Jump to content

User talk:Petebutt

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Tonymax469 (talk | contribs) at 03:41, 15 July 2012 (→‎Wanna organize your user page?: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Aviation WikiProject
Articles for review



This box:

Wikiwings

Wikiwings
For diligent creation of many articles, including PZL Bielsko SZD-7, PZL Bielsko SZD-10, PZL Bielsko SZD-11, PZL Bielsko SZD-12, PZL Bielsko SZD-13, PZL Bielsko SZD-6x and PZL Bielsko SZD-8. - Ahunt (talk) 01:54, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

The Citation Barnstar The Citation Barnstar
For amazing citation-fixing work on Glossary of USSR/Russian aviation acronyms - Ahunt (talk) 13:55, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Awarded for your mind boggling dedication, workload and sheer application in creating and editing several lengthy and detailed tables, especially those relating to lists of RAF stations and ROC Monitoring posts. 21st CENTURY GREENSTUFF 15:38, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wings

Wikiwings
Just to recognise some of your work in the background on aircraft article assesment and lists. MilborneOne (talk) 08:42, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Petebutt/Archive 1 User talk:Petebutt/Archive 2

engine redirects

I've started a discussion [here]. Comment welcome.Nigel Ish (talk) 11:47, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GOCE March copy edit drive

Invitation from the Guild of Copy Editors

The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in their March 2012 Backlog elimination drive, a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on March 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on March 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goal for the drive will be to eliminate the remaining 2010 articles from the queue. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits more than 4,000 words, and special awards will be given to the top 5 in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", and "Number of articles of over 5,000 words". We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa, Stfg, and Coordinator emeritus SMasters. 19:48, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

>>> Sign up now <<<

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

</left>

The Bugle: Issue LXXI, February 2012

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 10:18, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

February 2012

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Consolidated Liberator I, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Wikih101 (talk) 17:37, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Douglas Dolphin

See recent changes in the article, using original reference sources. Use talk if you intend to make changes. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 17:52, 5 March 2012 (UTC). I am familiar with citation templates, but there is no use in using them when all that is done is to introduce errors. See the edits. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 18:42, 5 March 2012 (UTC).[reply]

Cybele class mine destructor vessel

Just curious why you state this article fails B5? A photograph, while preferable, is not required to pass it. - The Bushranger One ping only 00:07, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just personal opinion. I feel that just an infobox is insufficient and any article I assess is judged similarly. If you think that it is justified go ahead and re-assess.Petebutt (talk) 04:41, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, since I created the article, it would be COI for me to reassess. ;) Just wondered why you reassessed it after it had already been assessed. - The Bushranger One ping only 04:52, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fascinating article by the way. It got picked up by the new article bot at Aviation, It's a pity there isn't an image, I searchewd the internet and couldn't find one either. Strange that they were actually given the status of ships even though they were only towed, maybe part of the deception!Petebutt (talk) 04:59, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Very odd indeed. Pretty sure that was the reason - hush-hush, old chap! - The Bushranger One ping only 05:32, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

SENAN

I appreciate you were trying to help with the SENAN article, but in future please do not add direct machine translations to articles, they are generally too poor if you're not going to do any cleanup afterwards--Jac16888 Talk 13:37, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It actually wasn't too bad from what I read, but yes I did the dirty deed and ran.Petebutt (talk) 18:24, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GOCE March drive newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors March 2012 backlog elimination drive update
GOCE March 2012 Backlog Elimination progress graphs

Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors March 2012 Backlog elimination drive! Here's the mid-drive newsletter.

Participation: We have had 58 people sign up for this drive so far, which compares favorably with our last drive, and 27 have copy-edited at least one article. If you have signed up but have not yet copy-edited any articles, please consider doing so. Every bit helps! If you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Join us!

Progress report: Our target of completing the 2010 articles has almost been reached, with only 56 remaining of the 194 we had at the start of the drive. The last ones are always the most difficult, so thank you if you are able to help copy-edit any of the remaining articles. We have reduced the total backlog by 163 articles so far.

Special thanks: Special thanks to Stfg, who has been going through the backlog and doing some preliminary vetting of the articles—removing copyright violations, doing initial clean-up, and nominating some for deletion. This work has helped make the drive a more pleasant experience for all our volunteers.

