Jump to content

User talk:Gdandsnahb: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Gdandsnahb (talk | contribs)
Line 158: Line 158:
"Mentioning anywhere that the reservation system includes the destination does not suffice.". If this were the case then I'd agree with you but it is NOT and I did NOT say this. If you attempt to book the flight it appears, is available; with a price, time, terminal, etc.. Once again, how in the world could this potentially not suffice anyone's doubt that the service will exist on and after March 31, 2013? That makes absolutely no sense! My hidden note wasn't meant to "fix anything", just to deter people from removing correct and substantiated information. I will most likely re-edit the page by the end of the day because I still strongly disagree with you. --[[User:Gdandsnahb|Gdandsnahb]] ([[User talk:Gdandsnahb#top|talk]]) 16:19, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
"Mentioning anywhere that the reservation system includes the destination does not suffice.". If this were the case then I'd agree with you but it is NOT and I did NOT say this. If you attempt to book the flight it appears, is available; with a price, time, terminal, etc.. Once again, how in the world could this potentially not suffice anyone's doubt that the service will exist on and after March 31, 2013? That makes absolutely no sense! My hidden note wasn't meant to "fix anything", just to deter people from removing correct and substantiated information. I will most likely re-edit the page by the end of the day because I still strongly disagree with you. --[[User:Gdandsnahb|Gdandsnahb]] ([[User talk:Gdandsnahb#top|talk]]) 16:19, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
:I won't do anything to get you blocked, it's not my intention since you show good will to discuss the matter. I just mentioned [[WP:SOURCE]] and [[WP:VERIFY]], the latter being a policy and subject, as such, to no discussions at all. That said, re-editing the page will implicitly show that you keep disregarding it.--'''[[User:Jetstreamer|Jetstreamer]]'''&nbsp;<sup>[[User talk:Jetstreamer#top|Talk]]</sup> 18:59, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
:I won't do anything to get you blocked, it's not my intention since you show good will to discuss the matter. I just mentioned [[WP:SOURCE]] and [[WP:VERIFY]], the latter being a policy and subject, as such, to no discussions at all. That said, re-editing the page will implicitly show that you keep disregarding it.--'''[[User:Jetstreamer|Jetstreamer]]'''&nbsp;<sup>[[User talk:Jetstreamer#top|Talk]]</sup> 18:59, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
Did you even read what I wrote? I have every intention to disregard you because you are wrong, there are many planned destinations on this website that lack sources. On the other hand, the policy you provided a hyperlink to has not been disregarded as the information is verifiable. Curious as to how it is verifiable? Read what I wrote to you before your last post. I am not sure how your last post was relevant to anything I addressed immediately before. --[[User:Gdandsnahb|Gdandsnahb]] ([[User talk:Gdandsnahb#top|talk]]) 23:20, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Revision as of 23:20, 9 November 2012

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Gdandsnahb, 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:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Ravendrop 20:13, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop removing destinations from the list. Destinations that are not currently served, but were in the past (as all that you have removed thus far have been) are allowed to be shown as long as they are appropriately marked (as they are). If you are disputing that Air Canada ever flew to these destinations, or want to change the format of the page, you must first post of the discussion page and gain consensus there before continuing to change the page. Further unexplained removal of material from the page will be considered vandalism. Let me know if you have questions about this. Ravendrop 20:15, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I was unaware of these procedures. I recognized that these were marked as terminated destinations and was trying to remove them to declutter the page. I personally find it redundant and useless to have in the same section as it can be very confusing for the average reader.

No problem. I understand your point of view, but for a major change like that its important to gain consensus first as this is one of the core principles used in editing here. See WP:CONSENSUS for more. You're welcome to start a discussion about changing it (but be sure to have an alternative proposal as how they should be displayed) on the talk page if you want. Ravendrop 20:22, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four halfwidth tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 17:59, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

June 2011

Please don't change the format of dates, as you did to John F. Kennedy International Airport unless there is a valid reason to do so. In general, date formats in articles should correspond to the variety of English that the article is written in. This means that if an article is written about a British or European topic, the day-month-year format should be used, e.g., 12 December 1904. If an article is about an American topic, the month-day-year format should be used, e.g., December 12, 1904. If neither, the dates should be left in the format they were originally written in.

