User talk:Jno

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hi Jno and welcome to Wikipedia. Good to see that you're keen to improve our coverage of Soviet technology, but please don't simply copy and paste material from other sites into the pedia - this creates potential copyright problems for the project. I hope you'll continue contributing though, while using your own words. Cheers, Rlandmann 11:16, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] copyright, copyleft...

in this case i just copy data from my own site. and leave the links to the original pages. all the questions about the data should be directed there. am i right? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jno (talk • contribs) .

If you're the owner of the www.aviation.ru site, you should leave a notes on the discussion pages of the articles you're contributing. That way you can let Wikipedia know that there is no copyright problem, and that you are licensing Wikipedia to use this material freely. Without this notice, other editors have to assume that the material has been taken without the owner's permission...
PS, when replying to another user, it's usual to do it on their talk page - that way they know that someone has left a message for them! :) --Rlandmann 11:35, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

No problem :) Most of the time, when we see material here that comes from somewhere else on the internet, it's because they've just taken it - it's a nice change to see someone legitimately sharing their own material! (see [[1]]) for over 800 problems in the last week!) Let me also take this opportunity to congratulate you on your extremely useful site - it's been a great resource to me personally here (see the link to your OKB list on my user page...) I'll undo the copyright notices I put on your contributions... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jno (talk • contribs) .

You may also like to take a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Aircraft, the attempt to co-ordinate the aircraft content on the pedia. --Rlandmann 11:47, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Actually, both the second and third type of materials can cause problems for us. Basically, Wikipedia needs the copyright owner to grant a licence allowing Wikipedia to use the material and to re-distribute it. Obviously, only the actual owner of the copyright material can give that permission... Anyway, there's so much good stuff on your site that seems to fall into category 1 that this shouldn't be a problem :) --Rlandmann 12:04, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

To undo the copyright notices, just click on the "history" tab, then select the last version before I edited it. If you then click "edit this page", you'll get a warning that you're editing an out-of-date version, but ignore that and just click "Save page". Actually, you don't need to worry, because I'm working on them for you now (since it was me who put the copyright notice there!) --Rlandmann 12:24, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for all your patience and understanding. I hope that you will become a regular contributor here. You might also like to take a look at the Wikipedia:Manual of Style. Once again, welcome! :) --Rlandmann 12:37, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Bomber stubs

Hello. I noticed you contributed some articles om bomber aircraft and included in them the {{mil-stub}} tag. You may want to know that there is a specific stub message for bomber aircrafts. The tag is {{bomber-stub}}, wich will generate this message. You can see all these standard messages and their respective tags at Wikipedia:Template messages. For stub messages, see Wikipedia:Template messages/Stubs. And wellcome to Wikipedia! JoaoRicardo 13:20, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Actually, please don't. Category:Bomber stubs and its accompanying template are the work of one individual who even himself seems now to have abandoned this idea (and never implemented it generally anyway).
All aircraft stubs should be tagged {{aero-stub}}. As you've already discovered, there's also {{bio-stub}} for people, and {{mil-stub}} for more general military technologies. You should probably also note {{corp-stub}} for companies and corporations - probably the most appropriate choice for OKBs. But please, only one tag per article! Wikipedia at the moment is battling against a proliferation of these things, and there's no real advantage in placing it in multiple categories - in short articles, the information in the tags just about outweighs the text of the article itself... --Rlandmann 02:48, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Other stuff

You have no obligation to do so, but it would be really helpful if you could take note of a few formatting points for aircraft:

1. Please start each article with a complete sentence, indicating the topic of the article in bold, and linking it to the appropriate manufacturer/design bureau -

eg: "The Boeing 747 is a large US-built airliner that first flew in 1969."

2. Please thumbnail all images. The convention for aircraft articles is 300px wide, right justified, and captioned.

eg: [[Plane.jpg|thumb|right|300px|This is a plane in the air]]

3. Please use the tag {{airlistbox}} at the end of the article - this links it to the rest of our aircraft coverage in Wikipedia.

4. The most difficult request! - Please learn the Category system and categorise your new articles. Aircraft categories follow the pattern nation-role-decade, for example Category:Soviet bomber aircraft 1930-1939. The decade refers to the year that the aircraft first flew. The role is the original, primary role that the aircraft was designed for. You can find a full explanation here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Aircraft/Categories. Until you get used to the system, it can help to look at the category of a similar aircraft and copy or adapt it. Note that for Russian/Soviet aircraft, aircraft built between 1910-1919 are labelled "Russian", 1920-1929 "Soviet and Russian", 1930-1939 up to 1980-1989 as "Soviet", 1990-1999 "Soviet and Russian", and 2000-2009 "Russian" again...

