User talk:Jetstreamer

Reversion in TAP Portugal

I don't know what kind of reversion you may have made in TAP Portugal page according to your justification, since TAP Portugal doesn't fly to Tel Aviv, nor any other city in Asia. Nupest 0:10, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Finding reliable source

Hi jetstremar I am runaparvin you told me if I want to add anything I have to add a reliable source but how can I add a reliable source changing the destinations? Please help me adding a reliable source but I can't understand why not you changing the page of us-bangla airlines.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Runaparvin (talk • contribs)

Now 18th worst disaster

And still the 4th worst *at the time*. Please read the commit / diff information "Jetstreamer" before reverting changes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_New_Zealand_Flight_901 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Voigty (talk • contribs)

Old vs. New

No offense, but the pictures found on Ellenikon Airport are ALL old. I most certainly think it would not bust your balls to take ONE of the old ones out, and put in a new one. One I, as a professional photographer took last week, as I was in Athens. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dennis David Auger (talk • contribs) 18:47, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Dusseldorf Airport again

The dispute regarding AA service has appeared again. Another IP continued inappropriately label edits as "vandalism". The dispute is the AA to ORD started as year-round service but it has converted to summer seasonal. Where does the source go? Rzxz1980 (talk) 05:04, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

last edits

My friend I haven't done incorrect changes because if they are not correct then edit the informations about Imam Khomeini airport. Please check there carefully and then talk about my changes.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.238.68.143 (talk • contribs)

Then it won't be difficult for you to add reliable sources to support your changes.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 10:09, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Invitation: Garuda Indonesia – issue

Hi Jetstreamer, I was recently caught in the discussion about an attempt to merge articles of Garuda Indonesia and Philippine Airlines. Please, if you are willing so, read my whole expose about this issue here: Garuda Indonesia-Philippine Airlines merge article, and give your opinion on it, so we can move forward from this stalemate. Thanks! PinasCentral (Talk) 12:40, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Flag carrier

Swiss is operated by Lufthansa and that's common knowledge virtually anywhere to check. So please undo your premature activist revert. — 91.10.11.168 (talk) 20:55, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Common knowledge is not considered a reliable source. Before making any edits, you should be familiarised with Wikipedia core content policies a priori. Otherwise, your changes might get reverted.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 21:15, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

The source is one or two clicks away, so go for it and don't withhold information to myriads of Wikipedia users just to be anal about ”policies“ – reminds me of the Usenet ”netiquette fascists“ back in the good old 1990s. So why don't just be constructive and add the (superfluous) reference (next to the blue link in the very same table row) you long for yourself? — 91.10.11.168 (talk) 21:36, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

WP:BURDEN. I'm not gonna do your work for you.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 22:26, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

[[WP:SOME_OBSCURE_ABBREV_TO_DEMONSTRATE_WIKI_SUPERIORITY]]. What a pity you chose to only take the BURDEN to revert an edit and ridiculously cite WP rules rather than producing anything useful. Let's wait for a wise man together, both clever and diligent enough to click to Swiss and undo your revert while inserting that reference never to be looked at again (cf very same column entry for Austrian). — 91.10.11.168 (talk) 23:57, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

I already explained my reasoning. There are policies to be followed. Do not edit Wikipedia if you do not agree with them.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 02:12, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

The thing you don't get is: there are policies – but they have to be laid out, applied with respect to each individual case. You know mathematics? They do a lot of proving, don't they? Do they prove the obvious? Of course they could, but they don't: Besides someone proved it already, anyone not believing the ”obviousness“ can do the prove himself. – So in Wikipedia, you clearly don't have to prove (or cite sources) the world is round™, New York is located 40.42° N or Rome 41.53° N… — So rules and policies are a good-thing™, unless self-declared guardians of WP:THE_POLICIEZ following words rather than reason turn them into tools of disruption. — (edited previous comment for orthography; same individual, different IP than above:) 91.10.37.111 (talk) 14:26, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Sources for "the sky is blue" are not needed. I'd be obtuse if I try to challenge that claim. Sources to support Lufthansa (LH) being the parent of Swiss International Air Lines (LX) company are required; that's not as obvious as you suggest above. Matemathics is based on axioms. LH being LX's parent is not an axiom. You are not understanding the verifiability policy.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 14:34, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Images at Mexico City International Airport

I've been doing edits to Mexico City International Airport, but i have a doubt, while HKG has 17 aircrats pics, MAD 12, DXB 17 and NRT 18, why not Mexico? What is the criteria? and who decides? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.132.146.136 (talk) 00:01, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Consensus decides and as far as I can see from the article's history, there are two editors (me included) that believes the page had too many images.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 00:39, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Mayday episode of Quantas 32

You removed my reference to the Mayday episode of Quantas 32 citing unreliable source. What would you consider a reliable source in this case? I have seen the episode myself and it is listed in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mayday_episodes. Should I link directly to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mayday_episodes?

Kind regards, NiclasB (talk) 17:24, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the fact that you have seen the episode does not count as a reliable source. See WP:RELIABLE and WP:VERIFY. Thanks.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 17:30, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Flydubai Incidents Section

Hello,

You seem like the person people would come to for help regarding anything aviation related. I am a new user and I need your opinion on something. I was editing the page Flydubai and I added a new section for incidents the airline has had and this was the following that I wrote:

"* On 22 April 2012, a Flydubai flight bound for Doha was involved in a 'near miss' incident with Air Arabia that was bound to Istanbul. The incident took place off the coast of Dubai.<ref>http://www.thenational.ae/news/uae-news/air-arabia-and-flydubai-jets-in-near-miss-off-dubai</ref>"

The first time it was removed, the reason was "doesnt appear to be particularly notable". I undid the revert and stated the reason why I undid the revert. And 2 minutes later, it was removed a second time with the reason being "remove trivia" which I believe is not trivia at all. I am leaving the page without the incidents section because I do not want to violate the 3 revert rule and end up in an edit war.

