Jump to content

User talk:Ahunt

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by EelkeSpaak (talk | contribs) at 15:51, 27 June 2012. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Diaspora URL

Hi there, you undid my edit of this morning (was not logged in at the time) to Diaspora (social network) because it was 'too spammy'. I added the URL because it seemed appropriate, it is also the link to which Diaspora refers on Facebook. Let's disuss this on Talk:Diaspora (social network). EelkeSpaak (talk) 15:51, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

You did a bunch of great work on Chromebook, so I was wondering if you might be interested in tinkering with Project Glass too... Best regards, Steven Walling • talk 23:50, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can have a look over the next day or two. - Ahunt (talk) 00:19, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Steven Walling • talk 00:40, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I had a look though it and what is there looks okay, I just made a few small changes for formatting. It certainly has good refs. Not much is known about the project at present and so there isn't a lot of text that can be added right now, but I am sure as the project proceeds and more results are released that more tech media refs will appear with updates. - Ahunt (talk) 12:56, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute resolution survey

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite


Hello Ahunt. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released.

Please click HERE to participate.
Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts.


You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 02:08, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I tried completing it, but the survey is badly designed and wouldn't accept my answers. It insisted on answers that I was instructed to leave blank if I had not participated in that mechanism. - Ahunt (talk) 09:51, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bob Bailey Designs

I know that Bob Bailey designed the Connie because he told me! See: http://www.msacomputer.com/FlyingBoats-old/ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMjLR_cktZo You can see the similarity to the Dragonfly.

He worked for Highcraft Aeromarine on the Buccaneer although it was not his concept. He helped to develop the Buccaneer 2 and the Buccaneer SX: http://www.ultralightnews.com/ssulbg/connie-moyes_microlites.htm

As for a citation for the 50L tank, Bob has just built a Dragonfly for me with a 912UL engine and a 50L tank.

Cheers,

Mirek (aka Konrad6da) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Konrad6da (talkcontribs) 15:17, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note. That wouldn't belong in the Dragonfly article, but in an article on Bailey-Moyes Ultralights or in a biography article on him, if we had those. As far as "As for a citation for the 50L tank, Bob has just built a Dragonfly for me with a 912UL engine and a 50L tank" goes, please see WP:OR. We need to cite reliable references for factual information added. "I know this is right" is not a reliable source that can be verified. - Ahunt (talk) 16:06, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wow ... great job on the Glidersport LightHawk. Thanks. S.Steve.Adkins — Preceding unsigned comment added by S.Steve.Adkins (talkcontribs)

No problem, with good refs we can achieve anything here. - Ahunt (talk) 17:42, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ahunt,

With regard to to the 'Variants' section, I don't think it is right to say that the Dragonfly C is the up engined version. The original version and the B have been superseded. The base model is now the C airframe with the Rotax 582 engine.

I don't know what citation is appropriate for this. The LiteFlite website doesn't mention any variants with respect to the airframe; the only choice mentioned is the choice of engine. In practice one can also choose the larger fuel tank, which instruments to fit and also the option of wider tyres but these are perhaps too trivial to mention.

Konrad6da (talk) 04:13, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note. The only ref I have for the "C" model is Downey, Julia: 2005 Kit Aircraft Directory, Kitplanes, Volume 21, Number 12, December 2004, page 69. Belvoir Publications. ISSN 0891-1851. Let me rework the article on the basis of what that ref says and see what you think. - Ahunt (talk) 11:42, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, very good! I can't argue with that.

Cheers, Konrad6da (talk) 10:02, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Glad that works! Thanks for checking it over. - Ahunt (talk) 11:30, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An afterthought: I have a pdf copy of the aircraft flight and operation manual. Is that acceptable for citation as a source document (given that it is not published in the public domain, it is only available to owners)? Konrad6da (talk) 07:03, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That is fine as a ref, just cite it the same as a book. - Ahunt (talk) 10:44, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Meyer Little Toot (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Dihedral
Paramotor Inc (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Oyster Bay, New York
Paramotor Inc FX series (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Oyster Bay, New York

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:34, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - Ahunt (talk) 11:58, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Outage

