Jump to content

User talk:Samf4u

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by MrKiffy (talk | contribs) at 18:37, 21 January 2018 (→Politicization of Candy Making Article). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome!

Hello, Samf4u, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Air Cargo Carrier Freight Flight SNC-1290, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! MilborneOne (talk) 20:05, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for welcoming me to Wikipedia! I have used much of the info you listed. Please excuse the tardiness of this response. Samf4u 20:58, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Air Cargo Carrier Freight Flight SNC-1290

The article Air Cargo Carrier Freight Flight SNC-1290 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non notable accident does not meet the criteria for an article

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. MilborneOne (talk) 20:05, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help MilborneOne (talk. -- Samf4u (talk) 02:58, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Air Cargo Carriers Flight SNC-1290 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Air Cargo Carriers Flight SNC-1290 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Air Cargo Carriers Flight SNC-1290 until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. MilborneOne (talk) 10:01, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Air Cargo Carriers Flight SNC-1290

Hi Samf4U, Your article is not TOO bad. The problem is the subject which has ZERO-notability and therefore has no place in Wikipedia as a stand-alone article. One thing that might make your life easier, (once you find a suitable NOTABLE subject), and that is to use the templates at Template:WPAVIATION creator, which cover most articles that can be written about aviation subjects. Just insert your title and press create, or (what i do), put a gobble-de-gook title in press crete and copy the template for insertion in a blank page.--Petebutt (talk) 10:07, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just to support what Petebutt has said, not all accidents or incidents are notable for a stand alone article and are just mentioned in the airline or aircraft articles. Sometimes the incident is not really encyclopedic at all so may not get mentioned anywhere. As the article has been nominated for deletion it has its own discussion page (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Air Cargo Carriers Flight SNC-1290) where you can make a case either way. The article was a good start for a first article and I hope we can encourage you to create more and contribute. A group of users who are interested in aircraft accidents are at Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Aviation accident task force pages where you can ask questions or feel free to use mine or Petebutts talk page. MilborneOne (talk) 10:35, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for everything MilborneOne (talk) ---- Samf4u (talk) 02:58, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Information icon Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

  1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
  2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 01:16, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Air Cargo Carriers Flight SNC-1290

You seem to be worried that re-directs and links might not point to this accident, but simple re-direct when it is deleted (99.999% probability), will solve the problem. So don't panic.--Petebutt (talk) 14:30, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you .--Petebutt (talk). -- Samf4u (talk) 02:58, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of 2001 Antonov Design Bureau AN-70 Crash

The article 2001 Antonov Design Bureau AN-70 Crash has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unreferenced.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ...William 11:18, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks ...William. Samf4u (talk) 02:37, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of 2001 Antonov Design Bureau AN-70 Crash for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2001 Antonov Design Bureau AN-70 Crash is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2001 Antonov Design Bureau AN-70 Crash until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ...William 23:32, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Samf4u (talk) 02:39, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unfinished articles

Sam, you may wish to create a sandbox to work up articles in peace before releasing them. To create one, simply edit the User:Samf4u/Sandbox page. If no other editor edits an article while its in your sandbox, you simply copy and paste into the new article when ready. If using categories in your sandbox, you need to use a colon before the word Category. One of my sandboxes is User:Mjroots/sandbox2, where you will see how I bash articles into shape before release. A lot of what is in the proto-articles gets deleted at release into mainspace, but it is there to accommodate different types of mills. Best, Mjroots (talk) 08:45, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the good information Mjroots. (talk). Samf4u (talk) 02:58, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your signature

You signature appears to be in breach of WP:SIGLINK. Please fix it. Mjroots (talk) 19:33, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sandbox and Signature

Thanks for your help Mjroots. From now on I'll use the sanbox as you suggested. I also fixed my signature. Samf4u (talk) Samf4u| 03:55, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sig not fixed yet! For some reason it's including the command to edit the page in both user and talk links. Have another go, but if you can't fix this yourself, you might need to find a 'crat. WP:BN is probably the place to ask. Us mere admins haven't the ability to fix this for other people. Mjroots (talk) 19:48, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:2001 Antonov 70 crash 1.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:2001 Antonov 70 crash 1.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:18, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:2001 Antonov 70 crash 1.jpg

That photo is not needed and should be deleted. I'd do it myself if I new how. What is the best way to delete it? Thank you. Samf4u 15:02, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Signature

My signature is now I believe correct. If not anyone please respond. Samf4u 15:05, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your signature links to your user page, so WP:SIGLINK is met. Mjroots (talk) 21:27, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again Mjroots (talk). Samf4u (talk) 02:58, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar!