Your drive coordinators – Dianna (talk), Stfg (talk), and Dank (talk)

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

The Bugle: Issue LXXII, March 2012

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:32, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]


826 Naval Air Squadron

Thank you for your words of support. They mean all the more as they come from someone who seems to have a creditable track record, as distinct from some of the pompous, overbearing and patronising "administrators".

I don't blame the Bot for flagging the article. That was a fair cop as I had saved it prematurely. What gets my goat was the "Welcome to Wikipedia. We're trashing your article which may have taken two hours of your valuable time. Maybe you'd like to completely rewrite it. Happy editing. Have a nice day" attitude. This is to someone who would have been paid up to 100,000 pounds in a commercial environment for the time they have freely given to the site . "Welcome to Wikipedia" to someone who has done 30,000 edits - you couldn't make it up.

Plucas58 (talk) 00:05, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GOCE March drive wrap-up

Guild of Copy Editors March 2012 backlog elimination drive
GOCE March 2012 Backlog Elimination progress graph

Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors March 2012 Backlog elimination drive! This is the most successful drive we have had for quite a while. Here is your end-of-drive wrap-up newsletter.

Participation

Of the 70 people who signed up for this drive, 40 copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Special acknowledgement goes out to Lfstevens, who did over 200 articles, most of them in the last third of the drive, and topped all three leaderboard categories. You're a superstar! Stfg and others have been pre-checking the articles for quality and conformance to Wikipedia guidelines; some have been nominated for deletion or had some preliminary clean-up done to help make the copy-edit process more fun and appealing. Thanks to all who helped get those nasty last few articles out of the target months.

Progress report

During this drive we were successful in eliminating our target months—October, November, and December 2010—from the queue, and have now eliminated all the 2010 articles from our list. We were able to complete 500 articles this month! End-of-drive results and barnstar information can be found here.

When working on the backlog, please keep in mind that there are options other than copy-editing available; some articles may be candidates for deletion, or may not be suitable for copy-editing at this time for other reasons. The {{GOCEreviewed}} tag can be placed on any article you find to be totally uneditable, and you can nominate for deletion any that you discover to be copyright violations or completely unintelligible. If you need help deciding what to do, please contact any of the coordinators.

Thank you for participating in the March 2012 drive! All contributions are appreciated. Our next copy-edit drive will be in May.

Your drive coordinators – Dianna (Talk), Stfg (Talk), and Dank (talk)

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

EdwardsBot (talk) 22:15, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Changes to the Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross series

Thanks for your contributions to the various Knights' Cross of the Iron Cross articles. I reverted some of your changes, particular those adding the "See also" section. I believe the "See also" to be unnessary since the upper right hand navigation template addresses the same needs. Also various reviews of had indicated that a "See also" gives the impression of an incomplete article. And lastly the articles are already rather lengthy. Please also note that the full name of the order is "Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross". The Knight's Cross refers to multiple orders. I hope you agree and understand MisterBee1966 (talk) 05:39, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't get my head around the fact that they were ALL Knights' Cross of the Iron Cross. The navbox was a definite Doh! on my part. What I am trying to do is elevate them all to at least A-class status, it seems silly that some are and others not for what is essentially a single article split into parts.Petebutt (talk) 07:56, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WikiThanks

WikiThanks
WikiThanks

You are among the top 5% of most active Wikipedians this past month! 66.87.2.116 (talk) 13:53, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An award for you

A Barnstar!
Golden Wiki Award
In recognition of all the work you’ve done lately! 67.80.64.128 (talk) 23:01, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GOCE May copy edit drive

Invitation from the Guild of Copy Editors

The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in their May 2012 Backlog elimination drive, a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on May 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on May 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goal for the drive will be to eliminate January, February, and March 2011 from the queue. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits more than 4,000 words, and special awards will be given to the top 5 in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", and "Number of articles of over 5,000 words". We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa, and Stfg.