Actually the recent outage (which is fixed 15 mins ago) was a major one affecting almost 10 million accounts! Gmail team hurriedly talked on it see here. And about citation, this could be added apps status dashboard! --Tito Dutta (Message) 18:16, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You need to cite a reliable ref, not a forum. See WP:SPS. The Google link has no useful information that can be cited - there was a problem they fixed it, it doesn't indicate how many people were affected. Regardless of all of this, temporary outages are normal in all web services, they are not encyclopedic events unless noted in third party reliable refs as notable. - Ahunt (talk) 18:22, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It is more or less solved, as you know! Thanks for your help in ref-filling!--Tito Dutta Message 12:48, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Aero Synergie Papango (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Maori
Tak Sun Secondary School (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Ma On Shan

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:00, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - Ahunt (talk) 10:49, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Replied to your post in talk

I have replied to your post in Gmail talk! --Tito Dutta Message 12:46, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have replied again, in the same post! --Tito Dutta Message 13:18, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your notes here. I do watch that page, so I will see when you respond there. - Ahunt (talk) 14:06, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
He he, actually I often miss updates in watchlist! And adding a note quickly alerts a user (email notification, yellow message bar at top) that he has got a reply! And is is friendly too, since it indicates that the editor is requesting you to participate in the discussion! I do not use talkback template, so manually type the message "I have replied here" etc! BTW, I have replied once again! --Tito Dutta Message 14:26, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sabre Aircraft

I couldn't figure out how to send you a message. I have never used Wikipedia before. I made some changes to the Sabre Aircraft page and you changed them back. I was just trying to correct, and add info. I have a lot more pictures if you want them. In any case, Sabre started production in 1991. Sun-n-Fun 92 was the first public showing, however it was advertised in Ultralight Flying magazine prior. We produced almost 1000 fully built and test flown trikes, and over double that in wings. At the time, many US and Mexican manufacturers used our wings. We were easily the oldest and largest US manufacturer. Northwing may have overtaken us by the end, I am not sure about that as all trike manufacturers were hurting, but it would have taken them years to catch up with our numbers. By the year 2000 we were up to about 100 trikes per year. However in 2002 they announced LSA and, like most manufacturers, our sales tanked. We still had good sales to Mexico, but the writing was on the wall. We stopped manufacturing trikes in 2005, and I sold the Factory building that year. That message on the web site was put there by the guy who did the site, not by us. I was on the ASTM committee to come up with the standards for Light Sport Weight Shift Aircraft. I was at odds with the committee, because I thought their rules were lacking in many areas, and simply not correct in others. I went on to start Helm Navigation LLC to produce the X650 www.helmnav.com

The Sabre Trike was a beautifully simple trike that was a joy to fly, and had a safety record that is still tops in the industry.

Hopefully this will give you the information you need to update the site. By the way, I have a picture of the very first trike that I designed when I was 15 years old. I have a picture of me at 15yrs sitting in it just before a practice taxi run. I test flew it off of a frozen lake in Northern MN that winter. Let me know where to send the photos and I will give you all you need. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rhelm22 (talkcontribs) 17:49, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note, this is fine to communicate. We can't update anything in the article unless we can cite reliable references that say this. Your own personal recollections are great, but they are original research and therefore not verifiable and can't be included. If you can point out a reliable reference that says this we can put it in, otherwise we are stuck with what the published refs do say. - Ahunt (talk) 19:50, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

You commented on my page that it is very odd to award yourself? I was just testing what WikiLove actually was. I will be sending you one soon for your good advice. Felixphew (talk) 07:42, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, okay, I had wondered if it was a test! I just saw it and thought it was odd! No problem, you can experiment on your user pages all you like.- Ahunt (talk) 11:10, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
Here is one for you instead. Felixphew (talk) 07:45, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate the thought, although I am not an admin. - Ahunt (talk) 13:00, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome!

Ha-ha, I didn’t know it's a template under a user page, otherwise I won't edit it :). In Chinese Wikipedia, this kind of template are always belongs to "template" instead of "user" (e.g.: zh:template:User GIMP). In addition, there isn't an "Audacity" template in Chinese Wikipedia, maybe I will create one.

PS: Many open source software are even better than commercial software. Do you agree? --Jack No1 (talk) 15:50, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely! - Ahunt (talk) 23:32, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the Welcome Message!

