Greetings! Just spreading a message to the members of [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikify|WikiProject Wikify]] that the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikify/Drives/2015/June|June drive]] has been started. Come on, sign up! :) [[User:Wilhelmina Will|"A wiki of beauty is a joy forever." Seriously. That's how long it'd take to read!]] ([[User talk:Wilhelmina Will|talk]]) 04:08, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
Greetings! Just spreading a message to the members of [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikify|WikiProject Wikify]] that the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikify/Drives/2015/June|June drive]] has been started. Come on, sign up! :) [[User:Wilhelmina Will|"A wiki of beauty is a joy forever." Seriously. That's how long it'd take to read!]] ([[User talk:Wilhelmina Will|talk]]) 04:08, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
No reason, i just thought you might enjoy it =P Keep up the good work! ツ Jenova20(email) 17:23, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you; I love cookies! Airplaneman ✈ 01:34, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Invitation to a discussion: Wikipedia and legislative data
Hi Airplaneman, since you are interested in meetups in DC, I'd like to invite you to attend the Cato Institute's "Wikipedia and Legislative Data" events on March 14. (There's also an all day workshop on March 15; let me know if you are interested, we may be able to add more people.)
There will be an introduction to Wikipedia and open edit-a-thon in the afternoon, and a Sunshine Week Reception in the evening. I hope you can make it!
Hope to see you there! -Pete (talk) 18:59, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Good Article Nominations Request For Comment
A 'Request For Comment' for Good Article Nominations is currently being held. We are asking that you please take five to ten minutes to review all seven proposals that will affect Good Article Nominations if approved. Full details of each proposal can be found here. Please comment on each proposal (or as many as you can) here.
At this time, Proposal 1, 3, and 5 have received full (or close to) support.
If you have questions of anything general (not related to one specif proposal), please leave a message under the General discussion thread.
Please note that Proposal 2 has been withdrawn and no further comments are needed. Also, please disregard Proposal 9 as it was never an actual proposal.
Article
Dear Airplaneman, we did not communicate in a while but I would like to invite you to join the conversation on this page [1] because I am not sure that the person who is revising the article knows what she is doing. She started the conversation on her talk page with some other user based on unsubstantiated assumptions; she doesn’t check the facts and she doesn’t cooperate, listen or otherwise answer the major and legitimate arguments. She says that she doesn’t have to be familiar with the subject and uses wrong information in a new version. Also, she states, for example, that different poetry books (poetry collections) are not collections but a collection. A Poetry collection contains many poems so different poetry books, containing many poems each, are usually called poetry collections. I was following the protocol for other writers and books and if this is not true about poetry collections then hundreds of articles must be revised to be in accordance with her ideas. She states that Stojanovic wrote 125 poems although it is obvious that he published more than 400. She reorganized the text and moved one sentence from the opening paragraph to the style section and now the first two sentences of the Style section are redundant. She replaced this sentence, much more appropriate for the opening paragraph, with the number of poems, which is, first of all, unencyclopedic and it is not correct (the number 125). Number of poems is not the fact that should be in the opening paragraph in my opinion since the quality of poems is much more important. The other sentence was much more appropriate. She also uses a very strange format in Published Works, starting every line with the name, then comma, then the last name, although I have not seen any article with the name of the author listed in this section unless the name is a part of the title (it is obvious that the books, based on the article itself), are by the author about whom the article is, although the dates can be placed before (like in some other articles) but not with a point after the date but with a colon. She also changed Serbian-American to Serbian and now nowbody can now that this author has been living in America for 23 years.
She doesn’t want to check the Library of Congress or WorldCat and she doesn’t want to check the article published in the World Literature Today digitized by Google. Please join this conversation since you sincerely participated in the creation of this article and since you always acted in good faith. Somebody with a neutral mind would have to participate and clarify this nonsense. Thanks. Mountlovcen8 (talk) 17:10, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's great to hear from you! I'm extremely busy in real life right now, so unfortunately, I won't be of much help until I can get some free time in June. A cursory look at the situation gives me the impression that Cindamuse (talk·contribs) was not satisfied with sourcing, something that would especially help, as you said, recognize Stojanovic's notability. For one, I'm not fond of people using "administrator" as a title and throwing that around as if I were some high authority figure. In reality, all I'm here for is to moderate and clean up. I'm sure there are many non-administrators that know more about how to write a good article than I. To this end, I need you to work together without getting angry, something that I think is happening, because both of you want an article that is well done. The face that we're collaborating online compounds the difficulty and makes this process harder than it needs to be (also, as you said). This requires additional effort from both parties to assess each others' goals to see what is ultimately trying to be achieved (in this case, we're working towards a more comprehensive encyclopedic entry). I think you're getting there. I'd love to get into the specifics of improving this article, but in that case, I wouldn't be getting any sleep. I'll try to keep this on my radar. Best, Airplaneman ✈ 06:13, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for responding and it is great to hear from you too. The problem here is that this lady hardly recognized even the obvious facts and still refuses to recognize other facts that would be obvious to any reasonable person. She started the conversation, after placing some tags on some articles which attracted my attention, and I noticed a conversation there with Tokyo girl about this article which is, in my opinion, against Wikipedia’s rules.