>>> Sign up now <<<

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. EdwardsBot (talk) 18:45, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GAN review

Hi, Pete. No rush, but were you going to complete the GAN review for German aircraft carrier II? If not, it's not a problem, just let me know so I can reset it. Parsecboy (talk) 17:42, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornet in Australian service GAN

Hi Pete, Thanks for taking the time to review this article. Have you now finished adding comments at Talk:McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornet in Australian service/GA1? If so, could you please mark the article's talk page as having passed this review? Thanks, Nick-D (talk) 11:41, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done it.Petebutt (talk) 03:53, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

changing templates

Not wanting to sound funny about this, but why are you changing articles from template:aircraft specifications to template:aero specs. The former is an accepted temnplate in long use and shouldn't need changing. GraemeLeggett (talk) 12:11, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because someone has tagged them as requiring either template change or more specs. The template is Template:Aircraft specs, the latest iteration, but yes some earlier ones are acceptable, but there is no problem either changing them or leaving them. Is there a problem I am not aware of?!!Petebutt (talk) 12:17, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My apology with the redlink, trying to do two things at once. The template template:aero specs missing only marks an article out as needing more specfication data - eg performance data - not that the template needs a change. A problem I can forsee with changing the template is not retaining the original data which should be in the units that are given in the source. If the source is not available to be checked, both imperial and metric set should (need to?) be retained. GraemeLeggett (talk) 17:48, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I found a problem with the Template:Aircraft specs, it rounds off the speed conversions such that strange effects occur eg 200 km/h (120 mph) and 201 km/h (125 mph). GraemeLeggett (talk) 12:05, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What can we do to address the conversion factor problem. I don't see how it is doing that to be honest. to be so wildly out, maybe somebody has written the script to round to the nearest five instead of one!Petebutt (talk) 12:15, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've commented on the template talk page. I believe I have the answer. But I am supposed to be "at work" at the moment, so cna't fix for a few hours but it does seem fixable. GraemeLeggett (talk) 14:04, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of Royal Air Force & Defence Units & Establishments and Operational Training Units

Good Evening Petebutt

I'm working on a list of Operational Training Units (OTU) do you know where would be a good place to place these?

I'm thinking about placing the units within List of Royal Air Force & Defence Units & Establishments and making a new title for them (there are around 90 OTUs) but i'm not currently sure so i thought i would ask you as you created the list.

Thanks

Gavbadger (talk) 16:08, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Now that you ask, I wou;d have said they are already in that list but apparently not. I don't think there is a need to change the title, and if you did it would probzbly be revertyed as being too long. OTUs are covered by the Unit bit. Do you have Lakes Flying units of the RAF?, If not you might have difficulty.Petebutt (talk) 16:21, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I ordered both RAF Squadrons: A Comprehensive Record of the Movement and Equipment of All RAF Squadrons and Their Antecedents Since 1912 by C.G. Jefford and The Squadrons of the Royal Air Force and Commonwealth, 1918-88 by Halley yesterday but i've never heard of one by lake, I'll get it if the other two books do not cover the Topic. Thanks for the notice on my talk page by the way. Gavbadger (talk) 16:32, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Those books probably won't cover OTUs sensibly. I assume you're getting them from a library, as the Lake book was printed in 1999 and is provbaly very hard to find for sale. (Flying Units of the RAF;Lake, Alan;Airlife;London;1999;ISBN 1 84037 086 6).Petebutt (talk) 16:50, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks i will have a look. Gavbadger (talk) 17:00, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXXIII, April 2012

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:33, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GOCE May mid-drive newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors May 2012 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter

Participation: Out of 49 people signed up for this drive so far, 26 have copy-edited at least one article. It's a smaller group than last drive, but we're making good progress. If you've signed up but haven't yet copy-edited any articles, please consider doing so. Every bit helps! If you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Template:J

Progress report: We're on track to meet our targets for the drive, largely due to the efforts of Lfstevens and the others on the leaderboard. Thanks to all. We have reduced our target group of articles—January, February, and March 2011—by over half, and it looks like we will achieve that goal. Good progress is being made on the overall backlog as well, with over 500 articles copy-edited during the drive so far. The total backlog currently sits at around 3200 articles.