Greetings, and thanks for the welcome to Wikipedia. I see we have a common interest in aircraft - your efforts in that regard are mighty! Flymow (talk) 01:50, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note! You may want to join us over on WP:WikiProject Aircraft. We have a group of knowledgeable aircraft editors there and can always use more help making aircraft articles better! - Ahunt (talk) 15:08, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Great idea! Long long ago I used to contribute to the WP:Autogyro page, but I'm retired now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flymow (talkcontribs) 02:31, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the welcome!

Hey Ahunt, thank you for the welcome you gave me a few months ago! Sorry for the long delay...

Any tips on how to setup my user page? Thanks in advance!

Pimentel28 (talk) 16:15, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nice to hear from you! Setting up a user page? The best way is to find one that you like and then click "edit" and copy the page's coding into your own page and then modify it to suit. Everything here is freely licenced! - Ahunt (talk) 16:26, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Cyclone Airways

Hello Ahunt. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Cyclone Airways, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 is not about notability—it is about whether the article makes an assertation of importance. Thank you. Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:44, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reviewing it. I see you have sent it to PROD. I'll keep an eye on that and see if it gets removed. - Ahunt (talk) 12:48, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited AeroAndina MXP-150 Kimbaya, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Continental Motors (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) 09:33, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - Ahunt (talk) 11:45, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

10 GB of space Gmail

A new reply in Talk:Gmail#10_GB_of_space :) --Tito Dutta Message 17:52, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Diamond DA42-VI

The Diamond DA42-VI (roman numeral 6, ie. "dash 6") is now the official name of the new DA42. The previous "V1" was retired due to the unfortunate historical reference.

Here's the press announcement from Diamond Aircraft (at 15:20):

http://www.flitelevel.tv/episode/AeroDiamondPressConference

The AOPA article is also correctly updated, whereas the previous AVWeb article is now outdated.

The correct name can be seen on the images as well...

http://www.aopa.org/aircraft/articles/2012/120418diamond-shows-off-new-airplanes-and-powerplants.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.125.38.98 (talk) 07:27, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thanks - that makes sense WRT V-1 flying bomb. - Ahunt (talk) 10:05, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Allods Online userbox

Sorry for the mixup but people are using the One Ring. How does it qualify as a non-far image and there are not complains about the ring. Sorry but I don't get it. It's absurd point of view, I don't think it makes sense. Sorry, but I am bit frustrated.

Regards:The Mad Hatter (talk) 21:48, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The image file data indicates that it is a copyright image and therefore can only only used on Wikipedia under US Copyright fair use rules. Wikipedia lawyers have indicated that the Act's fair use rules do not include the use of logos and such in user boxes thus rendering the use of copyrighted logos illegal under US law in user boxes. This means that you need to use a free image or lettering in the user box instead. I hope that makes sense as I am not a copyright lawyer. Wikipedia:USERBOX#Caution_about_image_use has more guidance on this. - Ahunt (talk) 21:57, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there is anything cynical about it

Unfortunately, I suspect I'm being realistic, not cynical. As, apparently, paid editing is the new accepted norm on Wikipedia, editors who are interested in improving the encyclopedia without taking payment will be forced out - cetainly anyone who expreses any opinion other than complete acceptance seems to be shouted down very vigorously by its proponents. In addition, being attacked for having the nerve to try to improve an article found during a CCI clean-up, being told that I should not edit anywhere on Wikipedia because I referred to redacted instead of redacted for a British Naval Base in Northern Ireland, does not improve my mood.Nigel Ish (talk) 23:07, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I guess not. I did read the new TOS and WP:COI and didn't see anywhere that this has changed. I was offered money to edit, but refused that because it would affect neutrality, I am sure others have done the same. - Ahunt (talk) 23:14, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

BATS Chi-X Europe

Hi Ahunt. As an above-board COI editor I take personal offense when I see edit histories from presumably COI editors like this.[1] The edit is described as "cleanup" but removes some controversial content. On the Talk page I saw you had previously worked with a COI editor on the article and I thought you may have been the one that took the time to improve the article and may be interested in policing it.

Just thought I would give you a heads up. I have a very distant COI in this matter, so I won't touch it. User:King4057 (COI Disclosure on User Page) 00:43, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't dig into it in incredible detail - just came across it in research. So I could be off here. :-D User:King4057 (COI Disclosure on User Page) 00:47, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your note here. I actually starting helping out on that page at the request of someone else and my lack of expertise in that area made it hard to evaluate those edits made. I can have a careful look and perhaps re-instate some of the removed content. - Ahunt (talk) 11:36, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think you are doing

I got a message from you about not editing Stellarium, if you look on their bloody website then you'll see there is 0.11.4 coming out in around November and also 1.0.0 which I would imagine would be released sometime next year.

