User talk:Russavia/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Aviaenergo

I am updating the page Aviaenergo, however when submitting the article, and previewing the results, I notice that the edit links are all out of whack, they aren't where they should be. I have checked thru the coding of my edits, and can't see what may have caused this? Any assistance in pointing out what I have done would be great. --Russavia 10:21, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Could you type out what you tried to add below so we can see what might be affecting you edit. Think outside the box 10:55, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Sure, the text I added is as follows: {{Infobox_Airline | airline=JSC Aviaenergo<br><small>ОАО «Авиакомпания «Авиаэнерго»</small>| logo=Aviaenergo logo.gif| logo_size=229| IATA=7U| ICAO=ERG| callsign=Aviaenergo| parent=[[Unified Energy System|RAO UES of Russia]]| founded=1992| headquarters=[[Moscow|Moscow]], [[Russia]]| key_people=Alexandr Rafaelovich Blagonravov ([[Director General|General Director]])| hubs=[[Vnukovo Airport|Moscow Vnukovo Airport]]<br>[[Sheremetyevo Airport|Moscow Sheremetyevo Airport]]| focus_cities=| frequent_flyer=| lounge=| alliance=| fleet_size=3| destinations=| website= http://www.aviaenergo.ru/| }} '''JSC Aviaenergo''' ([[Russian language|Russian]]: ''ОАО «Авиакомпания «Авиаэнерго»'') is a [[charter airline]] based in [[Moscow]], [[Russia]]. It was established on 31 December [[1992]] and operates charter flights within [[Europe]], the [[Commonwealth of Independent States|CIS]] and other countries. It is wholly owned by [[Unified Energy System|RAO UES of Russia]], although UES, as part of its restructuring effort, has placed Avianergo on the market<ref name="RBC">{{cite news | author = Shesternina, Elena | url = http://www.rbcdaily.ru/2006/09/21/tek/236087 | title = Чубайс устроил «магазин на диване». | publisher = RBC Daily |}}</ref>. Its main base is [[Vnukovo International Airport]], Moscow, and also operates from [[Sheremetyevo International Airport]].<ref name="ATM">Federal State Unitary Enterprise "State Air Traffic Management Corporation", <I>Airline Reference</I>, Vol. 1, Russian Federation, 20 February 2007, p. 66</ref>.:: --Russavia 11:04, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
What do you mean there all out of wack? They seem fine to me (there again I quite new at this editing) Think outside the box 11:20, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Same, I can't see anything wrong. Can you explain further, or put the "bad" version of the article at User:Lucasbfr/Sandbox, so we can see what you see? I am removing the helpme tag for now, please add it again when you see our messages! -- lucasbfr talk 14:12, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Here is an image of what is wrong with the article. The 'edit' functions should be next to each section, instead they are all lumped together at the bottom. I still can't find what is wrong with my coding. --Russavia 00:23, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

http://img83.imageshack.us/img83/8690/aviaenergoys1.jpg

The edit functions are okay, because some pages are like that. Real96 00:39, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

TransAVIA

Please don't change the spelling or case inside wikilinks, as it breaks the links. If there needs to be a change, go to the talk page of the article, and the airline's article, and discuss it there. Akradecki 17:29, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

The airline name is TransAVIAexport Airlines and I have changed the articles to reflect, and am changing the links as I progress.--Russavia 17:37, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
When you change it in the accident link, it's breaking the link. Please don't do this. Akradecki 17:38, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
OK thanks. All wikilinks and redirects are now in place --Russavia 18:11, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Looks good, thanks. Are you aware of whether the flight had a flight number? Akradecki 18:14, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Will check with my sources in Minsk and if any info found I will add it. --Russavia 18:17, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Join us

You may wish to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation and Wikipedia:WikiProject Aircraft. The second project has extensive guidelines for aircraft pages that you might find helpful. Akradecki 18:20, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Image thumbs

Oh, and just a note, since you're new and probably unaware of this, please don't put sizing in the image thumb code string. This will disable the user preferences function that allows users to decide how large the thumbs should appear on their screen. If you want the thumbs to appear larger on your screen, then click on "my preferences" at the top of the screen, and go to the "files" tab and select your preference there. Thanks. Akradecki 18:24, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Regarding edits to Ilyushin Il-86

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Russavia! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the link you added, matching rule aerotransport\.org, is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia's external links policy for more information. If the link was to an image, please read Wikipedia's image tutorial on how to use a more appropriate method to insert the image into an article. If your link was intended to promote a site you own, are affiliated with, or will make money from inclusion in Wikipedia, please note that inserting spam into Wikipedia is against policy. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! Shadowbot 20:27, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Please stop adding inappropriate links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming and will be removed. Thanks. Shadowbot 20:32, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

The links are not inappropriate as 1) this is a well known database which is known for its accuracy 2) no other online reputable links exist for the information which is being added. --Russavia 20:35, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Please don't be discouraged by the shadowbot reverting your footnote additions. It seems like you've scaled them back as a result, when in actuality, what you added was very good, and should stay. If don't feel like adding them back in, I'd be happy to, and will be happy to battle the bot on this. Akradecki 03:06, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, it might be better though to leave the links how I have, as I was logged into the website at the time, and am not sure if the direct links will work for the public at large, at least by simply providing the weblink, people can do the search for themselves, instead of potentially going to a non-working link. Thoughts?
I wasn't logged in, and got good info. When using a link for a citation, it's preferred to provide the full information that supports the statement, rather than making it so the reader has to do the searching. Akradecki 19:04, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
OK point taken :) If you want to reinsert the links that would be good, saves me fighting with the bot. Am working on cleaning up generalistic info on various articles at the moment before engaging in complete rewrites on many of them in the near future. --Russavia 21:39, 26 April 2007 (UTC)