On the other hand, Cindy is arbitrary; she doesn’t listen to almost anything and she overlooks even the obvious facts. This article is sourced with almost the same number of references as the article about Robert Frost. The problem with her is that she did not do anything in a professional manner and did not perform due diligence before involving with this article. She did not even check the authority control in the article to make this less painful. She changes the text, making obvious factual errors, she doesn’t insert the additional resources although she placed the tags in the text and received the information. I even asked her if she wanted physical copies of the books and copies of articles written in major newspapers, weekly magazines and literary magazines and periodicals in Belgrade and she did not answer, yet continues in a completely wrong direction.
So, the problem is not with sourcing but with the lack of cooperation on her part and she does want to recognize the facts. I do not understand this kind of behavior and don’t know is this a whim, caprice or it could be something else. Obviously, she tries to prove the unprovable and continues for the sake of sticking to her “perspective” as she calls it instead of doing a real job.
What she did by now made the article worse. That’s why I thought somebody like you could help to clarify this since I have everything in order already and everything could be done quickly with a good will. She is almost not doing anything except that the tags are kept there. Would you recommend that I remove the tags and fix the article just a bit with inserting these references and only one picture? Then in June you can review everything and possibly recover what is lost now although may be important. She did not prove she can do a good job with this type of work related to authors.
Based on the tag, the tag says that it can be removed after several hours if the editing work is not completed. I did not want to remove it for three days but at this point, I don’t consider her behavior responsible and I think the tag should be removed and the article fixed at least to the extent possible now. She removed all the photographs (even with the Nobel Prize winner). So I would place back at least this important photo illustrative of that section. I am sorry for bothering you with this and best regards. Mountlovcen8 (talk) 07:04, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Deleting my wikipedia user page?
Hello Airplaneman, I was wondering if you could delete my user page (not the talk one, but user page). It is empty and I created it a long time ago, but I'm not using it and don't think I'll ever do. I was not able to delete it myself, so I was hoping if you could please help me out? Thank you very much! EthemD (talk) 04:13, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Airplaneman! If it's not too much hassle, is it perhaps also possible for you to delete these 4 sub-pages? /User_talk:EthemD/archive2010 /User_talk:EthemD/archive2011 /User_talk:EthemD/archive2012 /User_talk:EthemD/archive2013 -EthemD (talk) 18:24, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No problem; it only takes a second. Best, Airplaneman ✈ 23:15, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Deletion of Whuteva page
I just realized that you deleted or had the page I was working on for Whuteva deleted. I found redible articles includeing MTV with legitimate sources to back up the article such as video footage and live interviews. I dont understand what makes you qualified to critique an article on a subject it which appears you know nothing about. I can understand if I were talking about Cessna or Boeings (of which I probably know more than you know about hip hop music).
Excuse me for taking this personal but I definitely feel you marking this article for deletion was unjust and I would like to know how to go about re-establishing the article with the content and research (time and energy) Ive already exhausted on this piece. I just hope it was never completely removed and I can still recover what was lost. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Innertainment (talk • contribs) 02:32, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Innertainment,
I don't remember ever being involved in the deletion of Whuteva, but if you'd like, I can restore the page to a user subpage of yours at User:Innertainment/Whuteva for you to work on. See here for some starters. If you'd like me to restore the page, I'd be more than happy to. Make sure to take a look at the notability guidelines and good sourcing policies. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me or anyone else. And don't worry, I don't take these things personally. Cheers, Airplaneman ✈ 16:48, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Your input is requested
Greetings, Airplaneman! If we have not met, I'm AutomaticStrikeout. I've come here to ask you to take part in the survey at User:AutomaticStrikeout/Are admins interested in a RfB?. I am trying to gauge the general level of interest that administrators have in running for cratship, as well as pinpoint the factors that affect that interest level. Your input will be appreciated. Happy editing, AutomaticStrikeout (T • C • Sign AAPT) 01:41, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You protected the above page on 19 January 2013 for three months because of an IP vandal who keeps adding false information to the page. The vandal is back. I reverted him here. Can you please re-protect the page for the same duration? Editor time is better spent elsewhere. The IP address has been blocked several times for repeatedly and needlessly making this exact edit. link - Fantr (talk) 00:02, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sharing cookies
Here's a plate full of cookies to share!
