User talk:LanceBarber: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 20:35, 26 April 2010

This is a Wikipedia user talk page.
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:LanceBarber.

"Experienced Editor, awarded for being a registered editor for at least 1.5 years and making at least 6,000 edits" — This editor is an
**Experienced Editor**
and is entitled to display this
**Service Badge**.

Greetings

Welcome to Wikipedia, Lance! -- your favorite ex-Commie missing-in-action RF-84 person. - Emt147 ^Burninate! 03:30, 6 March 2007 (UTC) Welcome![reply]

Hello, LanceBarber, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia... How to edit a page... Help pages... Tutorial... How to write a great article... Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!

There's an official wikipedia welcome..Thanks for your comment. Yeah, I feel the same way about physics.. especially if you go to grad school, there a are a lot of exciting things you can do in the field. Danski14 13:41, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Intro

This is my Usertalk area and expect your input to be friendly and helpful, as I will be to you. I will keep this page clean, any reverting, changes or edits on this page will constitute vandalism and will be reported formally to Wikipedia. One user with his perceived "seniority" level reverted my hour's worth of learning and testing here on MY page. My purpose is to provide Wikipedia, it's editors, and the internet public with my experiences, my expertise, and research; while learning and growing; and NOT to have my time wasted by vandals.

Feel free to add to my "Greetings" or other sections for new suggestions on improving my Wiki techniques. Add new sections on specific Wiki-articles, infoboxes or templates or for multi-discussion topics. Thank you.

  Please sign all your suggestions or conversations with your Username.

vn-3

This user talk page has been vandalized 3 times.

... zero tolerance. Admins will be notified immmediately.

... My article updates have been vandalized, 21 times, and been logged.

Helpful articles on using images, from 'bot' when PD is left out

For more information on using images, see the following pages:)... Wikipedia:Userpage. For user-spaces definitions and archiving space.

Wikipedia:Image use policy... Wikipedia:Image copyright tags... Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 05:04, 24 March 2007 (UTC

Welcome to the Military history WikiProject!

Hi, and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.

A few features that you might find helpful:

Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
The announcement and open task box is updated very frequently. You can watchlist it if you're interested; or, you can add it directly to your user page by including {{WPMILHIST Announcements}} there.
Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, detailed article and content review, and project-wide collaboration.
We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, periods, and conflicts.
We've developed a variety of guidelines for article structure and content, template use, categorization, and other issues that you may find useful.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask one of the project coordinators, or any experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Kirill Lokshin 19:48, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandal reporting

Report vandals to [[WP:AIV] (that is short for administrators intervention against vandalism). Good luck! -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 22:58, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Compound vandalism on NORAD:Revision as of 19:35, 3 May 2007 (edit) (undo) 154.5.0.135 (Talk)

22:20, 3 May 2007 LanceBarber (Talk | contribs) (15,565 bytes) (Undid revision 128069917 by 66.189.155.104 (talk) vandalism) **I reverted the second, and edited out the original verbage, and reported this to Admin:User talk:Chrislk02 ...... LanceBarber 23:38, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

(diff) (hist) . . Titan (rocket family)‎; 04:44 . . (-40) . . LanceBarber (Talk | contribs) (Undid revision 128102022 by 208.117.46.130 (talk)-4th vandalism
diff) (hist) . . m Spacecraft‎; 15:24 . . (-44) . . Stephenb (Talk | contribs) (Reverted 2 edits by 70.90.97.198 identified as vandalism to last revision by Mystytopia. using TWINKLE)
(diff) (hist) . . m Project Apollo‎; 22:50 . . (-12) . . Skizzik (Talk | contribs) (Undid revision 128761499 by 24.118.188.135 (talk))
(cur) (last) 21:15, 7 May 2007 LanceBarber (Talk | contribs) (20,315 bytes) (Undid revision 129042204 by 68.80.103.157 (talk)removed 1st of 2 vandalims, logging IP)
(cur) (last) 21:12, 7 May 2007 LanceBarber (Talk | contribs) (20,352 bytes) (Undid revision 129042382 by 68.80.103.157 (talk) remove 2nd of 2 vandalims in reverse order)
(cur) (last) 20:35, 7 May 2007 68.80.103.157 (Talk) (20,385 bytes) (→Spacecraft subsystems)
(cur) (last) 20:34, 7 May 2007 68.80.103.157 (Talk) (20,352 bytes) (→Spacecraft subsystems)
(diff) (hist) . . Project Apollo‎; 04:14 . . (+133) . . 76.173.139.32 (Talk) (→Background)
(diff) (hist) . . North American Aerospace Defense Command‎; 00:49 . . (+24) . . 68.191.10.108 (Talk)
(diff) (hist) . . Project Apollo‎; 14:08 . . (+3) . . 65.37.50.161 (Talk) (→Spacecraft)
diff) (hist) . . March Air Reserve Base‎; 04:38 . . (-61) . . LanceBarber (Talk | contribs) (Undid revision 131462504 by 66.171.237.109 (talk)revert vandalism)
(diff) (hist) . . Apollo 11‎; 04:11 . . (-38,020) . . 24.86.90.163 (Talk) (←Replaced page with 'nbdrf h')
(cur) (last) 03:23, 19 June 2007 69.235.81.159 (Talk) (26,286 bytes)
(diff) (hist) . . Apollo program‎; 14:45 . . (+82) . . 216.83.123.175 (Talk) (→Background)
User talk:212.85.13.113 on Titan (rocket family) 2 vans —The preceding unsigned comment was added by LanceBarber (talk • contribs) 17:40, August 20, 2007 (UTC).
69.159.178.147 multiplevandalism edit on a/c articles
cur) (last) 05:11, 13 September 2007 76.178.151.150 (Talk) (9,815 bytes) (undo) B-52 units

