User talk:Toubabmaster

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] French nav boxes

Your addition of French nav boxes is being discussed at WT:AIR#French nav boxes. Please stop reverting the removal of your templates, and try to gain a consensus to have them used on articles first. Contiual reversion could place you in violation of WP:3RR, and lead to your being blocked by an admin for edit-warring. - BillCJ (talk) 16:35, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution.

  • Please, content disputes are NOT vandalism. You've been told where a discussion is taking place, so please discuss it there. I'm giving you a 3RRwanring this time, please heed it. - BillCJ (talk) 19:11, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Salut Toubabmaster, comme tu l'a sans doute constaté, il y a un désaccord sur l'utilisation des boites de navigations dans les articles. Certains utilisateurs (je suis l'un d'eux) pensent quelles ne sont pas très jolies et ne s'insèrent pas vraiment bien avec le design des autres boites déjà présentes. Comme le signale User:BillCJ plus haut, il y a une discussion en cours sur ce sujet sur la page du Projet aéronautique. Merci d'arrêter d'éditer les articles pour y ajouter les boites tant que la situation n'a pas été résolue et pour éviter une guerre d'édition. Je vois sur ta page utilisateur que tu ne parles pas anglais, mais n'hésite pas à communiquer avec les autres, je peux faire les traductions, ça ne pause pas de problèmes. Donc voila, n'hésite pas à me contacter si tu as la moindre question. --McSly (talk) 19:42, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you create an inappropriate page, such as Toubab edits, you will be blocked from editing. Anthony Rupert (talk) 00:01, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Je suis desole

Just a personal note to say that I'm sorry for the frustration you've evidently felt over the navbox issue. I still hold the opinion that keeping the box is undesirable, but if you could tell me how I could have treated the situation better, or communicated that opinion better, I am open to your criticism. Salut --Rlandmann (talk) 03:14, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback. Please keep in mind that the purpose of a WikiProject is to try to keep Wikipedia's presentation of information in a particular subject area consistent. So, for example, WikiProject Aircraft uses Templates to link together articles about aircraft by the same manufacturer, or in the same sequence of designations. On the other hand, Wikiproject Aircraft uses Categories to link together the aircraft currently in use by a particular nation. So of course there will be resistance to change - if the change does not follow established practice. If you had added the same aircraft articles to Category:Active French military aircraft you would have found no resistance at all.
And you're right - I should have chosen a more relevant example to discuss. So: Imagine the Eurocopter Dauphin article with navboxes on it for Argentina, Brazil, Burkina Faso, and the other 23 countries currently using it at the bottom of the page. Even if these were just categories it would be a horrible mess - which is why I personally think that it's a bad idea even as a category.
We have to try to be fair to everybody - which means that if we went ahead with an "Aircraft currently used by France" template on all these pages, then when someone comes along and wants to add an "Aircraft currently used by Argentina" template, we would have to allow this too; and the person who wants to add "Aircraft currently used by Brazil".
Ships are different - a ship belongs to only one nation at a time, so the number of navigational elements (templates and categories) at the bottom of the page cannot ever grow too large.
I don't expect you to agree with me! But I hope that at least I have explained the problem a little bit better and in a friendlier way. --Rlandmann (talk) 18:57, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
It's not just a US-thing. Wherever a country has had a systematic sequence of designations, we have corresponding templates - such as Austria-Hungary, Germany, Sweden, Japan, and the People's Republic of China are all covered. France (and the UK) have never had such a system (the closest thing that the UK had was for aircraft produced by the Royal Aircraft Factory during World War I - and yes, we have a corresponding template for it already - you can see it here). However, there are plenty of French and British manufacturers which are covered. You can find a (partial) list of such manufacturers here.
Template:ADF Aircraft is not in widespread use; and its main function has been replaced by Template:Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation
You do have a point about Template:British military aircraft since World War II - but you can see that this template is an anomaly. I'd support its deletion as well.
The Dauphin may not be made in Brazil, but it would be a justifiable candidate for somebody wanting to create a template for all aircraft currently in use by Brazil (just like the Hawkeye is included in the template we're discussing). General practice (if not strict policy) on Wikipedia is that if an article is included in a navbox, the navbox should appear on that page.
Finally, the navbox we're discussing is quite different from any other Aircraft template in that it doesn't contain links just to Aircraft, but to ships, and other equipment too (in some versions). --Rlandmann (talk) 21:24, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
The Hawker Siddeley Harrier was designated AV-8 in US military service, so it has a template that links it to the other aircraft in the American V sequence. Conversely, the American-built Northrop Gamma was designated BXN in Imperial Japanese Navy service and B 5 in Swedish Air Force service, so it has templates linking it with the other aircraft in these designation systems. These templates allow readers to follow a sequence throughout its entire path; from P-1 to F-111 for example.
Different Wikiprojects are organised differently; this is natural since the taxonomy of their subject matter differs. But, like you say, this is sterile. Consistency is unimportant to you; it is very important to me. It is therefore unlikely that we will ever agree. I hope, at least, that you can understand my opposition, even if you do not concur with it. --Rlandmann (talk) 22:57, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Un remplacement possible

Salut Toubabmaster. Puis-je proposer un remplacement possible pour votre modèle de navigation {{French_Navy_Vehicle}}? On peut voir ici: Template:French Navy Vehicle/suggestion.


Cheers. HausTalk 14:59, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

( copied from my talk page for clarity )

Milles mercis pour ta proposition qui j'espere permettra de résoudre une part importante du conflit existant. Cependant, je crains qu'il y ait encore des voix qui s'élèveront pour la présence de ce bandeau sur les aticles du style Eurocopter Panther.
Je vais transformer mes modèles sur la base du tien car je pense que cela permettra d'avancer sur une discution qui tourne en rond depuis trop longtemp.
Encore merci
--Toubabmaster (talk) 15:26, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
(Translation by Haus) "Thanks very much for your proposeal, which I hope will solve a large part of this conflict. I'm afraid some people will object to the presence of even this new template on articles like Eurocopter Panther. I'll redesign my templates based on yours, because I think it will help us move forward in a discussion which has gone in circles for too long. Thanks again."
(Sorry for the delay in response -- I read French much more quickly than I can write it. I wish you the best of luck in your work and a speedy resolution to your troubles.)
Je vous prie d'excuser mon retard à répondre. Je lis beaucoup mieux le français que je ne l'écrire. Je vous souhaite bonne chance dans votre travail et à une résolution rapide de les problèmes. HausTalk 17:36, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Suggestion

  • No offense, but if you intend to communicate in French most (if not all) of the time, maybe you should contribute more to the French-language Wikipedia. I'm sure a lot of people are having trouble reading your talk page. Anthony Rupert (talk) 18:47, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
For the record, he does. HausTalk 00:47, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] April 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on French Army Light Aviation. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

  • Just because you disagree with me does not make me a vandal, or my edits vandalism. - BillCJ (talk) 02:03, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

With regard to your comments on French Army Light Aviation: Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. -

  • Perhaps "vandal" means something different in french - in English, calling an experienced editor's edito "vandalism" is an insult and a personal attack. Do this again, and I may filing an RFC. - BillCJ (talk) 02:10, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
RFC? For this template here ? Funny idea. See also for "personal attack". --Toubabmaster (talk) 20:37, 6 May 2008 (UTC)