Regarding edits to Kavminvodyavia

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Russavia! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the link you added, matching rule aerotransport\.org, is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia's external links guidelines for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! Shadowbot 10:48, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Russavia, regarding the two above items...I've finally got through to the operator of the bot, and he says he's now whitelisted aerotransport.org, so you shouldn't have any more problems with the bot reverting your edits. Akradecki 05:30, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks Alan, everything was going ok for a while there. Seems it was hit and miss in its reverts anyway. Cheers. --Russavia 15:16, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Rossiya

I did the move and some cleanup. In the future, if the article name is wrong, any user can move an article. By creating the redirect at Rossiya (airline) you actually made the task of moving more difficult. Also, the other name you suggested, Rossiya - Russian Airline I believe, is probably less desirable as it is not likely the common name for the airline. Vegaswikian 19:14, 7 May 2007 (UTC)


Ideal cruising

You tagged this article for speedy deletion, but you did not notify the article's creator that it had been so tagged. While such notification is not mandatory, it is strongly encouraged, and this is mentioned in the various speedy delete templates themselves. please consider notifying article creators of speedy delete tags in future. See Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#Notify authors about speedy deletion? where this issue was discussed. DES (talk) 21:57, 12 May 2007 (UTC)


Travel Republic

You tagged this article for speedy deletion, but it seems to me that the notability is clearly asserted in the article, & that rewriting to reduce the spam is possible. If you disagree, just nominate it for AfD. DGG 00:32, 13 May 2007 (UTC)


Image:Aeroflot.png

Hello, Russavia. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Aeroflot.png) was found at the following location: User:Russavia/Sandbox. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 02:34, 15 May 2007 (UTC)


Blocked

Y

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

There has been an issue with autoblocks today; it should be fixed now.

Request handled by: —Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:26, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Template:Airlines_of_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China

[1], Why remove so many airlines? SchmuckyTheCat 21:14, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Please meet me over at Template talk:Airlines of the People's Republic of China and I will explain. Might also get wp:airline people over there for their input to. --Russavia 21:22, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

summaries and tags

Hi Russavia, you added a {unreferenced} tag to gainer [2]. Since that article is a one-sentence stub missing just about everything a real article should have, do you really think your tag saying it misses references is useful? In my opinion one-sentence stubs don't benefit from being tagged with almost anything. I hope you will agree.
Further I would like to ask you to start using edit summaries. Thank you. --MarSch 09:43, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi MarSch, don't know why I put that tag there, it should have been something else of course. Cheers. --Russavia 09:46, 23 May 2007 (UTC)


Skytrax links on airline pages

Hi, Please discuss this topic over on the project page here. Cheers. → AA (talk • contribs) — 20:22, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Template:Aviation lists -- not to be used on airport pages; please don't reinstate

Hi there. Please see the discussion on WikiProject Aviation's talk page. This template is not to be used on airport pages - it is irrelevant. WikiProject Aviation subsumes disparate subprojects, and cluttering airport pages with this template is not desirable. Currently, no airport pages have this template anymore. Thank you. --Mareklug talk 19:54, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Hey Mareklug, no worries at all, I didn't realise that. Will keep in mind when starting new airport pages in the future also. Cheers. --Russavia 23:19, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Air Pristina

You are not the expert you claim to be. Air Pristina now has four Airbus aircraft and has begun flying routes with its own planes, albeit under other airlines AOCs until it gets its own. www.airplanephotos.de/Photogallery/A-319_321/0211_2.jpg. Looks pretty real to me for an airline with "no aircraft"! Harry was a white dog with black spots 08:23, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I would mind you to refrain from making snide comments. Just because there is a photo of an aircraft in its 'livery', an airline it does not make. --Russavia 23:19, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:El Al ocean ad.png

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:El Al ocean ad.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:46, 4 June 2007 (UTC)


Hello Russavia. Could you add information on where you got Image:El Al ocean ad.png to the image description page? It seems to be a pretty important picture and it looks very good in the El Al article, so it would be really unfortunate if it got deleted. I've written a fair-use rationale which I hope will be sufficient, but the sourcing info is still required and I didn't have the sourcing info. Thanks, nadav (talk) 11:40, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Sukhoi Su-25

As you are interested in Soviet/Russian aviation, please feel free to leave your comment/opinion at the WPMILHIST A-class review of the Sukhoi Su-25 article. Thanks! --Eurocopter tigre 14:36, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

anti-NATO campaign

I think your taking your anti-NATO campaign just a bit too far. It's one thing to remove them from infoboxes, but quite another to go around deleting them whereever you see them. Please show some consideration for other people who may only know SOviet aircraft by the NATO names. It's not their fault. - BillCJ 06:50, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I am removing NATO codenames where and when required. The overwhelming overuse of NATO codenames is almost pushing NPOV envelopes, and as mentioned in the talk page, their use is sloppy. --Russavia 09:20, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Aviation trade unions

Hi Russavia, nice work in setting up Category:Aviation trade unions. Cheers, --Bookandcoffee 18:36, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

No worries at all, hope it helps navigation somewhat. Have also added WPAVIATION tags to said articles in the hope that perhaps some of our project members can assist in expanding the articles. We are over at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Airlines if your project needs info, etc. Cheers. --Russavia 18:38, 23 July 2007 (UTC)



Skytrax

Sorry, didn't realise the cat was up for deletion. Harry was a white dog with black spots 09:33, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Commercial aviation and Civil aviation

You added original research tags to both of these articles, but didn't leave any information about the problem on the talk pages. Would it be possible to go back and identify the problems more specifically, so that people can discuss and fix them? Thanks. David 11:04, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Virgin Atlantic Airways

Hi, I noticed you added the legal name for VAA (ltd.) in the infobox on Virgin Atlantic Airways but most other airline pages don't do this. In the name of consistency should it not remain Virgin Atlantic Airways?RaseaC 16:59, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Hotels