But like I said, please consider this a request only - not a prerequisite to contribute here! --Rlandmann 02:48, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Various things!

I'm glad to see that I haven't scared you away yet! Sorry that I am dumping so much information on you in such a small space of time. Most contributors here start by making a few small edits here and there and gradually pick up the "feel" of Wikipedia articles from that (by osmosis!). You, instead, have chosen to start big :)

1. There is a way to make the template you asked me about on my talk page. I've created it for you under User:Jno/template1. To use it: start to edit a new article, then paste in {{subst:User:Jno/template1}} and save the article. Now click on edit again, and fill in the details! I also created User:Jno/template2, which also includes the standard aircraft data section and navigation section, for when you feel ready to start using them.
Anything that you create as a subpage of your User page can be changed into a template this way.
2. To save you from having to give individual permission on every talk page, I also made Template:Aviation.ru, based on another aviation website that we have permission to use material from (Template:Vectorsite). To use it, just put {{aviation.ru}} at the end of the article text (just after where the stub notice goes, if the article has one).
3. Stubs are very very short articles - only a sentence or two. Anything bigger than that should not have a stub notice on it.
4. The title (page name) of an article about a person should be given that person's full name in first name/surname order. Take a look at Category:Russian scientists for examples.
You will see that Wikipedia policy is still not fixed about including patronymics in Russian names - but I think it's a good idea to include them (since this is how they're known in their own language). In practice, articles about Russians well known in the West do not ususally include the patronymic in the article title (Sergei Korolev, Konstantin Tsiolkovsky). Those less well-known usually do. This is not a policy - just an observation!
In any case, the first line of the article should include the full name in first name/patronymic/surname order, first in Roman, (then, ideally, in Cyrillic).
5. Finally, on a related note, single names, (such as Tupolev, Petlyakov, Sukhoi, also Western names like Boeing) are used in English to refer to the (O)KB or firm, not the man. (the article on the (O)KB should link prominently to the man anyway...) The only exceptions are when the man never had a firm/OKB/corporation named after him (like Abramovich...)

Once again, sorry that this is so long and detailed. If I annoy you too much, please tell me to go away! :) --Rlandmann 23:08, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I've corrected the category for Kamov Ka-8 to the corresponding military one. Thanks for catching my mistake.

The link for the Rybinsk RD-600 engine is correct though - in this case, Rybinsk isn't referring directly to the town, but to Rybinsk Motors. Some Wikipedians link engines like this: Pratt & Whitney R-1830 ([[Pratt & Whitney]] [[Pratt & Whitney R-1830|R-1830]]), so Rybinsk RD-600 ([[Rybinsk Motors|Rybinsk]] [[Rybinsk RD-600|RD-600]]) would be fine too. Personally, I don't think it's necessary - if someone follows the link to the engine, then the engine article should link straight to the manufacturer/design bureau anyway...

It's not possible to move images - they have to be deleted and re-uploaded with the new name. Please upload the picture again with whatever name you want, and then I'll delete the existing image. --Rlandmann 21:53, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Aviadvigatel/Soloviev

Actually, the prefix refers to the firm/company/OKB that designed the aircraft/engine/weapon. In the case of the Soloviev D-25, "Soloviev" does not refer to Pavel Soloviev directly, but to OKB Soloviev/OKB-19 - which is (part of) Aviadvigatel JSC since 1992.

Of course, it makes most sense to prefix pre-1992 engines as "Soloviev" and post-1992 engines as "Aviadvigatel". Just like we have Douglas DC-3, not Boeing DC-3! So you arrived at the right conclusion, even for the wrong reason... :)

Thank you for catching another of my errors. --Rlandmann 22:33, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Comment response.

Heya! I noticed your comment on Wikipedia talk:Extended image syntax, and wanted to let you know that I had responded. If you have any questions, drop a line here or on my talk page. Hope that helps! grendel|khan 19:22, 2005 Mar 3 (UTC)

[edit] Sikorsky Alexander Nevsky and more

Hi, Jno! I wrote articles on Sikorsky Alexander Nevsky and Sikorsky Russky Vityaz, but I'm not sure if my technical English is any good. And there's a lot of stuff missing regarding their specifications. Could you please check it out? I asked Rlandmann to take a look at them awhile ago, but he probably forgot. Maybe, you can help. Thanks a lot! KNewman 04:38, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Moving pages and deleting content

Hi there,

I noticed the page Main Agency of Missiles and Artillery of the Ministry of Defense of the Sovient Union and that it was a misspelling. Just to let you know that if you make a misspelled article title, you should usually move it using the Move link at the top of the page. Also, if you create an article in error and want it to be deleted, just edit the page and put {{db-author}} at the top.