Hi Airplaneman, here are some delicious cookies to help brighten your day! However, there are too many cookies here for one person to eat all at once, so please share these cookies with at least two other editors by copying {{subst:Sharethecookies}} to their talk pages. Enjoy! Brambleclawx 18:27, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
And while I'm at it, I may as well ask you your assessment of getting Outcast (Warriors) to GA. Brambleclawx 18:41, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! How are things? I appreciate the e-snack. I shared them with my friend; she enjoyed them as well! The large question about getting Outcast to GA is whether or not there are sufficient sources… I've been quite out of the loop in regards to GA standards for the past two years. I wonder if anything has changed. Airplaneman ✈ 22:07, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Cookie infestations on Wikipedia??? I've been pretty relaxed for the last month (though not editing much)... Glad to see you're still around... somewhat. Brambleclawx 18:25, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I see the criteria seem to have been reworded somewhat... I'll nominate it just to get feedback from people who are in the GA loop I guess. I have a feeling it won't pass due to shortness. Brambleclawx 18:29, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
WP:WARRIORS discussion
Hello Airplaneman. I have started a discussion at the project talk page regarding a proposal for merging the individual book articles into list articles. You are invited to participate in this discussion, providing feedback and offering your own proposals so that we may reach a consensus decision on the course of action to be taken. Thank you, Brambleclawx 15:23, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Any further comments before we proceed with the merge? Brambleclawx 15:05, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Butter
Butter has been semi-protected since 2010. There is no clue on the talk page or the protection log as to why permanent protection is still warranted. Before I go the WP:RFUP route, I am asking you to consider removing the protection. Thanks in advance,. 68.165.77.199 (talk) 18:56, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! A careful inspection of the edit history prior to proection shows long-term vandalism with nearly no constructive edits from unregistered users logged. A perusal of the protection log also shows a long history of protections. Granted, it's been 30 months, so I'll unprotect the page and see what happens. Have a chill weekend, Airplaneman ✈ 04:33, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
My pleasure. Take care, Airplaneman ✈ 04:16, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You've been mislead
I noticed that you've imposed PC1 on Wesley Warren Jr. following a request that's archived at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Rolling archive#July 16. I'm afraid you've been mislead by the requester. The article is stable and does not have a history of vandalism other than a handful of edits on the nights that a British documentary film about the article subject was broadcast. What is really going on is that there is currently a thread on Wikipediocracy directed against the editors who collaborated on this article (towards which the thread is extremely personally abusive), and the request for pending changes appears to be intended to lock them out from further editing it. Not coincidentally, the requester is a regular Wikipediocracy member. The article is on several watchlists already, which should be sufficient, and it is unlikely there will be any further outbreaks of vandalism until and unless the film is shown again, at which point short-term PC might be necessary. Please lift the PC for now as it is not needed. Prioryman (talk) 06:30, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the heads-up. It was foolish of me, being so out of the loop, to go and make decisions such as that right away. I did vacillate on the matter for a few minutes, and in hindsight, I clearly made the wrong choice. The PC1 has been lifted. Cheers, Airplaneman ✈ 07:43, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No problem - thanks. If it does get vandalised again on a scale that necessitates pending changes being reimposed, I'll make a request on WP:RPP. Prioryman (talk) 07:46, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I was not misleading anyone. My statement was pretty clear that this was going to be an inevitable target for degrading vandalism of an article on a living person and had already seen vandalism. PC protection doesn't lock out any editors, but just subjects edits from newly registered or anonymous contributors to pre-approval. Those types of contributors are those most likely to make degrading vandalism of the kind the article has already seen. Suggesting that we should just wait for some more people to come in and mock this man for the fact that a procedure to reverse a seriously debilitating condition left his genitals permanently disfigured is reprehensible.--The Devil's Advocatetlk.cntrb. 20:48, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm hesitant to protect a page that is new and has a history of only afewinstances of vandalism from two different users, none of them recent. Article traffic statistics indicate that his swollen testicles and subsequent surgery are a clearly viral phenomenon, one that has come to pass. A low-traffic page with no vandalism since the spike in interest in the subject nearly a month ago needs no protection. As per the protection policy, "Semi-protection should not be used as a preemptive measure against vandalism that has not yet occurred, nor should it be used to privilege registered users over unregistered users in (valid) content disputes." There is no case for any sort of protection for this page. Airplaneman ✈ 21:31, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Any ideas?