Hello. Your current string of hotel AfD nominations brings back sweet memories! When I first started editing Wikipedia a while back I did pretty much the same thing and got a large chunk of them deleted. Of course, these tend to be recreated after a while. In any case, I'm just letting you know that a few of these are clear candidates for speedy deletion since they are blatant advertisements written entirely by single purpose accounts. So don't hesitate to tag the obvious spam with {{db-spam}}. Cheers, Pascal.Tesson 19:31, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey Pascal, nice to be able to take you back down memory lane. Those were the days eh? Ha. Will up dp-spam in future for those which are clearly spam, and afd the iffy ones. Sorry to give you work to do, but you know how it is, once you get started, you just can't stop, particularly with the audacity of some of the 'articles'. Cheers, --Russavia 20:24, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
While some articles may be candidates for CSD, some are clearly not. I'd like to respectfully remind you to use AfD/CSD criteria when determining if articles are fit for nomination. No offense intended. Luke!
I'd also like to mention that it is not a good idea to nominate several dozen pages of the same general sort for deletion at the same time. It makes it very much more difficult to pay the necessary attention to each one of them. Personally, I do groups of two, but I think groups of five or six would also be manageable. But not the 15 or 20. There was a discussion of this about a week ago on the talk page for WP:AFD, where it was pretty much agreed that it is better to space them out--my opinion is not eccentric at least in this. that I disagree with you about the notability of many ofthe hotels is not the point. DGG (talk) 07:14, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
I note from your contribution history, that your latest AFD exercise has begun by tagging an entire string of hotels located in not anywhere in the world but the country you appear to loathe, probably thanks to your long-standing disagreements in another article related to that country. If this is so, kindly exercise better judgement and instill some professionalism in your editing career here. Nominating The Ritz-Carlton Millenia Singapore, Meritus Mandarin Singapore, Shangri-La Hotel Singapore, etc, are clear-cut disruptive.--Huaiwei 13:15, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

NATO names as article titles

You might be interested in these discussions: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#Russian SAMs & NATO code names, and Talk:SA-19/SA-N-11#English wiki/NATO designation. - BillCJ 04:15, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey Bill, thanks for that, will pop over and put in my 2 bob. --Russavia 06:11, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Cheatline

Hi, please don't transwiki this yet, I'll be merging it shortly into an expanded Aircraft livery. Thanks. --Targeman 11:32, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi, no worries, merging all of these dictionary terms into a single article is a good idea. I was thinking that Airline branding would be a more inclusive term, as this would include not only the livery but all branding off an airline - the 'livery' seems a little too spotterish to me, if you know what I mean, and could have the potential to simply become just another wikilink repository. Thoughts? --Russavia 11:45, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Well, I myself am only moderately interested in aircraft per se, I wrote this article (as well as Logojet and Retrojet) bearing in mind the artistic, esthetic and symbolic aspect. I agree Airline branding would make an excellent article but I can't start it because I know next to nothing about the subject. So for now I'll try to merge and provide good references for what I have, and when someone decides to to create Aircraft branding, Aircraft livery will obviously be included in it. PS. Is "livery" a geeky word? I've seen it in business magazines and I'm not a plane spotter... If "paint scheme" is more widespread, I'll be glad to change the title. Cheers --Targeman 12:06, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Banks in Singapore

Actually, I don't have much of a problem with that article. It is a fairly mediocre article but at least its approach is fundamentally sound. It tries to convey more information than just a bare list: it would not be a huge effort to expand the context and turn this into a decent encyclopedic article. Pascal.Tesson 02:56, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Eagles Nest

Hi. Please see both my comments on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eagles Nest and the improved article as well. It would be nice if you could reconsider your choice on the AfD. Ingolfson 10:51, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Shangri-La Hotel, (placename)

Hi, did you have problems with prods being disputed? It's suprising to see all these shangri-las up for AfD when none of the ones I have looked at so far have been {{db}}'d or {{prod}}'d.Garrie 21:45, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Aircraft seat maps

You tagged Aircraft seat maps for speedy delete. I have removed the tag since the article was previously on AfD and the decision was to keep. If you feel strongly about the article being deleted, please take it to AfD or WP:PROD. Thanks! JodyB yak, yak, yak 20:33, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

recent speedies

I and several other editors have been removing speedy tags from such articles as FlightAware and several charter airlines. It is not at all clear that these are not-notable. Please check WP:CSD and WP:Deletion policy. You are making unnecessary work for us over-worked admins when you overuse speedy. Deletion is for articles that cannot be improved, as a last resort. If there is spam that needs removing, remove it. (I removed spam from some of these articles when I removed the tag. )

ANd please remember that when you place a speedy or a prod tag, to notify the author of the article. It is not at the moment strictly required, but it is very highly advised, as WP is a cooperative project--and on the grounds of basic fairness. I see others have noticed this also. DGG (talk) 21:39, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Bellview Airlines

Speedy deleted via G6 to accommodate page move as requested. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:46, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Reply to your bot: Android Mouse Bot 2

I have received a msg from your bot, claim that picture: Bottom_OLS.jpg is violated "non-free content criteria". The picture is from vi.wikipedia.org, which supposedly to be a part of wikipedia. Please give me further information about violation of this picture. TQ. Regards ChowHui 17:41, 4 August 2007 (UTC)



Plaguedbyhordes

Are you connected with User:Plaguedbyhordes?

