User talk:BilCat

NOT RETIRED

This user is somewhat active on Wikipedia, and limits his activities to a small range of pages and mostly non-contentious discussions. There may be periods in which the user is not active due to life issues.

This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.

This is a Wikipedia user talk page.
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:BilCat.

Archives

Archive 1 - October 2006 - March 2007
Archive 2 - April - May 2007
Archive 3 - May - June 2007
Archive 4 - June - July 2007
Archive 5 - August - September 2007
Archive 6 - October - November 2007
Archive 7 - December 2007 - February 2008
Archive 8 - March 2008 - May 2008
Archive 9 - June 2008 - August 2008
Archive 10 - September 2008 - November 2008
Archive 11 - December 2008 - March 2009
Archive 12 - April 2009 - June 2009
Archive 13 - July 2009 - Dec 2009
Archive 14 - Jan 2010 - June 2010
Archive 15 - June 2010 - August 2013
Archive 16 - December 2010 - August 2013
Archive 17 - August 2013 - January 2015
Archive18 - January 2015 - March 2016
Archive19 - April 2016 - present
Archive20 -
Archive21 -

This page has archives. Sections older than 21 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

Template:NoBracketBot

BilCat

My bad. I forget to remove flag. ; - ) Wikihistory (talk) 05:53, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Wikihistory: No worries. Wikipedia has a fairly steep learning curve, but it can be a very rewarding experience here. - BilCat (talk) 05:55, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@BilCat:

Should this edit be reverted?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/789733125

Wikihistory (talk) 06:13, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Wikihistory: I'd say so, yes. - BilCat (talk) 06:31, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, BilCat! 2013AtlantaBraves (talk) 15:11, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Avro Canada CF-105 Arrow - Operators

Please point me to the MoS or consensus that says that there should be an Operators section for aircraft that never entered operation. As I said, its not there for TSR-2. Mztourist (talk) 06:46, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I can't quote chapter and verse, but a lot of aircraft that never entered service have that section, with the understanding that those are intended operators. Even aircraft built only for research or testing of some sort usually have such a section, such as Hawker Siddeley P.1127. Usually, but not always,the service listed did participate in testing the aircraft. The TSR-2 is an odd exception, but a lot in that article is odd, as it gets a lot of attention from editors outside the aircraft project. - BilCat (talk) 06:57, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The P.1127 has a logic to it as it was evaluated by various different countries, but the CF-105 was being developed for one operator who never took delivery, so it seems completely superfluous to have a section that says "Royal Canadian Air Force – Arrow was cancelled before entering service" which is blindingly obvious from all that precedes it. Mztourist (talk) 08:47, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Key word "all that precedes it." For those suffering from TLDNR, the section is useful. - BilCat (talk) 20:28, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree and will raise it on the aircraft project page. Mztourist (talk) 10:06, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Mztourist: No problem. Feel free to copy over this discussion if you feel it'll help. - BilCat (talk) 10:11, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nicknames

See Bangalore has So many nicknames including silicon valley of India,garden city of India, fashion capital of India,and pub city of India etc,,,, if you have any misunderstanding please check the Bangalore Pete Wikipedia page you can find answers there, I respect you for concern. Suryavamsha 18:30, 7 August 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suryavamsha (talk • contribs)

Please cite reliable sources that these nicknames are noteworthy. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 19:02, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Airbus Group

A tag has been placed on Category:Airbus Group requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. —swpb^T 19:56, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is this legit? It looked distinctly under-explained on is page, someone seems to have created a new and less useful category. Anmccaff (talk) 20:06, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Swpb and Anmccaff: I don't generally deal with categories, but I assume this is related to the ill-advised merger of the Airbus and Airbus Group articles. It's probably best to raise any questions you have on this with the user making the changes, or at Talk:Airbus. - BilCat (talk) 23:27, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have no involvement in the article merge; all I know is that empty categories are speediable. If there's a use for this category, whoever is responsible for it needs to populate it, or soft redirect it to whatever equivalent category is populated. —swpb^T 12:45, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the "thank you"...

... but I fear you thanked me too soon. :( --Colin Douglas Howell (talk) 08:12, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bell 407

Hi, I have reverted the 407 to before over the comment of the increase in window size as it is not really that relevant to the article.

On the AW109SP Grand New that I work on we have a larger fuselage than the previous "E" model and the next version up was the "S" which weighed 300KGs more than the "E" and had the increased fuselage - worthy of mention, just like the SP then being produced and the fuselage now being made with carbon fibre to reduce weight further for all the new avionics being added on after the "S" version.

All that to me seems worthy but the subject of one third larger windows seems a bit of unnecessary padding out of an already quite good article.

I welcome your input on this.

Regards

Pam-javelin (talk) 15:01, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Pam-javelin: You've already made up your mind that it's superfluous, or you wouldn't have reverted, so I don't see what difference my opinion makes at this point. Thankfully, another user has restored it. - BilCat (talk) 23:31, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, If two others disagree then I am not going to go against that!

Regards

Pam-javelin (talk) 13:11, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Flag of the Bahamas

Hey there, Bil!