Quit removing my perfectly accurate edits because this is getting annoying!

Here are the links:- 0.11.4 https://launchpad.net/stellarium/+milestone/0.11.4 1.0.0 https://launchpad.net/stellarium/+milestone/1.0.0 FoxRiley (talk) 13:02, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If done something wrong then please don't hesitate in sending me a message and I'll apologise profusely but I hope you understand that this is annoying. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FoxRiley (talkcontribs) 13:34, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Adding substantive information requires citing references as outlined in WP:V. As explained at WP:ONUS it is up to the person who adds to text to provide the refs required. Now that you have provided some refs above I'll add them for you. - Ahunt (talk) 15:14, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Seizing, a 2-stroke could seize/sieze from lack of fuel as the lubricant is the fuel, but you are right, I stupidly wrote the terminology used in the reference.Petebutt (talk) 16:09, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No sweat, teamwork works! - Ahunt (talk) 19:31, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Google Chrome OS

Was just looking at this when your message came in. Will chime in on the talk page Barte (talk) 15:07, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure. Though maybe more input than you wanted. ;-) BTW, I never did get a Chromebook. After searching around for a replacement to a broken Dell laptop running Joli OS, I wound up buying my first and so far only Apple product, a MacBook Air. And thereby going to the opposite extreme of open source--the cathedral, not the bazaar. About three times the cost, but in this case, at least, I thought Steve Jobs had made his point. Barte (talk) 18:54, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah we didn't get one either. My wife looked at the laptop options carefully and bought a System76 Pangolin running Ubuntu and has been very happy with it. - 21:45, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Iowa Air Museum Edits

Thanks for the heads up and the corrections. The museum in question in Sioux City is actually called "Mid American Museum Of Aviation & Transportation" Edits have been made to correct that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.223.116.11 (talk) 11:14, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks for fixing that up. I'll check it out. - Ahunt (talk) 11:22, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: "Just a caution" in "Wing configuration"

The "do not edit" statement was made exactly because the original text had been altered without discussion or consensus on the talk page as requested in the original edit summary. This item had been up for discussion without any comments made for a week. The quick diminution of the text appears to be a form of tagging, vandalization to mark an area as the property of an individual. This is an on ongoing problem in this section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stodieck (talkcontribs)

Yup I am watching it. - Ahunt (talk) 13:22, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Synergy (aircraft) needs some assistance

Hi there, Ahunt. When you have time, can you take a look at the Synergy (aircraft) page? I'm too new at Wikipedia editing to give proper guidance to the recent contributor, however the article doesn't read as objectively as it probably could/should. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Inverted22 (talkcontribs) 12:35, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, let me have a look. - Ahunt (talk) 12:38, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks great! Thanks! --Inverted22 (talk) 11:35, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for checking it over. We have a lot of people watching it now, hopefully we can keep it less spammy. - Ahunt (talk) 11:39, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Mister Ahunt, first of all hats off to all your contributions on Wikipedia! I noticed your AEROANDINA article, and the MXP 150 Patriot is not part of it. I tried to edit your Kimbaya entry, as they are basically the same plane; but you revoked my (correct) information. Naturally I have references to back everything up.

Are you going to add the MXP 150 Patriot to the Aeroandina page, as it is incomplete as it is?

Regards,

Lost Luggage Lostluggage (talk) 15:19, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you have the refs then please add those to the article or list them here so we can update the article! - Ahunt (talk) 15:30, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done Ahunt……….please have a look. It is offered in Canada & Brazil too and is called Tayrona in the USA. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lostluggage (talkcontribs) 18:43, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Let's take this discussion to Talk:AeroAndina MXP-150 Kimbaya. - Ahunt (talk) 22:47, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Duncan (artist)