Input needed for the article on Boeing B-29 Superfortress Survivors

There is currently an problem with edits at Boeing B-29 Superfortress Survivors. A discussion has been started at Wiki Project Aircraft's talk page. Your input, as a contributor to either an old or new version of the article would be much appreciated on the projects talk page. Thanks! -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 16:13, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome to enhance the sections if you feel information was lost. However, I do believe the table version is the most intutive to the casual reader. As I have stated, wikipedia is not supposed to be a repository of all information for niche groups. No list should have to have a "how to use the list" section as the top. I belive putting in table format fixes that issue and may make it of some interest to the casual reader. If you feel that information was lost though you are more than welcome to add it in! Thanks for your feedback. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 12:49, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great B-1 picture!

Wow, that's a great image and it really improves the article. Nice stuff. Maury 03:04, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thank you, one of rare times when one has a camera for the perfect lighting. LanceBarber 04:48, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

B-1 wingweb.co.uk page images

Hey, you removed this page B-1 Lancer page on wingweb.co.uk from B-1 Lancer saying there were "errors in 7 photos on this webpage". I'm just wondering what the errors with the images are. I'm not seeing anything obvious. Thanks. -Fnlayson 13:35, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The pics were labeled as B-1B, incorrect, the photos were of the B-1A. I notified the webmaster of the incorrect captions. The photos were taken at the Wings Over the Rockies Air and Space Museum of the A model. I work and volunteer at this Museum. I also added a "welcome" and note to the editor(IP address) who added the link. I will be more than happy to take a series of walk around photos of the A model and label them according for our B-1 Lancer article. I recently added the nose-shot. LanceBarber 13:50, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! That was simpler than I expected. ;) I think the last B-1A originally had a B-1B type blunt tail randome, but they switched it with an A style pointed one after it was sent to a museum. If you can take some detailed pictures to add to what's in the B-1 article, that'd be great. I'm not sure what to add though. Take it easy. -Fnlayson 15:19, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jeff, The UK site fixed the captions, and I have added the link back into the B-1 article, with some extra cleanup. Have a great 4th! LanceBarber 17:11, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was interested to see the Denver pix were actually of a B-1A, I didn't realize that when I took them, and I will revise my own website accordingly. I might point out that the UK website lifted those pictures (and its article) from my Air Vectors website, which is OK, but then credited them as their own, which is not. BTW, if you check my photo pages on www.vectorsite.net I got some really good pix of a B-1B at the Cheyenne ANG airshow in 2006. MrG 4.225.213.110 16:02, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Boeing E-767

Lance, regarding the cat change on the Boeing E-767, I sincerely dout that was vandalism. At mt request, User:Yasobara translated the Japanese E-767 page for us, providing most of the content currently in the this article. Most likely, he just got mixed up between the E-767 and 737 AEW&C, which is the Wedgetail. - BillCJ 07:11, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. Thank you for the explaination. It looked strange at first, as I was cleaning up all the boeing cat. nomenclatures. Thanks. LanceBarber 07:15, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Military history WikiProject coordinator selection

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by August 14! Kirill 03:35, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

copyvio

Hello. Concerning your contribution, American Aviation Historical Society, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material without the permission of the author. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.aahs-online.org/about.htm. As a copyright violation, American Aviation Historical Society appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. American Aviation Historical Society has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:American Aviation Historical Society and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:American Aviation Historical Society with a link to where we can find that note.
If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:American Aviation Historical Society.