Thanks JodyB yak, yak, yak 13:35, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

No --Russavia 02:12, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:TAM A350.jpg

I've added my reply on first fair use to the image page. It is unlikely (if not impossible) that there is a free image available of a future airplane when none have been built yet. The only source of images would be the aircraft builder (in the form of a computer-generated image), and thus could only be used on a fair use basis.--Dali-Llama 16:13, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Short 330 pic

Thanks for finding and adding the Short 330 airlienr pic to the Short 330 page. I've been looking for usable pics for a few weeks now, and have not found any free pics whatsoever (plenty of the 360 tho). I've never asked for permission to use an Airliners.net pic before, and so was not quite sure how to go about doing it. Jeff (User:Fnlayson) and I are working on a separate C-23 page, and a good airliner pic for the 330 was our main hold-up. Thanks again! - BillCJ 19:18, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

No problems, I have aded some more Short pics on individual airline pages in case they are needed. --Russavia 22:40, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I think that the smaller pic looks very miniscule and you can't see anything? The point of the larger image was to show the VOD system and the attendants' new uniforms. By condensing the image into a smaller one, the reader can't really see anything. What do you think  ? I'd rather see the larger picture.

No, do not size the thumbs, as people will have their own preferences, some may show small thumbs, some may show large thumbs, its an individual choice. --Russavia 22:40, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Biman photo

Just want to say thank you for adding the Boeing 707 photo to the Biman article. It's a historic photo for which I see you've managed to obtain the necessary permissions. Cheers. → AA (talk) — 00:31, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

No problem, any time. Will be adding some more older Biman pics at a later date --Russavia 22:41, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks again. One of an ATP would be great. → AA (talk) — 23:00, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Heey

Hi,

heey what happend with my pictures???? explain me pleaseee migssant19 9 August 2007, 14:57

Unfortunately, you have taken the majority of those photos from other websites, you haven't taken the photos yourself, so you are unable to release them into the public domain. --Russavia 22:37, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

RE: Fair use disputed for Image:Buran On Antonov225.jpg

Fair use has been given by Alex Bakharev. Thanks --Djmckee1 - Talk-Sign 19:43, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Isn't the license incorrect on that image? It's a NASA image so therefore in the public domain? → AA (talk) — 19:54, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Nope, it's on a NASA website, however most of the images on that particular site do not belong to NASA, meaning they were not taken by NASA or a US government employee. This particular An-225 photo was taken by the Soviets, and I will dig thru my stuff in order to at least credit the photo to its owner. --Russavia 22:33, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
I see. Thanks. → AA (talk) — 23:00, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

newinfobox tag on several airline pages

Hi Russavia, Just wondering why you have been tagging airline pages with the newinfobox tag when they appear to have a current and none subst'ed infobox.

I have been reviewing the Category:Pages_needing_an_infobox_conversion page and quite a few airlines are showing.

Also this tag should be placed on the talk page, rather than directly on the article as per Template:Newinfobox page.

Please let me know your thoughts.


RWardy 11:51, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Parent Company and infoboxes

Thanks for the heads up, I have left a comment on the BA page. I am just defending the use of the field as it has been utilised I do not have a problem with your basic arguments. I did not like the idea of the legal name in the header and have suggested that it should have a field of its own, but that apart I generally support your ideas for a new infobox with a clear and concise suggestions on what is required in each field. MilborneOne 11:46, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Tu-22

Спасибо что удалили (поспособствовали удалению) 2-ух фотографий Ту-22М ! Фотографии были особенные, одна показывала садящийся самолет (а не полумуляж в Монино), другая, почему самолет имеет кодировку НАТО Backfire (Обратная стрельба) Обе фотографии имели надлежащюю заготовку Fairuse:Air, притом они были размещены в Википедии с разрешения авторов ! Также немаловажно, что написав в моем Talkpage вы указали, что картинки можно легко заменить на похожие, с свободной лицензией, а в итоге, где ваши легкие картинки ? Шаблон Fairuse предусматривает неудаление изображений которые невозможно или трудно получить в силу разных условий, особенно если автор разрешил их использование, т.е. небыло нарушения copyright'а и изображения нельзя было удалять методом Speedy Deletion. --Mothmolevna ( © ® ) 18:05, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Enrich Loyalty Programe

This article has been deleted per your request for housekeeping action. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 10:58, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

BA template

Much more sensible! Good idea. Mark83 13:46, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Beriev

The Beriev page has now been deleted so you can do the move. --MoRsE 12:25, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Dispute resolution

Could I request that you refrain from editing Singapore Airlines before you have proposed making changes on the discussion page, and requesting comments on the proposals from other editors before further edits are made? At present, there are several editors who are reverting or overtyping the contributions of others without discussion, with the result that your investment of time and energy in this article is being negated. I recommend that you follow this suggestion, as you are currently at risk of involvement in an Edit war, which has the potential to undermine your credibility and stature as an editor. The points of dispute can be resolved, if you make the effort to work collaboratively. --Gavin Collins 16:00, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Please respond to my comments of today on Talk:Singapore Airlines. --Gavin Collins 15:10, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
I also have to echo Gavin's words on this. I have suggested a revert to the prior article prior to the dispute while its sorted out. Also, to note you are close to violating 3RR on Singapore Airlines. --Arnzy (talk · contribs) 10:48, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Clare Frewen Sheridan

. Thanks.--FruitMonkey 22:08, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

September 2007

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to List of largest airlines in Oceania, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Sparrowman980 04:45, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Sparrowman980

For future reference, you might like to read WP:TEMPLAR. It brings up some good points as to exactly why templating the regulars is a bad idea; and in fact, these have all proved true in this case. The Evil Spartan 18:39, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Ahem to that. Imagine my amusement when he popped a template like this in my talkpage too[3], after weeks of disputes over the way a source should be interpreted. 3 years into the project, and I don't know WP:V? Gimme a break.--Huaiwei 15:28, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Obviously not Huaiwei, you need only look at Singapore Airlines for that. --Russavia 07:26, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks The Evil Spartan, I will take that into account in future for sure. Cheers. --Russavia 07:26, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Aeroflot

Stop revert warring on the Aeroflot article, I agree with you but you're going to get yourself blocked.--Miyokan 09:07, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Singapore Airlines