The Civility Barnstar
I like your approach to deletion discussions and questions of policy or guidelines. Even when challenged you seem to remain calm and collegial. Always a good thing. Keep up the good work. St★lwart111 01:56, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks St★lwart111. Look forward to working w/you in the future.

Replaceable fair use File:F89-D Scorpion Air Force interceptor 1958.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:F89-D Scorpion Air Force interceptor 1958.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
  2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:40, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Fut.Perf. ☼. Thanks for pointing out that problem. I think the best way to address this is to ask the photos owner John if he would agree to let it be used freely by Wikipedia AND its downstream users, and that such use might include commercial use, for which the contributor is not entitled to royalties or compensation. I have e-mailed him and waiting for response. Samf4u (talk) 22:35, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
John says the photo was taken by the South Dakota Air National Guard and is public domain. I'd like to reclassify the photo but I'm not sure how. Can you help? Thanks Samf4u (talk) 22:21, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
To reclassify it, replace the tags on the page {{Non-free historic image}} and {{Category ordered by date}} with {{PD-USGov}} -- Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:07, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Ian (Wiki Ed). I removed 3 tags and added the one you suggested. Samf4u (talk) 21:48, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Samf4u, could you please forward this statement from John that the photo is from a public domain source to permissions-en@wikimedia.org? (You will receive an auto-reply with a ticket number - please ping me with that ticket number and I will process it if someone else doesn't do so first.) Right now, the image is still tagged as fair use, but if it is PD (and we have appropriate documentation), we can remove the fair use rationale and restore the full-size version. --B (talk) 17:35, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Palmdale

Hi Sam: The problem is that some of the article has been copied word for word from the sources. That's not acceptable on Wikipedia. And some of the bits that haven't been copied word for word are very, very close to the source (i.e. only a word or two changed) which is also not acceptable. You'll need to carefully rewrite anything that's either plagiarized or closely paraphrased before it will be accepted! Sorry. Let me know if you have any questions! MeegsC (talk) 23:14, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re: your question about the version of the article that's "used". When you nominate something for DYK, the DYK check is on the version as it stood when it was nominated, not the current version. MeegsC (talk) 23:18, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the info. I'm guilty as charged. After I work on it I'd like you to take a look and give me your opinion. Samf4u (talk) 23:04, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I believe all the errors are now fixed. Can you take a look and give your opinion? Samf4u (talk) 15:03, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Samf4u, since MeegsC hadn't gotten back to you, either here or on the DYK nomination page, I took a look at the article, and found what I thought to be significant close paraphrasing. I then asked Nikkimaria to take a look—she's the DYK expert on close paraphrasing—and she found enough that she felt she had to tag the article. There are definitely passages that have been copied or are still very close to the original sources, and that's not acceptable on Wikipedia. You can use tools like the copyvio detector or the duplication detector to find identical phrases. It's going to take a fair amount of work on your part, given how much needs to be fixed. Please let us know how you plan to proceed. So long as that close paraphrasing template remains (and the material that led to the template's addition), the nomination will not be able to qualify for DYK. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:45, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi BlueMoonset (talk), I plan on working to fix these issues today. If possible take a look in a day or two and give me your opinion. I want this article to be the best it can, Thanks for your help. Samf4u (talk) 13:58, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi Samf4u! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 22:02, Saturday, March 21, 2015 (UTC)

Mission 1 Mission 2 Mission 3 Mission 4 Mission 5 Mission 6 Mission 7
Say Hello to the World An Invitation to Earth Small Changes, Big Impact The Neutral Point of View The Veil of Verifiability The Civility Code Looking Good Together

DYK for Battle of Palmdale

— Coffee // have a cup // beans // 12:01, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Great article! I enjoyed reading it. Good work! - Location (talk) 15:56, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you — Coffee // have a cup // beans // for helping w/DYK. Samf4u (talk) 23:38, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Location (talk) for your kind words. Samf4u (talk) 23:38, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

March 2015

Information icon Hello, I'm BilCat. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to M1 Garand because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 03:14, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BilCat, Thanks for fixing my addition to M1 Garand on March 27. It was my mistake and I never intended to leave that. The sentence I added to the Features section on March 25 however, I did mean to leave. Is there any reason I can't revert it? Samf4u (talk) 13:42, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's unsourced, and really not unique to the Garand, I would imagine. - BilCat (talk) 02:27, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'll work on finding a source, that won't be a problem. As for "really not unique to the Garand", of all the WWII era firearms I own (39 including a Garand) and have examined, no other uses an en bloc style clip. While it is true that other rifles have used this type clip, I would imagine none served in WWII. I've heard the distinctive metallic "pinging" sound of my M1 and it IS unique to the Garand. Samf4u (talk) 02:50, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What's not unique is that soldiers would throw "anything" within reach to make such noises, probably from time immemorial, and probably to varying degrees of success. The fact that they threw Garand clips isn't really noteworthy of itself, especially if it wasn't any more successful than throwing anything else. - BilCat (talk) 04:20, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid you may be missing the point. When loading the M1, 8 rounds and the en bloc clip are inserted as an assembly into the rifle. Immediately after the eighth round is fired the now empty clip is automatically ejected with some force making the ping sound. In essence the rifle has announced it is now empty. No other weapon of the era dose this. Tossing an empty clip would therefore imitate the ping possibly leading the enemy to believe your rifle was empty tempting them to make a move, while in fact your weapon is loaded and ready to fire. Samf4u (talk) 13:06, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 28 March