Hall of Fame: GOCE coordinator Diannaa was awarded a spot in the GOCE Hall of Fame this month! She has copy-edited over 1567 articles during these drives, and surpassed the 1,000,000-word mark on May 5. On to the second million! – Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa and Stfg

>>> Sign up now <<<

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 14:41, 15 May 2012 (UTC) [reply]

Company names beginning with the definite article

Thanks for your thoughts on the sheep shearing company name. The trouble is there are many companies whose correct names begin with the definite article. Just as recent fashion dictates (if you can do it) a one word name like Diageo the fashion a century ago was to get started with a The. Should all the other company names be amended just like the sheep shearing company? Regards, Eddaido (talk) 02:28, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In short Yes. Wikipedia is not here to re-write history! Or is it?Petebutt (talk) 02:29, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm, well I'm a fan for correcting the occasional Wikipedian excess but I try to be relaxed about it all. Here's a couple of examples where new article names would be immediately in order:
Cheers, Eddaido (talk) 11:26, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Carry on.Petebutt (talk) 11:33, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Wish I could find your enthusiasm! Best, Eddaido (talk) 11:45, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Blériot XI A class nomination

Hi Pete, I'm afraid that I've closed this nomination as not being successful. I hope that the comments the reviewing editors left are helpful for improving the article, and please feel free to renominate it once you think that it's ready. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 00:29, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's always worth having a review to see what is needed.Petebutt (talk) 12:30, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Gordon Bennett!

An image, an infobox, tables of entrants in each competition... I obviously have to try harder! Nice to see that you thought the Bleriot XI article worthy of an 'A-class' review, btw: I've put a bit of work into the article but feel it needs a fair bit more.TheLongTone (talk) 16:37, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just standard stuff, the vast majority of imageneeded tags are unlikely to be satisfied, but it is necessary to tag them so editors can check what is needed and correlate it with what's available; see:[[Category:Aviation articles needing images]] on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Maintenance page. I suggested the tables as I would be interested in a complete list of entrants and their aircraft, especially as some were rare pioneering aircraft. I nominated the Bleriot article for A-class in the mistaken belief, (yes I didn't check) that A-class came before GA and not the other way round. A nomination for GA would probably succeed!!Petebutt (talk) 17:55, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
An image of the Trophy would be really nice, if there's a free image out there. The thing has a bronze sculpture of a Wright Flyer on the top. I'll add stuff on the individual races, but my crystal ball tells me there'll be redlinks or links to stubs involved.TheLongTone (talk) 18:08, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry about red-links. they indicate articles that need to be written. Due to Wikipedia's strict search parameters I suggest searching in Google to discover articles that might be relevant.Petebutt (talk) 18:46, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Any aircraft flyable enough to compete in this race needs an article. Identifying the things can be a huge problem as well
for example Paulhan was flying two different Antoinettes at Rheims. Sources are oftern conflicting...TheLongTone (talk) 18:53, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No need to shout!!! (you popped in a semi-colon there. If you check List of aircraft or List of aircraft (pre 1914), you might find most of them have articles already.Petebutt (talk) 18:56, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about that. I rather like semi colons. Yes, I've done quite a lot od sniffing around the pre-1914 list as I'm sure you've noticed. It's not the redlinks that bother me: it's the links to aircraft about which little reliable is published: I itch to expand them, but my resources are more or less limited to British aircraft.TheLongTone (talk) 20:13, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
LikewisePetebutt (talk) 01:20, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nearly ready to drop in tables for 1909-1911: only one redlink (Bleriot XXIII, but the Nieuport II was a close shave, only been there a couple of months.TheLongTone (talk) 15:35, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

PZL P.11

This article you contributed to needs one para referenced to remain in the B-class. Perhaps you'll have time to work on it? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 22:23, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done!Petebutt (talk) 22:27, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXXIV, May 2012

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 15:13, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GOCE May drive wrap-up

Guild of Copy Editors May 2012 backlog elimination drive wrap-up

Participation: Out of 54 people who signed up this drive, 32 copy-edited at least one article. Last drive's superstar, Lfstevens, again stood out, topping the leader board in all three categories and copy-editing over 700 articles. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

Progress report: We were once again successful in our primary goal—removing the oldest three months from the backlog—while removing 1166 articles from the queue, the second-most in our history. The total backlog currently sits at around 2600 articles, down from 8323 when we started out just over two years ago.