I didn't realize this was such an issue when I made the change to Qantas last night, so that wasn't an endorsement of either side in this debate. I promise you'll I'll try to talk a closer look, though given there's quite a bit of debate for me to go through right now, I can't promise I'll get to it immediately. I'll try to take a look later today, as it appears to me that an RFC could be the sensible way to get this settled. I don't know enough about the subject to say for sure, though. Thanks. -- RG2 15:19, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I've already slogged through one RFC today, so I don't intend on getting to the SQ article tonight. I briefly scanned through the discussion, and User:Gavin.collins, User:Vegaswikian, and User:Jpatokal have made some helpful comments; it's too bad that it looks like they're dealt with in such an aggressive and hostile manner at times.
As far as user behavior goes, you've both been pretty disruptive in the past, what with the pointless "petty, hormone-raging teen" vs. "major inferiority complex problem" insults. But in the more recent discussions, thank you for letting comments like "Let's see what other garbage he can throw at us" roll off of you and responding in a level-headed manner.
It still looks like an RFC is the next step, allowing both you and Huaiwei to comprehensively state your opinion on the matter, and allowing for the other three to comment on the best solution. It doesn't look like continued dealing in this talk page will be an effective remedy at this point. And please refrain from attacks and even pointed comments against the other person; you've doing a much better job of that right now, Russavia, than Huaiwei is. After scanning through the archive, I'm getting sick of it, and I'm willing to block either of you for attacks and failure to assume good faith. Remember: Always assume good faith of other editors; deal with bad edits. -- RG2 02:44, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Qantas group is Qantas

Qantas group is Qantas!Sparrowman980 17:45, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Ending it.

I would like to end this "war" if you will.Also wondering if you will like to assist me in creating the page Qantas group even thou Qantas is Qantas Group.Sparrowman980 01:34, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Russian diplomatic missions

Hi Russiavia,

I noticed that you have changed the format of Russian diplomatic missions.

Firstly, you are right that we should rename this to Diplomatic Missions of Russia. It is Wikipedia practice to name articles [nouns] of [country], rather than [denonym] [nouns]. Other editors and myself are making this change to the 175? other articles.

However the way you have presented information is a departure from existing formats, and presents more problems than adds value.

  • (1) It is now very difficult to ascertain Russia's network in each continent, given that you have sorted the missions by country. I notice you are familiar with aviation on Wikipedia and I therefore guess you would know of the airline destination articles (eg: Aeroflot destinations). The DMBC (Diplomatic Missions by Country) articles should be work in a similar fashion.
  • (2) We have avoided listing ambassadors because it would be a logistically a lot of work to check who is coming and going. I am still trying to update news of missions opening or closing - ambassadors get rotated every two to five years generally so the changes would be much more frequent.
  • (3) Likewise with cross-accreditiation - not every country specifies this. In other cases it is complex (consular and political reporting could be convered by different posts). Above all it does not really add value for us to know if, say, it is the ambassador in Ghana or in Abuja who is concurrently responsible for Togo.
  • (4) And we do not do honorary consulates. Some countries give out honorary consul positions like confetti and it would be a pain to cover this for every state.
  • (5) The pictures are way too small to be of use.
  • (6) And above all, your style would mean the Russian diplomatic missions article would be radically different from other DMBC articles - we want to be consistent and professional. I notice you are quite new to the DMBC categories, so you might not be aware of the conventions already in place (this is not to say there is no reason why you cannot suggest improvements).

Could you please provide a compelling reason why the article, and all the other 176 DMBC articles, should follow your new format? Otherwise could you revert this back.

Thank you Kransky 02:20, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

In lieu of a response I have made the reversion myself. My arguments are already laid out above - drop me a line if you still want to debate this. Kransky 10:49, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I respectfully disagree with you on your point that the format I have done the list in presents more problems than adds value. If you compare 'my' list' to the 'old' list it is plain to see that the extra information in the list enhances the list rather than creates problems. I will address your issues one by one:

1) I turn your attention to New Zealand diplomatic missions which makes use of maps. I am currently working on similar maps for my version which would negate your concern that it is difficult to ascertain what continent the Russian Federation has missions in. In particular, I turn your attention to this map on the New Zealand page which enhances that article greatly without the need to physically sort by continent - as they say, a picture says a thousand words. 2) Ambassadors are a very important part of any diplomatic mission network, and many ambassadors are notable people. Yes, ambassadors do come and go, and in the instance of the Russian Federation, these comings and goings are publicised in numerous Ministry of Foreign Affairs articles, press releases and other documents, in addition to some Russian magazines devoted to diplomacy. That a nation like (hypothetically) Burkina Faso either doesn't publicise the names of their ambassadors, or publicise changes in diplomatic postings, shoulding negate articles concerning countries which do this from having this information. Additionally, for Russian diplomatic missions, it is also useful to include the names of Ambassadors as often this info is only available in a non-English language, of course this would usually be Russian. 3) + 4) Am able to compromise on that, and I can see your point, however a Note or two will remain, such as Guatemala being resident in Costa Rica, it is an interesting note that a country has a physical embassy, yet is resident in another country. 5) The pictures I have done like this, as I have seen in other lists, as it is my intent to gather photos of the various Russian diplomatic missions, so that (ideally) ever photo box in the article is filled. I am already in contact with someone I know at the MID who is looking into what they may be able to provide for this list (article)

I am also going to be adding another column in the table for the year in which the particular mission was established, and am currently compiling the information required for that. I will also be expanding on the prose in the list article to explain more about the history of the diplomatic missions of Russia (and Imperial Russia and USSR), which would be separate from Foreign relations of Russia, in that it would be specific to Russian diplomatic missions.