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:27, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Bot, Ref fixed. Samf4u (talk) 01:51, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Palmdale

Hi, Eric

I'd just like to let you know that your article about the battle of Palmdale inspired me to write an article of my own for the website I work for. [1] I've added a little thank you note for you and for being my inspiration. I hope you don't mind being named there. If you prefer your name not to be stated, I will promptly remove it. Nevertheless, thank you once again. (air)Wolf (talk) 14:53, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Airwolf,
I just finished reading your article and I really enjoyed it. I believe seeing things from a different perspective is healthy and the photos you added were excellent. I am honored you included me in your work. Samf4u (talk) 01:18, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: John Mollison (April 25)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Timtrent was:
This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia.
What you can do: Add citations (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners) to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of the subject.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Fiddle Faddle 18:42, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Teahouse logo
Hello! Teahouse, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Fiddle Faddle 18:42, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:John Mollison has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:John Mollison. Thanks! Fiddle Faddle 19:50, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:John Mollison has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:John Mollison. Thanks! Fiddle Faddle 20:10, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Skyway Enterprises flight SKZ 7101, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page SMX. 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) 10:20, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Bot, concern fixed. Samf4u (talk) 01:45, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Skyway Enterprises flight SKZ 7101 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Skyway Enterprises flight SKZ 7101 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Skyway Enterprises flight SKZ 7101 until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Petebutt (talk) 11:15, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for Deletion

An article is nominated for deletion when an editor thinks there MIGHT be a case for not including it in main-space. The result of the debate seals it's fate. Personally I feel that far too many get passed, purely on the basis of how many news articles there were or how many hits on Google are generated. The process is there to be used, but some people get shirty about it. The important thing to remember is that it is not a personal attack (although there have been occasions where it has been used as such).--Petebutt (talk) 05:18, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I understand it's nothing personal, you have always been cordial in the past and I respect your opinion. Samf4u (talk) 21:33, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Short 360 G-BNMT Photo by Werner Fischdick.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Short 360 G-BNMT Photo by Werner Fischdick.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
  2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:11, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

The Article Rescue Barnstar
For finding in-depth coverage of Loganair Flight 670A independent of the subject in a reliable source (the Flight Safety Foundation Accident Prevention newsletter) and thereby rescuing the article from deletion, I hereby award you this Barnstar. YSSYguy (talk) 02:57, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks YSSYguy for helping me to become a better Wikipedian. Samf4u (talk) 22:32, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Samf4u. You have new messages at YSSYguy's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hello, Samf4u. You have new messages at YSSYguy's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

A page you started (Bill Graham helicopter crash) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Bill Graham helicopter crash, Samf4u!

Wikipedia editor Poltair just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Nice article. Could you check the first reference still exists? I can't get it to work. Thanks.Poltair (talk) 15:20, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for finding that Poltair (talk). Now fixed. Samf4u (talk) 15:27, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Payen Pa 22 with German markings.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Payen Pa 22 with German markings.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 01:31, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: John Mollison (July 28)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted because it included copyrighted information, which is not permitted on Wikipedia.
This submission appears to be taken from http://www.argusleader.com/story/news/2015/07/02/return-vietnam-local-man-seeks-spirit-survival/29643585/. Wikipedia cannot accept material copied from elsewhere, unless it explicitly exists under a compatible licence and is written in an acceptable tone—this includes material that you own the copyright to. You should attribute the content of a draft to outside sources, using citations, but copying and pasting or closely paraphrasing sources is not acceptable. The entire draft should be written using your own words and structure.
You are welcome to write an article on the subject, but please do not use copyrighted work. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 16:47, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Teahouse logo
Hello! Samf4u, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 16:47, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference source

