User talk:BilCat

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

NOTES

• NOTICE - I have made the editorial decision to stop reading or editing all articles related to India and China (and some related to Pakistan), particularly in the aviation and military fields. I no longer feel like constantly butting heads with users who continually ignore WP policies, notably WP:V, WP:RS, WP:NPOV, and WP:NOT, or who do not understand what an encyclopedia actually is, and then treat me as if I am at fault. I am also tired of those who misuse the English language, and act like I'm the one who doesn't understand proper English. Perhaps someday enough editors will be able to police these pages to the degree that they can follow policy as the rest of WP does, but until then, I need a break from this foolishness. Btw, if you think I'm referring to you, I probably am! Any non-productive responses on this page to this post will be removed without comment. To other editors who are genuinelly trying to police these pages, especially MilborneOne‎ and Enthusiast10, you have my blessings! - BillCJ (talk) 07:44, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

• If you initiated a conversation here, I will most likely respond to your comments here, rather than on your talk page (except for certain people from Alberta or Australia!)

• If you are discussing an article, I would prefer to use that article's talk page, unless you'd prefer not to use that page for some reason, such as commenting on a particular user's edits in semi-privacy. Please limit this page to discussions not related to any particular article, those covering a wide range of articles/topics, or personal comments.

• Due to the misbehavior of a few IPs, IPs are prevented from editing this page. If you need to discuss an article, see the previous note. If you need to discuss something else with me, register, and come back in four days. If it's urgent, use the e-mail feature; it won't work if it's been abused lately. If you chose to whine on an admin complaint board somewhere, I'll probably hear about it. And ignore you. ;) PS. if you posted the type of comments on my page that you would post on an admin alert board, they would have been ignored and removed anyway!

• Most comments will be archived about once a month. Critical comments are welcome, but those containing highly-offensive or profane material will be deleted immediately, and the overall content ignored.

• NO BOTS ALLOWED!! You'll have post here yourself!

• Also, talk to me like a normal person, and don't just quote Wiki guidelines to me - I'm NOT a newbie . (Policies are somewhat different). I consider it rude, and will likely just delete your comments, and ignore the point, as guidleines can be ignored. If you do it anyway, and turn out to be wrong, an apology would be the considerate thing to make, though you probably won't since it's not policy to apologize for your mistakes. (If Jimbo wnated people to apologize for their mistakes, he'd have made it a policy, right?!)

• If you want me to take your opinions and edits seriously, you ought to Register!. Otherwise one never knows who really made the edits, especially in the case of dynamic IP addresses.

• If I mistakenly called your edits as vandalism when I reverted them, it was probably because you did not leave an edit summary. Please realize that, in many cases, unexplained edits are indistinguishable from vandalism! This also applies to Rollbacks.

• I reserve the right to clean up this page in any manner I chose, including the use of Rollbacks for non-vandalism, and especially if you made more than one edit. Please do NOT repost what I've removed, unless you are an admin issuing a formal warning, though I'll probably still remove it!

• If you wish to keep a matter confidential,such as disscussing personal and/or confidential information, you may use the "E-mail" feature (usually activated!). I will respond in kind unless otherwise requested. This is not for discussing routine matters regarding editing on pages - use the article talk pages for that.

Thanks.

• Title Case May Be Used in Headings on This Page

• Me, myself, and I use serial commas.

Cessna 350 & Cessna 400

Hi Bill, thanks for fixing that abortive page move on these articles. I am not sure if all this marketing name stuff is being pushed by fancruft or the company marketing department (hopefully not, I give them more credit than that). I have added notes to both talk pages asking people to gain consensus rather than doing it any more. At least the next reverts can reference the talk pages! - Ahunt (talk) 18:12, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the support! Cessna seems to change or add to their product names (not numbers so much) as often as most people change their socks! Or so it seems! THe model numbers alone seems the best way to go at this point. - BillCJ (talk) 18:19, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

So much so that it is WikiProject policy! - Ahunt (talk) 18:52, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

True, but don't tell these guys the Cessna Citations don't follow that pattern! Alan Radecki set up the most of the Citation articles, and I followed his pattern ont he articles that I did. Alan did a good job, as both the names and numbers are quite confusing! In the case of the Citations, they are better known by the names than by the numbers, as far as I can tell. That's an exception I don't see any need to change, though we may well have to explain it at some point to these new guys. - BillCJ (talk) 19:16, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Westland 30