You recently undid an edit to the article on the Flag of the Bahamas in which a new editor added some information about the Bahamas being located in the North Atlantic rather than the Caribbean. Your reasoning was that the information was not relevant for an article about the flag— I am not disagreeing with you. My concern is that the person who made the edit, an edit I encouraged her to make following an OTRS ticket request to fix the article— felt stomped on. I know, I know that you can't be expected to monitor the background of every editor whose edit you may undo, and I am not asking for that. I am only contacting you to say that I think she could be a really good Wikipedia editor some day if we give her a chance to get situated, and that I think we both agree that WP:DONTBITETHENEWCOMERS is super important for the long term prospects of the project. I don't think you meant to bite! I only mean she felt bit, and that matters, too. I have probably done the exact same thing myself more than once but was never told. That's all. KDS4444 (talk) 06:24, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@KDS4444: Uh, thanks for letting me know, but I would have done the exact same edit if I had known beforehand. Yeah, I would have also given a explanation had I known, but how was that to happen? Perhaps you need to do a little more investigating of a user's issues before giving out advice that might lead to them getting "bit". At the least, some explanation of the issue and the OTRS ticket on the talk page might have been helpful in advance. Otherwise, I don't know what else I would done in this situation, as I stand be my solution of simply eliminating the contentious statements. - BilCat (talk) 07:47, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's what I figured. Well, thanks anyway! KDS4444 (talk) 09:06, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Benniejets

I read through all of those posts and was wondering how does one participate in the conversations at SPI? Dinah In Wonderland 17:50, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Dinah Kirkland: You can make comments in the section called Comments by other users. - BilCat (talk) 17:55, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also this IP https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/80.182.181.119 does infact appear to be a Sock puppet but is everyone waiting until the case is closed to block it? Or just doing some research? Dinah In Wonderland 17:55, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And thanks Dinah In Wonderland 17:56, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Dinah Kirkland: You're welcome. There's usually a backlog on SPIs, so sometimes it takes a while for an admin to look at them. More than likely, his block will be extended to indefinite, but it depends on the admin. - BilCat (talk) 18:03, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sad that this happened. I was beginning to like them (despite the comment on my Italian). I suspected something was wrong when they asked me to put a warning on a Users page for vandalizing. I believe the admin will extend the block with this sock puppeting. Dinah In Wonderland 18:07, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Dinah Kirkland: We actually see such self-destruction quite often. Usually it's a relatively young user, but not always. The language barrier doesn't help, but English Wikipedia seems to be more attractive to many users than their own language WPs. And sometimes they've already been blocked there! - BilCat (talk) 18:23, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

True. And I think this was a young user. Their second launaguges was terrible and the way they typed doesn't suggest "that's how they type when in a hurry" Dinah In Wonderland 18:27, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well it's been decided case closed... I have no further questions, thanks for your help. Dinah In Wonderland 19:18, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sherman Fairchild

Completely up to you. I used the company page since the title was about the former title of the company. I have no objection either way. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:25, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@CNMall41: Actually, Sherman Fairchild is a biography page, or at least it used to be/is supposed to be one. :) Since Hiller was an aircraft company, I felt the Aircraft company page would be more appropriate. - BilCat (talk) 21:31, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense. I just knew it shouldn't be a stand-alone page. Thank for the ping! --CNMall41 (talk) 21:35, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cyber Command

BilCat, people are going crazy trying to edit these articles faster than I can roll them back. Any suggestions?Garuda28 (talk) 06:29, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Garuda28, That's not unusual in a situation like this, and it can be very frustrating. Right now it's in the news, and getting lot's of attention, as anything Trump-related does these days. Sometimes I just let it go for a few hours, and then revert, but often I'll just leave it be, or add a note that, in this case, would say it's still pending. If it gets to be a serious problem, you can ask for page protection at RFPP or by contacting an admin directly. - BilCat (talk) 06:37, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

thanks BilCat, much appreciated! Garuda28 (talk) 06:39, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of information.

You've removed an informative table in the Gepárd Rifle article 4 months ago.

Your excuses are invalid; do not attempt to further desecrate the article, or there will be consequences.

Revert the edit, or you'll be reported for removal of information out of bias/butthurt. Honved2018 (talk) 20:33, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"removal of information out of ... butthurt"?? Yeah, good luck with that one! - BilCat (talk) 20:50, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And no, I won't restore it. It's still "Original Research/synthesis - text is unsourced, and gives no cited basis for a comparison." - BilCat (talk) 22:06, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

219.122.170.236

219.122.170.236 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) has been doing rapid-fire vandalism for several days at least. As the IP returns quickly under a new guise after blocking, I think Zzuuzz is just reverting to more easily keep an in on the IP. Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Rapid-fire vandalism apparently on proxies Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 08:42, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'm aware of the issue. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 08:44, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You are reverting faster than I can! Jim1138 (talk) 08:48, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rollbacks, but Zzuuzz is even faster. - BilCat (talk) 08:49, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Zzuuzz just blocked this IP. - BilCat (talk)

Hunley

Hi, Bil, I see you undid my edit to H. L. Hunley (submarine) in which I had added the word "the" to the various mentions of the ship's name in the article. It looks like the MOS article you referenced states that "the" should not be used in the lead sentence (unless part of the ship's actual name)— fair enough, and I was unaware of that. How do you feel about subsequent usage of "the", however? The vessel's name appears to consistently have "the" before it in a number of reliable published sources, including the most recent scientific investigation as to how it went down. I am thinking we should have "the" added to the ship's name everywhere except the first mention in the lead. You? KDS4444 ^(talk) [Note: This user has admitted participating in paid editing,— trust but verify.] 10:48, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You need to raise this on the article's talk page so other contributors can participate there. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 16:54, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bennie

Hi BilCat. User:Picuslor, claims to be British, yet his command of the English language says otherwise. Roughly the same editing interests as Bennie, however I wouldn't have spotted him if it wasn't for this edit, where he restores some irrelevant gibberish first added Benniejets. Also, his spelling of "bad feith" here is exactly how Benniejets used to.

Whats your opinion? Antiochus the Great (talk) 17:40, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Do i disturb somebody?This is english.Picuslor (talk) 17:43, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]