It appears to me that HarperCollins has decided to be ridiculous and update their Canadian site. The unfortunate problem now is that all the publication dates we cited for Warriors from there for Canadian releases now match the American ones, which is crazy because I know for a fact we got the release before the US and UK. Which is kind of weird, seeing as now, we can't even cite the publisher for the correct publication date for their own novels. Ideas? Brambleclawx 01:11, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmmmmm I guess it'd be ok to cite reliable third party sources for publication dates, right? Airplaneman ✈ 19:07, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
DYK RfC
As a listed GA participant, you are invited to contribute to a formal Request for Comment on the question of whether Good Articles should be eligible to appear in the Did You Know? slot in future. Please see the proposal on its subpage here, or on the main DYK talk page. To add the discussion to your watchlist, click this link. Thank you in advance. GilderienChat|Contributions02:49, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Help restoring deleted page
Hi there, I was wondering if you could help restoring the text of a deleted page. The page in question is Zopim and I want to use the text as reference for a rewrite of the article. I'm unsure if this is the correct procedure for this request. Your help is appreciated. Abhiroopb (talk) 08:38, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Abhiroopb, the article was deleted because it was unambiguous advertising. I took a look at it, and it's nearly identical to the one you currently have at AFC. There's nothing worth salvaging, and it would be a bad reference text to use. Best, Airplaneman ✈ 16:52, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Userfication request
Could you please userfy Donkey Kong's animal buddies and Kleever for me? I feel there is helpful content in those two articles (even if the latter is poorly written). I'm trying to reserve non-copyrighted, deleted Wikipedia articles. Thanks. 2005-Fan (talk) 13:59, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note to self: this was done by someone else. Airplaneman ✈ 13:01, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Airplaneman, here are some delicious cookies to help brighten your day! However, there are too many cookies here for one person to eat all at once, so please share these cookies with at least two other editors by copying {{subst:Sharethecookies}} to their talk pages. Enjoy! Dreamfigure (talk) 11:04, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
WP Apple Inc. in the Signpost
The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Apple Inc. for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. –Mabeenot (talk) 12:28, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
WikiProject Warriors role call
Hello Airplaneman. You have listed yourself as an active contributor of WikiProject Warriors, but as we are trying to see who is still active, we have put all active contributors under "status pending." If you are still active, go to Wikipedia:WikiProject Warriors and move your name to "Active." Move your name to "Inactive" if you no longer wish to contribute. You may always move it back. On January, 9, 2014, all members who have not listed themselves as active will be moved to the "inactive" section. Thank you!
Airplaneman Hello, could you possible help me on a recognized artist actor and singer. Sources are reliable, Awareness is recognized, more of two major producing albums and player two films. However, a French contributor continues to unnecessary headbands. Thank you to you.--Mediasurf2 (talk) 01:20, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Mediasurf2, it seems like Daniel has taken care of it here. Sorry for the delayed response. Airplaneman ✈ 13:10, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Mac Pro GAR
Mac Pro, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Someone not using his real name (talk) 23:02, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Can you help me retrieve content for two deleted pages?
Hi Airplaneman
I found you on the "Wikipedia administrators willing to provide copies of deleted articles" page and wonder if you could help me get back some of my work that was lost. Mark Miremont and The Resurrection of Beauty
These were both deleted pretty quickly and I did not get a chance to get their content to make possible future attempts better. The person who nominated the long standing page (I think since 2006) Mark Miremont had made several deletions prior to nominating it for deletion. Anyone reading that article may not have seen all the evidence of the notability as a result. I don't have intentions to re-post or work on wikipedia for a while because this process and that editor's was rather demoralizing. Still it would be nice to be able to retrieve all that work I did for my own records. I am assuming once a decision for deletion has been made, even if only by one or two people, that it is done in stone and there are no appeals. If you get a look at the page, I would greatly appreciate your input on what myself and any other editors did wrong with establishing notability. In my field it is obvious that there is notability and I thought the references were from reliable sources. Thanks! Nynewart (talk) 22:20, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Nynewart,
It's nice to meet you. I did some looking around just to see the context of how these articles came to be deleted. I didn't put the time in to read the entire discussions, but honestly, they are a large example of why I don't edit frequently anymore. Everything is so much of a hassle, and real life requires a lot of the energy I would need in order to participate in such discussions. I'm checking in right before I go to sleep, so I won't be evaluating the notability claims of the two articles extensively. If I have some time in the future (this is quite a nebulous statement), I'll try and make a proper evaluation. If much time passes, and I haven't yet, feel free to give me a poke.
It's nice to meet you too, Airplaneman. I completely understand what you are saying. I don;t know that I will be doing much editing after this negative experience. What irritated me was the wasted time I put into this jumping through the other editor's hoops. I suspect that the person who nominated the deletion must have a grudge against the subject because he went in and made 10 or 12 deletions with edit summaries like "bullshit" etc- while, admitting to not reading the references. At the same time there were also deletions elsewhere on wiki related to this subject of the article by someone using a redirected IP address. I am not saying it was sockpuppetry but it is a bit coincidental given the flurry of deletions for a page that has existed for almost 6 years.
After I updated the references and limited it mere factual statements, he then said he looked at a main reference and it was ok to use... meaning that I spent hours of research and re-editing was for nothing and he admitted his deletions were inappropriate. But he did not want to go back and restore the content. Looking at the pages that editor maintained, it was clear that he did not hold them to any of the standards he was imposing on this one. That was another clue to me that there was something odd about the deletion and tone.
I believe even this neutered version of the article you sent me showed notability; give the institutions his work has been acknowledge by and exhibited with and individuals he has collaborated with. (There are many more that were not included (as I don't think I was bold enough in the content I posted).
I am very grateful you were able to get me the deleted content to save. This may not be your area of expertise, but I would value anyone's opinion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nynewart (talk • contribs) 16:55, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Airplaneman, I wondered if, now that I was able to retrieve the content from the pages that were deleted, you could revert them to the previously hidden pages they were. As they are now, they show up in online searches and I would hate for the subject of those pages to think I were involved in them being deleted. I would appreciate that very much.