Please also note that Wikipedia does not use ordinal suffixes (e.g., st, nd, th), articles, or leading zeros on dates. For more information about how dates should be written on Wikipedia, please see this article.

If you have any questions about this, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Enjoy your time on Wikipedia. Thank you. HkCaGu (talk) 19:51, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Aer Lingus - ORK - FCO & BCN

These routes are not new. They are currently operating but Aer Lingus have decided to bring them back year round again after stopping them last winter. Please stop adding them as new routes when they are already operating. Jamie2k9 (talk) 18:48, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ethiopian Airlines: Mahe service

It has been postponed until further notice from Ethiopian Airlines's press release: http://www.ethiopianairlines.com/en/news/pressreleases.aspx?hl= (doesn't say flights postponed until 22 January 2012). Snoozlepet (talk) 02:44, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

November 2011

Please don't change the format of dates, as you did to Charlotte/Douglas International Airport. As a general rule, if an article has evolved using predominantly one format, the dates should be left in the format they were originally written in, unless there are reasons for changing it based on strong national ties to the topic. Please also note that Wikipedia does not use ordinal suffixes (e.g., st, nd, th), articles, or leading zeros on dates.

For more information about how dates should be written on Wikipedia, please see this article.

If you have any questions about this, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Enjoy your time on Wikipedia. Thank you. HkCaGu (talk) 01:02, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not use styles that are unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in Salt Lake City International Airport. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Thank you. HkCaGu (talk) 01:02, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In Air France destinations, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Malta Airport (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. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line 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) 13:38, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Ethiopian Airlines destinations, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Muscat (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) 10:38, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

January 2012

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to Turkish Airlines destinations. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you.--Jetstreamer (talk) 16:58, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bishkek, Khujand and Osh are still operated by S7 airlines

Why have you deleted them from the destination list? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kostja1975 (talkcontribs) 20:12, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pardon my mistake, Novosibirsk-Khujand has not been cancelled but Novosibirsk-Bishkek and Novosibirsk-Osh service have been cancelled which you can see through s7's reservation system. --Gdandsnahb (talk) 07:55, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New flight format

You will be blocked if you make anymore vandalism edit. You know what you edited on Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport was wrong and it WILL NOT be tolerated. Again you will be blocked if you make anymore vandalism edits. Cali4529 (talk) 23:01, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Go try and book one of the seventeen destinations I labelled for cancelation from Reagan on Delta Airlines after the termination date I provided and see if your search returns any non-stop iteneraries. Don't tell me i'm vandalising anything. I'll give you the pleasure of reversing your "correction" of my edit, good day sir. --Gdandsnahb (talk) 07:45, 3 January 2012 (UTC) day. --Gdandsnahb (talk) 07:45, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. You had already been notified that we now use the year for all airport destination tables. HkCaGu (talk) 20:10, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I received no such notification, now I know. --Gdandsnahb (talk) 01:33, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As an editor you are responsible to know if people revert your edits and explain their reason in an article's edit history and edit summary. HkCaGu (talk) 01:45, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok --Gdandsnahb (talk) 02:19, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Fuji Dream Airlines, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Niigata (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) 11:03, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