Coodinator election: The six-month term for our third tranche of Guild coordinators will be expiring at the end of June. We will be accepting nominations for the fourth tranche of coordinators, who will also serve a six-month term. Nominations will open starting on June 5. For complete information, please have a look at the election page. – Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa, and Stfg

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 15:51, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Petebutt. You have new messages at Talk:1912 Brooklands Flanders Monoplane crash.
Message added Mjroots (talk) 07:48, 11 June 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

reqphoto

I see you are very busy with updating aviation talk pages at the moment. Adding the reqphoto is useful but could you please note that the parameters should relate to existing categories. For example not USA but the United States, not UK or Britain but the United Kingdom or England or other region. I know the wording of some others are difficult without looking them up such as Georgia or some African republics so if you do not want to go though he subcategories please feel free just to add reqphoto without any parameters. I have a bot that runs once a week and based on WikiProject templates will set the correct category.--Traveler100 (talk) 06:02, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. Mostly finished at present, just trying to clean up the nimageneeded pages and widen the catchment area for the requests.Petebutt (talk) 06:55, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Please be careful with reqphoto parameters, if you are getting a red link check existing categories, most topics and places are well covered. --Traveler100 (talk) 07:13, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I was trying a re-direct but i am not sire it worked correctly.Petebutt (talk) 13:08, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Batik Air

I noticed you put a photo request on the talk page for this article. What are you requesting a photo of? Please specify. Thanks, Compdude123 15:04, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! OK, a photo when they finally start operations then!Petebutt (talk) 16:50, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Charles H. Zimmerman

I have added a group photo to the page which includes C.H. Zimmerman. Also a photo of some of his work (looking at the dates I do not think it is him in the photo). --Traveler100 (talk) 18:08, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, but is Zimmerman one of them?Petebutt (talk) 18:30, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you click on the image the description states he is the 16th from left.--Traveler100 (talk) 18:44, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Found a good one of George H. Prudden too.--Traveler100 (talk) 18:46, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It gets better, I knew it was a good idea to widen the catchment area. Well done!Petebutt (talk) 18:49, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Help Survey

Hi there, my name's Peter Coombe and I'm a Wikimedia Community Fellow working on a project to improve Wikipedia's help system. At the moment I'm trying to learn more about how people use and find the current help pages. If you could help by filling out this brief survey about your experiences, I'd be very grateful. It should take less than 10 minutes, and your responses will not be tied to your username in any way.

Thank you for your time,
the wub (talk) 18:17, 14 June 2012 (UTC) (Delivered using Global message delivery)[reply]

RLM numbering system for gliders and sailplanes

I think you had better look again at the reversions you carried out on this article. Strictly speaking it is your actions that could be construed as vandalism!!Petebutt (talk) 02:17, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted the changes mainly because they said "Data from German Military Aircraft Designations (1933-1945). However this webpage quotes the Wikipedia article as its primary reference. This is clearly an example of a circular reference which I couldn't resolve. I tried to clarify in my second edit summary that it was not a case of vandalism. . . Mean as custard (talk) 07:45, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Think about it. The info inquestion was not mentioned in the article, which is why I put it in. So how can it bew a circular reference if the article didn't have the info in the first place!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The Egg definitely comes first!!Petebutt (talk) 12:38, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think a note to say that the reference to wikipedia quoted in the reference is incorrect.Petebutt (talk) 12:38, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Found the source of the trouble. A previous editor has obviously removed the table list after Mr Pausch wrote his webpage, so the circular reference did not exist.Petebutt (talk) 12:42, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that now the article quotes no main source, whereas the version I originally reverted to at least had a contemporary primary reference, the Flugzeug-Typenbuch of 1939/40. . . Mean as custard (talk) 13:54, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is a problem,but te Typenbuch didn't give the correct RLM designations. We shall have to find a sourcre somewhere. Somebody must have one because the wikipedia article came first.Petebutt (talk) 13:58, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GOCE July 2012 Copy Edit Drive

Invitation from the Guild of Copy Editors

The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in their July 2012 Backlog elimination drive, a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on July 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on July 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goals are to eliminate the articles tagged in April, May and June 2011 from the queue and to complete all requests placed before the end of June. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits more than 4,000 words, and special awards will be given to the top 6 in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", "Number of articles of over 5,000 words", "Number of articles tagged in April–June 2011", and "Longest article". We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa and Stfg.