However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. --W.marsh 17:04, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators from a pool of fourteen candidates to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by August 28! Kirill 17:38, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: SineBot

Hi there. I noticed you posted a problem on SineBot's talk page instead of mine. With regard to your problem, according to Wikipedia:Signatures, all posts to user talk pages, article talk pages, and other discussion pages should be signed. However, if you would rather the bot not sign posts to your talk page (or simply not sign your posts all together), you can opt out of signing by following the directions on the bot's user page. If you have any further problems, please feel free to contact me using my talk page. Cheers. =) --slakr 03:23, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Colorado template

Thank you so much for your kind words, Lance! I didn't create the template, but all the same ;) Please feel free to do whatever you feel should be done to the template that would improve it! — † Webdinger ^{BLAH | SZ} 03:06, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Orignal Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		Presented to LanceBarber (talk · contribs) for an impressive body of contributions to aerospace-related articles on Wikipedia, and for your generous willingness to lend us your expertise in these areas, I award you this Original Barnstar. You, sir, are long overdue. ➪HiDrNick! 03:52, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Asams10 and B-52B section

That being said (I reviewed your contributions before looking at your question), I am surprised to say that I have to agree with Asams10 (talk · contribs) on this one, and here's why: I'm really a big fan of "less is more" when it comes to pictures. Unless a section is really pretty long, it can't hold more than two pictures without breaking up the paragraphs and making everything hard to read, particularly on bigger screens. In the cold war section on that article, there are already two pictures. The map of the flight path is really interesting and adds a bit to the section; I wouldn't want to replace that. I do see your point that the side-by-side comparison is helpful, but maybe it should be made in the section about the different models of the airplane, rather than in the section on the Cold War.

I want to be clear that I don't advocate Asams10's editing style. He is an edit warrior for sure; I, however, and you and most other editors prefer to take editing disputes to the talk page, and I hope you'll keep doing that and not get into a revert war. You were also right to seek a third opinion, which usually helps to put these things into perspective. I'm hardly the arbiter of what's best for the article here, and you might want to put a note in the article's talk page about the photo and see if you and some other editors can work it in somewhere. It's a nice picture for sure, and a nice piece for your museum. I used to work at the Omniplex Science Museum in Oklahoma City, which has a large air and space museum, so I know where you're coming from.

Anyway, I hope this helps. I'll look at the article some more and see if I can't find a better place for the picture. I'm not really too familiar with the material though, so I don't want to go mucking up the article. Cheers, ➪HiDrNick! 04:03, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re: JL-Bot

Responded on bot's talk page. -- JLaTondre 04:04, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: User talk:67.84.116.10

From User talk:Gurch:

User talk:67.84.116.10 has vandalized Apollo 11 3 times is sequence, please block indefinitely. Thank you. LanceBarber 20:14, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Four things wrong with your request. Gurch is not an administrator, so cannot block users. Gurch has not edited for over two months. We don't block IP addresses indefinitely. We don't block users for vandalism without warning them first. – 86.140.177.115 11:37, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for the barn star! My contributions pale in comparison to yours, though! nf utvol 16:01, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ACM, replying to your message on my talk page

My goodness, what did you do? I redirected ACM to Association for Computing Machinery and fixed the improper "for other uses" banner at that top of that article because I thought that your intention was to have ACM redirected to Association for Computing Machinery. What you actually did, in putting "for other uses" banners at the tops of all those articles, has no precedent in guidelines and is not useful in the slightest. The purpose of "redirects here" and "other uses" banners is to assist in disambiguation, but since no user will ever arrive at any of those other articles by searching on "ACM", all those banners you put up are specious. I hope you won't leave it to me to go and revert them. This issue is wholly independent of whether or not "ACM" should redirect to "Association for Computing Machinery", a debate I have no strong feelings for one way or another, although I do believe that the Association for Computing Machinery was probably the first and best known ACM and the one with the most members, giving it at least some priority for the acronym. Robert K S 21:07, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, but you seem to be missing the point. Whether or not ACM redirects to ACM (disambiguation)--and I don't have a problem with that--all of the other ACM-like articles should not say "For other uses, see ACM (disambiguation)." Do you understand why? Robert K S 08:31, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No template should be used. This is a case of the improper user of hatnotes. Robert K S 09:03, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand the need for wanting to be link-rich and giving users the privilege of exploring the encyclopedia and learning. But, unfortunately, doing so in arbitrary ways (such as with hatnotes) becomes unweildy and unmaintainable. Best just to write good articles with lots of wikilinks, and reserve hatnoting to its important function of disambiguation. Thanks for understanding and cheers, Robert K S 10:05, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