The editor that fought so passionately for the pages to be deleted began engaging me on my talk page again, suggesting ways to contest the deletion. I don't now why he would do this, but did not plan to try to reinstate the pages again. But I would value a second opinion becasue no one commented on the improvements I made before the miremont page was quickly deleted. If you think there might be some notability there, perhaps I would give it another attempt. Thanks! Nynewart (talk) 02:14, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I added a line of code to each page called Noindex that will delist the pages from search engines. Airplaneman ✈ 05:25, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Pikachu protection
Pikachu has been semi-protected for almost four years now. Would it be a good time to experiment with pending changes? If vandalism resumes afterwards, it can always be reprotected. What do you think? Narutolovehinata5tccsdnew 14:28, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the late response – looks like it's been taken care of. Hopefully it goes well! Best, Airplaneman ✈ 01:19, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Scaly Adventures deleted page
Hi,
Another administrator deleted the Scaly Adventures page that I wrote. After initially contacting them regarding why the page was deleted, the administrator did not contact me again regarding a request to reinstate the page. Would it be possible for you to get me the text from the page so that I can make the discussed changes and repost it? Thanks!
Hopeliving94 (talk) 17:57, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, just wanted to let you know about the Smithsonian APA edit-a-thon happening May 10, 2014. There are events in NYC, DC, Los Angeles, San Diego and Austin, TX. You can also work virtually, but just wanted to let you know, since you have been active on the Asian American projects. Thanks! -- Fuzheado | Talk 20:33, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Mainland Air
Hi Airplaneman,
Can you send me a copy of this recently deleted (8 May) article to me so I can work on it to improve it so it can be resubmitted for inclusion in wikipedia. It was deleted by GED UK the reason was A7 but it has been on wikipedia for many years so don't know why it was deleted all of a sudden. Thanks in advance CHCBOY (talk) 12:06, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nice to meet you, CHCBOY. I've got the article in your userspace, at User:CHCBOY/Mainland Air. The article did look a little sparse in terms of reliable sourcing, and it will indeed need work to firmly establish notability. I'm tagging User:Ged UK. Let's see if this nifty tagging function works. Cheers, Airplaneman ✈ 12:38, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, it works! I did reply on my talk page, but essentially there was nothing in there about why the ariline was notable. It desparately needs some external sources that talk about the company (a profile piece in an airline magazine, NZ newspaper etc) would probably be enough. GedUK 12:52, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I'm sorry! I missed your note when I checked your talk page a few minutes ago. I should pay more attention. Good to know the tagging system works. Airplaneman ✈ 12:55, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Airplaneman I will have to do some researching for it, will take some time I guess. CHCBOY (talk) 16:27, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Airplaneman do you think the article at User:CHCBOY/Mainland Air is fixed up now with the new refs I found for it. Would it be ready to submit it for inclusion in Wikipedia now? CHCBOY (talk) 07:07, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I submit the article and it was accepted how do I attach all the view history section as its left behind on my userspace.CHCBOY (talk) 03:22, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hey CHCBOY,
I'm sorry it took me so long to respond! I don't log in regularly these days. I would say that the information and references that you have added are a good start towards a solid article. The referenced sentences clearly stating the purpose of the airline, as well as an additional history section, help establish notability. This is good. I would continue to move in that direction if any more information is available. The article that you recreated is under the title Mainland air. For correct capitalization, I will move it to Mainland Air, where the article once was, and perform a history merge of your userspace and the article that you just created. To prevent this in the future, use the move function to preserve the page history when you finish working on an article in your userspace and want to put it back in the mainspace. I'll perform the moves in about 12 hours when I got home. Cheers, Airplaneman ✈ 15:05, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the fix up and putting all the history back too. I will keep that in mind the MOVE function for next time. There is still lots of new things for me to learn here on Wiki.Bye for now. CHCBOY (talk) 09:49, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
My pleasure. I'll see you around! Airplaneman ✈ 19:51, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Just a quick question how can a I get the airline logo (free image) for the article as would like to add it in. CHCBOY (talk) 23:57, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
First off, I highly doubt the image is free-use, as it is a company logo. It's probably copyrighted or trademarked or under some other sort of intellectual property ownership. As such, an airline logo would be under the category of non-free content; yet, as the page explains, you may indeed use it because there is no suitable free-use alternative (a logo can't really be substituted). You can see what a correctly cited non-free image is here, for example. It's a cumbersome process, but something that's in place so Wikipedia doesn't get sued. I'm sorry that there's no quick way to do this. Here's a link to the upload wizard that will help you upload. Remember, the image is not "free," per se. Take your time, Airplaneman ✈ 02:51, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks once again for your detailed instructions it worked successfully for the article and I also used it the method to attach the logo on my other article called Air Safaris. CHCBOY (talk) 11:18, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Cool! It seems like you've uploaded 4 files using the wizard:
It seems that the fair-use rationale (FUR) template of choice for those four files is Template:Non-free use rationale 2. You're missing some fields in each file that I suggest you complete in order to finish the upload process. Also, you will need to add an additional template to the file for each unique page that you use the file on. Yes, it's cumbersome. For example, the File:United Airlines Logo.svg has two FUR templates because it's used on two articles. On a side note, I think Wikipedia prefers logos to be loaded as SVG images. Best, Airplaneman ✈ 14:55, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Airplanman, Im new here and its taking a while to get the hang of!