Hi! can you please take a look at Charles Duncan (artist). I took it to AfD to avoid soem people to delete the SD tag. It is a hoax as no info available of the existence of that person could be found. --Hahc21 [TALK][CONTRIBS] 14:57, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, let me have a look. - Ahunt (talk) 15:19, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That should have been left as a CSD case - if would have been deleted by now. Let me see what I can do. - Ahunt (talk) 15:22, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
=( Ok. I'd really appreciate the help. Regards. --Hahc21 [TALK][CONTRIBS] 15:23, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Once the speedy tag is removed it really can't be re-instated so I have just endorsed a speedy at AFD. I'll ask an admin to have a look. - Ahunt (talk) 15:25, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks. I've also asked one admin i've been in constant contact. --Hahc21 [TALK][CONTRIBS] 15:27, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OK, then one admin or another should be able to speedily close the AFD, hopefully. - Ahunt (talk) 15:29, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Illegal use of company logo in userboxes

You should probably stop using the google based userboxes YOU are using, and then you might need to do something about these... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:UBX/Chromium http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SteveSims/Userboxes/Firefox http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ZeroOne/Userboxes/User_browser:Opera

In fact, while you are in the mood, you should probably go through en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Userboxes/Software and tell the hundreds of other userbox creators the same thing as you are telling me. MrZoolook (talk) 23:27, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Before you accuse other people of hypocrisy you should do your homework. If you actually checked the files for the Google boxes and the Opera letter "O" you point out above you will see that those logos are not copyrighted, because they consist only of text and thus fail to meet the threshold of originality required for copyrighting. Likewise the Chromium and Firefox logos you point out above are both freely licenced. All the other logos used on the software boxes page are all regularly checked and they all comply. That contrasts with the copyrighted logo you have tried to put into a user box multiple times in contravention of Wikipedia policy and US copyright law. You can apologize anytime. - Ahunt (talk) 11:17, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The Opera logo I pointed to does not 'consist only of text' there is a shadow underneath. Additionally, since it consists of more then just a single letter, and in its entirity looks an exact copy of http://media.opera.com/media/images/icon/Opera_512x512.png, it is likely copyright owned by Opera. You are free to delete that anytime. MrZoolook (talk) 12:40, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you cared to check it, the licence on that image file specifies "Since a single letter in raster format cannot be copyrighted, this image is in the public domain" and "This image consists entirely of a raster rendering (e.g. PNG) of characters from one or more typefaces. As such, it is ineligible for copyright in the United States and therefore is in the public domain." It would be more productive if you just admit you were wrong, promise to check the licencing on any image before you try to use it in a user box and just move on, having learned something from this. - Ahunt (talk) 17:14, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Complete with shadow, ergo NOT a simple letter. All I have 'learned' from this is that some things are overlooked, others are vehemently denied, and yet others are in a state of limbo. *shrug* For instance, you just stated that a single letter is allowed since it is declared PD. Entire words would therefore NOT be considered the same correct? MrZoolook (talk) 21:56, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Since you are down to WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT it is time to move along. - Ahunt (talk) 22:22, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, we are down to you (and I presume Wiki in general) saying that a simple typefaced raster characters are allowed, then allowing simple typefaced raster characters with extra artifacts. I am just wondering where the "extra artifacts" stop being allowed and start to constitute infringement? Thanks for not clearing the issue up! MrZoolook (talk) 02:23, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The tags you are quoting from on the letter "O" image are very specific cases and very specific policies. There are much more general principles in US copyright law as reflected in tags as found on files like this one, which says much more generally: "This image only consists of simple geometric shapes and/or text. It does not meet the threshold of originality needed for copyright protection, and is therefore in the public domain." As indicated I am not a copyright lawyer, but my understanding is that simple shapes and text of any kind, yes even with shadows serifs or any other embellishments, does not come even close to the level of originality to be copyrighted. - Ahunt (talk) 10:44, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
MrZoolook, the three images you mention in your first post are all hosted on the Commons. I would suggest that you take your concerns to Commons:Commons:Village pump/Copyright and ask there if the files are a problem. Or you could ask at Wikipedia talk:FAQ/Copyright. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 14:23, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Doom

Jdaniels15 (talk) has presented you with the Donut of DOOM in the spirit of WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little more gothic.
Bon appetit!
Spread the smell of DOOM by adding {{subst:Give doom}}.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdaniels15 (talkcontribs) 15:21, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! - Ahunt (talk) 15:23, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I tried the DOD myself, and all it did was give me gas. Jdaniels15 (talk) 15:43, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