B-52

As per a suggestion in the articles peer review I removed the section headers and replaced them with ; B-52H : <span id="B-52H"></span>The...... not to fix the TOC, but because it is fast becoming the standard for aircraft articles. This linking will still work on the other articles. Try it out -->B-52 Stratofortress#B-52H. If you have any specific examples of where this no longer works I'd be glad to check them over.
I have no personal experience in classic aircraft, but that is not a requirement for editing, in fact Wikipedia:No original research frown on this sort of thing.
"I think I have something to contribute to Wiki but you revesrting my work makes me suspicious of your intent." Two things to take a look at, Wikipedia:Ownership of articles:"If you don't want your material to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by others, do not submit it." and Wikipedia:Assume good faith:"Unless there is strong evidence to the contrary, assume that people who work on the project are trying to help it, not hurt it." And, yes, I understand that this applies to me as well.
As a Wikipedia Administrator I have to be familiar with these policies and guidelines and have to operate within them. Lets try to work together here. My next intention for the B-52 article is to expand the lead section as per this guide and overall improve the article to these standards.

- Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 02:23, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of F-100 Units of USAF

Thanks for the Military Barnstar - it was surprising to see it, but I thank you. Yes, my username is from the satellite system I used to work on. I've added a bunch of units to the F-100s, not squadrons though (will get on that later - apparently the USAF likes their personnel to work *most* of the day... ;-) Projects I'd like to start relatively soon:

List of F-105 Users (too late - started and filled in ANG/AFRES users)
List of USAF A-7 users
List of USAF F-15 users
List of USAF F-4 users

I've also got some pictures of the F-100 Thunderbird the USAF museum has on display. I'll upload them to Commons and add them to the "Photo Gallery" on the F-100 user page. TDRSS 16:08, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:BellH13PuebloMuseum.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:BellH13PuebloMuseum.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:05, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Added PD-self. fixed. LanceBarber 09:30, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article review

F-4 Phantom II has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Snowman (talk) 11:20, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

F-86 white space eliminated

Copyedit from my page:"Bill, Why did u revert my tweak of the pics to eliminate the white space?? YOU like all the white space?? I tried 4 or 5 different combos with left/center/right and different px sizes. My fix was the simpliest and most logical. Lance.... LanceBarber (talk) 19:44, 9 December 2007 (UTC)" Hi Lance, thanks for writing, I fuly agree with the changes you put in but they don't work on some monitors and browsers, specifically the Mozilla Firefox. My edit is a bit cruder but it allowed the large operators list to be rewritten into two columns but that meant that the "operators map" had to be relocated. Your change actually "balloons" the image on Firefox to a huge picture. FWIW Bzuk (talk) 19:49, 9 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I'm with Bill. My PC's outdated-but-servicable browser is Firefox precursor Mozilla v.1.7.1 and my chosen screen size is 1024x768. That map's position and its 600px size bumped into and split up the list of specs on my screen. The Dec. 9 20:04 version works nicely for me.

Decreasing white space is a noble concept but is nearly impossible to achieve when the readers are using a wide assortment of operating systems, screen sizes and browser applications. The best one can do is shoot for the median... which is what, exactly? Current internet screen resolutions: 1024x768 54%, 1280 and up 26%, 800x600 14%. Current internet browsers: Firefox 36%, IE6 35%, IE7 21%. Current internet operating systems: WinXP 74%, Win2xxx 6.8% and falling, Vista 5% and climbing, Mac 4%, Linux 3.3%. All of these numbers depend on whose data is being examined. I got this lot from www.w3schools.com who compile and publish their access logs. At any rate, it appears that one can't really win the white space fight as there's no settled viewing standard. Binksternet (talk) 20:39, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid that it's a case of everyone is right. The advantage of incorporating columns to condense "white" space probably is not possible whenever there are "overlapping" images that are crowding the same spaces. At the same time, one positive is that I have had a more in-depth look at the F-86 article and it certainly does require some revisions for {WP:Weight} as well as a rewrite for readability. FWIW, columns are possible in many instances and have been adopted for over a year in aviation articles, most notably in citation records as the {reflist|2} format. Bzuk (talk) 20:47, 9 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Bink, I also use the 1024x768 but with Explorer 7, not sure why we don't see the same thing. Maybe Firefox is differential. I left another message for Bill under his talk, with an idea for a joint project to expand the operators section with more data, with a single column list and pic along the right side. THis should be okay with all browsers. I hope... Thanks, Lance.... LanceBarber (talk) 20:45, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I concur that the single column can still be a good solution. I see it as an opportunity to display right-hand side images. Binksternet (talk) 20:53, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MIMIC at AFMC

Hi again. I guess you missed my question. Would appreciate a clarification. Thanks. CeeGee (talk) 21:04, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to you, LanceBarber. Happy wikiediting. CeeGee (talk) 08:18, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:F104C914usafMus.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:F104C914usafMus.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 20:15, 27 December 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. 哦，是吗？(O-person) 20:15, 27 December 2007 (GMT)