I am trying to remove a photo that i mistakenly posted on GEORGIE SMITH wiki page ( georgie_smith.jpg ) , now ive had the time to read up on all the rules.
I had a message saying its been flagged for removal, and thats fine. Ive tried to remove it myself but it still appears to show on the live page.
Please can you help me remove it? Thanks! Scoobiunderground (talk) 00:18, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(Note to self) Looks like it was taken care of the very day you posted here. Airplaneman ✈ 03:59, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Traiding a copy of ESTIEM's wikipedia article for 5 cookies!
Hello Airplaneman!
I am contacting you considering the fact that ESTIEM's Wikipedia Page has be removed. I kindly ask you to send me a copy of this page. I'm done reading both the Neutral Point of View and the Wikipedia is Not guidelines. Therefore I am prepared to change any necessary choice of words/phrases of even major part of the content, if that will make our article to be recognised as objective and unbiased.
Im aiming to get it back online as soon as possible, which is why I don't want to write an article from scrap.
Thank you very much for taking the time to read through this, Looking forward to your reply!
Best regards,
Marios
PS: I already contacted the person that deleted the page in the first place -not sure if it matters-
Hey Marios, nice to meet you. I hate to be "that guy," but it seems that you may have a conflict of interest regarding ESTIEM. I do realize that it is beneficial to your organization to have a portal on Wikipedia, as it broadens your reach. A quick Google search of the topic reveals that the article in its old state almost directly mirrors the website in terms of content. As such, restoring the article in its current state is nearly the same as just copying from the website. I do not have qualms regarding the notability of the organization (so I do think it has a place on Wikipedia) but I am hesitant to restore the old text of the page. I simply do not believe that it is worth it. If you would like, I can copy over the old Information Navbox, file links, and reference/category formatting, as I realize that those are hard to reproduce well. How does that sound? Airplaneman ✈ 19:18, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again Airplaneman, thank you for the very quick reply. I do understand your point of view and thus I naturally respect it. I'd be very thankful if you could copy the above mentioned Infobox, file links, reference/category formatting. The only reason for which I wanted the Copy was in order to easen my workload upon re-writing the article (Having a structure ready). Nontheless, I am very, very thankful that you could help me atleast to some extend! 4 Cookies to Airplaneman!
best regards,
Marios
Marios, you can find the content under your usernamehere. Remember that creating a balanced article requires more than just a description of the organization at hand. Peace Corps, for example, has a section on third party opinions (labeled "criticism"). Airplaneman ✈ 20:03, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for all your help Airplaneman, I appreciate it really. =) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mar.kiriakidis (talk • contribs) 05:41, 26 July 2014
No problem, Marios. Let me know when you make some changes to the page. I would be happy to look at it. Please note that I am not online all the time, so I may take a while to respond. Best, Airplaneman ✈ 22:24, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
A kitten for you!
Hi Airplaneman, I want to let you know that I added your user page to your watchlist. You can leave a note on my talk page.
I don't know why you're an administrator but I gave you a Barnstar to appriciate you being like that. Why don't you leave a note on my talk page. Keep up the good work. Eiji Mendoza (talk) 00:12, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Like this kitten?
Ok, Airplaneman, why don't you fully protect your page so no one can edit it. You can leave a note on my talk page if you can or can't.
What a good day of being an Administrator Airplaneman. It is so refreshing here in Wikipedia.
I hope you like the day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eiji Mendoza (talk • contribs) 22:29, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Re: Mahfouz Bin Marei Bin Mahfouz
Midoahmad (talk) 09:13, 10 September 2014 (UTC)Hi Mr Airplaneman,[reply]
Hope you are great.
I have got a slight problem in creating the page of Mahfouz Bin Marei Bin Mahfouz. The page has been deleted once has been created since the admin Olaf considered the page does not have wealth and enough information and sources about Lord Mahfouz Bin Marei Bin Mahfouz. However, the page has been updated again with more and more information, sources, images, etc, but so far is still tagged to be deleted automatically if it will be recreated again (which is not helpful at all and very disappointed). I have emailed Olaf about his feedback about the upgrade and new information and sources provided, however, there is any feedback so far! Please kindly be advised that the page is very important as it gives important information about a very public person in Middle East and UK. This information is very important for many educational institutes, charities, students, patients seeking for assistance in UK and Middle East. Please be advised also the Arabic version of this paged is already authorised and published in Wikipedia Arabic and here is its link
I look forward please to your help and cooperation in this matter and to have a look please at this page and reconsider it for publishing, and of course, any advices, recommendation and/or suggestions from you are very welcomed.