What I am trying to ask is your opinion. Is what I wrote worthy enough to add in Flydubai? I'd appreciate the opinion! --PilotJaguar1996 (talk) 17:33, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

@PilotJaguar1996: First of all, thanks for considering I'm the one to be contacted, even when there are a number of editors far more skilled than me in this subject. Regarding warring, you may want to use the article's talk pages to discuss with others and gain consensus. To me, the entry seems to be not notable enough for inclusion; it was just a potential tragedy. Cheers.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 17:39, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

@Jetstreamer:  There is a discussion going on at the articles talk page. I wish to invite you to voice your opinion as well, regarding what I first wrote and how I am not adding the section anymore. Appreciate it! --PilotJaguar1996 (talk) 17:42, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Ethiopian Airlines Cargo

Hi Jetstreamer,

I apologize if I am annoying you right now. But I was browsing the Ethiopian Airlines fleet section and noticed that there was a Boeing 737-400 under Passenger Fleets. Seeing you edit the page the most, adding information and reverting incorrect edits, I did not want to make an edit without consulting you.

The Boeing 737-400 is actually a freighter aircraft, as per these pictures found on airliners.net at the end of this message. I am still trying to find a source that shows Ethiopian Airlines acquired the freighter jet. I do not know if pictures are reliable sources or not, but I believe this should be moved to Cargo fleet instead of Passenger fleet. But I'll leave that decision to you.

Thank you for your time! --PilotJaguar1996 (talk) 21:59, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Ethiopian-Airlines-Cargo/Boeing-737-43Q(SF)/2392956/L/&sid=c8bbd1cdf59afbd3a1c22d07816fce6c http://www.airliners.net/photo/Ethiopian-Airlines-Cargo/Boeing-737-43Q(SF)/2320511/L/&sid=255b36c0307d036490289b51d43c3a0f http://www.airliners.net/photo/Ethiopian-Airlines-Cargo/Boeing-737-43Q(SF)/2316155/L/&sid=255b36c0307d036490289b51d43c3a0f http://www.airliners.net/photo/Ethiopian-Airlines-Cargo/Boeing-737-43Q(SF)/2302483/L/&sid=255b36c0307d036490289b51d43c3a0f

Re: Speedy deletion nomination of Earl Hilton

The article Earl Hilton was just created and only had one edit in its history before the speedy deletion tag was placed on it. As a contributer, I appreciate the expeditious manner in which you reviewed the article, but I along with other editors would probably appreciate more if administrators would exercise more patience before tagging a brand new article for deletion. :-) --Educatedblkman1914 (talk) 19:40, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

@Educatedblkman1914: Your suggestion might work. The other plausible option that will avert these arguments is to start any article with at least a section and including a minimun number of references, by contrast to starting a page with just an infobox. You may use either the sandbox or a draft space in your own personal page to work on an article until you believe it is ready to be moved to the mainspace.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 20:47, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Jetstar Airways

Hi I am having some trouble cleaning up fleet the table in the Jetstar Airways article. Seeing you edit so many airline pages I was hoping you could give me a hand in removing the unnecessary columns and just generally cleaning up the table. Thanks Otchiman (talk) 22:01, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

@Otchiman: Sure. What exactly do you want me to do?--Jetstreamer ^Talk 12:51, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

 There is just an extra column at the end that I cannot work out to remove. If you could remove it I would be greatly appreciated. Otchiman (talk) 23:05, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

@Otchiman: I think it's done. Please check. (BTW, you don't need to use the {{ping}} template at my talk page, I get a popup notice when I receive a new message).--Jetstreamer ^Talk 00:22, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks so much looks much better now. Otchiman (talk) 01:42, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Fuerteventura Airport page

Hey there! Thanks for leaving that notification on my talk page. Just to let you know, the reason why I removed the picture of the airport is because it's the wrong airport. The current Fuerteventura airport is El Matorral. The airport in the photo I removed was Los Estancos, the former airport closed down in 1969. So BIG MISTAKE from whoever placed that picture. Woodywyatt (talk) 18:32, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

@Woodywyatt: The template I left at your talk was not for removing the image but for adding unsourced information ([1]).--Jetstreamer ^Talk 19:38, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Oh okay. How do I source it? I'm new to Wikipedia and I really want to give LOADS of information I know about this island, Fuerteventura.

@Woodywyatt: WP:RELIABLE, WP:SOURCE and WP:VERIFY should help.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 01:55, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

No war please

Everything in Wiki articles should have a reason. OK? 77.185.38.248 (talk) 16:53, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

No aims to war. Have you seen the number of references I've added to Qatar Airways? You cannot tell me I'm not aware of the current condition of that page: it's full of unsourced statements. And you suggest to tagbomb the article?--Jetstreamer ^Talk 17:14, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

First: thank you for your edits and talk.

You added refs: Thats it. Of course additional refs improve and some could be added: Thanks, AND: Refs are not absolutely needed if content is self-explained for well informed editors or can be quite quickly googled. Thats the reason i deleted the tags, additionally the "closely related".

Tagbomb: Can't see much disputed content. Or? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.185.38.248 (talk) 17:49, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Generally: Article tags are for:

• important messages to readers: main article faults
• minimum highly important and urgent messages to the editors with reasons how to improve.

No reason given and no can be seen here. Don't know anything about Ilyushin Il-76. 77.185.38.248 (talk) 17:46, 19 September 2014 (UTC)