FixedLanceBarber (talk) 18:16, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gratitude

Dear Lance,

Thank you so much for the Barnstar. This is the first award I've received that did not involve being shot at! --Buaidh (talk) 20:43, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter — Issue XXII (December 2007)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter
Issue XXII (December 2007)

Project news

The Intelligence task force has been created.
The contest department has completed its ninth month of competition. The top scorer this month is Blnguyen, with 22 points, followed by Dreamafter, with 8 points, and Redmarkviolinist, with 6 points. Blnguyen also remains the overall leader, with 162 points in total. All project members are encouraged to submit the articles they're working on as entries.
Help with converting deprecated infoboxes is needed; any assistance is welcome!
{{WPMILHIST}} now supports an explicit tag (class=DAB) for marking disambiguation pages.

Articles of note

New featured articles:

New A-Class articles:

Current proposals and discussions

A discussion about minimizing terminological ambiguity has begun.

Awards and honors

Blnguyen has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his efforts in improving the quality of articles related to Vietnamese military history, including the creation of numerous A-Class articles.
Woodym555 has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his outstanding work on topics related to the Victoria Cross, notably including the creation of featured articles, featured lists, and a featured topic.
For their outstanding efforts as part of Tag & Assess 2007, Bedford, TomStar81, and Parsival74 have been awarded the gold, silver, and bronze Wikis, respectively.

Tag & Assess 2007

Tag & Assess 2007 is now officially over, with slightly under 68,000 articles processed. The top twenty scores are as follows:

1. Bedford — 7,600

2. TomStar81 — 5,500

3. Parsival74 — 5,200

4. FayssalF — 3,500

5. Roger Davies — 3,000

6. Ouro — 2600

7. Kateshortforbob — 2250

8. Cromdog — 2,200

9. BrokenSphere — 2000

9. Jacksinterweb — 2,000

9. Maralia — 2,000

12. MBK004 — 1,340

13. JKBrooks85 — 1,250

14. Sniperz11 — 1100

15. Burzmali — 1000

15. Cplakidas — 1000

15. Gimme danger — 1000

15. Raoulduke471000

15. TicketMan — 1000

15. Welsh — 1000

15. Blnguyen — 1000

Although the drive is officially closed, existing participants can continue tagging until January 31 if they wish, with the extra tags counting towards their tally for barnstar purposes.

We'd like to see what lessons can be learned from this drive, so we've set up a feedback workshop. Comments and feedback from participants and non-participants alike are very welcome and appreciated.

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

Note: This newsletter was automatically delivered. Regards from the automated, Anibot (talk) 23:44, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Line spacing

Hi there lance, I have removed the line spacing that you added to the individual Invincible class carriers. This is because it goes against the WP:MOS to do so. If you need a line break, use <br>. Any questions can be left on my talk page. Warm regards. Woody (talk) 13:16, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reeve Aleutian

I've copied your comments to the talk page, and made a start on what was suggested. All of the place names have links somewhere in the article. Is a redlink to Boreas Corporation needed? Mjroots (talk) 09:08, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redlinks aren't necessarily a bad thing, look what happened to Alaska Coastal Airlines! I'll add a redlink, but I'm not writing the article! At least there is a start point. Mjroots (talk) 18:19, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS - Thanks for barnstar! Mjroots (talk) 18:24, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Al Hussein missile article

Hi, I rewrote and formated most of the Al Hussein article. Some months ago, you labeled the talk page with a "rewrite needed" tag. Could you please reasses the page?. Thank you. DagosNavy 11:12, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Job well done. Upgraded to B-class.LanceBarber (talk) 18:07, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

THANKS A LOT, Lance!!!. I have no words for the Barnstar...here in Argentina is summer right now, so I will get a pint of chilled dark beer ;)...Thank you again!DagosNavy 00:00, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Estes Park, St. Mary's and Hidden Valley

Hi, Lance. I see that you have added a link to the description of the long-dead Hidden Valley ski area to the St. Mary's, Colorado page, and a link there from Estes Park, Colorado entitled "Hidden Valley". While I know that these were all well-meant edits, they are incorrect. I'm quite familiar with all of these areas; in fact, my wife and both of her sisters were ski instructors at Hidden Valley in the late 70s and early 80s. Hidden Valley is nowhere near St. Mary's - it's on Trail Ridge Road near Estes Park. The defunct ski area at St. Mary's was called St. Mary's Glacier. It's also featured on the website that has the writeup on Hidden Valley, but they are very different places. Happy Editing! Merenta (talk) 15:39, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Balham station

