User talk:Astronaut

Welcome to my Talk Page

See Help:Talk page#How to keep a two-way conversation readable. When you begin a new message section here, I will respond to it here. Likewise, whenever I begin a message section on your Talk page, I will watch the page for your response. This maintains discussion threads and continuity.

Welcome!

Malware

Thanks for your interest at my question. I am having the exact symptoms. What should one do ?  Jon Ascton  (talk) 11:19, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

I can't really remember all the details - it was well over a year ago on my brother-in-law's PC. I do remember the Google results and not being allowed to access the Task Manager. Instead, I used Process Explorer and autoruns from sysinternals to seek out suspicious programs, then a variety of rootkit detection programs so I could find and delete the malware. Each time I thought I had finally got rid of it, it came back again and again. In all, I spent half of the Saturday and most of the Sunday and still wasn't really convinced it was all gone. All the same, the problems didn't reoccur and I was able to enable the task manager again with a small change in the registry (I can't remember where - you'll have to Google for that). I then gave my brother-in-law another lecture about safe surfing practices :-) Astronaut (talk) 11:36, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

John Ham merger

I found John Ham as a separate article. Was it merged? (Also, I edited out the vague reference in Ham re "Commander".) Thanks. --S. Rich 22:13, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I did. Some months after the AfD decision was made it seems nothing had actually been done, so I redirected John Ham to Ustream because there wasn't any material that needed to be merged. However, it seems just a month later 74.85.19.163 undid my redirection. The same IP editor has also made POV edits to John Ham, Brad Hunstable and Ustream and I strongly suspect a conflict of interest there. Thank you for letting me know; I have raised another AfD for John Ham (though I have exclused the Brad Hunstable article for now because it seems better referenced). Astronaut (talk) 23:09, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

This is a minor issue for me. I did some edits on Ham simply because he graduated from my alma mater -- Poly High. Thanks.--S. Rich 23:14, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Re:File:Hiroshima Dome 1945.gif

A potential free image of both subjects (an example of a ground zero and the monument) exists/could exist, and so a non-free image should not be used, as per non-free content criterion 1. J Milburn (talk) 16:15, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

I have removed both usages of the image again. This is not appropriate as a lead image in either article (it doesn't even illustrate the article's subject in one of them) and I request that you do not add it back. J Milburn (talk) 16:19, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

How can there be a free image from 1945? How can you say it is not an image of the peace memorial - the dome is the centerpiece of the peace memorial. For the time being I have readded the image to gallery on Hiroshima Peace Memorial to prevent it being speedily deleted. I'll open a discussion at Talk:Hiroshima Peace Memorial. Astronaut (talk) 16:53, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

We don't use non-free content in galleries... J Milburn (talk) 13:17, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

I didn't know that. Image moved to be with the article text. Astronaut (talk) 14:09, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Re: Quilte

You are correct that this article is a hoax, though I admit a fairly funny one. I'm the Managing Editor of the Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia (GAMEO) at http://www.gameo.org/ SamSteiner (talk) 12:35, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Adding '/small' tag to RefDesk Q about Papal Visit

Thanks, Astronaut - I was just in the middle of doing it myself, when I noticed it had already been added. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 16:03, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism at "List of tallest buildings in the world and others"

The User talk:Mdmday, is doing vandalism by reverting again and again my edits on list of tallest buildings in the world, list of tallest residential buildings in the world, and list of tallest buildings in Asia. World One, in Mumbai is not under construction at all, but this user do not understand. All the reliable sources like CTBUH, Emporis, and skyscraperpage say that either its Approved or Proposed. But this user reverted these sources from the article page without giving any explanation. I am hereby to invite you to please participate in the discussion at this user's talk page for consensus to reach.

Nabil rais2008 (talk) 15:13, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi

Hi, can you please tell me how you made this diagram: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:BurjKhalifaHeight.svg I would like to learn. Thanks! :) A Fantasy (talk) 01:47, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

I used a vector drawing package called Inkscape. Astronaut (talk) 21:56, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Tallest approved, under construction, etc/Emporis

I have created a few list of tallest articles and a few building articles and I was wondering where do you find a comprehensive list of the tallest future or proposed buildings? One at a time through a site such as skyscrapercity?