February 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia. Your recent edit to the page Toronto Pearson International Airport appears to have added incorrect information and has been reverted or removed. All information in this encyclopedia must be verifiable in a reliable, published source. If you believe the information that you added was correct, please cite the references or sources or before making the changes, discuss them on the article's talk page. Please use the sandbox for any tests that you wish to make. Do take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thank you. OhanaUnitedTalk page 17:11, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is not necessary to have citations for desinations, go check Air India's timetable or attempt to book the flight. You logic is wrong regagrdless as the flight operates Delhi-Amritsar-Toronto so technically Delhi is not driectly served from Toronto BUT since Air India has traffic rights between the two Indian cities and onwards to Toronto there is no issue with placing Amritsar as a destination. This is similar to jet Airways' Delhi-Brussels-Toronto route. Brussels is listed because Air India has traffic rights between Brussels and Toronto. So why dont you continue to be incorrect and also remove that while your at it. --Gdandsnahb (talk) 21:57, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to play games with you. If you say Air India has traffic rights between 2 Indian cities (which is right), then according to your flawed reasoning you will list out any airports that Air India serves through Delhi. The Brussels example clearly demonstrate your lack of ability to understand the policy. Brussels is not in India so this destination is listed even though it's a stopover. OhanaUnitedTalk page 20:57, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What are you talking about? The difference is the flight originates from Delhi NOT Amritsar! It then picks up other passengers in Amritsar and eventually carries on to Toronto, NOT the other way around! Armitsar is the only directly served destination in India from Toronto-Pearson, please stop playing games with me. --Gdandsnahb (talk) 21:14, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, AI188 actually flies from YYZ to DEL first then it continues on to ATQ with the same aircraft. Therefore the flight does originate from Amritsar, stops in Delhi, and then fies to Toronto. Snoozlepet (talk) 21:42, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize for my omission but I still strongly disagree with the removal of Amritsar as the flight number for the Amritsar-Delhi and Delhi-Toronto sector is the SAME. If your logic carries for the entrie page than there are many other destinations that should also be wrongfully removed --Gdandsnahb (talk) 13:10, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

March 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose International Airport, please cite a reliable source for your addition. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. See Wikipedia:Citing sources for how to cite sources, and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Amartyabag TALK2ME 14:33, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, you may be blocked from editing.  Abhishek  Talk 15:57, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing I am editing is incorrect, don't threaten me. --Gdandsnahb (talk) 15:59, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.  Abhishek  Talk 15:59, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Prove that I am wrong or I'll report this bullying. Check Kingfisher's reservation system and you will see that I am right. --Gdandsnahb (talk) 16:01, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will report you if you continue. You have been numerously warned many times for adding wrong info. The reservation sysytem itself still shows up these flights. The schedules pdf shows schedules valid only till March 24th for all the flights. But that does not mean, all these flights are gonna end. If we have to go by your rationale, then the airline itself has to shutdown on March 24th. So stop or you will be reported.  Abhishek  Talk 16:08, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am not following, if you are not able to book tickets on these flights past the 24th how is the route not cancelled? --Gdandsnahb (talk) 16:13, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Where have I mentioned that these flights are not bookable after 24th? I said they still show up way after 24th!  Abhishek  Talk 16:42, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
FYI... [1]  Abhishek  Talk 13:34, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What is wrong with you? I stopped editing the pages even though I think your wrong. If i get blocked because your a power trip i'll report you, so FYI.. leave me alone. Are we allowed to have a conversation on here without you reporting me? --Gdandsnahb (talk) 14:18, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

April 2012

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Sri Guru Ram Dass Jee International Airport. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Air India no longer has a flight from Toronto (YYZ) - Amritsar (ATQ), please do not revert the changes. Gsingh (talk) 04:49, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

AI operates a Amritsar-Delhi-Toronto route with trafic rights on Amritsar-Delhi as well as Delhi-Toronto and on the return leg. Both these sectors have the same flight number, therefore AI does operate from Amritsar to Toronto. --Gdandsnahb (talk) 22:22, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Sri Guru Ram Dass Jee International Airport shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Gsingh (talk) 00:00, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have any opinion on this matter, but talk this out on the article page before edit warring. If there's a dispute solve it by discussion, no need to revert other peoples edits. I've posted the dispute on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airlines to get other editors opinions, please contribute to the discussion on that page. Gsingh (talk)

User page

I've moved your user page to User:Gdandsnahb/sandbox--that content is not appropriate for a user page. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 01:20, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Non-free content policy and guideline