Since when have we needed permission from the local protection racket to make edits? --Mr Thant (talk) 20:06, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since when do people get to choose to ignore proper merge procedures? Nick Cooper (talk) 09:31, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Balham sta

I didn't notice your request to Slambo. Anyway, i have done a separate request at WP:RFP. Simply south (talk) 03:34, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately this was actioned after User:Mr Thant remerged the pages, effectively "hiding" the relevent discussions on Talk:Balham tube station and Talk:Balham railway station. This is all becoming a bit of a joke. Nick Cooper (talk) 09:37, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted the original pages and added merge tags. The protection expires on Wednesday. Simply south (talk) 10:45, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was out of town for the weekend so I didn't see the request until just now (Monday morning). I see that the proposed destination page is currently protected, so it appears that the immediate problem is being handled. I'm reviewing the discussions that have occurred so far. Slambo (Speak) 11:53, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Balham again

OK, so now we've got a complete mess, with photos of the tube station on the Balham railway station article, and vice-versa. This is utterly ridiculous, and adds fuel to the idea of having a single article to put both in context. --RFBailey (talk) 07:00, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shuttle missions

Hi Lance! I noticed that you have changed several articles and re-written the official name of missions from their mission name, to "STS-xxx Shuttle-ISS mission". While I can understand why you may have added this, please note that per the manual of style, the bold item in the opening sentence is the name of the article (which in the case of mission articles, would be the official NASA name of the mission). There is a standard used for Wikipedia articles on shuttle missions, under the WikiProject spaceflight, and the official name of any shuttle mission is simply its designation, the term "Shuttle-ISS mission" is not used by anyone, (as you can see if you'll check any of the references - missions are never referred to in this manner by sources). Per the project: "Space Missions should begin with the bolded name of the mission, followed by a simple description of the mission."

Also so you're familiar with it, in every mission article, the project standardizes the opening sentence to clearly state if the mission is an ISS mission or not, so the very first sentence will say "is a Space Shuttle mission to the International Space Station", which, for a reader unfamiliar with the subject, is more helpful than to immediately use the acronym "ISS", which not every reader will understand. Please, please do not take this as criticism, as you've made many excellent and helpful additions to a huge variety of pages, but the lead sentence for shuttle missions is something that was decided on by a number of project members, and standardization is used for mission articles. I have corrected most of them, but if you notice any I may have missed and would fix them, that would be great! Thank you so much, Ariel♥Gold 18:49, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lance! Thanks so much for your reply. Yes, I too noticed that some of the older articles (that haven't been reviewed by project folks) were done rather haphazardly, without the proper leads. I also understand the reasons that an aircraft's name is bolded along with its "common name", so I had no doubts that you were working towards standardization. However, a few things are different when it comes to shuttle missions, first, NASA does not call them "STS-XXX Shuttle-ISS Mission", they call them by their official designation, (simply the STS-###) as does Wikipedia when naming the articles. Second, especially with the ISS missions, the information is given immediately in the opening sentence ("was a space shuttle mission to the International Space Station"), which lets the reader know right away what the mission's purpose/objective was, so to say "shuttle mission" in bold, and then repeating the same information in the sentence, is not really necessary. Understandably, the Mir missions were done differently, and actually this was because there used to be a template used that standardized the opening of all shuttle missions, but it was deleted in TFD many months ago, so the administrator who updated the files linking to that template, not being part of the WikiProject, did not know that the template provided a measure of standardization, and simply filled in what they thought was appropriate. For many of these, When going through them all, I went ahead and added to the lead sentence the main objective of the mission, to make it clear in the lead what the purpose was, which improves them for a general reader. I really personally appreciate all the time you went to, especially with the talk page work! I have done that as I've come across them, but did not ever take the time to work through each mission one by one, and your work there was simply excellent! Keep up the excellent flight article work! Ariel♥Gold 20:39, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Florida Historical Society

Greetings. Why are the following external links at Florida Historical Society? Thanks. FieldMarine (talk) 05:34, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sun-N-Fun Museum: Florida Aviation Historical Society Index
- Florida Aviation Hall of Fame: Inductees for 2005
- Florida Aviation Hall of Fame: Inductees for 2006

Thanks for your prompt response...Nice overall work on aviation history. FieldMarine (talk) 05:52, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Invite

{{Invite User University of Florida}}Jccort(talk) 17:25, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Douglas A-26 survivors

Thanks, LanceBarber. I need to download more help files, replying to you is about as hostile a process as I could imagine. I've already had encouragement and offers of help from MilborneOne. Last night I made a big mess of all the refs, but luckily did a preview and trial and error put it back to a reasonable state. I'm on pay-per-minute dialup, and no income, so unwilling to spend much time online. PeterWD (talk) 00:42, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_surviving_A-26_Invader_airframes"