Hi! Thanks for the kind remarks. Glad to have been able to insert an image of this short-lived type. I had been lucky enough to fly in the 'chopper' from JFK to 60th Street - so took a shot of it after landing. Will try to keep contributing, including photos, but perhaps at a slower rate during the coming summer months! RuthAS (talk) 09:01, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

HTMS Chakri Naruebet

True. The aircraft carrier with lowest displacement is the HTMS Chakri Naruebet. --220.150.94.243 (talk) 04:24, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Unprovoked total ban

G'day Bill. Can you tell me why you instigated a total ban on my person? I see you only asked if I used to edit as a different user, but your query instantly morphed into an accusation of Sock puppetry and bad manners. I have NEVER engaged in Sock puppetry, although I have been banned for such. I'm usually flamed for being annoying, but a kind word is usually enough to straighten things out. But never have I posted as a sock. Not even one time. Can I explain my case here? I have no other platform to explain since a total ban means no right to explain or appeal. A bit extreme, I think, for just being slightly annoying from time to time.

BTW, just as an aside, do you remember chastising me for reminding editors that under the FARs, an "airplane" is different from an "aircraft"? The WP conclusion was that aircraft could be described as behaving like "airplanes", even though the FARs state otherwise because Wikipedians were comfortable with their own made-up terminology. So I got annoyed. That's how it goes.

Can you investigate how your query turned into Alan slamming a total ban on me? Bushcutter

It probably would have been better for you to have addressed this to me, since I'm the one who indef blocked you. It was done because a detailed investigation showed that the account User:Bushcutter was making virtually identical edits to two other sock accounts, in ways that are virtually impossible to be considered coincidence. And, BTW, almost every sockpuppet I've run across says things like "But never have I posted as a sock." As far as I'm concerned, the evidence is pretty clear that you have edited wikipedia before using at least two different accounts, and those accounts have been indef-blocked. Therefore, according to our policies, any subsequent accounts also get indef blocked. About the only way to get editing privileges back is to go back to your original account, 'fess up to what you've done, apologize to the community, and commit to a) no more use of multiple accounts and b) no more disruptive editing. AKRadecki^Speaketh 17:48, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Alan, I apologise for not posting to your account but Bill raised the point that resulting in banishment. I phoned you and left a message, but you didn't call back. There's not much I can do except phone you, email you, or post as a numbered IP address like this.

It looks to me like you're going back several years to my former account ID. I only edit as one ID, and even the first time I was banned, I wasn't sock-puppeting. I had legitimate alternative account IDs, permitted under WP rules. Regardless of what other users might say about Sock puppetry, I was not sock-puppeting. I had one ID for aeronautics, and another for civilian edits. The term Sock puppetry refers to these two IDs talking to each other for fraudulent or deceptive purposes. It's not correct to extend this definition in arbitrary ways just because a user (me) is being annoying. I'm sure that Bill wasn't asking for a total ban because he has said more than once that he's OK with my edits.

You've said: "the evidence is pretty clear that you have edited wikipedia before using at least two different accounts". Since this is permitted, where's the beef? This is the second time this club has been used against me, but it looks like you're using it simply because it was used before - not because there's anything wrong with having two IDs.

In theory, I'm sure it would be easy enough to appeal these matters (because the accusation is not founded on fact), but the way you implement the ban, no appeal is possible. There's no rule against having another ID if I'm not talking to my other ID other for fraudulent or deceptive purposes (which I'm not and never have done). Years have gone by. The original complainers have disappeared. What do you want me to do? The appeals process doesn't work after a total ban. So you can't say "the only way to get editing privileges back is to go back to your original account, 'fess up to what you've done, apologize to the community, and commit to a) no more use of multiple accounts . . ." This can't be done under a total ban, for one thing. For another, since there's no prohibition on using multiple accounts, who would I apologise to?

Bill, are you able to comment on this arbitrary & draconian banishment? You're the guy who got Alan all fired up. Did you have a complaint that maybe we could have dealt with like two old octegenarian editors, man to man? Would it help if I apologised to you for something? Since you started this banishment, have you backed away, or are you still involved in the process? Bushcutter