I thank you very much in advance for your assistance and cooperation and look forward to your positive feedback asap please.
Kind regards,
Ahmad
Hello Ahmad, it's good to meet you. I did some poking around and found some discussion on your talk page about this matter as well. This includes discussion with the editor you mentioned, User:Olaf Davis. On your talk page, I found a link to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mahfouz Marei Mubarak bin Mahfouz, which gives many reasons for why the page was repeatedly deleted. Many of the reasons fall under the notability guidelines. What is different here is that we now have an argument in favor of the article in that it exists on another wiki (as per your link above).
I haven't done thorough research to say whether an article on Lord Mahfouz would be worthy of inclusion on Wikipedia, as I am a student and don't have significant chunks of time to spend editing nowadays. Since another wiki does have an article on him, however, one of the ways we can create an article for him on the English Wikipedia would be to translate from Arabic to English. What we can do here is start an article under your username. In this case, the link would be User:Midoahmad/Mahfouz bin Mahfouz (that's what Google Translate tells me the title of his article is on the Arabic Wikipedia). By starting an article in what is called the "userspace", it is not subject to immediate review. That is because it is not published in the mainspace, the part of Wikipedia where articles are held. This will give time for the development of the article, making it less likely that an unfinished version of it would be deleted. If the article is sufficiently referenced and notability is established, we can move the page to the mainspace. Does that make sense? Airplaneman ✈ 21:14, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Re: Mahfouz Bin Marei Bin Mahfouz
Dear Airplaneman,
It is nice to meet you too and thank you very much for your kind assistance and cooperation. I have done what you have advised me and it is now under
As you could see, the page is now fully referenced with with different sources and notability is achieved. So, i need please to know when the page could be moved to the mainspace as it is urgent.
I indeed thank you again for your time and kind cooperation and look forward to your kind positive feedback.
I really appreciate you are busy in your study and wish you all success. I just need a few minutes from you to have a look to the article after adding it under the userspace and help me to move it on to the mainspace as it is very important to us.
I thank you again for your time and effort and look forward to your help asap.
I'm awaiting your feedback and help please as i'm feeling in no where and very confused.
Kind regards,
Ahmad--Midoahmad (talk) 18:43, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Midoahmad,
Your being thorough in this article creation process is indicative of a clear ability and drive to create a good Wikipedia article. It's good that you reached out for other opinions on the article here. I can only echo what they said. Wikipedia has very stringent guidelines on the quality of biographies of living persons articles. Referring to prior consensus, it appears that the article needs a drastic change in the sheer number of reliable sources from which data is taken. A cursory look at the current draft shows me that many, if not most, of the sources link back to the person's own website. Although citing primary sources is acceptable in some cases, it does not contribute to the reliable third-party sourcing that is necessary to substantiate an article that is comprehensive. In short, the article is not there yet, and until a wide range of sources can be found, it will not be.
I know that this is something that is important to you and many others. This indicates a conflict of interest. Yet, it must be noted that there are many other ways to find out about Mahfouz Marei Mubarak bin Mahfouz. Google is just one example. I realize the substantial time investment that has gone into trying to meet the article guidelines here. It is something that I can empathize with. I have also worked on many pages for countless hours; not all of my contributions have been great. In fact, the first article I created on this site was promptly deleted. Please realize that just because the editorial consensus here currently lies in the negative, it does not mean that there are people out to snuff out the product of your valuable time. Please see if you can heed the works given to you by the editors on the help page. Best, Airplaneman ✈ 07:27, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
So Airplaneman, what are the 117 users you blocked? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amaris Monteon (talk • contribs) 22:59, 16 November 2014
Hey, Amaris,
The users I have blocked have fallen mostly under the category of repeat vandals. You may find the log here. Also, when you leave messages on discussion pages, it is beneficial to sign your comments with your signature, which is generated by typing four tildes, like so: ~~~~ .
Hello Airplaneman. This message is part of a mass mailing to people who appear active in reviewing articles for creation submissions. First of all, thank you for taking part in this important work! I'm sorry this message is a form letter – it really was the only way I could think of to covey the issue economically. Of course, this also means that I have not looked to see whether the matter is applicable to you in particular.
The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when hallmarks of copyvios in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered.
If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied from the draft, rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the Wayback Machine is very useful for sussing that out.)
If you do find a copyright violation, please do not decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Wikipedia to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the page for speedy deletion right away using {{db-g12|url=URL of source}}. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with {{subst:copyvio|url=URL of source}}.
Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with weasel words; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors.
I hope this message finds you well and thanks again you for your efforts in this area. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC).[reply]
I'd like to port it to a non WMF wiki with different inclusion rules. Could you (temporarily) restore it for me. I think once I check its revision history I'll find that I was the sole author of the article's intellectual content -- in which case I wouldn't need to be concerned about attributing other people's efforts.
I'll only need it for a day or two, and then I'll place another U1 on it.