Talk text above was posted in error to A-26 survivors talk page, so moved it here. PeterWD (talk) 19:18, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A-26 survivors page. I have used the form from Citation Templates for cite book rather than cite journal, just tried id= and other variations but none of them cause the ISBN number to display on the final page. PeterWD (talk) 21:02, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for renaming A-26 Survivors, and notes about citations, that I'll revisit soon (I tend to splash and dash with this dialup connection). Meanwhile, perhaps somebody

should look at the Citation Templates page, that says |isbn=123456 is a valid format. PeterWD (talk) 19:00, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've got big problems with re-doing specifications in the On Mark Marksman page. Existing specifications and citations templates used are different to those in A-26 Invader and the Specifications template page, and mixing templates doesn't work. I'll try to use one form of each, but which are the preferred ? PeterWD (talk) 11:00, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do not know which is preferred. See your Talk page under "Spec" subsection for details. Lance...LanceBarber (talk) 05:18, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:KB29sRefueling.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:KB29sRefueling.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 15:24, 6 March 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MECU≈talk 15:24, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Wings" museum challenge

The Wings over the Rockies Museum article is under challenge by another editor for copyright violation. Hopefully, you can help resolve the issue. DonFB (talk) 16:20, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IF you own that website, just as a formality, can you confirm by creating a page or somehow adding text that shows us you are the creator and owner of the page? Not that I dont trust you, just for formality purposes. IF you can, can you give me the link? Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 04:02, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

an you also mail the link to permissions-en@wikimedia.org with your statement that you are releasing the content for use? Please make it out to my attention if possible. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 04:06, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You dont even need to edit the page, just send the email to the address above from the email address listed as pagemaster on the page cited. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 04:25, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aol web page updated and email sent to above address. LanceBarber (talk) 05:06, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Ill update the page now.Chris lk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 05:09, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Page has been updated. Thanks again! IF there is anything else I can do for you, please let me know. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 05:14, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lowry Air Force Base

Thank you for your kind comments - I try :) Bwmoll3 (talk) 17:09, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:MHcabin.jpg

Hi~! I call to your attention with regards to this image, which is deemed as a posed shot for a Malaysia Airlines commercial ad more than that of a self-work. Question is, how am I going to put that into the image page and mark it for speedy deletion. Thanks and cheers. --User talk:Dave1185

Manitou Cliff Dwellings article

I notice that you created the article Manitou Cliff Dwellings Museum. However, I notice that there is another article, Manitou Cliff Dwellings. Shouldn't the two be merged, and a redirect page set up? Thanks. Plazak (talk) 14:29, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, should be merged. Comments MCD Talk page.LanceBarber (talk) 19:09, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, good work on questioning "notable" people. I've been doing a bit of that myself. I suspect that there is a lot of abuse of these lists, either for self-promotion, or people listing their friends or cats. Plazak (talk) 21:27, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Colorado

A meeting sounds good to me. Probably the best thing to do would be to just set a time and place, and see who can show up. Plazak (talk) 13:26, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gracias

Thank you for that barnstar and service badge! You have a very impressive "editing résumé" yourself. Take care. -- Luke4545 (talk) 21:04, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Technology Barnstar

		The Technology Barnstar
		Presented to LanceBarber (talk · contribs) for significant and tireless contributions to articles pertaining to technology, transportation and applied sciences. Keep up the great work! -- Luke4545 (talk) 22:40, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming of 13th Space Warning Squadron

I've had a bunch of pages changed by *someone* to match Wikipedia naming standards - apparently like-minded countries use similiar unit titles. While the 13 SWS probably doesn't qualify under that, I was trying to make things standardized... since my day job in the AF involves standardization, its a hard habit to break! TDRSS (talk) 16:10, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Smile!

Dave1185 (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Image copyright problem with File:H-21CWingsMsueum.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:H-21CWingsMsueum.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 02:04, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ground track images

Hey Lance! Could you please go put the source information on the pages for the three images you uploaded? They need to have the URL of the NASA page you got them from to show that they are indeed, NASA images, so they are not deleted.

Thanks! Ariel♥Gold 15:32, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hee hee, no biggie, I just didn't want them tagged! Ariel♥Gold 15:42, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Landing background section

Hey Lance, I'm going to be working on getting that article to good article status, and perhaps even featured status, and since all of the information in that list you added is already given in the infobox with refs, I'm going to go ahead and remove that, since it isn't prose, and articles that have redundant info like that sometimes get picked at when reviewed, so I'm just anticipating what might come up with the review. It is nothing personal, I hope you know, but I think there may already be issues due to the other types of lists that are in the article, and they may need to be put into prose (like the mission background stats, etc.). Hope you understand! Ariel♥Gold 16:26, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An exciting opportunity to get involved!