Also, it should be noted that the way the list I did has been presented complies with WP:LISTS. It is easy to navigate. It is well presented. It will also act as a development tool (in creation of new articles). It is well sourced (and am going to properly reference it in my user area - currently doing this). It is the intention to work on this particular list to get it up to standard in order for it to be put up for Featured list nomination. It's my opinion that the bar should be raised rather than lowered when it comes to providing information on WP, and I feel that the way the list I presented does this. Welcome your comments. --Russavia 13:16, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok, to go through your rebuttals -
  • (1) I am deeply opposed to the idea of using a table like what you have suggested. It is a significant departure from what has been done previously and does not make any improvement on what is already out there. Maps have use only up to a point. In Wikipedia they can complement information, but ultimately they cannot replace information. How do you expect to illustrate where say 100 embassies and consulates are using a 400px map? How does your new list make it an improvement where states are listed in alphabetical order instead of by continent? Again, see how well information is presented in the airline destination articles.
  • (2) I fail to see how including a list of ambassadors will be worth the effort. I believe we should be striving for consistency, and having a list of ambassadors here and not elsewhere will make it stick out like a sore thumb. But I have an idea - if you think it is worthwhile, then why not establish an article like Ambassadors of Russia?
  • (3/4) You could be setting a rod against your back trying to list non-resident accreditations - our High Commission in Port of Spain has accreditation to 13 other Caribbean states, and often they change (not sure if this information is published). Furthermore some states divvy responsibilities between different posts according to expertise. This is largely an administrative, not political, issue and I seriously fail to see what value this will bring. It will be like a trivia section that is neither amusing or suprising.
  • (5) Great if you can dig up some copyright free and good quality photos of Russian missions.
  • Date of establishment idea: again it would be a change to the format, and perhaps we can only get this data for a few countries, but I can see this information is useful (Iran has this data I know). What do other people think?
  • On your last paragraph, where you state your case for using a table, I am afraid I cannot see how your list makes it any easier to navigate for information. On what basis is your information better presented than what we have been using for over a year? At least in my format readers are not faced with the ugliness of text wrapping (hint: the bane of table compilers is that there will always be a field with more characters than you want). Why did you bother to reference every single mission when you could have simply provided one reference to the website where all the missions are listed?
I like your dedication but man, I really believe you should think your suggestions out first before you talk about "raising the bar" Kransky 15:54, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Aeroflot collaboration

Hi Russavia, what did you want to change to the current Aeroflot article? Also, if this article is to reach FA status everything will have to be referenced, which will be fine as long as you have all the references or we can find them.--Miyokan 02:26, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the help.Sparrowman980 18:03, 4 October 2007 (UTC);

Anadyr

Hi there! Regarding this move and related edits, I would have to disagree that the town of Anadyr with a population of merely 11K should be the primary meaning of "Anadyr" supercedeing the Anadyr River and Anadyr Gulf. A reader looking for "Anadyr" is not at all more likely to search for the town; the river and the gulf are just as, if not more, notable, which is why Anadyr used to be a disambiguation page and not to default to one of the items from the said disambiguation page. I would thus ask you to reconsider this set of edits. Thanks.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:03, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

AfD overwriting

Through this post, you overwrote AfD#1 to post AfD#2. Please review your actions to make sure that this does not happen again. Thanks. -- Jreferee t/c 05:36, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Jreferee, this is a problem with WP:TW, which is what I used to do the nominations, and will file a bug report.--Russavia 11:33, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
I would just like to point out that this is the second time Russavia as done this in recent memory. Golbez has had to clean up after him just a day ago over at Singapore Airlines fleet [4][5]. Kindly review all your past nominations and clean up any mess you may have created.--Huaiwei 07:08, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Hey Huaiwei, how about staying the out of stuff that has nothing to do with you. Someone says sh*t and you bob up. And for your info smart guy, I asked Golbez to help fix that. --Russavia 11:33, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Why would this has nothing to do with me, when you dropped a notice in my talkpage telling me a page I created has been nominated improperly for deletion? Whether you asked Golbez for help or not (provided thay is true to begin with) is immaterial, for you have already wasted his time to solve a problem you can solve yourself, and which any logical person would have avoided in the first place. If you arent happy with me bobing up in your talkpage, the best way to prevent me from doing so again is to conduct yourself properly, and make sure you follow procedures. Is that too much to ask from you?--Huaiwei 12:38, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Þingeyri/Thingeyri

Hello Russavia. I have undone your yesterday's move of Þingeyri to Thingeyri, as I dispute that the latter is, as you stated, "the most common name in English". Please consider taking your proposal to WP:RM in order to attract further input from other users. Best regards, Húsönd 12:41, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Singapore Airlines fleet

I see your AFD nomination. I hope there isn't a feud between you and Huawei. I have seen both of your names together before. If you feel like punching him, let me know. Archtransit 19:39, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I understand what you are saying when you say the Singapore Airlines Fleet article is just a list.

I am willing to turn this into an interesting article. This is much to write about it! How about giving 60 days to write an article. If you withdraw the AFD, I will begin work. It will not be an easy article to write because you cannot just find an article on the internet and make a summary. A new article would require lots of research. Little pieces of information from many articles would build the article. This takes a lot of work.

What's your opinion on delaying the AFD for 60 days and let me make this an interesting article, not just a list! You are welcome to help but don't have to. Archtransit 20:51, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Abkhaz source support

I was trying to convert a directly linked source on the current inventory for the Abkhazian Air Force to a standard citation format, but the Segodnia article doesn't even appear in Cyrillic characters for me. Could you please take a shot at it? TIA, Askari Mark (Talk) 21:48, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Singapore Airlines

My personal opinion is that both you and Huaiwei are behaving irresponsibly and the ridiculous debates on both SQ and SU have long since descended into a personal vendetta. You can of course file a RFC/U, but he'll probably do another one about you, because you've constantly stooped to his level with "you are the petty, hormone-raging teen you accuse me of being", etc. But if you do go ahead, I think this is probably the single most damning evidence of his disruptiveness.