Please do not place or replace any non-free images to any pages except for actual articles, as you did at User:Gdandsnahb/sandbox. Such use is a clear violation of point number 9 of our policy concerning the use of non-free images. Continuing to do so can be viewed as disruptive behaviour and you may be blocked from editing. VernoWhitney (talk) 21:26, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

true --Gdandsnahb (talk) 14:49, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you continue to replace non-free media into your sandbox in direct violation of policy, you will be blocked from editing. If you have any questions our concerns about the policy, please ask. The images can always be restored when you paste the wikicode back into the actual articles. VernoWhitney (talk) 22:18, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

November 2012

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to Lanzarote Airport. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Jetstreamer Talk 11:10, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not everything requires a source. Check British Airways' schedule, if the service does not appear then I will post a source. Until then, no. --Gdandsnahb (talk) 18:07, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This requires a source, actually.--Jetstreamer Talk 21:35, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The flights are available to the general public for reservation. You are incorrect, I will not add a source. Please refrain from consulting me on erroneous grounds in the future. --Gdandsnahb (talk) 05:00, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm consulting you nothing, just warning that your edit does not comply with WP:VERIFY. Continue and I will report you.--Jetstreamer Talk 22:17, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Lanzarote Airport. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Jetstreamer Talk 21:37, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Lanzarote Airport, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Jetstreamer Talk 22:18, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The flight is available for reservation on British Airways' website, is that somehow not a valid source or am I just crazy? The information is substantiated by British Airways. It doesn't get more legitimate then when the service is published in a airline's reservation system, and for a number of days at that. Do you dispute that service is planned or have you just failed to check for it through BA? Please, spare me some energy and shed some light as to how my edit is inappropriate. If you take such issue with a source not being present then find one yourself and add it. I will not waste my time as it is not necessary. To ensure that the verifiability policy is enforced, I presume that sources should be added to every single destination on the page, right? No, because that would be unreasonable and a colossal waste of time. How about you contribute to the page and not remove information that should be there. I will now go and undo your edit, and presumably, when you attempt to have me blocked from editing I will report you and prove to whomever it may concern just how wrong you are. I apologize for the my tone of writing but I take your threats very seriously, especially since they seriously lack meaningful basis. --Gdandsnahb (talk) 06:58, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You need to provide a source for future destinations at airport articles, that's the issue. Mentioning anywhere that the reservation system includes the destination does not suffice. A good external reference is a press release, which is not available yet. Thus, your edit is unsourced, and I have reverted it again. Placing a hidden note does not fix anything at all. Just wait for an official press release.--Jetstreamer Talk 10:26, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have been on the website for many years now and have never heard that. There are many planned destinations throughout airport pages that lack sourcing. Not every airline releases a press statement for new routes, so you may be waiting an awfully long time for something that will never exist. I guess we'll never be putting up quite a few destinations on these pages. "Mentioning anywhere that the reservation system includes the destination does not suffice.". If this were the case then I'd agree with you but it is NOT and I did NOT say this. If you attempt to book the flight it appears, is available; with a price, time, terminal, etc.. Once again, how in the world could this potentially not suffice anyone's doubt that the service will exist on and after March 31, 2013? That makes absolutely no sense! My hidden note wasn't meant to "fix anything", just to deter people from removing correct and substantiated information. I will most likely re-edit the page by the end of the day because I still strongly disagree with you. --Gdandsnahb (talk) 16:19, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I won't do anything to get you blocked, it's not my intention since you show good will to discuss the matter. I just mentioned WP:SOURCE and WP:VERIFY, the latter being a policy and subject, as such, to no discussions at all. That said, re-editing the page will implicitly show that you keep disregarding it.--Jetstreamer Talk 18:59, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Did you even read what I wrote? I have every intention to disregard you because you are wrong, there are many planned destinations on this website that lack sources. On the other hand, the policy you provided a hyperlink to has not been disregarded as the information is verifiable. Curious as to how it is verifiable? Read what I wrote to you before your last post. I am not sure how your last post was relevant to anything I addressed immediately before. --Gdandsnahb (talk) 23:20, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]