Jump to content

User talk:Jetstreamer

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by MANdropov (talk | contribs) at 14:48, 8 October 2014 (→‎Edit: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Reversion in TAP Portugal

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

Finding reliable source

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

Now 18th worst disaster

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

Flag carrier

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

Common knowledge is not considered a reliable source. Before making any edits, you should be familiarised with Wikipedia core content policies a priori. Otherwise, your changes might get reverted.--Jetstreamer Talk 21:15, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The source is one or two clicks away, so go for it and don't withhold information to myriads of Wikipedia users just to be anal about ”policies“ – reminds me of the Usenet ”netiquette fascists“ back in the good old 1990s. So why don't just be constructive and add the (superfluous) reference (next to the blue link in the very same table row) you long for yourself? — 91.10.11.168 (talk) 21:36, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
WP:BURDEN. I'm not gonna do your work for you.--Jetstreamer Talk 22:26, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[[WP:SOME_OBSCURE_ABBREV_TO_DEMONSTRATE_WIKI_SUPERIORITY]]. What a pity you chose to only take the BURDEN to revert an edit and ridiculously cite WP rules rather than producing anything useful. Let's wait for a wise man together, both clever and diligent enough to click to Swiss and undo your revert while inserting that reference never to be looked at again (cf very same column entry for Austrian). — 91.10.11.168 (talk) 23:57, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I already explained my reasoning. There are policies to be followed. Do not edit Wikipedia if you do not agree with them.--Jetstreamer Talk 02:12, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The thing you don't get is: there are policies – but they have to be laid out, applied with respect to each individual case. You know mathematics? They do a lot of proving, don't they? Do they prove the obvious? Of course they could, but they don't: Besides someone proved it already, anyone not believing the ”obviousness“ can do the prove himself. – So in Wikipedia, you clearly don't have to prove (or cite sources) the world is round™, New York is located 40.42° N or Rome 41.53° N… — So rules and policies are a good-thing™, unless self-declared guardians of WP:THE_POLICIEZ following words rather than reason turn them into tools of disruption. — (edited previous comment for orthography; same individual, different IP than above:) 91.10.37.111 (talk) 14:26, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Images at Mexico City International Airport

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

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

Mayday episode of Quantas 32

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

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

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

Flydubai Incidents Section

Hello,

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

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

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

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

@PilotJaguar1996: First of all, thanks for considering I'm the one to be contacted, even when there are a number of editors far more skilled than me in this subject. Regarding warring, you may want to use the article's talk pages to discuss with others and gain consensus. To me, the entry seems to be not notable enough for inclusion; it was just a potential tragedy. Cheers.--Jetstreamer Talk 17:39, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Jetstreamer:  There is a discussion going on at the articles talk page. I wish to invite you to voice your opinion as well, regarding what I first wrote and how I am not adding the section anymore. Appreciate it! --PilotJaguar1996 (talk) 17:42, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ethiopian Airlines Cargo

Hi Jetstreamer,

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

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

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

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

Re: Speedy deletion nomination of Earl Hilton

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

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

Jetstar Airways

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

@Otchiman: Sure. What exactly do you want me to do?--Jetstreamer Talk 12:51, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 There is just an extra column at the end that I cannot work out to remove. If you could remove it I would be greatly appreciated. Otchiman (talk) 23:05, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Otchiman: I think it's done. Please check. (BTW, you don't need to use the {{ping}} template at my talk page, I get a popup notice when I receive a new message).--Jetstreamer Talk 00:22, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much looks much better now. Otchiman (talk) 01:42, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fuerteventura Airport page

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

@Woodywyatt: The template I left at your talk was not for removing the image but for adding unsourced information ([1]).--Jetstreamer Talk 19:38, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh okay. How do I source it? I'm new to Wikipedia and I really want to give LOADS of information I know about this island, Fuerteventura.
@Woodywyatt: WP:RELIABLE, WP:SOURCE and WP:VERIFY should help.--Jetstreamer Talk 01:55, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No war please

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

No aims to war. Have you seen the number of references I've added to Qatar Airways? You cannot tell me I'm not aware of the current condition of that page: it's full of unsourced statements. And you suggest to tagbomb the article?--Jetstreamer Talk 17:14, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
First: thank you for your edits and talk.
You added refs: Thats it. Of course additional refs improve and some could be added: Thanks, AND: Refs are not absolutely needed if content is self-explained for well informed editors or can be quite quickly googled. Thats the reason i deleted the tags, additionally the "closely related".
Tagbomb: Can't see much disputed content. Or?
Generally: Article tags are obviously for main parts of the article:
  • important messages to readers: main article faults
  • minimum highly important and urgent messages to the editors with reasons how to improve.
No reason given and no can be seen here. Don't know anything about Ilyushin Il-76. 77.185.38.248 (talk) 17:46, 19 September 2014 (UTC) Updated: 77.185.38.248 (talk) 20:46, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Never mind about the Ilyushin Il-76 stuff. I don't agree with your position regarding the maintenance templates but I think I can live with the article not having them.--Jetstreamer Talk 18:31, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Glad about the agreement. I generally think Wikipedia fullfills minimum quality in most articles. Bad articles, which are not wrong, but bad in
  • being stubs
  • missing the point
  • missing refs without being disputed
mostly don't get better even if article tagged for years.
In contrary inline tags are mostly corrected within a few weeks. 77.185.38.248 (talk) 20:46, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Message from Orientaldecorations

Actually this is for AndyTheGrumpy or whatever he is calling himself. Somehow I can't get his own page or he is hiding because he knows very well what he wrote under spam on my page:

I strongly advise you to stop spamming Wikipedia articles with your third-rate publications. This is an encyclopaedia, not a platform for the promotion of misleading self-published copies of official reports masquerading as books, and abusing our facilities in this way is liable to result in you being blocked from editing. While there is clearly little we can do to stop you promoting your ripoffs elsewhere, we are certainly under no obligation to permit you to do so here. AndyTheGrump (talk) 07:55, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

is pure slander. You accuse an acclaimed writer (just check amazon.com or Barnes&Noble) of writing "ripoffs", publishing third rate publications and "masquerading" etc. I can sue you for that. I did explain exactly why we publish these books but you seem to lack the level of understanding it. You hide behind childish names such as "Andy Grump", "Streetwalker" or "I love horses". What is that a children's playground? I demand within 24 hours an apology and putting back on the appropriate websites the additions I made. If not I will file a complaint directly by mrs Lila Tretikov Wikimedia Foundation in San Francisco. You know perfectly well that she does not need this kind of publicity from low level ants. Good day, discussion closed.

(Orientaldecorations (talk) 01:43, 30 September 2014 (UTC)). {{admin!}}[reply]

@Orientaldecorations and AndyTheGrump: I'm calling for admin help regarding the message above, as it borders legal threatening.--Jetstreamer Talk 10:22, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yup. And note the irony in someone registered as 'Orientaldecorations' complaining about anonymous usernames. The simple facts are that Orientaldecorations' only 'contributions' has been to add multiple links to books he is publicising (often duplicating them on the same page: [2], or placing them on pages not even concerning the subject of the article [3]). This is a blatant violation of our conflict of interest guidelines. If he wishes to draw further attention to his unscrupulous business practices, that is his concern, but Wikipedia is under no obligation whatsoever to assist him in selling for profit material which is freely available. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:20, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
And incidentally, if Orientaldecorations/Dirk J. Barreveld (see [4]) is an 'acclaimed writer', why is he publishing books under the pseudonyms of ' George Cramoisi', 'Pete Collins' and 'Igor Korovin'? AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:40, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Indef block for Harassment, lawyers aren't actually mentioned. Ronhjones  (Talk) 23:09, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Ronhjones: Thanks.--Jetstreamer Talk 23:56, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reliability

Hi Jetstreamer,

I just saw that you reverted my edit in Aeroflot's page, because "Planespotters is not a reliable source".

  • About the general case: How do you come to that conclusion? WP:RS, or a consensus in the WikiProject Aviation / Airlines ?
  • About this particular case (aeroflot): You probably know that Aeroflot website's fleet page is clearly outdated. In this case, we're not talking about replacing an official source by another one, just to keep wikipedia's data updated on an hourly or daily basis. It's a matter of 6 months. The article currently says "As of September 2014, the Aeroflot fleet includes the following aircraft". This is obviously a false information. It's not about Planespotters versus aeroflot.com. It's dozen of reliable sources versus aeroflot.com. Don't you feel uncomfortable to revert a correct information by a wrong one?

85.218.56.214 (talk) 14:16, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. It was agreed not long ago that the official information is the more accurate one we have to support fleet tables. Regarding Planespotters, you may want to have a word with MilborneOne, with whom I had a number of discussions over the reliability of the different sources available for this particular purpose.--Jetstreamer Talk 15:09, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Please remember that this is an encyclopedia so it doesnt matter if it is a few months (or even years) out of date as long as it has a reliable reference and is dated, there are plenty of enthusiast websites like planespotters that keep up to date almost daily if that is what the reader wants but that is not the role of an encyclopedia. Most of these fan site are personal websites that do not meet the wikipedia requirement for reliablity. MilborneOne (talk) 15:15, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your answers, but let me disagreed, for the following reasons:
  • Per WP:RS, I can't understand why Planespotters is not a reliable source. This should be discussed and decided by consensus.
  • I can't understand why "the official information is the more accurate one we have to support fleet tables". Where does that come from? Why should we, in this case, give priority and even exclusivity to a primary source? Especially when this source comes from the company itself (clear conflict of interest).
  • Provide a reliable source for a statement is a thing, but is it enough? What if the source is obviously wrong?
  • We can debate about the fact that "It doesn't matter if an information is a few months or even years out of date". But what's the relation between Wikipedia being an encyclopedia, and the fact that it should not be up to date?
  • In Aeroflot Il-96's case, I don't get your point of view. Aeroflot obviously do not operate them anymore. This can be sourced by dozens of reliable sources. Why do you prefer to keep the outdated information? Which also become a wrong information, as the text said "as of september 2014"… Your position appears far more dogmatic than pragmatic to me. And finally, in that case, leads to make wikipedia less relevant. That's my opinion, but I'll open the debate on the subject as soon as I find some time.85.218.56.214 (talk) 15:57, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Star Alliance

Sorry about accusing you of vandalism. Can you help me as someone keeps removing what I have put for the former affiliates when I am putting the airlines affilates (e.g Bmi Regional) Can you revert it back for me.thank youSillyPotatoe (talk) 17:35, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Air Serbia's fleet

WHY YOU ALWAYS CHANGE THE FLEET SECTION ON AIR SERBIA?!?!?!? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.180.124.130 (talk) 17:58, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Capital letters are not necessary. Anyone can edit Wikipedia but you behaviour is disruptive and I'm just following the consensus. I suggest you to read the article's talk to know the reason why you're being reverted. You're making exactly the same edits that led 95.180.123.154 (talk · contribs) to their current block. And WP:DUCK suggests that you're the same editor. I strongly advise you to stop.--Jetstreamer Talk 20:33, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Edit

To user Jetstreamer:

It was my intention to edit the article in SkyTeam, but I would just like to say that I would include my sources.

I got it from the Wikipedia Articles of King Abdulaziz International Airport and King Khalid International Airport.

Thank you.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jetstreamer&oldid=628794980"