The easiest way out, though, is a gentleman's agreement: you stop messing with SQ, and he'll stop messing with SU. There are more important things in life than whether Temasek is listed as SQ's parent company in the infobox or not. Jpatokal 06:35, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your suggestion, but I am not so sure if this "you don't mess with XX article, and I won't mess with YY article" is applicable here. I think it needs to be stressed again that no one owns any article, and no one is going to stop anyone from editing any article. I have stated matter-of-factly that he is most welcome to edit any article, including the SIA one, provided it is done in good faith and in keeping with Wikipedia's policies. I suppose the current state of affairs just illustrates the outcome of how his contributions were deemed as. Can the above agreement solve this problem? I don't think so, because I do not consider a termination of his contributions in the SIA article as an automatic lost of my rights to edit the Aeroflot article in anyway.--Huaiwei 17:53, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Huaiwei, the very fact that you're watching Russavia's talk page speaks volumes, and you both constantly engage in wikilawyering and hiding behind policies to justify your own agendas. Unfortunately, gentlemen's agreements only work between gentlemen. Jpatokal 07:58, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Indeed. My settings are such that every article which has seen at least one edit from me ends up on my watchlist, and it is routine for me to review all edits on my watchlist since my last visit. This particular talkpage appears on my watchlist too, as does that of many others, including yours, and as is the case in all these talkpages, I take particular interest if my name is mentioned, or if the debate revolves around me. And even if so, I actually respond dependent on the content, such as in response to the kind of provocative comments over here. Is this not normal behavior? I sure hope it is, but if not, does it really matter?--Huaiwei 08:22, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
And speaking of "wikilawyering and hiding behind policies", I clearly remember actually expressing my disdain over his age-old habit of plonking long strings of policies everywhere[6], and then making fun of this habit of his later[7]. I would be curious to know just where I would share similar guilt in this regard?--Huaiwei 08:36, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Now I honestly don't care if you are going to go hopping mad about me butting into your conversations with others again, because for some reason, I am always involved anyway. I take issue with some of your comments, and I will voice it out where neccesary:

  • I have almost had it with being unable to edit the Singapore Airlines article without hitting a brick wall with Huaiwei: Before making it sound as thou someone called "huaiwei" is out to oppose every single edit you make to that article, perhaps it is you who should be reviewing the kind of edits you are attempting to introduce first, and the kind of edits which has remained, including your own. Kindly be mindful that not all of your edits where reverted.
  • he continues to revert verifiable information with unverifiable info, or continues to remove dispute tags from the article (and claim that I need to get concensus to even add them): You know full well that this is a content dispute, and I sense that you somehow cannot distinguish behaviorial problems from it. I also sense that in the midst of any content dispute you engage in, you somehow believe you have the moral right to replace verifiable information from others with verifiable informtion from yourself, and then claiming the replaced information is "unverifiable". You also somehow believe that because you think that you are right, you can go right ahead and impliment all those changes without gaining concensus, even thou you know full well those changes are disputed by others. The verdict on just who's actions are justifiable is still on the table, apparantly.
  • mediation cabal (which he didn't participate in and then claimed that he wasn't given the opportunity: If you could read basic English, I quite clearly states that I chose not to participate in the mediation cabal. Has your wild imaginations on other's behavior gotten the better of you once again?
  • unfortunately is holding me back from editing other articles, such as Aeroflot, in which Huaiwei has attempted to include highly NPOV info: Such an astonishing comment this is. In one breathe, you claim you cant edit an article because of me, and you claim you can't edit in another article because of me too, when your behavior in the second article was practically a carbon copy of what you think I am doing in the first. This is getting a tad hilarious. Could you share with us just what happened to those "highly NPOV" info I tried to introduce in that article?

Given the kind of wild accusations you can fling on others even in a user page discussion like this, I am hardly surprised that you are desperate to launch an RFC/U against me. Kinda surprising that you have to call for support first thou. My comments remain valid: I shall take you on in every single one of your attempts to deceive, lie, and slander the name of others in a dispicably dishonest manner, including in an RFC/U. Are you up to the challenge?--Huaiwei 17:40, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Royal Swazi.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Royal Swazi.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 17:11, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Tarnogskiy Gorodok

There is no need to request a speedy deletion here. If you intend to write an article on the town, just remove the redirect and write it. One extra version in the history is insignificant. Rmhermen 15:37, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Your comments are invited on a proposal at WP:MILAIR

As an editor who has been active in working on air force-related articles, I’d appreciate your input on a a proposed generic structure for "XYZ Air Force" articles. I’d like to get broader inputs and would appreciate your suggestions on improving the proposal. Thanks, Askari Mark (Talk) 20:15, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:HeavyLift Cargo Airlines logo.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:HeavyLift Cargo Airlines logo.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 15:14, 4 November 2007 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Lviv Airlines logo.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Lviv Airlines logo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:13, 7 November 2007 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:MNG Airlines logo.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:MNG Airlines logo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:55, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Palestinian Airlines logo.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Palestinian Airlines logo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 14:25, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Reference content check on Abkhazian Air Force

I've discovered discrepancies between sources reporting on the air force inventory published 9 February 2007 by Nezavisimoe Voennoe Obozrenie and what was added to the article. The cited source, Segodnia.ru, differs from the article in that it reports "7 вертолётов Ми-8, 3 вертолёта Ми-24", not 1 each. Two English translations I've found both list 1 each, but identify the MiG-21 fighter incorrectly as "MiG-23" (a mistake not found in the Segodnia report), and specify the Mi-8 as a "Mi-8T". Do you have access to the original Nezavisimoe Voennoe Obozrenie source so the actual text can be checked? Thanks, Askari Mark (Talk) 17:05, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Kangaroo Route