Thanks for doing the Nieuport 31 page - note that Airwar.ru cannot be used as a reference as it is largely made up of copyrighted material that is not theirs to distribute - a problem that means wikipedia cannot for legal reasons provide any links to them.NiD.29 22:39, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi NiD.29, I assume you're referring to Nieuport Madon. Thanks for the info on Airwar.ru, I'll be sure not to use it again, and thanks to you and Petebutt for fixing the mess I made of it. Samf4u (talk) 15:06, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No mess, and it has to start somewhere. I have more sources for the Madon, including for a clipped wing version...NiD.29 18:02, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
Can you upload your photos? Maybe we can use them in the article. Samf4u (talk) 20:41, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
They are not copyright free, being from a book unfortunately which they need to be for wikipedia, although a number of French archives have come online recently so something may turn up. Indeed Wikimedia's Nieuport directories have grown substantially in the last few weeks. I am Having trouble uploading anything at all right now though.NiD.29 04:11, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Nieuport Madon

Hi Samf4u, I am a bit confused as to why you reverted froma recognised (albeit out-dated) specs template to a manual one which involves a lot of work and can introduce conversion errors! Between me and NiD29, we have sorted it out now. Please feel free to use Template:WPAVIATION creator for any aviation articles, which will apply conventions and give you a specs template.--Petebutt (talk) 22:57, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Petebutt, In an effort to model Featured articles I noticed most of them have wikilinks in the specs section. For example; *Wingspan: etc, so I wanted to add those as I did in Lohner Type AA. Unfortunately I made errors. I will do better in the future. Thanks to you and NiD.29 for fixing my mistakes. Samf4u (talk) 15:20, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Farman HF.14

Good subject, but probably better to wait until there is more content before saving. A tip you might like to use:- copy the Template:WPAVIATION creator template into a worp processing app, edit it there then save when finished (always find tweaks after saving in my experience).--Petebutt (talk) 01:31, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I Should have started this in one of my sandboxes as I usually do. There is much to add to this article. Thanks as always for your help and advise. Samf4u (talk) 01:49, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Madon

Thought you'd like to see this.... http://pages14-18.mesdiscussions.net/pages1418/aviation-1914-1918/georges-nouvel-avion-sujet_1702_1.htm

The images probably can't be used, however they are interesting. cheers, NiD.29 21:49, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Nice source of photos and info you found, thanks for sending the link. Also, I like the photo you added to Nieuport 14. Samf4u (talk) 22:00, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for adding the first image - another page is no longer devoid of images. The San Diego Air and Space Museum has uploaded a massive collection here covering all eras to Flikr commons and there are a lot of gems to be found - I have been filling in gaps in the Nieuport and Morane directories and bringing a little more balance and a lot more pics to some previously un-illustrated types. A lot more to be transferred though.NiD.29 06:57, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
Wow, you've discovered a gold mine of images with no known copyright restrictions, nice work. I can't wait to dig in. Samf4u (talk) 14:18, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

new articles

Hi Sam, When you create a new article in mainspace, can you enter it in the lists at Wikipedia:New articles (Aircraft), so other people can have a link to it straight away, just follow the format of other entries.--Petebutt (talk) 05:46, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pete, Yes, from now on I will add to that list. Thanks for your additions to Wight Quadruplane. I'd like to change the caption in the last photo back to decreasing span. The text states "wings of decreasing span from top to bottom" and I think the caption should match. Samf4u (talk) 15:27, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Aircraft

Thanks for signing up for this project. It is a very busy and active project with lots going on and we can always use more help and especially a fresh set of eyes. If you haven't done so already you might want to add Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aircraft to your watch list as this is where much of the background discussion occurs. You may also want to watch Wikipedia:New articles (Aircraft) as this is where newly created articles get listed for peer review. Having a look over these new articles is a great way to get a feel for how things are done on the project and also most new articles need reviewing anyway. If you have any questions you can leave me a note or post at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aircraft, either way you will get a quick response. - Ahunt (talk) 20:29, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ahunt, will do. Samf4u (talk) 13:17, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Commando (aircraft)

Thanks for your comments Samf4u, if you have time I'd appreciate your thoughts on another one I've done recently RAF Bomber Command Aircrew of World War II thanks R44Researcher1944 (talk) 11:38, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Audie Murphy plane crash

First of all, you are over-linking in the Audie Murphy article. Secondly, that article link belongs under "See also". — Maile (talk) 22:08, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Maile66, nice to meet you. Every article of this type I found links this way, for example: Bill Graham helicopter crash linking to Bill Graham (promoter). You may like to take a look at WP:OWN. Samf4u (talk) 16:42, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A smile for you!

Hello Samf4u, The Haze Master (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! The Haze Master (talk) 22:57, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Spread the cheer! Smile at a friend, enemy, me, or even a random editor on recent changes!

