User talk:BilCat

Unified login: BilCat is the unique login of this user for all public Wikimedia projects.

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.

Barnstar

		Wikiwings
		I award you these Wikiwings with Anti-vandalism barnstar device! The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar For thousands of hours, reverts, rollbacks, and cleanups on aisle 12, your thankless efforts are no longer unrecognized. We're just sorry that we only had enough money in the budget for this. --Born2flie (talk) 05:09, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks much! I know how much time I spend on the task, but I wonder if anyone has ever figured out how much of a load vandalism and its removal puts on the WIki-servers? Perhaps this is a way to force the Big Jimbo to finally rethink his "non-negotiable" stance on open editing. - BilCat (talk) 02:22, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

V

A review from the magazine Slate noted that journalists and bloggers have seen V as an anti-Obama allegory.[14] In response, executive producer Scott Peters maintained, "We are not looking to put any sort of agenda onto the table."

I thought that this was a very fair edit, considering your declared biases. Kudos.

Thanks. That's what neutrality is articles is supposed to mean. Sometimes it takes some wrangling to achieve, but that is one of the benifits of coopertive editing. - BilCat (talk) 04:14, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Not that it did any good! Other than the words in the script, the Visitors are still very much like those in the originals with Fascist tendencies. Perhaps those trying to contrive a controversy need to analyze why a fascist regime reminds them so much of Obama! ANyway, all this is based on one episode, whose script was written some time ago. The other scripts were still written eariler this year, and we have yet to see how thay play out. A police state is being set up in the story, and the parallels to the Bush Administration's anti-terrorism policies ware wide open. Will these same critics protest if such parallels can be drawn? Somehow, I greatly doubt it! Of couse, if the show depicts schoolchildren singing "Anna, Anna, Anna! Hmmm, hmmm, hmmm!" then I'll admit the show is clearly going after Obama! - BilCat (talk) 19:42, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Anyway, I'm done there. It's sad when people don't even recognize there own biases, but are so intent at pointing oout the biases of others. For persoanl rasons, I don't have the time or energy to fight with page owners today. - BilCat (talk) 20:14, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Yea, the head is not good at damaging walls. Hope you feel better soon, Bill. -Fnlayson (talk) 01:50, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! - BilCat (talk) 02:06, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Silhouettes

Evening BilCat. A little while ago you left me a note on silhouettes, suggesting they should not be thumbs, but sized at 300px. 300px is fine, but how to do this with a caption? I could use thumb with a forced 300px, or (I think) frame with 300px. Is there a preference or alternative? Certainly Image:xxxx.jpg|right|300px|Caption does not produce the caption. A caption is often vital with the silhouette in the specs section, for the latter may specify a Foo Mk.XX, whereas the silhouette is a Mk. XVI. Any thoughts?TSRL (talk) 17:47, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Break

Hope you are feeling better soon! - Ahunt (talk) 22:51, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Adam. I'm feeling a little better. However, I'm fed up with WP - too much like herding cats! - BilCat (talk) 19:22, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

I can understand that sentiment! - Ahunt (talk) 23:01, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Nice to see you are back, even in a limited capacity! - Ahunt (talk) 13:57, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. Let me know if you need help with something. -Fnlayson (talk) 17:39, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks much! I'm feeling better, and the wiki-withdrawals were too high! I hd to delete my watchlist to enforce my break, but I lost my backup list. Would y'all mind sending me your raw watchlists (plain text)? Feel free to edit out anything you don't want me to see, but it would help me get caught back up on most of the WP:AIR pages I watch. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 18:29, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

OK, here are most of my watchlist (hidden text):

Delete this when done, I guess. -Fnlayson (talk) 19:13, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! - BilCat (talk) 19:14, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

I imagine you have a good watchlist built up by now. Let me know if you need help with articles or such. -Fnlayson (talk) 18:03, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm back over 6000 now, with about 2000 left to recover from my contributions list. Alss, I've just about cleaned out all your rock band articles from my list! ;) Thanks to both of you for the head-start. - BilCat (talk) 18:09, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

A330

I agree with the sentiment of not changing between versions of English in Airbus A330. Not sure whether this was a british/international thing I went to the BBC website and searched for an airline story. They use singular for an article about Emirates Airline - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7175527.stm. I'll leave up to you but think the BBC is a pretty good guide as to what's normal in british english.

removal of sourced addition to Sleeping while on duty

Why is it that you think that the recent addition to Sleeping while on duty should be removed? Please discuss it thoroughly before removing. Hellno2 (talk) 23:26, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

It's just WP:TRIVIA - I'm sure the meetings are recorded anyway, in case he missed an important discussion. See Talk:Sleeping while on duty#Trivia. - BilCat (talk) 23:59, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

A380 origins

Not discussing this here, per my above notes. My edits are in line with the Template:Infobox Aircraft Type guidelines. See WP:MOSFLAG for the general guidelines against flags. If you have specific issues withthe infobox itself, then take them up on the template's talk page. For specifics on using it on the A380 page, it's talk page would be best. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 03:28, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Sikorsky S-52