I have started a vote on the discussion page of this article to remove content that is irrelevant to Qantas's operations. Seriously this article needs a rewrite! Please add your vote. Kransky (talk) 12:13, 26 November 2007 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Utair logo.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Utair logo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 21:10, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Polar Airlines logo.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Polar Airlines logo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:06, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:SAT Airlines logo.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:SAT Airlines logo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 21:12, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Shandong Airlines logo.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Shandong Airlines logo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 22:19, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Australia newsletter

WikiProject Australia publishes a newsletter informing Australian Wikipedians of ongoing events and happenings within the community and the project. This month's newsletter has been published. If you wish to unsubscribe from these messages, or prefer to have the newsletter delivered in full to your talk page, see our subscription page. This notice delivered by BrownBot (talk), at 22:03, 11 December 2007 (UTC).

Flight numbers at Singapore Airlines

Hi there, Russavia!

Nice to have the opportunity to chat with you. As you probably realise, I'm not the most knowledgeable gal, so could you point me towards the consensus that was reached as per your recent edit summary ("Flight numbers - Consensus was reached not to include flight numbers in airline article, hence this section has been removed.")?

(I am assuming that it was not the discussion archived here...

Thanks in advance for any help you can offer, Russavia! Alice✉ 05:34, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Your edit has now been reverted by another editor but I would still appreciate a response to my message above. (Although I do notice that the last time you replied to anyone on this, your page for talking to your fellow editors, was at 11:33 UTC, 9 October 2007. Just tell me plainly if I'm wasting my time trying to communicate with you here...) Alice✉ 10:40, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Merry Christmas! I look forward to reading your response before the New Year... Alice✉ 22:46, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

here and here. --Russavia (talk) 06:56, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, Russavia, and have a very Prosperous and Healthy New Year! Alice✉ 07:48, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Air Dolomiti logo.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Air Dolomiti logo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:11, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Australia newsletter

WikiProject Australia publishes a newsletter informing Australian Wikipedians of ongoing events and happenings within the community and the project. This month's newsletter has been published. If you wish to unsubscribe from these messages, or prefer to have the newsletter delivered in full to your talk page, see our subscription page. This notice delivered by BrownBot (talk), at 22:12, 3 January 2008 (UTC).

hi, I appreciate your concern, but "The purpose of Wikipedia is to present facts, not to teach subject matter. It is not appropriate to create or edit articles which read as textbooks, with leading questions and step-by-step problem solutions as examples." I believe that the article I have created does this in a very good manner. This is also a great reference to anyone wishing to see where they could fly to or from Karnataka. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Indiandefender2 (talk • contribs) 23:23, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Former destination lists

"have merged Aeroflot destinations back into the main Aeroflot article and have reformatted it as a collapsable table. I have also removed Former destinations as it would be near on impossible to achieve a complete, verifiable list (no list should be left incomplete), due to the sheer number of destinations which Aeroflot used to fly to, particularly with the Antonov An-2 to many Urban-type settlements throughout the former Soviet Union. Prose will be included in this section in the very near future to explain former destinations of the airline (both Soviet and Russian). --Russavia 18:09, 27 September 2007 (UTC)"

1. It is sometimes 100% okay to leave a list incomplete. We just post what we know.

2. To solve the problem I simply added "post-1992" since the pre-breakup and post-breakup definitions of Aeroflot vary. WhisperToMe (talk) 22:24, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Оренбургские авиалинии / Orenair

Because the airline's title changed officially, could you tell me how we could get their new 'Orenair' logo? It's really hard to get in touch with them, at least by e-mail… Thanks forward for answering. ✓ Kanġi Oĥanko (talk) 15:58, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Is Turkey in Europe?

Turkey be listed as Europe or Middle East in the Diplomatic Missions by Country articles? A user (or users) on a Turkish IP address are changing all the articles to reflect that Turkey is European. Please provide your reasons in Category_talk:Diplomatic_missions_by_country and Talk:Diplomatic_missions_of_Denmark) Kransky (talk) 11:23, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:AMC Airlines logo.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:AMC Airlines logo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 09:44, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Success Hill railway station, Perth

Next time just redirect such an article to the article about the line with a reasonable edit summary. To cover yourself put a note on the talk page a few days before you do the merge/redirect. Don't take things to AfD if you are hoping for a "merge" result! Garrie 05:42, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Redirect for LAPA Flight 3142

I deleted the redirect LAPA Flight 3142 (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) as you requested, but I wasn't sure if you wanted LAPA flight 3142 (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) moved to the title with the capitalized name. If you wanted it moved, you should be able to move it now. If you still need admin assistance, let me know and I'll finish whatever needs to be done. --Elkman (Elkspeak) 15:55, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

List boilerplate

I've created Template:Airlines list boilerplate, which can be subst'd to quickly start new airline list pages, and keep them uniform. - Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 01:45, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Large airlines

I have declined the speedy for List of largest airlines. If you wish to move this article then please follow the instructions at requested moves and open a discussion on the World's largest airlines talk page. Anu questions can be left on my talkpage. Regards. Woody (talk) 13:29, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Re:List of airlines of the People's Republic of China

Ah, my ole friend. As you may have noted in a recent edit of mine [8], there are certain things which aren't quite "negotiable". If you are not already aware, I have been dealing with a user for over three years now over issues related to Chinese politics, and the article you created has recently become a target for a suspected sockpuppet of that user, who has since been banned. The said article may be airline related, but kindly be aware that the WP you swear allegiance to has no final say on an article which is also related to other WPs, in this case Chinese-related, where political POVs are of a far greater concern that the kind of trivial fights over whether to include a table or not which seem to preoccupy most activity over at WP:Aviation! ;)--Huaiwei (talk) 17:55, 7 February 2008 (UTC)