• Also I see that emporis is not very reliable at all. I added the criticism thing to it and a talk page thing. I just made the List of tallest buildings in Hartford using mainly emporis but it's top 25 list for Hartford does not include the 2004 built Marriott Hartford Downtown, which does have an emporis entry.
• Top 25 list:http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/ci/bu/?id=101328
• Marriott Hartford:http://www.emporis.com/application/?nav=building&lng=3&id=171290

The Hartford Marriott is at least 50 meters while the list goes down to under 50; also the list does include the 2006 Hartford 21. Emporis does have a disclaimer of all it's stats and there really is no profit motive to what it does but it still seems surprisingly outdated. It also contrasts skyscraperpage.com a lot and usually has different years than most other sites on buildings. Daniel Christensen (talk) 03:37, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Sudhan

Hi Astronaut
Would you please repair the User talk archive of the article Sudhan that you effected on 11 June 2009
Thanks Intothefire (talk) 09:23, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

In fact it wasn't me. I correctly archived the talk page on that date, but the archive got left behind when the parent page was moved from Talk:Sudhun to Talk:Sudhan by Bennylin (talk · contribs) on 31 August 2010. I've now moved the archive to be under the new name and the link has now reappeared in the Talk page's archive box.

Please note: you should not edit the archive. If you wish to reopen a previous discussion, please start a new topic on the current talk page - you could refer to the old discussion if necessary, like this: Talk:Sudhan/Archive 1#Religion (for example). Astronaut (talk) 23:25, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Pagcor Tower and Mervynbunique

Hi Astronaut, I see you are pretty active in the skyscraper articles. I'm mainly contributing in the dutch wikipedia and encounterd this Mervyn who keeps adding speculation to Pagcor Tower. This 2008 proposed tower has actually no news at the moment, it seems to be sleeping. I don't know the procedures here and cant simply go on with reverting this person, that's why I am reporting this guy here. Cheers, Leodb (talk) 20:26, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

My talk page is not really the right place to report this problem. The usual procedure is to warn the user by placing a warning template on their talk page; starting at level-1 and gradually increasing to level-4 should the user seem to not be taking notice of the warnings. After a fifth incident, and after having been sufficiently warned within a reasonably short space of time, you can request that an administrator take some action (the place to go for this is one of the administrator noticeboards.

That said, it might be better to assume good faith and guide Mervyn to be a better contributor by suggesting they read up on Wikipedia's policies on verifiability and reliable sources. Only if that turns out unsuccessful, persue the user warning route. Astronaut (talk) 22:40, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you KINDLY for helping me find this video!

It took me YEARS of searching, but I'm glad I had the foresight to ask the Reference Desk (even if twice) and that you happened to be around to find it.

Now I will have to go back to the Reference Desk to ask a question about how deep the deepest parking garage on Earth is, and what all the resources it would take to make one 720+ floors deep, as depicted in the commercial you found for me.

How should I repay you, kind sir? --70.179.178.5 (talk) 04:33, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Price discrepancy

Thanks for taking the time to contact me. I think we were looking at different sources. The other article cited at the end of the sentence in question (the link doesn't seem to be working for me now, but it's still cited as of this writing) has the 70% figure in the title and I think treated it somewhat differently. That's what I was referring to. I'm not particularly familiar with the topic though so I trust your judgment. Andreona (talk) 04:00, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Lotus tower

I am sorry. However this tower does have its own article. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peliyagoda_tower Intoronto1125 (talk) 19:50, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

By looking at the picture it is a skyscaper not a structure.