Bill, judging by the shape Sikorsky S-52 is in now, you may want to switch User:BilCat/Sandbox/Sikorsky S-52 to something else or delete. Just a thought. Take care. -Fnlayson (talk) 15:38, 24 November 2009 (U

F-22 Raptor image

Why can't I change the lead image on that article to a ACTUAL image? -Brainiack16

Cause you are making a mess, and because it is an actual image. - BilCat (talk) 02:34, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Point made

You have made your point, but you would have done better to have brought it up on my talk page. -- allen四names 03:09, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

It would not have been printable! - BilCat (talk) 03:14, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Infobox title lines

Noticed your recent changes on infobox title - Interestingly I have always assumed that model numbers meant anything that didnt have a name like Douglas DC-3 would be shown as Douglas DC-3 and not DC-3, but the Bloggs F-22 Foofighter would just be Foofighter. Obvious more that one meaning to model numbers! No big deal but if it is not clear perhaps we need to get a new consensus. Also need to add the bit about more users for current types being based on fleet size not national pride, refer Douglas DC-10 edits today! MilborneOne (talk) 23:02, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

The previous discussions should make clear what was meant by "model number". The notes should be clarified to make it clear. I'm fine with new duscussions on the issue, as I'll raise allowing the manufactuer'sname in almost all cases. - BilCat (talk) 23:06, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

I dont see why it cant be the same as the article title but sometimes the article title is a common name and a fuller designation could exist. I dont have a problem with manufacturers name in the infobox title. Its time to log off this side of the atlantic now so I might raise it at wp:aircaft if you havent done so when I come back on tomorrow. MilborneOne (talk) 23:32, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Electric Boat

Hello BilCat, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Electric Boat - a page you tagged - because: There's a (minimal) discussion on the talk page about moving to GD electric boat. This request can't be uncontroversial therefore. Gain consensus for the move first. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. GedUK  19:03, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

I figured that, but wanted to try anyway. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 19:06, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

INS Viraat

Bill, just looking at Indian Navy and as allways pretty suspicious of any images from India/Pakistan being copy vios. Not an expert on ships but this looks like a copyvio File:Vizagstrategic.jpg, it is I believe INS Viraat but I cant find the original. Looks like an official Indian or US Navy shot. If you come across it then please let me know. Thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 19:50, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

OK, thanks. If it's a USN photo, it's most likely PD, but that has to be proven, of course. - BilCat (talk) 19:52, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

F-16 Fighting Falcon

Thanks for tweaking the wording. Long words with specific meanings are great, as long as the meaning is actually appropriate. SeanWillard (talk) 04:12, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Bristol Fairchild Bolingbroke edits

The Bolingbroke Mk IV did mount a different turret with twin Browning machine guns in some of the production run, so the edits have to be somewhat adjusted. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 19:33, 9 December 2009 (UTC).

Editing the USAF Thunderbirds page

BilCat,

I appreciate your diligence and willingness to make WP the most accurate source of information possible. At first I was irritated that the time I took to edit the USAF Thunderbirds page was completely wasted when you removed it. However, after doing a bit of research on Wikipedia itself, and checking out your avilable information, I can appreciate why you made the changes you did. However, I think the information I added to the page regarding the roster and schedule were valuable details that readers will find useful. I was hoping we could meet in the middle. I am open to suggestions about placement, external links, or other possibilities. I hope your health problems are on the mend and that I hear from you soon.

TBirdpaTbirdpa (talk) 22:10, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

MQ-9 Reaper

I provided source material (Wing Commander article) and as an MQ-9 operator I have first-hand knowledge of the subject. Such first-hand references trump secondary sources (i.e. the "aviation media"). It doesn't get much stronger than that and, in my humble opinion, a "consensus" isn't required.

I did post in the discussion for the MQ-9 page, but I'd really appreciate if you'd stop undoing my changes. I'm adding to the subject, not taking anything away from it.

I posted my 3 cents' worth on the talk page: essentially, they're synonyms. Basically, the USAF is pushing the status quo ante - attempting to return to the term it rejected as old-fashioned - because it's actually a more accurate term. However, the USAF successfully got the whole world to accept UAV. Whether it will have similar success with restoring general usage of RPV - or predominantly fails, as with UAS - remains to be seen. Anyhow, I have posted a suggestion for discussion. Askari Mark (Talk) 04:59, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Mark, and good point on the edit-warring - I'm too stubborn sometimes! Anyway, I sort of get the impression the return to RPV might be politically motivated - see MQ-9 Reaper#Controversy for complaints by a UN weenie about "so-called predator" (his words) killings. Just a hunch, but since the Obamunists took over, the military is doing some strange things! - BilCat (talk) 05:05, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

I have not seen the USAF use the RPV terminology, but have not been looking either. I bet it is related to putting more attention on the controllers, to help with recruiting. They have been training some non-rated pilots to be controllers for the last year or two to help fill spots. Sorry, I checked the MQ-9 talk page after posting that, btw. -Fnlayson (talk) 06:02, 12 December 2009 (UTC)