Cheers! --The Haze Master (talk) 22:57, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Samf4u (talk) 13:30, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Header section

Hi Samf4u, I appreciated your comments on my article on the aircrew of Bomber Command and I've just completed another one, I know it's nautical and not aviation but if you get a moment please can you help me to get the pics in the header box formatted properly ? It is British merchant seamen of World War II, I've picked up a fair bit of "how to do Wiki stuff" in the 3 months I've been here but I still struggle with this. Thanks R44Researcher1944 (talk) 16:02, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Researcher1944, Made some changes to British merchant seamen of World War II. Added another link to it from Battle of the Atlantic, removed Orphan tag and changed infobox. If the changes aren't what you had in mind let me know and we can tweak it. All in all a fine article, well done! Samf4u (talk) 22:36, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks Samf4u, that looks tidier, appreciated ! R44Researcher1944 (talk) 08:06, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Bell 206B Bill Graham accident.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Bell 206B Bill Graham accident.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:35, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:44.M Hungrian anti-tank weapon of WWII.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:44.M Hungrian anti-tank weapon of WWII.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:43, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can you help please ?

Hi Eric I've been doing some more work on my article on RAF Bomber Command Aircrew of World War II and have somehow ended up with a load of blank space near the top, can you advise or help me to adjust it to improve appearance. Many thanks R44.Researcher1944 (talk) 15:50, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi R44, I changed the Table of Contents box to horizontal. If you don't care for that look there are other ways to change it, that one was real easy. Take a look at TOC here. Let me know what you think and we can get dialed in the way you want it. Samf4u (talk) 02:54, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks Samf4u, I hadn't realized that there were options like that, I will have a proper read at TOC and educate myself some more LOL thanks againResearcher1944 (talk) 09:10, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, always glad to help. :-) Samf4u (talk) 15:39, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Eric, I've put it in for Peer Review, any comments or advice would be appreciated. R44Researcher1944 (talk) 08:55, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Season's Greetings

File:Xmas Ornament.jpg

To You and Yours!

Your help to this Newbie has been greatly appreciated. R44 Researcher1944 (talk) 10:02, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Researcher1944! May you and your loved ones enjoy a happy Holiday Season. Samf4u (talk) 14:58, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:John Mollison concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:John Mollison, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:31, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Draft now deleted. Samf4u (talk) 13:31, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Views/Day Quality Title Content Headings Images Links Sources Tagged with…
758 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Aviation accidents and incidents (talk) Add sources
94 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Unassessed, Predicted class: C Toyota NR engine (talk) Please add more content Please add more images Please add more wikilinks Please add more sources Add sources
576 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: B Consolidated B-24 Liberator (talk) Add sources
96 Quality: High, Assessed class: GA, Predicted class: FA Comair Flight 5191 (talk) Add sources
92 Quality: High, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: FA Pilot error (talk) Please add more sources Add sources
195 Quality: High, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: FA Jagannath (talk) Add sources
392 Quality: High, Assessed class: Unassessed, Predicted class: FA Windows 10 version history (talk) Please create proper section headings Cleanup
27 Quality: High, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: FA Woodhall Spa (talk) Cleanup
52 Quality: High, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: FA Avolon (talk) Please add more content Please add more wikilinks Please add more sources Cleanup
5 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Unassessed, Predicted class: Stub Media in Key West, Florida (talk) Please add more content Please create proper section headings Please add more images Please add more wikilinks Please add more sources Expand
5 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Wight Seaplane (talk) Please add more content Please add more images Please add more wikilinks Please add more sources Expand
2,715 Quality: High, Assessed class: GA, Predicted class: GA Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 (talk) Expand
53 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Critical engine (talk) Please add more content Please create proper section headings Please add more wikilinks Please add more sources Unencyclopaedic
460 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C Aircraft engine (talk) Please add more sources Unencyclopaedic
266 Quality: High, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: A Enjo kōsai (talk) Please add more content Please add more sources Unencyclopaedic
1,724 Quality: High, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: FA Boeing (talk) Merge
66 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start IBM AP-101 (talk) Please add more content Please create proper section headings Please add more images Please add more wikilinks Please add more sources Merge
388 Quality: High, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: GA Grand Ole Opry (talk) Merge
113 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Ñetas (talk) Please add more content Please create proper section headings Please add more images Please add more sources Wikify
374 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Calvin Klein (fashion designer) (talk) Please add more content Please create proper section headings Please add more images Please add more wikilinks Please add more sources Wikify
219 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start High-explosive anti-tank warhead (talk) Please add more content Please add more sources Wikify
12 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Gangchon Recreation Area (talk) Please add more content Please create proper section headings Please add more images Please add more wikilinks Please add more sources Orphan
4 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Unassessed, Predicted class: Start The English Access Microscholarship Program (talk) Please add more content Please create proper section headings Please add more images Please add more wikilinks Please add more sources Orphan
4 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Vanadium (band) (talk) Please add more content Please create proper section headings Please add more images Please add more wikilinks Please add more sources Orphan
2 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Stub Flygfabriken LN-3 Seagull (talk) Please add more content Please create proper section headings Please add more images Please add more wikilinks Please add more sources Stub
34 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Vella Lavella (talk) Please add more content Please create proper section headings Please add more images Please add more sources Stub
147 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Stub '92 Tour EP (talk) Please add more content Please create proper section headings Please add more sources Stub
16 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Coosawattee River (talk) Please add more content Please create proper section headings Please add more images Please add more wikilinks Please add more sources Stub
6 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Christopher C. Ashby (talk) Please add more content Please create proper section headings Please add more images Please add more wikilinks Please add more sources Stub
17 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Jack Anglin (talk) Please add more content Please create proper section headings Please add more images Please add more sources Stub

