User talk:BilCat

HEMI-DEMI-SEMI-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.

Get well soon

Hope you are feeling better shortly! - Ahunt (talk) 12:19, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Best wishes for a speedy recovery. El_C 12:25, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Hang in. Qwirkle (talk) 15:13, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks all. I do appreciate it very much. - BilCat (talk) 18:11, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Feel better!User:Peteschulz210 (talk) 14:18, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! - BilCat (talk) 16:35, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Bombardier C series

hi

Appreciate your point, but the other points outweighed it for me

1. Started pre 2010, with 2. letters of intent in 2008

3. The production complex was not started until 2010 4. Production started post 2010

5. First aircraft produced post 2010

6. Competition was all post 2010, and much from mod 2010s on

Similarly, the paragraph talks about competing with the 737 Max, in 2017.

Actual production and sales took place after 2009, and with the paragraph mentioning it's competition mainly being the -700 -800 -900 and MAX series, it pretty much makes it NOT an "early activity"

Can we at least agree on that before continuing? Chaosdruid (talk) 05:55, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Before continuing to do what? - BilCat (talk) 07:34, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Flag of Jamaica

OK, I accept that the heading wasn't the best place to link Jamaica: so where should it be linked from. I've no doubt there should be a link somewhere on the page - I was in that article and wanting to get to the article about the country, and didn't expect to have to type it in the box. But the only other occurrence of "Jamaica" in the lead or the first section is in the phrase "Jamaican Independence Day", and that seemed an even worse place to link. What do you suggest? --ColinFine (talk) 18:38, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

@ColinFine: It'll take some creative writing in the lead. I'll take a look, and see if I can find a place to slip it in. - BilCat (talk) 20:29, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Wingtip device article

If you thanked me for removing a fake image of a Airbus plane (A317) that does not exist, why did you revert my deletion of the image? David notMD (talk) 10:50, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

@David notMD: Because I'm a doofus! I was trying to revert further back, but reverted to the wrong diff, and didn't double-check my work. Thanks for catching it, and feel free to apply Trout. I'll try to be more careful. - BilCat (talk) 18:06, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

EC-47 edits

The reason I tried to correct the EC-47 information came from an informed website (http://www.ec47.com/ec-47-serial-numbers-and-data). The entry indicates that C-47A & C-47D were modified to EC-47N/P/Q when in fact only C-47A & C-47B were modified as such. The C-47D was a modified C-47A (power plant changes) that never got modified to EC-47 status. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.177.158.202 (talk) 18:37, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Hyphen

Why do you insist on a hyphen, as in 1781-1789, rather than an en-dash, as in 1781–1789, the latter being prescribed by WP:MOS? Michael Hardy (talk) 00:47, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

I didn't even notice that, but to be honest, that's a guideline I don't pay much attention to anyway. I can barely even see a difference between a hyphen and an en-dash on my tablet screen, my eyes are so bad. I normally just use hyphens when I type, and leave it to others to sort it all out. It's all too confusing, and so different from what I was taught in English and typing classes over 30 years ago. And it seems to change every few years here anyway. IIRC, the n-dash between dates was only put in the MOS in the last couple of years, but I could be wrong on the timing. But I'll try to be more careful in the future. - BilCat (talk) 01:42, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

I'm astonished that you think it was only in the last couple of years. It goes back at least 15 years. I remember in about 2009 wondering why some people were _still_ not aware of it. Michael Hardy (talk) 18:41, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

If I can interject here, I often see the same issue. There has never been any degree of actual day-to-day "editing consensus" on hyphens, vs endash, vs emdash vs etc, regardless of MOS, policy or guidelines. My keyboard doesn't have an endash or emdash key, only a hyphen key. Oh, I know how to write them in HTML5, but that is not appreciated here, so, like Bill, I write my articles with hyphens only. Often other editors appear and change everything to endashes, emdashes, double hyphens or something else, always quoting some MOS page or other. I just leave them. Then, soon, another editor will show up and change them again, quoting some other MOS interpretation. And, then, some time later, another editor will appear, MOS in hand, and change them all back to hyphens. I just watch and get on with writing articles. Outside my window the trees sprout leaves in the spring, are green all summer and then they fall to the ground in autumn, the trees sit dormant all winter and then the leaves grow back in the spring. So it is with hyphens and dashes. Perhaps my next computer will have an endash or emdash key on it. Perhaps the hyphen and dash warriors will call a truce and come up with a policy that makes some sense. Perhaps the leaves will stop falling in the autumn, too. - Ahunt (talk) 19:05, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Exactly. - BilCat (talk) 19:18, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

There actually a number of questionable guidelines I'm no longer enforcing. I'm not purposefully violating them, but I'm not expending any effort to revert them when I see them. We have far too many guidelines in the MOS as a whole, and unfortunately many contradict each other. There are also far too many users in Wikipedia whose sole or primary purpose appears to be to write as many new guidelines as possible. Most of them are trying to enforce their own narrow prescriptivist grammar rules, and they really have no interest in actually writing for an encyclopedia. I tend to ignore those users and their rules. - BilCat (talk) 21:40, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Welcome back

Last time I checked your user page, it showed that you were retired. The reason I remember your username is because you were the first one to 'thank' my edits back in 2017 (diff/767857493 and diff/767847280) when I was very young and naive on this project. I hope you are doing well and would like to take the opportunity to welcome you back. Regards, Field Marshal (talk) 20:35, 30 July 2020 (UTC)