Jump to content

User talk:CBG17: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
MOS:PUNCTREF: moved to Talk:Irkut MC-21 for clarity
No edit summary
Line 192: Line 192:


I would hardly call it an edit war if i've reverted only two post so lets not exaggerate here
I would hardly call it an edit war if i've reverted only two post so lets not exaggerate here

[[File:Stop hand nuvola.svg|30px|left|alt=Stop icon]] Your recent editing history at [[:Embraer E-Jet family]] shows that you are currently engaged in an [[Wikipedia:Edit warring|edit war]]. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the [[Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines|talk page]] to work toward making a version that represents [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See [[Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle|BRD]] for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant [[Wikipedia:Noticeboards|noticeboard]] or seek [[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution|dispute resolution]]. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary [[Wikipedia:Protection policy|page protection]].

'''Being involved in an edit war can result in your being [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked from editing]]'''&mdash;especially if you violate the [[Wikipedia:Edit warring#The three-revert rule|three-revert rule]], which states that an editor must not perform more than three [[Help:Reverting|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&mdash;'''even if you don't violate the three-revert rule'''&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> [[User:Boaqua|Boaqua]] ([[User talk:Boaqua|talk]]) 00:52, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Revision as of 00:52, 6 September 2017

CBG17, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Teahouse logo

Hi CBG17! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Jtmorgan (talk).

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:04, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Jet2

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Jet2.com. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. MilborneOne (talk) 23:28, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This wouldn't happen if you actually read the reference as nothing is said about second hand orders, they are all orders straight from Boeing. CBG17 23:32, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes sorry, I must apologise for that I was wrong and confused as I was just reading about them acquiring some second-hand aircraft. MilborneOne (talk) 23:43, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also, just to clarify, I have never heard or read anywhere that we don't list used orders as most orders for airlines are for used aircraft. CBG17 19:22, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cubana de Aviación

In this [1] edit you reinstated an outdated number of Il-96s the airline has in its fleet, so please be careful and doublecheck what you are removing and what you are reinstating.--Jetstreamer Talk 22:58, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

Hello, please understand that sources or references are crucial at Wikipedia per WP:V. Information cannot be changed without providing a source. Regards. — Sunnya343✈ (háblamemy work) 16:13, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Air Alderney

The article Air Alderney has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Does not meet WP:CORP or WP:GNG - specifically, there is no coverage in independent, reliable sources.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Exemplo347 (talk) 00:30, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sriwijaya Air

You're absolutely right about this [2] edit. Apologies.--Jetstreamer Talk 22:41, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CBG17. Can you please add comments to the Alliance Airlines talk page to discuss changes and confirm where content is taken from. Anna FA (talk) 23:05, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pegasus between Ercan and Stansted

Please note that according to our guidelines - which you seem to have understood wrong - we do only list destinations with an intermediate stop in between when the airline does not have traffic rights on all sectors and therefore the flights are considered direct flights. As Pegasus does have traffic rights between Ercan and Turkey, we only list the Turkish destinations from Ercan and not Stansted as it is not considered a direct destination. This topic has been discussed in recent years and decided this way. That is also why the large note is shown at the destination table at the article for Ercan airport as several onwards destinations are missing, not only Stansted. Best regards.

Hello

Information icon Hello, I'm Sunnya343. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks.

April 2017

Information icon Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Air Arabia Maroc, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. Jetstreamer Talk 19:07, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Air Europa Express. Jetstreamer Talk 20:37, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Its called basic maths my friend you should try it sometime CBG17 Talk 21:50, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Very last warning for your unsourced modifications [3].--Jetstreamer Talk 22:54, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 12 hours for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Iran Aseman Airlines. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Ad Orientem (talk) 00:19, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Ad Orientem: Please note that this user keeps making unsourced changes [4].--Jetstreamer Talk 20:25, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kish Air, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ATR (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) 09:46, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

April 2017

Information icon Please do not add or change content, as you did at Tigerair, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. The fleet information in this article is reliably sourced from the monthly updated list provided by CAAS, the national aviation regulator in Singapore. SempreVolando (talk) 14:54, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cobalt Air destinations

Thank you for providing reference that both style of layout can be used. However kindly keep new version that looks more up to date, it's easy to edit, looks better than basic version and its more informative with IATA & ICAO codes. New version looks more profesional. I am sure you agree. Thank you Wappy2008 (talk) 22:26, 1 may 2017 (UTC)

It's not exactly easy to edit compared to the list, if you check the guidelines IATA & ICAO codes should not be included so maybe you should do more research yourself. CBG17 (talk) 22:45, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I will not revert back but thank you that you do appreciate improved edits of other people. It's very kind of you. Wappy2008 (talk) 23:05, 1 may 2017 (UTC)

Cobalt Air destinations

I have noticed that you have reverted edits of several users for Cobalt Air destinations including me without trying to co-operate and you insist on your version. Be informed this is not the way how Wikipedia works. I am well aware that both layouts are correct according to Wikipedia guidelines, therefore users should discuss problem and edits on talk page. If majority of people agree on one version that one should be in use. Feel free to create discussion on the talk page to discuss further edits with other users before you do next reversion. As well be warned that this was your fourth reversion within last 24 hours. Your next revert will be reported for edit war and you will be at risk of being blocked from further edits on Wikipedia. Saoluiz (talk) 20:26, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you actually read in my talk section just above you will see that me and another user have already spoken about this and agreed on a list so you are the one at fault here CBG17 (talk) 20:26, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Im sorry but it doesn't look to me as user agreed with you, user just didn't want to create further arguments (thats how i see it), as you are not valuable to co-operate and make discussion with other users. Saoluiz (talk) 22:10, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

well they clearly did because they stated that wouldn't revert it back plus as I stated to the other user the table isn't even no where near what the guidelines say so you clearly have not read them either CBG17 (talk) 23:21, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