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:10, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to MILHIST

Hello and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.

A few features that you might find helpful:

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask any of the project coordinators or any other experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome, and we are looking forward to seeing you around! Anotherclown (talk) 23:03, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

Pending changes

Hi Samf4u, I see that you have recently been granted the pending changes reviewer permission. Please note that I have reverted your acceptance of this edit as it 1) added unsourced information to the article and 2) remove reliably sourced content without an explanation. Please ensure when reviewing pending changes that you do not approve changes that introduce unsourced or poorly sourced material to biography articles. Thank you, --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:01, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Here is another instance where you accepted an edit that should not have been approved. The article was protected to prevent precisely the edit you approved. Please be extremely careful if you intend to continue reviewing pending changes.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:06, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This will be the last one I will note, but here you approved an edit that removed a portion of the lead without explanation and left the entire lead in bold. Please be careful.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:13, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Jezebel's Ponyo, Thank you for pointing out my mistakes and correcting them. I'm committed to improving Wikipedia and appreciate your assistance. I will take greater care in any future reviews. What was the problem with the Shravan_Reddy article? I found a source that states he was born on 20 July. Also, I've studied Wikipedia:Reviewing and understand "Reviewers do not take responsibility for the correctness of edits they accept." Samf4u (talk) 15:08, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The "reviewing process" section of Wikipedia:Reviewing states "As a general rule, you should not accept the new revision if in analyzing the diff you find any of the following: It conflicts with the biographies of living persons policy." The Shevran Reddy edit you approved added unsourced personal info to a BLP contrary to policy. The reviewing guidelines also state "Furthermore, reviewers should take special consideration of the reason given for protection, and attempt to uphold it." The Reddy article was protected, by me, for "Addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content: persistent addition of unsourced personal info and biographical data". The edit you approved was the type of edit the article was protected to prevent. Finally, Wikipedia:Reviewing is a guideline and does not supplant our core policies such as BLP. There are many websites reporting various DOBs for Shevran Reddy, the problem has been finding one that meets our reliable sourcing criteria.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:57, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Understood, thank you for the explanation. Samf4u (talk) 20:34, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

B-52 accident

Why did you remove the accident of B-52 which crashed in May this year when it's clearly that it happened? So why it should not be in the section of accidents of that plane? Are you trying to hide something? If you won't give me a logical reason for your action, the content which you removed will be restored.

What could I possibly be hiding? This has been discussed at length on the Talk:Boeing B-52 Stratofortress page. In the future, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. Just add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. Samf4u (talk) 18:00, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Merry, merry!

From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 15:15, 24 December 2016 (UTC) [reply]

Thanks Bill, Merry Christmas. Samf4u (talk) 22:32, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Do X

Hi there, the Sydney was not a commercial aircraft so the Nile closer in role to the Do X. RegardsRstory (talk) 16:58, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rstory, I thought the Dornier Do X more similar to the Blackburn Sydney as they share inline engines. The Nile would have had radials had it been completed. If you'd like to change it back, feel free to do so. Samf4u (talk) 18:51, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

The WikiProject Barnstar
For for tireless contributions to Wikiproject AviationPlanespotterA320 (talk) 11:37, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you PlanespotterA320. Keep up the good work and don't let Jetstreamer get to you. Samf4u (talk) 16:01, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Which Sikorsky?