>>> Sign up now <<<

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 19:09, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GOCE July 2012 Copy Edit Drive

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:20, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Aviation accident TF

Why was the sub-page for the accident TF changed here? I don't see any discussion for it, and now all the templates that link to that page, e.g., Template:WikiProject Aviation, have redirects, and you can't use the "up folder" option anymore. I don't see a benefit to it, and I think it should be changed back, as the majority of project TFs are subpages. --Funandtrvl (talk) 17:09, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Update, I've moved the task force page back to its original page name, so that it remains a sub-project of WikiProject Aviation, and all the backlinks will work now. --Funandtrvl (talk) 18:13, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That'll be why I got wierd results when I tried to revert. Does it work OK now?Petebutt (talk) 18:24, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I was actually trying to turn it into a primary page instead of a sub-page, but the results I was expecting didn't material ise and then I had real life intervene. Thanks for the repair job.Petebutt (talk) 18:26, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, I think it's working okay now. Cheers! --Funandtrvl (talk) 18:28, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Chicago (airplane)

Hi. I was wondering is we could come to some agreement on this merge issue. Before your proposal, I had proposed this article for use on July 14 at did you know because of the Bastille Day angle. Now, it wont be eligible until we hash this out, so there is bit of a time issue. I created this article based on a request at the Smithsonian Project page, so there was at least some indication that a separate article is warranted. I did comment at the merge discussion and I think I understand your point but given the names of the two articles, it does appear they are on different related subjects - similar to any article pair about a class of things and an individual notable example. So, would you be willing to abate your merge proposal? Thanks. Alanscottwalker (talk) 14:47, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The slashing of content to bolster a case is not acceptable and when just refusal to listen to others is also evident, the rewrite of the new article was always a possibility but the Douglas World Cruiser and First aerial circumnavigation are the main articles and there does not appear to be any need for a peripheral article. Three months is really a long time for a merge proposal, typically a one-week period suffices. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 20:09, 5 July 2012 (UTC).[reply]
Are you talking to me or Alan? I, for onr, am not talking of slashing content, but ensuring what is there is in the right place and of a good standard. As i say in the discussion better one very good article than several mediocre ones.Petebutt (talk) 23:31, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not you. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 04:02, 6 July 2012 (UTC).[reply]

Credo Reference Update & Survey (your opinion requested)

Credo Reference, who generously donated 400 free Credo 250 research accounts to Wikipedia editors over the past two years, has offered to expand the program to include 100 additional reference resources. Credo wants Wikipedia editors to select which resources they want most. So, we put together a quick survey to do that:

It also asks some basic questions about what you like about the Credo program and what you might want to improve.

At this time only the initial 400 editors have accounts, but even if you do not have an account, you still might want to weigh in on which resources would be most valuable for the community (for example, through WikiProject Resource Exchange).

Also, if you have an account but no longer want to use it, please leave me a note so another editor can take your spot.

If you have any other questions or comments, drop by my talk page or email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com. Cheers! Ocaasi t | c 17:28, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Petebutt. You have new messages at Alexzarach's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talk:Woomera Test Range

Hello Pete. I noticed that you have recently reassessed this article as "Start class" from "B class" with this edit [1]. Not sure if you realised though that both MILHIST and WPAVIATION templates are still displaying it as "B Class". This is because each of these templates still have the B class checklist filled out with all "yes's", so it is automatically displaying the assessment as B class. If you feel the article still needs further development to reach B class (I have no opinion either way) then you will just need to adjust the B class checklists appropriately to reflect this (i.e. is it lacking for referencing, coverage and accuracy, structure, grammer or supporting materials?) etc. I hope this helps. Anotherclown (talk) 22:47, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think you will find that The assessment system for WPAVIATION, WPGERMANY and WPMILHIST requirs the start classification for the automatic assessment to work, so don't worry and dont change it', or the B-class will disappear.Petebutt (talk) 03:34, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wanna organize your user page?

Wanna organize your user page? I can show you how. Tonymax469 (talk) 03:41, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Petebutt&oldid=502350070"