User talk:BilCat

I miss the "Orange Bar" that notified me when I had a new talk page message. Poor vision is bad.

Unified login: BilCat is the unique login of this user for all public Wikimedia projects.

Attention needed (vandalism)

Greetings! Dear BilCat, as I'm not a frequent guest here, I would like to draw your attention to the following issue. Some pages related to the cars of Eastern Europe have been attacked by a vandal similar or identical to "Bandera Isuzu" who adds factually incorrect, blatantly false sentences, claiming that every car was "reverse-engineered" or "copied" from another one, despite the fact that they were built under license, in cooperation, etc. It seems he is either a sock of "Bandera Isuzu" or another notorious vandal that was blocked a dozen times for adding the same nonsense. If you can -- and you're great at protecting pages from vandals, -- please help to protect those articles from his vandalism and add them to your watchlist. Any help is much appreciated. Here are his IP and a list of attacks: [1]. 118.70.184.63 (talk) 22:26, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for contacting me. Yup, that's certainly "Joe Bandera" (I've dropped calling him "Isuzu" so as not to tarnish the brand's name). I've been watching his (or her) edits since 2015, and those that you found fit his pattern, as does his IP location. Unfortunately, I'm not an administrator on Wikipedia, so I don't have the ability to apply page protection to articles or block users. Most of the time, he only edits in short spurts, so it's usually not something an admin will block or protect for, as his IP address usually changes by the his edit session. We usually just revert on sight, and keep the articles clean of his nonsense. - BilCat (talk) 02:57, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

...but why ^^

Hi BilCat I don't understand the reason why you deleted my addition under "CAF disambiguation", concerning the Compagnie Aérienne Française, a nowadays disappeared french airline. May you just tell me a little more ? Read you with pleasure Nicolas HEITZ-BRANDT (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:39, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

@Nicolas HEITZ-BRANDT: Because DAB pages are only for existing Wikipedia articles. - BilCat (talk) 16:24, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Someone messed up this article real bad

Bill, I literally got a headache and a lol from reading the reference section of Stealth aircraft. Who screwed up the links? Oh man.... --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 18:18, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Northern Ireland

Hey mate,

Can you let me know why you've now twice reverted my corrections on the page about 'British English'?

FYI, Northern Ireland is not part of Britain (with or without the 'Great'), yet the R-Dropping section of that page incorrectly implies that it is. This isn't a matter of opinion or point of view or politics, it is a simple geographical fact - Great Britain is an island which encompasses England, Wales, Scotland; Northern Ireland is on a different island. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Britain explains this in more detail.

Perhaps the author had meant to say 'United Kingdom' instead of 'Britain'.

Anyway, how should I go about getting this error corrected?

looking forward to hearing from you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.30.208.181 (talk)

Britain commonly means the United Kingdom. My advice would be to get over it. - BilCat (talk) 03:19, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

So you're saying accuracy of the information is not really important? That we can have 'alternative facts'?

Britain being conflated with the United Kingdom is indeed a common mistake - in America. Let's please not dumb this down to the level of the lowest common denominator.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.30.208.181 (talk)

No, because it's not a mistake, any more than conflating America with United States is a mistake, as many Latin Americans believe. See Britain.

I think you'll find that the residents of Northern Ireland would disagree.

And what makes you think I meant United States when I said America? This is a mistake that even Trump makes continuously.

Neither are mistakes, though certain minor groups make a lot noise about them. - BilCat (talk) 04:08, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Also you might want to read the first section at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Britain where this misusage of Great Britain is called out. Perhaps someone already tried to get this corrected but couldn't get it past some editors who think they know better. :-/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.30.208.181 (talk)

I'll worry about what the Irish, Northern or otherwise, think when they start calling the Irish Sea the Irish and British Sea. No wonder my ancestors fled Ireland! - BilCat (talk) 04:08, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

No one calls it the British Sea (with or without the Irish prefix). Literally no one. It's always been the Irish Sea, and pretty sure it always will be.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNu8XDBSn10 has a decent explanation about the relationship and naming of all the entities that collectively make up the British Isles. It's worth watching even if you still disagree about the facts.

But getting back to my original question, it sounds like the standard to be applied on wikipedia is to be 'correct' according to some North Americans' opinions and views of the world, not actually correct; and the citizenry of the places being discussed should 'get over it'. Is that an accurate and fair summary? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.30.208.181 (talk)

And no one outside Ireland cares about the British Isles naming dispute, hence my quip. But nope, the British government uses UK and British interchangeably too, as do many other UKians. - BilCat (talk) 04:41, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Beginning of an edit war

Hi BiCat, we have an IP user that is engaged in a variety of edit wars, including at Auxiliary ship. User:General Ization and I have tried, in vain, to explain WP:3RR (at the risk of running afoul of it ourselves) and attempted to engage the individual at the Talk page of the articles in question, without success. Perhaps you could identify a more successful approach, including possible Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring action. Cheers, HopsonRoad (talk) 11:38, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) given them a 24-hour break so they can consider what they are doing. MilborneOne (talk) 14:45, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you both. - BilCat (talk) 21:21, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Moscokvitch 408 - Popular culture

I would like consideration made to the sub heading of popular culture to be reinserted back to main page of the Moskvitch 408 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moskvitch_408

Here is an excellent article written by car enthusiasts ( not film fans) from Russia. It lists 10 Iconic soviet cars that have made an impact on the big screen . You will see that the 408 has made it to number 5 on the list https://fastmb.ru/autonews/autonews_rus/1291-top-10-kultovyh-avtomobiley-sovetskogo-kino.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matchkick (talk • contribs)

You must stop adding unnecessary, unimportant details based on websites that don't even fall under the definition of WP:RS. Their notability is extremely low and the sources are unacceptable. What you have added is not encyclopedic content; we don't list all films and books featuring a certain car. ) 22:41, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

• Thanks for responding, but I'd really prefer that only registered users respond to posts on my talk page. It's less confusing that way, and allows me to contact you more directly in the future if a follow-up is needed. Cheers. - BilCat (talk) 20:03, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your response, sadly this does not offer help me improve my contributions nor does it offer any encouragement to submit further . There is no point in discussing further. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matchkick (talk • contribs)

Please remove any links and the page of the IP etc as I feel that this violates my privacy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matchkick (talk • contribs)

That reply was not from me, but another user. And as far as I can tell, since you probably wouldn't respond that way to your own post, is not your IP address, so therefore does not violate your privacy. Anyhow, I am not an administrator, so I can't remove the address from my talk page history even if it were your IP address. - BilCat (talk) 07:30, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

(driveby...) On the issue at hand, I'd agree, this fails on sourcing, but as an external link, it could be of interest to readers. TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 07:35, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

The information is on your page, you have edited and remove other posts. I can not see why this request is any different? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matchkick (talk • contribs)

Yes, I can remove things from my page, but it's all still in the page history for anyone else to look at. But how does another user's IP address violate your privacy? That's what I don't understand. - BilCat (talk) 18:42, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

really not sure where this third party has come from. I have now taken the IPs off this front page