Afternoon Samf4u: You say you've added Sikorsky 9, but entry 20 on the New Aircraft list is the Sikorsky 7 (again)! Typo?. Cheers,TSRL (talk) 16:26, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TSRL, Good catch, thank you. Now fixed. Samf4u (talk) 16:30, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback granted

Hi Samf4u. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

  • Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
  • Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
  • Rollback should never be used to edit war.
  • If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
  • Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Beeblebrox (talk) 18:13, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Beeblebrox (talk). Samf4u (talk) 18:18, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Specs

Hi Samf4u, excellent articles, much needed to cover Sikorsky!! Just wondered why you reverted to the low performance specs template rather than Aircraft Specs. You are, of course, at liberty to use whichever you want, but if you use low performance templates don't be surprised if somebody (probably me) applies a better template.--Petebutt (talk) 12:06, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pete, good to hear from you. The S-50 was the first helicopter article I've worked on that had specs. The aircraft template I had been using had no place for main rotor diameter. I looked at several Sikorsky helicopter articles and they all used the low performance specs template so that's what I went with. For any future helicopter articles I'll be using the better one. Thanks for your edits. Samf4u (talk) 14:41, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

RfA

File:New Zealand TW-17.svg Thanks for supporting my run for administrator. I am honored and grateful. ) Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:13, 24 July 2017 (UTC) [reply]

Hey...u situated Romanian language in the Balkan area, and mistaken the country with Bulgaria not Romania on the Romanian Language page

The Balkan area does not incorporate Romania.... Romania is situated alongside Carpatian Mountains, Danube, Black Sea..etc, look at the map — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aged1 (talk • contribs) 20:40, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what your point is. I simply reverted "not so accurate info" on the Romanian language article. I will revert incorrectly formatted nonsense wherever I come across it. Cheers, Samf4u (talk) 01:39, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tanjong Katong Secondary School

I have restored my removals of blatan puffery and irreevant content. Per WP:BRD, please do not change them again without discussion. Thanks Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:09, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, my mistake. Cheers - Samf4u (talk) 02:15, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Zapad 2017 exercise

Hi Samf4u,

please read both versions before reverting. The article is highly controversial between Russiand and NATO point of views.--Heiliger Johannes (talk) 15:07, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Huggle errors

Just wanted to let you know that your Huggle edits are spawning blank edit summaries other than "((HG) (3.3.0))"; it's something with the newer versions of the software and I've seen it happening to other users as well. Might want to try resetting Huggle or similar. Home Lander (talk) 21:46, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Home Lander, Thank you for the heads up! - Samf4u (talk) 21:48, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

recent edits

hello sam you recently removed my edit on lamesa high school because it was not constructive may you please tell me what about it was so — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.167.164.45 (talk) 01:54, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 216.167.164.45, Your addition was removed because the subject is not notable, please see Wikipedia:Notability. Thanks, - Samf4u (talk) 02:01, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Indianapolis fire department

Station 45 is the Far Eastside not Eastside and it's nickname is zombieland Shark46201 (talk) 16:37, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Even if you could find a reliable source for it, such a nick name dose not belong in the article. - Samf4u (talk) 17:00, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Guess you know more than me and the other firefighters that work here Shark46201 (talk) 17:06, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't know much about Station 45 but I do know that nick name will not be in the article. If you work there could you please tell me the number of your medic unit? Thanks, Samf4u (talk) 17:09, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

98 Shark46201 (talk) 17:20, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

not sure why you're editing an article if you don't know the information Shark46201 (talk) 17:22, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to WP. I removed Zombieland because it appeared to be vandalism. I changed Medic 98 to Medic 45 because of this source http://www.indianafiretrucks.com/pages/marion/ifd/45.html and all other Medic units match the station numbers in the article. I'm committed to improving WP and appreciate your assistance. Samf4u (talk) 17:32, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that page is out of date. www.indianafiretrucks.com is mostly correct but still has plenty of mistakes. It's not been updated in quite some time. Shark46201 (talk) 17:52, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Real are u gud man nd gud article writer Wiki6565 (talk) 23:30, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Wiki6565. - Samf4u (talk) 23:38, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hastert the molester

He admitted he molested children. Can you justify tagging this edit as vandalism? Don't you believe the most prolific acts of a person should be stated foremost in their biography?