Thanks for your contributions! Stifle 13:29, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for directions! --jno 10:46, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vympel R-33

I have no idea about the development of the R-33, only the production variants, and have not edited anything about the development versions. I was wondering, you say that you "stated your source", could you please show me where you did? I can't seem to find it, and it sounds like it may have some interesting data. We do agree that the production variants are semi-active, correct?

Prodego talk 12:38, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Putting active radar on the R-37 would be pretty expensive, look what happened to the Phoenix :-). So it is a pretty safe bet it's still semi-active, but who knows. The MiG-31 is an excellent BVR fighter, and without an F-14 in service to shoot back, there really isn't enough of an advantage(in my opinion) to using an active radar missile over a semi-active radar missile at such range. But again, who knows. Happy editing.
Prodego talk 12:56, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
Of course, a guess can't be used in an article, exactly, WP:NOR. The R-37 article needs alot of work, or perhaps it should be merged in with R-33, where the lack of information can be more clearly explained. What do you think?
Prodego talk 13:09, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My userpage

Thank you for telling me about my userpage not displaying correctly. I expected some problems, as it is a rather complicated design. In fact, it shouldn't work at all in the the Safari web browser, because it uses the Click template. Could you upload a screenshot of the problem(press Alt-prtscr while the internet window is selected) under the Wikipedia page screenshot license, so I can try to fix the problem? Thanks,

Prodego talk 19:57, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

How does it look now?(It should scroll) I changed all but the barnstar section to display at a set width. FYI, I also changed the license of the 2 images you uploaded to the "Wikipedia screenshot" license. Prodego talk 22:04, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for you help fixing these problems! Thanks for your help. Prodego talk 22:50, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Yea, I see the problem, I've asked Redvers(who uses firefox) to look into it. Prodego talk 22:02, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
I don't know enough about how firefox interprets the Wiki code to fix it, unfortunatly. Prodego talk 21:16, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
Fixed. Prodego talk 14:13, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] my own sandbox

hammer

[edit] WPSU

Hi, welcome to WPSU and thanks for joining! If you have any ideas, suggestions, either be bold, or ask us on the talk page :) - FrancisTyers 15:33, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] russian baby names

Hi:) Thanks for your message. We need a list of the top ten first names given to baby boys and girls born in Russia in 2005 (or 2004 if the new list is not available yet). In Britain this information is released by the Office of National Statistics and appears in the national newspapers. I expect the same is true in Russia but because of the different alphabet we havent been able to find it via google.ru. Thanks Jameswilson 22:36, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. Do you know the year of the materinstvo list so I can use that? Jameswilson 22:35, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
I'm confuesd - are the 7ya.ru figures for internet registrations, ie people of all ages, not babies? Or have I misunderstood? Jameswilson 22:33, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vympel R-33

No problem! :) I've made a few more small changes. If you have time, produce stub articles for the redlinks - FrancisTyers 13:24, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Russian Air Force

Thanks!

The article definitely needs more work, but I got tired the other day, so was planning on coming back to it.

The USSR was the RSFSR before 1922 wasn't it?

Anyway, thanks for the feedback, it's much appreciated.

EVOCATIVEINTRIGUE TALKTOME has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

EVOCATIVEINTRIGUE TALKTOME | EMAILME 11:56, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

RSFSR is an acronym (or abbreviation?) for one of 15 republics of the USSR. It was for Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic (now just Russian Federation or even mere Russia). --jno 15:28, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I thought it was the Russian Soviet Federate Socialist Republic, but that's only a little point, there seem to be quite a few interpretations of what the letters stand for. It's an acronym I think. Russia gained its states back after the Treaty of Versailles, didn't it, which nulled the Treaty of Brest Litovsk? In which case, I'm now clearer on that, so thanks.
EVOCATIVEINTRIGUE TALKTOME | EMAILME 15:33, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
RSFSR, to be precious, is Russian: Российская Советская Федеративная Социалистическая Республика, РСФСР. International treaties of that times didn't affect the state much. There was internal treaty of 1922 to form the USSR from some somehow "independant" states (including the RSFSR). The right for self-definition (eng??) was declared. Moreover, the Finland has used this right to peacefully separate from the new country. (btw, Finland is a very interesting neibour of USSR - there was the "winter war" of 1940 (I still cannot realize - was it victorious for the USSR or not), in the WW2 Finland started as an enemy of the USSR, but ended as an ally and still friendly, Finnish blue swastika appeared long before the German one, but was compromized by the later, Finnish army was (and somehow is) an assorted collection of numerous vehicles from East and West, etc) --jno 08:29, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
P.S. See this picture (now it's the building of The State Duma (parlament of RF)) and pay attantion to the State Emblem on it: there are only 7 "stripes" instead of common 15. It's just because the number of republics in the USSR was the subject of changes. --jno 08:35, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Ah, that's a lot clearer now. I'll take a look again at the article sometime soon for you. EVOCATIVEINTRIGUE TALKTOME | EMAILME 13:48, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Portal:Russia