No, that's a tower, just like the CN Tower is a tower, just like the Milad Tower is a tower, just like the Sky Tower is a tower. It even calls itself a tower and could be listed in the List of tallest towers in the world when completed. Astronaut (talk) 19:55, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Oh, i see. Good point. Intoronto1125 (talk) 21:41, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Permission to use image

Hello,

I would like to ask permission to use an image which has also been requested above, it is the newer version of the Burj Dubai height comparison: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:BurjKhalifaHeight.svg It is for a book, I can provide all the publication info, please let me know if this is ok and if so what credits you would like me to use. Thank you LucyH Lucyh24 (talk) 12:27, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, you may use the image. Please bear in mind the license under which it appears in Wikipedia, namely Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0) which allows you to use the image, or create derivative works from it, so long as it is attributed to the authors (presumably, myself and maybe the other authors involved in its creation, namely: Rama (talk · contribs), MrWeeble (talk · contribs) and Hc5duke (talk · contribs)), and that you release any derivative work under the same or similar license.

You may credit me as "Astronaut", or you can request my real name by email if you think it would be more professional (or maybe it is mandatory) to use my real name - there is an "E-mail this user" link in the toolbox to the left.

I request no fee, but the publication info would be appreciated. If you could also e-mail me a scan of the finished page containing the image, that would also be appreciated.

Thank you. Astronaut (talk) 13:10, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

thank you very much, I have sent you an email.Lucyh24 (talk) 13:24, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

It's your call

The geolocation of the IP along with the style of question suggest that it's a Light current alternate address (I've seen a few others from this ISP recently, in his style) or a copycat. It doesn't really matter which; they can be blocked on sight as pretty obvious trolls. Personally, I think your response was reasonable. By being utterly matter-of-fact, without showing any sort of overheated response, it's not going to give the troll the food he craves.

In the future, it's your call whether to reply to these questions or to just roll them back outright. (If everyone handled them as well as you did, there wouldn't be any problem.) I'm hoping that other Ref Deskers can show similar good judgement and restraint, but I fear that it's going to be too tempting a target for certain more childish regulars who can't resist the opportunity for a bit of toilet humour. Cheers! TenOfAllTrades(talk) 16:58, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Stalking

First off, I wanna say that I agree with you, for the most part, regarding the Strait of Messina edit, that it was a bit confusing or repetitive. Hence why I did NOT revert it back. Though I did put "miles" as well as the "km" thing, as many people are not that familiar totally with the metric system, and as is done on other WP articles, both "miles" AND "km" are put to make it abundantly clear. I hope you respect that.

That's one.

What I did NOT appreciate or agree with you at all was your stalking me, and checking up on what I did on other articles, by obviously checking my "Contribs". That's very UNCOOL...nerve-racking, and disrespectful. And it's arguably against WP:Hounding policy and etiquette. Good-faith and provably accurate edits should only be reverted or changed if there's a genuine problem. Like "repetitive or confusing", which is why I agreed with you (mostly) with what you did in the first article in question.

But it seems you went into the "list of proverbial phrases" article with an obvious bias against me, second-guessing me, and that I HAD to be wrong. If you deny that, so be it, but you were still arguably wrong in undoing my edit.

Here's how...

to that other editor who undid my edit before (wrongly), as I said, it doesn't matter that Burns wrote it that way originally, as that's NOT the point...the point is a "proverbial saying" in GENERAL...of how it's spoken today.

it's not "misleading" to give the understandable and intelligible rendering of the words, and also how it IS spoken today.... the original wording is NEVER REALLY used as a proverbial saying today.

The question is, is that saying worded the way I edited today or not? As "gone awry" or not? You KNOW it is. How many people either say or understand "agley"?

Also, you said the wording was exactly the same in both references. Actually, no. (At least not as far as I can tell.) The first reference link only had the word "agley", NOT the word "awry". The reference page that I myself put in had the word "awry" too. "Go awry" is better known, and better understood. And the reference page I put had that one.

(By the way, I see that you've disrespected my edits on "John Cabot" and "Russia" which I will revert back...since you're clearly violating WP Policy now...and arguably edit-warring because of bias.)