216.118.132.115 (talk) 23:59, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Take it easy, my mistake and I reverted it before your message. - Samf4u (talk) 00:01, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sussex Chicken

Hello Samf4u, I was reading my edits again to ensure I phrased the sentences right. I felt like the recent edit from "market place" to "location" needed to happen as "market town" was one of the terms the author used and I wanted to avoid any plagiarism where I could. What are your thoughts? I appreciate your help. Thank you, John Cartright (talk) 03:25, 21 October 2017 (UTC)John cartright[reply]

Please accept my apology, I made a series of errors with Huggle and have reverted. - Samf4u (talk) 03:27, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No worries! Have a good one! John Cartright (talk) 03:52, 21 October 2017 (UTC)John Cartright[reply]

I agree he did the same to me RvMemory (talk) 16:06, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

RV

My dog passed away this morning he was 17 and was a good dog I loved him very much and I was editing the page so that a boy whom loved him even more than I did so that he knows that he can be ok then you came along and decided *look at me I'm going to just edit this edit out because I don't know this person and I feel so confident and good about myself * RvMemory (talk) 16:05, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for your loss but Wikipedia is not your personal blog. - Samf4u (talk) 16:08, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Eric this is not funny put it back or I will make it my personal blog about how much you're a jerk I have never blogged in my life and you might think I'm one of those bratty teens well news flash you have no heart 

RvMemory (talk) 16:15, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ps I think your the grinch You're so 😡😤😖😫 

RvMemory (talk) 16:18, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Premier League Scorers

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_top_Premier_League_goal_scorers_by_season

You reverted the edits for this despite me updating them to todays stats. They were previously displaying last changes 23rd september. Why did you revert it as "not constructive"?

66.214.58.180 (talk) 17:55, 18 November 2017 (UTC) Nathan[reply]

Because you added Wayne Rooney at the top of the list. Was that a mistake? - Samf4u (talk) 17:59, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. Complete mistake. Cursor jumped at one point and it must have moved him. 66.214.58.180 (talk) 18:02, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, thanks for your contributions. - Samf4u (talk) 18:07, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Do I need to re do the changes then? 66.214.58.180 (talk) 18:08, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes please feel free to change as you see fit. - Samf4u (talk) 18:10, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok all changed. As far as I can tell theres no errant Wayne Rooneys lol 66.214.58.180 (talk) 18:24, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Good job. :-) - Samf4u (talk) 18:27, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Foreign policy

Hello there! Just got your message about the edit to the foreign policy page. I understand the concern that the edit may not have appeared constructive on account of the huge reduction in word count, but the text being removed was not contributing to the page and actively harming the readability thereof; the first part of the section of the page in question made sense, but then that paragraph was copy-pasted over and over again for no apparent reason, so I removed the part that had been repeated. 90.255.38.80 (talk) 01:27, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for that edit. Samf4u (talk) 02:21, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request to edit page Forever and for Always

Hello, I added in a reference to the page Forever and for Always since the original reference was referencing the Wayback Machine and the link didn't bring the page to anything. Could you fill in the bare reference? I'm editing on mobile and I don't have the time to spend trying to format the source correctly, so just wondering if you could do it. Thanks. CheetaWolf (talk) 17:29, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CheetaWolf, Should be no problem, after the Bears football game I'll take a look. - Samf4u (talk) 19:58, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
 Done - Samf4u (talk) 21:54, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Season's Greetings

...to you and yours, from Canada's Great White North! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 21:03, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Bzuk: Thanks Bill, Merry Christmas to you and your family. - Samf4u (talk) 14:21, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Politicization of Candy Making Article

Please engage me on the Talk page for Candy Making where I have posted my reasons for disputing the content on this page. I quote my position as follows:

I respectfully dispute inclusion of the 3rd and 4th paragraphs under the History section: [1]

These paragraphs have to deal with gender discrimination issues. They only tangentially have anything to do with the actual topic of Candy Making. I request that they be removed and placed in an article about gender discrimination. Let's keep the lens through which we view every topic a more neutral one. Surely whatever message the author of these paragraphs might want to convey about gender discrimination can be properly addressed elsewhere. It alienates many readers to turn even the remotest topic on Wiki into a political platform. There is enough criticism of Wiki bias as it is.

MrKiffy (talk) 18:35, 21 January 2018 (UTC) MrKiffy — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrKiffy (talk • contribs) 17:46, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In the late 19th century and especially the early 20th century, industrial candy making was almost exclusively a masculine affair, and home-based candy making was a feminine affair.[1] Candy was considered sweet and dainty, so making it at home, giving it away to friends, and perhaps selling small amounts in the local area, conformed with the Western gender roles for women of the time. Most women making and selling candy did so only seasonally or for a little extra money; they rarely earned enough to support themselves or their families. Despite several large brands being named after women or otherwise capitalizing on wholesome, feminine, and maternal images, very few were owned or operated by women. Gender segregation also affected candy workers in the 19th century and the first half of the 20th century.[1] Men and boys were employed for cooking or operating machinery. Women were mostly employed for wrapping and putting candies in packages or for hand-dipping candies in chocolate. The best-paid women were chocolate dippers, yet the wages of these skilled and experienced female workers were almost always lower than that of the worst-paid male machine operators.


Sincerely,

MrKiffy

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Samf4u&oldid=821636900"