BA Cityflyer E170

There is evidence that the E170 is operated for BA, check all BA flights from LCY to Dusseldorf/Isle of Man, they are operated with Embraer E170 G-CIXW, owned by Eastern Airways. see https://planefinder.net/data/aircraft/G-CIXW — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jgh230 (talkcontribs) 18:17, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

June 2017

Please stop adding unsourced content. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. You have already been blocked once for this. Let's not go down that road again. Ad Orientem (talk) 20:59, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Biman Bangladesh Airlines

Please note that I reverted your last edit but also fixed the parameters in the {{cite web}} template [5] so that the airline's website and not the archive version is displayed. Hope this is fine for you.--Jetstreamer Talk 20:31, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That is fine but I still think it is a bit pointless archiving a website such as this especially for a fleet table as the archived link is basically pointless when updating the table as it won't be up to date so there's no point having an archived one and the normal one as the archived one won't be used CBG17 Talk 21:37, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Azur Air (Germany)

Please desist of editing this company name and moving the article itself towards wrong notation. The official company's name like written in their very own imprint [6] is exact the same name their Russian sister company is using und both got the same brand by parental company. That's very, very common in aviation industry! An airline named Azur Air Germany is not existing!! On Wikipedia, such name redundancies are solved by adding a specification in braces like (Germany) in this case or (actor), (movie) e.g. Its very common on Wikipedia, too, to make use of talk pages instead of making such changes by your own. Thank you very much. AviNation (talk) 08:04, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you read here [7] the say "Azur Air Germany" this is no different to Azur Air Ukraine CBG17 (talk) 17:39, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As said on the talk page [8], there is an essential difference. By the way the official company's name is written at the bottom of your link! This name is registered to authorities and has to be used for the title on Wikipedia. AviNation (talk) 09:53, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

July 2017 - Wataniya Airways

Hi, please stop your edit war at Wataniya Airways. Other editors will sort it out in due course, meanwhile if you persists in warring, whether right or wrong you may be sanctioned by an admin. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 14:29, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How can I stop it if the other person is clearly vandalising the page? As the airline has restarted new operations only the new routes should be shown not the old routes as they were operated previously in its first round of operations. Steelpillow CBG17 (Talk) 14:33, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Have patience. Give the rest of us a little time to figure out what is going on. Above all, when another editor alerts a WikiProject with a perfectly good post, do not take the law into your own hands and go deleting their appeal. That really was a big bad you did there, you are not on safe ground now. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 14:55, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If anything you are making it worse by changing the wrong pages so before trying to 'help' actually go onto the right page first. CBG17 (Talk) 14:55, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have been editing wiki since a decade so I know better than to vandalize, read it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wataniya_Airways_destinations#Adding_destination.139.190.254.44 (talk) 15:26, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Information icon Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.

A bit unfair seeing as you're not even listening to what i'm saying @Steelpillow:

A page you started (VIM Airlines destinations) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating VIM Airlines destinations, CBG17!

Wikipedia editor Meatsgains just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Consider providing additional reliable sources to strengthen the page's verifiability.

To reply, leave a comment on Meatsgains's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Meatsgains (talk) 14:43, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cut-and-paste move

Information icon Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Azur Air Germany a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Azur Air (Germany). This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 02:28, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The reason i did it like that is because i can't change the name of the pages around as it won't let me because they are pages of the same name

Sources

Information icon Hi, I'm Wjkxy! I noticed that you added new flights at Kyiv International Airport (Zhuliany) without citing a reliable source, WP:AIRPORTS states: "For future destinations, add: "(begins date service begins)" after the destination. Starting dates must be provided with full date including the year and references should be provided." So I kindly ask you to add a source next to new flights, to show readers and other editors that what you've added is true.
Thank you. Wjkxy (talk) 07:08, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Additions to Wikipedia must be verifiable

Sources

Information icon Hi, I'm andrewgprout! I noticed that at [[9]] and other similar pages you added new flights without citing a reliable source, WP:AIRPORTS states: "For future destinations, add: "(begins date service begins)" after the destination. Starting dates must be provided with full date including the year and references should be provided." So I kindly ask you to add a source next to new flights, to show readers and other editors that what you've added is true.
Thank you. Andrewgprout (talk) 19:18, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Flydubai MAX Order

I have reverted your incorrect edit you made at Flydubai. If you read both refs provided at the end of this message, when the airline took delivery of its first Boeing 737 MAX 8, both refs clearly stated that the airline has 76 aircraft on order. Thus after the airline took delivery of the first, they had 75 remaining aircraft on order (76-1=75). So that means, the airline has 74 MAX 8s still on order (76-2=74) after they took delivery of their 2nd aircraft. Please refrain from reverting the edit as it may be considered to be an edit war. And again, make sure you read both links provided to prove my case. Carry on with your own business.

Rogue1 (talk) 19:26, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

READ BOTH LINKS http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2017-07-31-Boeing-Delivers-First-737-MAX-8-to-flydubai http://www.boeing.com/commercial/customers/flydubai/first-737-max8-delivery.page

September 2017

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Aeroflot. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Toddst1 (talk) 12:45, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I would hardly call it an edit war if i've reverted only two post so lets not exaggerate here

Stop icon

Your recent editing history at Embraer E-Jet family shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

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. Boaqua (talk) 00:52, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]