Anyway, I felt compelled to communicate the matter out. I appreciate your own work and contributions to Wikipedia, as I guess you're accomplished to some extent, when you're not stalking or edit-warring, and of course I don't take away from valid points or edits; and I rarely even go on this, as I'm busy with other things. This is not really that important to me, cuz I don't live on Wikipedia. But when I do edits, I try sincerely to make sure they're good and effective and meaningful. But respect is more important to me. Please do not follow me around, hound me, second-guess me with things I do. I don't need that. Otherwise I'll have to stop WP or just change screen names, as I don't want hounders on my back discouraging or undoing things I do, valid things, simply because they have a personal hang-up against me. Again, you may have had a point about the Messina article edit, but was it necessary to check my contribs, and rudely try to find fault with things there? Archiver of Records (talk) 06:18, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Left lengthy guidance on the user's talk page. Astronaut (talk) 11:22, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

And this was my response: Archiver of Records (talk) 11:20, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

I agree with Archiverof Records. Thanks, A comment by a person who has been editing Wikipedia since October 28, 2010. (talk) 17:31, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

"Miles" are put in many other WP articles ALONGSIDE "KM" for further clarification

You obviously can't be reasoned with, so I won't even try anymore. You're obviously (lol) one of those WP nazis and neurotic hounders and bullies, violators, warrers, and stalkers, but will somehow make most Admins think you're smelling like a rose. I've seen it done to others as well...

I did put "miles" as well as the "km" thing, as many people are not that familiar totally with the metric system, and as is done on other WP articles, both "miles" AND "km" are put to make it abundantly clear. It's obvious you're not being cool about that, or respecting that. You got issues, sir.

(I can't respect someone who is so blatantly disrespecting me or my good-faith AND ACCURATE edits, because of whims, or psychological issues, tastes, or dogmatic attitudes... Hence my blunt tone with you now.)

I'll say it again though.... "Miles" ARE in fact put in MANY Wikipedia articles right alongside "kilometers" (and you being supposedly Brit should even more understand the need or good thing about putting "miles", since that's how it was long used in England, no? But I don't expect you to be logical, cool, or reasonable about anything. You already showed that with your rude revert-happy stalkish nonsense with me.)

What is the policy on "reverting"? Is it how you're doing? Uhh, no, not really.

it says:

"Revert vandalism on sight, but revert a good faith edit only after discussing the matter."

You, of course, violated that, and discussed nothing with me, but simply reverted at will, cuz of your uptight taste and whims, and didn't care.

Also, this is policy:

Revert wars are usually considered harmful, for the following reasons:

They cause ill-will between users, negatively destabilize articles and make other editors wary of contributing.

Also, you might wanna consider this (NOT my words, but WP Policy's):

Avoiding or limiting your reverts

Having realized that article development has ground to a halt because of incessant reversions, two or more people agree to give higher-than-usual respect to each other's edits.

One-revert rule Some editors may choose voluntarily to follow a one-revert rule: If someone reverts your change, don't re-revert it, but discuss it with them. See Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle.

Zero-revert rule Editors may also choose to adhere to a zero-revert rule, for example:

"Only revert obvious vandalism. Instead of removing or reverting changes or additions you may not like, add to and enhance them while following the principle of preserving information and viewpoints. If you can't figure out how any part of an edit benefits an article ask for clarification on the article's or the editor's discussion page."

Of course, someone like you can't follow any of that, I see. (And those were NOT my words, but Wikipedia's.) Because you don't have respect. But will revert ACCURATE, GOOD-FAITH ADDITIONS OR EDITS, that are done by someone you don't like, or if it's an edit you personally (no real good reason, but just personal whim or taste) don't like or care for. Meaning, you're NOT cool or respectful or self-controlled when it comes to "reverting."