It is done. Happy New Year, Geo! Airplaneman ✈ 02:23, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've finished. Thanks for your prompt assistance! Geo Swan (talk) 18:38, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Interview for The Signpost
This is being sent to you as a member of WikiProject Articles for creation
The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Articles for creation for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Thanks, Rcsprinter123(comment) @ 20:32, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A Class
I'm not disagreeing with you on Butthole Surfers, but if you look at the quality scale, A is a class. "Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject. A non-expert in the subject would typically find nothing wanting." Needs: "Expert knowledge may be needed to tweak the article, and style problems may need solving. Peer review may help." -- Joseph Prasad (talk) 03:36, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Joseph, I read the stipulations here and didn't see any review "by impartial reviewers from this WikiProject or elsewhere" for Butthole Surfers' A-class status. Further information can be found here. The A-class listing for Butthole Surfers seems to have been tagged 7 years ago, by one user. I realize it's trivial, but I made the change on the talk page for the sake of consistency in article assessment across Wikiprojects. Best, Airplaneman ✈ 03:41, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I can't tell you what pleasant surprise it was to be browsing Sarek's RfA and find your signature there. I did get the email you sent me last summer, and it meant a lot to me, but to my shame I never got round to replying. It's been a long time since I've seen you around, but I've missed you—several good friends from back then are sadly no longer around, but you stuck in the memory more than most. Anyway, I hope you're well and that you're here to stay. As you know, we're always in need of more good admins, but now more so than ever. Any time you feel like getting stuck into the backlogs, I'd love to have an extra pair of hands! All the best my friend, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:28, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Harry, it feels good to be around a bit more nowadays, and it's also great to see that you're still chugging along! And speaking to the volume of electronic notifications that vie for our attention nowadays, it's understandable that some will slip by before being tended to.
A few weekends ago, for the first time in a while, I decided to spend a couple hours just trying to catch up with the goings-on around here. In the sense that I would log in weekly and change small things as necessary, I never left entirely, but I definitely disconnected from the community. I can't say that this wasn't a welcome break. This place can get tiring. Anyways, after the couple of hours I spent catching up, I was overcome by just how many people I've worked with over the years are no longer contributing.
I'm currently here studying, so my time is as limited as ever. It's been so nice, after the initial overwhelming weekend, to be back. When time allows, I'll definitely dig back into those backlogs. And if you're ever around Chicago, let me know! Airplaneman ✈ 20:52, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I know what you mean about the place getting tiring. Wikipedia was always a bit ... intense. I guess it's the result of passionate people working on something they deeply care about and the facelessness of it (one of the reasons I like to have my face on my userpage). I like to take short breaks now and then, otherwise it's easy to get burnt out. And every so often I just abandon the backlogs for a few weeks and go and write something. I've not done that for a while, but I have a couple of potential FA projects in mind. It's important to remember what we love about the place that made us put all that energy into back-end things. There are a few people left from back then, but we're the old hands now; it's strange thinking about how much I didn't know (but thought I did!) when I was learning the ropes. As for Chicago, it's on my bucket list, but I'm no likely to get there in the short term. I do know at least one excellent Wikipedian there, though, if you'd like me to put you in touch. Anyway, it's good to see you around; hopefully we'll bump into each other more often. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:47, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think I've reached out to this aforementioned Wikipedian in Chicago! And yes, although I find backlog-clearing a deeply satisfying task, writing things is definitely a great way to break the monotony. As for having your face on your userpage, that's very brave, and I appreciate it. Maybe I'll convince myself that it's worthwhile to do the same in the future. I've made it a point to show my friends how Wikipedia is made and who makes it, and it's been eye-opening. Userpages of people I've worked with are one of the things I show them. I'm certainly down to give anything a good copyedit, so let me know if you need another eye on those potential projects. Cheers, Airplaneman ✈ 20:37, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Yutah Andrei Marzan Ogawa123|UPage|☺★(talk) 03:49, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Andrei, sorry it's taken so long for me to get back. I feel a bit uncomfortable undeleting somebody else's userspace for a solely aesthetic pursuit. Although there's technically no policy denying me from undeleting the page, I'd like you to ask ATMarsden if they are comfortable with the undeletion first before I do it. Best, Airplaneman ✈ 07:11, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think he gave me permission, check the page history, i had a conversation with him before. - Yutah Andrei Marzan Ogawa123|UPage|☺★(talk) 23:04, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
May you please point me to this more specifically? Airplaneman ✈ 06:20, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Buster7, it was nice to meet you as well! Here's to a bright future of collaboration. Airplaneman ✈ 22:45, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. I appreciate your edits at Maude Huchins. . Buster Seven Talk 00:34, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I just drafted a new page (The Australian Racism, Acceptance, and Cultural-Ethnocentrism Scale)and it was deleted. Are you able to please restore it so I am able to work on it and repair it so it is able to be published eventually? (As per tis comment: "If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.")
Hello, Airplaneman. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
.jpeg){kind=small}
I've been pretty relaxed for the last month (though not editing much)... Glad to see you're still around... somewhat. Brambleclawx 18:25, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Wikipediholism test. Thanks. — 