As a member of the Aviation WikiProject or one of its subprojects, you may be interested in testing your skills in the Aviation Contest! I created this contest, not to pit editor against editor, but to promote article improvement and project participation and camraderie. Hopefully you will agree with its usefulness. Sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here. The first round of the contest may not start until September 1st-unless a large number of editors signup and are ready to compete immediately! Since this contest is just beginning, please give feedback here, or let me know what you think on my talkpage. - Trevor MacInnis ^contribs 06:12, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nelson Aircraft

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Nelson Aircraft, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://home.comcast.net/~aeroengine/Nelson.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 06:01, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Badges

I actually think I am due at least 3 Purple Hearts for the war wounds I have received.... Davegnz (talk) 14:14, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Construction numbers

What do youhave regarding c/n on hawker Hurricanes as well as DH Mosquitos Davegnz (talk) 14:14, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Check your email for 2 documents, cheers. LanceBarber (talk) 08:00, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Combat Award

		Iron Cross w/starburst
		I Davegnz Award you this Iron Cross w/starburst for bravery in the face of numerous battles with wiki trolls in Project Aircraft.

Davegnz (talk) 16:46, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:SchweizerSGS1-24WingsMuseum.JPG

Hey that is great that you got a photo of Brigadoon for the Schweizer SGS 1-24 article!! Thanks for doing that, it greatly improves the article! - Ahunt (talk) 11:25, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aircraft museums

Hi, targeted you 'cos you're the Wikiproject Aviation guy with a declared interest in aircraft museums - not a popular interest?. Today I planned to start from scratch an article for the TAM museum, using recent experience on Havana and Rio museums. Found an article on TAM museum on Portuguese Wikipedia, grabbed a copy of source, translated via Google, then pasted into my sandbox. A few basic tweaks, bit more aircraft data, and it's approaching a reasonable state. I'd appreciate your comments on the method I've used, and any advice, general or specific.PeterWD (talk) 13:58, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for response. The wide pic was the result of searching Commons, and I just slapped it in at the top temporarily. I plan to use a museum infobox - shouldn't that be a 'standard' practice? The dodgy text is almost unchanged from the crude translation, aircraft data was priority, and I'll be re-writing it all, especially the restaurant work mention. PeterWD (talk) 08:35, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Update - knocked it into shape, unsure of citing Portuguese Wikipedia, other Portuguese external links, also co-ordinates, but hopefully other editors will deal with that stuff? (No-one has yet edited anything on the Havana article I did on 11 October).PeterWD (talk) 15:44, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your tweaks and advice. As a 'green' Wikipedian, I didn't realise until yesterday that any foreign language articles identified as equivalent are listed below the toolbox in the left column. Thanks also for tweaking the Havana article. (Sits back, awaiting other editors' actions).PeterWD (talk) 18:37, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Defenseimagery.mil

Hi, I am not sure, if you are the right person or if this is the right place to discuss this, but I hope so. If not, please advise. Well, for months now it is virtually impossible for me to reach the http://www.defenseimagery.mil/ website, full of (mostly) older US Forces photos, good for many an article. I know of other wikipediea/media users having the same problems. Can anybody offer any help? Cheers --(talk) 15:55, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Xmas

File:Christmas Barnstar (aviation).jpg

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year from Bzuk (talk) 01:21, 25 December 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Service awards proposal

Hello, LanceBarber! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards.

If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 20:35, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Air Division Emblems

I'll be creating the TAC gallery on commons shortly. I believe the TAC gallery on the page consisted of one emblem anyway. Revert or do whatever you believe is correct as I was led to believe that, generally, galleries are discouraged on Wikipedia. Take care :) Bwmoll3 (talk) 20:34, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Just wanted to leave a note of thanks for the Barnstar you gave me about a week ago. It's good to be noticed. :) Kyteto (talk) 18:05, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dodge Challenger SRT8-Video Games

The 2008 Challenger SRT8 appears also in Forza Motorsport 3, along with the concept version!!!SRT8SRT8 (talk) 20:35, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 543: / Line 543: @@
 Just wanted to leave a note of thanks for the Barnstar you gave me about a week ago. It's good to be noticed. :) [[User:Kyteto|Kyteto]] ([[User talk:Kyteto|talk]]) 18:05, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
+== Dodge Challenger SRT8-Video Games ==
+The 2008 Challenger SRT8 appears also in Forza Motorsport 3, along with the concept version!!!SRT8[[User:SRT8|SRT8]] ([[User talk:SRT8|talk]]) 20:35, 26 April 2010 (UTC)