LOL. Cute donut. - Ahunt (talk) 16:57, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Buffalo

Hi Ahunt; re this edit, today's RCAF is the same entity as the 1975-2011 CF Air Command so it is the same thing, there's no point in linking twice to the same article. Referring to today's RCAF by its 1975-2011 name is incorrect because it was simply renamed, not disbanded : last year's name change did not reinstate the original RCAF (for which the link would probably be "History of the Royal Canadian Air Force", though there is no point in linking it considering the current RCAF article summarizes the pre-1968, the post-1975 RCAFs and the mess in between). Cheers, CharlieEchoTango (contact) 11:40, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well then we should list the name that the CC-115 served the longest under, which would be Air Command. - Ahunt (talk) 12:12, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
But the current name for Air Command is RCAF; it doesn't make sense to call an entity by its former name, it's like calling AT&T Cingular or Ottawa Bytown. If you want to clarify that the Buffs were purchased under the pre-unification RCAF, which is a different entity, then I don't really have an objection, but it should link to "History of the Royal Canadian Air Force", not to the same article... Best regards, CharlieEchoTango (contact) 12:23, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well I think that the "Operational history" section covers that adequately, although it should mention the re-naming, which I will add. Otherwise it is probably too minor an issue to spend any more time on. - Ahunt (talk) 12:30, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to discuss the Dart Skycycle wiki page. I saw that you removed my edits stating that Emerson Stevens was the actual designer of the ultralight, which is the truth. You state "I have become rather fastidious about references in Wikipedia. For anyone who doesn't think it is important for Wikipedia to be scrupulously referenced, I suggest that you read this CBC article and this Globe & Mail article. A lack of references can cause real damage in some cases". The only problem with the citation you used to create this page is that it is incorrect. Bob did not design the Skycycle. I have paperwork documenting Emerson's design process of the skycycle. If you would take the time, you could call Greg Dart, Bob's son who lives in [REDACTED], and validate my statements. Unfortunately, Bob passed away a few years ago. I do not recall my wiki username but you have my IP address. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.99.174.224 (talk) 02:38, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Wikipedia operates on the basis of verifiabiliy, not truth. If you cannot verify something through reliable sources, it doesn't matter if it is 'the truth', Wikipedia must report what is in the reliable sources. Using your paperwork, that has not been published by a reliable source, or calling someone for information, would be original research, which is forbidden. (Also I have redacted some of your post on the basis of it being identifying information of a living person). - The Bushranger One ping only 02:43, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The cited reference Cliche, Andre: Ultralight Aircraft Shopper's Guide 8th Edition, page B-53. Cybair Limited Publishing, 2001. ISBN 0-9680628-1-4 says "The availability of the Dart Skycycle has been announced recently. In fact, it is not a new ultralight, it has first been introduced back in 1985. Production ceased for a while until its designer Robert Dart, decided to put it back on the market." Now it is possible that the author of the book is wrong in this regard, but as noted above, we need a reliable reference to change this. Phoning someone and asking them is not a reliable reference and is specifically prohibited as a citable source as it is original research and cannot be verified by anyone. If you can show a published reliable source to change this then we can change it, otherwise we have to go with what the one published reliable source says. - Ahunt (talk) 10:41, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

for the Wikiwings for "Drag Polar", as it again after an excursion through another name. I noticed the absence of cover whilst writing up a particular aircraft; it was quite fun to do, partly because it reminded me that I was a physicist. I hope one day Wikipedia comes up with a better maths editor: Latek, as implemented here with oversized characters and lack of context awareness, seems to my (reasonably experienced) mathematical eye to isolate the algebra from the text when they should both be part of a continuous narrative flow. I'll not hold my breath, though. Cheers,TSRL (talk) 09:29, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Great to hear from you. It is a good article, so I thought some credit and encouragement was justified! - Ahunt (talk) 12:28, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is your problem that there are comparisons, or that they are currently unsourced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.223.125.132 (talk) 21:16, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Basically on Wikipedia you can only do a comparison of things like different aircraft types if you have a single ref that actually compares them and you cite it. You can't take one ref about one aircraft type and another ref about another aircraft type and come up with your own comparison like that as it runs afoul of WP:SYNTHESIS and WP:OR. - Ahunt (talk) 21:20, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]