem to match any of the 37 aircraft listed in Ogden 2007 museums book - PeterWD (talk) 13:58, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your note here! That is a very interesting light plane! Not sure what it is! I did have a look through the original Flicker page to see if I could find a registration "N-number" for it to look up, but no luck! - Ahunt (talk) 14:10, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Help for Google Chrome OS version history

Hi could I have some help to have a colour to show that it is an old beta please. It is for Google Chrome OS version history Skybliei (talk) 15:05, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your note - let me see what I can do there! - Ahunt (talk) 15:07, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

ok thanks Skybliei (talk) 15:11, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

The formatting you have there is complex, this may take me a bit of research to figure out! - Ahunt (talk) 15:12, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

ok Skybliei (talk) 15:13, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

and old dev colour please thanks Skybliei (talk) 15:17, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

thanks for finding and old beta colour Skybliei (talk) 15:43, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

could you find and old dev colour please Skybliei (talk) 15:46, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘OK, let me see what I can do there. - Ahunt (talk) 15:50, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

ok thanks Skybliei (talk) 15:53, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

thanks for finding an old dev colour Skybliei (talk) 15:58, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Do we still need colours for "Obsolete" and "Discontinued"? - Ahunt (talk) 15:59, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

I am not sure do you think we need colours for them Skybliei (talk) 16:03, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

I think those are all covered by "Old Beta" etc. Let me just remove them. - Ahunt (talk) 16:07, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

THANKS (again)

Thanks for cleaning up after me on the Taylorcraft F-19 Sportsman page. You're the best. --Spray787 (talk) 16:50, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

No problem, collaboration works! (Appropriately enough the photo you used for the article was one I took! It is nice to see it used there!) - Ahunt (talk) 16:53, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Question for Google Chrome OS version history

Should I add back ==== to Google Chrome OS version history slit is easer to edit each version Skybliei (talk) 20:04, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

I don't see a title level is needed there, but see how it looks and works! - Ahunt (talk) 00:58, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	There are times when I'm lousy with words, so I'll just keep it short/simple. Thanks! Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 03:15, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

• Thank you - glad my intervention was helpful! - Ahunt (talk) 01:35, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

"page ownership" and page camping

WP benefits from a wide variety of editors, including certain well-advised deletionists, but it is inappropriate to simply delete information from a page, and then subsequently use that deletion to justify further deletion. A middle school student may be assigned to do a research paper on "utility helicopters" and then may benefit from the list of utility helicopters. Because you yourself are an expert on utility helicopters and can list them off in your head without the WP list, doesn't mean you should delete the list of utility helicopters. -WikiSkeptic (talk) 02:27, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

First off please read WP:AGF before accusing people of things. Second watching pages, improving articles, removing unsourced text and requiring references to be cited for additions is called "editing". If you want to start a list of utility helicopters then it should be located at List of utility helicopters. If you would like to discuss how the Utility helicopter article should look then the place for that is Talk: Utility helicopter. - Ahunt (talk) 10:46, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

3O would be appreciated at Help:Searching

I'm trying to improve Help:Searching, but another user who has added an excess of disorganized geek detail (written in not-so-good English) seems to think that he owns the page. I told him that he can "own" the geek detail, but I want to fix the overview summary (intro.) at the top of the page. I'd appreciate 3rd opinions. LittleBen (talk) 18:08, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the invitation, but I usually avoid WP help pages. - Ahunt (talk) 21:53, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

"(Links are not used in quotes)"

as an explanation for undoing the link added to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=DuckDuckGo&diff=554654892&oldid=554606721 means that there is a rule against clarifying links inside quotations? To avoid making similar errors, where may one read that particular rule and others like it? Thank you for your time and patience with a beginner. 68.111.156.113 (talk) 16:29, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

This is found at WP:LINKSTYLE, which says "Items within quotations should not generally be linked; instead, consider placing the relevant links in the surrounding text or in the "See also" section of the article." Hope that helps. - Ahunt (talk) 18:00, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that is very helpful. Would the same link be acceptable if placed in the immediately adjacent editorial insertion? It is within the quotation marks, but, obviously not the quoted words of the speaker. Your patience with this trivial question certainly illustrates the cooperative attitude of longtime wikipedians. 68.111.156.113 (talk) 03:10, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Well we are all here to build an encyclopedia!! The ideal thing is to work the wikilink into nearby text outside the quote. The main intention is to not distort the meaning of the quote. - Ahunt (talk) 10:43, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

I gave it a try here, see if that works for you! - Ahunt (talk) 10:47, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Userbox template

Hi! Please take a look at my user page, the userbox template is not inside my userpage border, how can I put it inside the border?? --Zayeem ^(talk) 10:02, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your note here! It looks okay to me when viewed in the Epiphany browser. I do note that the userboxes overlap the User:Kmzayeem/Header - is that the concern? I can fix that if it is! - Ahunt (talk) 10:48, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, thats the concern, it was fine until I inserted the Userboxtop and Userboxbottom, I wanted to have the userbox group on the right side as it is in other userpages. If the problem is with the header, please fix it, otherwise you might also want to edit User:Kmzayeem/Userboxtop. --Zayeem ^(talk) 12:40, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Let me see what I can do! - Ahunt (talk) 12:45, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Its not fixed yet! :( I want to have the userboxes inside the userpage design, for example in this revision, the userboxes are inside the userpage design but on the left side, I want it on the right side and within the design. --Zayeem ^(talk) 14:39, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

That seems it be a tough one! The two templates don't seem to play will with each other! The best bet may be to look around at other people's pages until you find something that works and then copy the code! Personally I keep it simple on my user page, just one row of boxes and then plain text, which formats well at all screen widths! - Ahunt (talk) 13:30, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I too felt that the two templates don't adjust with each other. Anyway, Thanks a lot for your assistance. :) --Zayeem ^(talk) 14:21, 14 May 2013 (UTC)