Hi there. I see that you edit Russia-related topics. Come check Portal:Russia/New article announcements and Portal:Russia/Russia-related Wikipedia notice board. You may even want to add these boards to your watchlist. Cheers, Ghirla -трёп- 09:53, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mi-17 article debate

G'day. To finally bring the facts about, without posting this into the main Mi-17 talk page as it's off-topic. If I've posted this at the wrong place, I apologize.

The problem is that Su-33 isn't an name for Su-27K, it's a synonim - K being Korabelnyi (shipborne). The Su-27IB isn't a predecessor of the Su-34 Fullback, it's absolutely the same plane (as well as its now obsolete designation Su-32MF - Mnogofunktsionalnyi). The Su-30 is a domestic fighter, that's true, but the Su-27MK isn't - it's a russian upgrade for the Su-27K. At least, that's the information I've been able to dig out through sites such as MilAvia.net and Airforce-Technoloy.com.

I wholeheartedly agree, it's one big mess, without standardized designations. But our issue in the article weren't the Su-27 series (and yes, I agree with making a "derivatives" page considering how many planes have been spawned on its airframe), but the Mi-17, ergo my need to post it here. Considering the differences between the Mi-17 and its base model, the Mi-8, I still believe that they are large enough to warrant two articles.

Regards, -- Stealth 19:33, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Mi-4.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Mi-4.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 23:58, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I believe that is enough to clear up any confusion -Thanks! Nv8200p talk 14:20, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] UR-100

Hi, Jno! I noticed that you tried to revert vandalism to UR-100, but missed a portion of it, which makes me think that you removed it manually. Just wanted to make sure that you know that you can revert to one of the previous clean versions wholesale (you don't have to be an admin to be able to do that) without having to track vandalism by hand line by line. If you don't know how to do it, let me know, I'll gladly explain. If you do, just disregard this message. Best,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 14:53, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Jno, in order to revert to one of the previous versions, go to article's "history" (a tab next to the "edit this page" tab). I trust you know how to use this screen to see the diffs between versions (if not, let me know). Click on the date/time link of the version you want to revert to, then press "edit this page". You'll be presented with a normal edit screen, except there will be a pink warning at the top reminding you that the version you are about to edit is not current. Type "reverting vandalism" or something of that nature into the "edit summary" box and save the page. Voilà! Let me know if anything is still unclear, or see Help:Reverting for more detailed instructions. The only difference between admins and non-admins is that admins can revert to the previous version with one click, instead of going through multiple steps.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 12:04, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GRAU designations

I've been working on the cleanup of Main Agency of Missiles and Artillery of the Ministry of Defense of the Soviet Union lately. Part of the cleanup has been a number of language fixes. I've tried my best to be faithful to intent of the original text, but I of course can't be 100% certain. Could you give the article a once-over to make sure I didn't change the content on accident? Thanks! --Adamrush 08:51, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requested articles

Hi Jno, know you're a missiles man, and we've had a request, following the allocation of the main request list to the individual task forces, for an article on the TOS-1 Buratino SP MRL. Appreciate your contribution if you'd like to start it or help me to start it collaberatively (I'm more a military organisations person, not technology...) Cheers Buckshot06 06:00, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey great work on the start of the page! Looks really good! Cheers Buckshot06 01:12, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:701 v12.jpg

You uploaded this image and tagged it with {{PD-release}} - which indicates you have the copyright holder's permission to release it. If this is the case you need to provide supporting evidence for this. If you took the photo you can change the license to {{PD-self}} and state that it is your own work in the image summary. If this is the case for other images you've uploaded you may want to consider changing their tags as well. Best wishes Madmedea 09:40, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:Prodego-1.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Prodego-1.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 21:36, 10 July 2007 (UTC)