But will stalk, harass, follow around, put on your "watchlist" (only pathetic trolls and bullies feel the need to do crap like that, who have no lives), hound, goad, medal in, second-guess, discourage and hurt people you THINK are not very good editors, because of some psychological hang-up with this and that. For childish or neurotic reasons. Again, all in VIOLATION of WP policy and principles, regardless of what uptight or sloppy or pressed-for-time or friendly Admin may or may not back your nonsense up. Reverting good-faith and valid and correct and accurate things, simply cuz you don't like them, is NOT favored or suggested by clear WP policy. Just the facts. Cheers.... Archiver of Records (talk) 11:05, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

After this, left a warning on the user's talk page about personal attacks. Astronaut (talk) 11:23, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

I love how you're totally dodging everything written here... But that's no big surprise.

Anyway, this was my response to your "warning" (and lovely how you ignored mine...you condescending stalker):

Copy of response. Archiver of Records (talk) 11:20, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

In response to your last comment on my talk page Archiver of Records (talk) 11:36, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

I agree with ArchiverofRecords. Thanks, A comment by a person who has been editing Wikipedia since October 28, 2010. (talk) 17:27, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

You deserve a barnstar

		The Barnstar of Diplomacy
		For dealing coolly with the shouting from that Archiver of Records fellow, I hereby award you this Barnstar of Diplomacy. Sophus Bie (talk) 10:57, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

In a quandary

Move discussion to Talk:Sonia Gandhi#In a quandary Astronaut (talk) 12:35, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Nicely resolved. Consider this an ephemeral barnstar worthy of note! --rgpk (comment) 15:06, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Showcase TV

It is still around, channel 201 on sky. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.6.142.66 (talk) 22:08, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

No it isn't. See Talk:Showcase TV. Astronaut (talk) 09:16, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Skyscraper

You just need to do a little research to find that the Manhatten Life Insurance Building did get demolished in 1963. There is plenty of photographic evidence. Nasnema  Chat  00:52, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Swiss cheese

Actually, the joke's on you. If you're in a shop that sells only American and Swiss cheese, it was almost certainly selling a cheep flavorless brand of Swiss cheese manufactured in Wisconsin. So yea, it was made in America. "Swiss cheese" refers to a type of cheese, not it's nation of origin. (My favorite brand of swiss cheese comes from Finland.) APL (talk) 17:40, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

More Burj?

I've seen something on t.v. to the effect that a mile-high tower is planned next. Would you know anything about that? Davidkevin (talk) 22:16, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

We have an article about the Mile-High Tower. However, details are sketchy with not much detail in reliable sources. If you can remember the source (TV show, date, time, channel, etc.) that could be a useful addition to the article. Astronaut (talk) 09:16, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

WoodKiller/M&M Tool and Machinery

Hi, Astronaut, Thanks very much for your input. In fact, I was hopeful to get a little more of it... You indicated that the entry reads like an advertisement - I understand that criticism as the entry focuses on a business, but I am having a hard time understanding how to then avoid a promotional tone. I feel the entry focuses more on the facts and history of the company rather than its selling points - accordingly, I was hoping you could specify what points of the entry seem the most promotional or how to best eliminate the elements that appear like an advertisement. I don't mean to seem thick-headed, I simply want to ensure the entry is as informative as possible without crossing the line into advertising territory. This, of course, is why the entry has remained in personal draft space. Again, thanks very much for your time and input. I'll look forward to a little more feedback. Oh! And the below link is one of a few entries used as a general template or guide for the (M&M Tool) entry in question.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dewalt http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:WoodKiller/M%26M_Tool_and_Machinery

Thanks again and much appreciation,

help desk

i didn't see the date. Thanks, A comment by a person who has been editing Wikipedia since October 28, 2010. (talk) 00:29, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

You haev messages here. A comment by a person who has been editing Wikipedia since October 28, 2010. (talk) 16:48, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

I was surprised you consider my comment on WP:HD#disruption as criticism. I was rather hoping you would see it as a piece of helpful advice. Astronaut (talk) 17:07, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

You said that I need to assume good faith and I did. I just forgot to read the history log. And “assume good faith”, to me, sounds like a reminder to behave myself, at least to me. Thanks, A comment by a person who has been editing Wikipedia since October 28, 2010. (talk) 17:10, 2 July 2011 (UTC)