User talk:Pf05268727

Edinburgh Thomson Routes:

Can you explain the reason for removing the Cancun and Orlando routes? And let me know where this content guide is to check this is actually the case please? Futurepilot1999 (talk) 10:31, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, as per the Wikipedia Airports page:

"Do not include ad-hoc, irregular, or private charter services"

It's also the reason why Korean Air's Seoul - Glasgow flights are not listed, for example. As a result I also removed Thomson's Glasgow - Montego Bay and Thomas Cook's Glasgow - Cayo Coco/Varadero routes as these routes also only operate a handful of times per year.

You can read about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Airports/page_content#Body Pf05268727 (talk) 11:31, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Thanks for the clarification. Never knew this so nice to learn something new1 Futurepilot1999 (talk) 18:34, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Route removals[edit]

Hi there,

To avoid future edit conflicts, it might be worth putting a note in the talk page of the article with some links citing the withdrawal of routes and mentiong this in edit summaries in the future?

April 2018[edit]

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. WP:BURDEN IS A THING Andrewgprout (talk) 17:06, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

August 2018[edit]

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. Andrewgprout (talk) 19:46, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It seems you have a long history of controversial reverting. As stated, these links have been on the page for many years therefore there was no need for the templates to be added. I therefore consider your reverts to be unconstructive. Pf05268727 (talk) 16:16, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

the templates are there for a reason, deleting them is nearly always disruptive. This is warning that deleting these without solving the issue will lead to your being banned from editing. Andrewgprout (talk) 16:57, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also if you turned out to be a serially banned sock puppet that would be an unfortunate situation. Andrewgprout (talk) 17:08, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

They are not there for a reason. With regard to banning, given that you are not an admin that is none of your concern. I have no idea what your 'sock puppet' remarks refer to. Pf05268727 (talk) 17:23, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the faux conversation at the top of this page will jog your memory. Andrewgprout (talk) 23:36, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I still do not know what you are referring to, nor do I wish to partake in your petty bickering. The bottom line is that your editing is disruptive, not mine. As I have explained several times, all I did was update the section with accurate data. The templates you added refer to destinations that have been listed for years and do not require referencing. I do not understand why you have a problem with this now, but have been quite happy to have them unreferenced for so long in the past. Please refrain from making further disruptive edits and encouraging arguments with other users. Pf05268727 (talk) 10:25, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

October 2018[edit]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at glasgow airport. Andrewgprout (talk) 17:28, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have either misinterpreted or be consiously ignoring the core WP:V component WP:BURDEN which clearly says it is solely your responsiblity to reference material properly. In this case it is clear that there is no sensible secondary reference to support this detail so it is quite alright for anyone to delete it. The fact that someone put a citation needed tag on it is nice, but does not save it from deletion. Given time it positively encourages it. Andrewgprout (talk) 17:35, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I presume you mean Edinburgh Airport. Once again you seem to be misunderstanding. As airlines will often not publish route suspensions or in this case the replacement of one service with another, there will never be the perfect source where said change/suspension is in writing. Therefore, the most accurate source is the airline's booking engine or timetable. In this instance, a direct link to a booking for Munich-Edinburgh is not possible therefore the source I provided is the most relevant one available at this time, hence why I added the citation needed tag. Please stop creating conflicts, especially on airport pages. The information that users are providing is often accurate and, where possible, referenced as best as possible. Pf05268727 (talk) 11:57, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are simply trying to justify ignoring WP:V here, in a “I’m special because I know what I’m writing is correct” way. And also confirming that it is often impossible to sensibly reference detail in airport destination tables. If you can’t reference something don’t add it there is no encyclopaedic requirement for such lists to be pedantically accurate, Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia not a directory or guide. Andrewgprout (talk) 17:06, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have a history of reverting edits without true justification. Referencing Wikipedia policies does not always make you correct, in fact you are only contradicting yourself. An adequate reference was added but you seem to insist on using the Original Source tag. Please stop engaging in edit wars or you will likely soon find yourself banned from editing. Pf05268727 (talk) 13:16, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Pf05268727. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]