User talk:Avman89

Welcome to Wikipedia, Avman89! I am Marek69 and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or by typing {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Oh yeah, I almost forgot, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!

Marek.69 ^talk 22:08, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yo, some dude revert your edits. Just letting you know. IGeMiNix (talk) 05:59, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah no problem, these service changes really make the wiki editors busy.--IGeMiNix (talk) 06:20, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia! (I normally do not do a formal welcome, so please bear with me. I'm also fatigued from all the editing today.) If you are interested both in contributing to Wikipedia and in the New York mass transit systems, please consider joining our WikiProject New York City Public Transportation where we organize the Wikipedia articles concerning everything about public transportation in and around New York City. If you have any questions, please write a message on my talk page and I'll help you the best way I can. Thanks! Tinlinkin (talk) 07:22, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! (I do not like formal welcomes either). I am definitely keen on joining WP:NYCPT. If there are specific articles or sections that need work, let me know and I will try to contribute.Avman89 (talk) 07:51, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. The biggest issue in our realm of Wikipedia is the lack of adequate reliable sourcing in articles. The articles are generally correct, but must ultimately be supported with references so that the encyclopedia can be trustworthy. My personal goal, which is too lofty at the moment, is to have more good articles and even featured articles. Featured lists is definitely possible, and there are a lot of NYC-related lists. If you write a message on the WikiProject's talk page, you should be able to get answers quickly if the respondents are knowledgeable. Also check out WikiProject Trains which is a parent of this project. So have a good time and try not to have the wikiculture stress you out. Tinlinkin (talk) 08:14, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on 2010 South Asian Football Federation Women Gold Cup requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Mo ainm~Talk 13:32, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article 2010 South Asian Football Federation Women Gold Cup has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No content beyond the infobox, no sources attached.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:50, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Avman Bhaia, if there's a confusion about copyright infringement, the logo shouldn't be used unless all confusions are cleared. The logo IS copyrighted, although I don't know exactly to what extent (you get the point). It's definitely no freeware. Ratibgreat (talk) 14:43, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being 'minor'. The only thing that's changed is that you will no longer have them marked as minor by default.

For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you are familiar with the contents of WP:MINOR, and believe that it is still beneficial to the encyclopedia to have all your edits marked as such by default, then this discussion will give you the details you need to continue with this functionality indefinitely. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 19:56, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have reverted your good faith move of Beach 67th Street (IND Rockaway Line). Per the station naming convention for the project New York City Public Transportation, we use the name that appears on the map with some additional guidelines on that page. Acps110 ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:47, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Archaeorhizomyces requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. — Finemann (talk) 19:19, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• I have declined the speedy deletion, done a minimal job of tidying and stubbing it, and "moved" it to Archaeorhizomyces which is the name given in the reference. This shouldn't have been nominated for speedy, but your articles will stand a better chance if you expand them a little more before posting them - have a look at WP:Writing better articles for hints. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 22:03, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've expanded it a little after I got hold of the original article; strange to think there's so much left to describe. Perhaps you'd be interested in joining the fungi WikiProject? It's not a bad community- we've got a number of editors of varying levels of expertise and activity, many of whom (myself included) are always available to help out. J Milburn (talk) 23:24, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • @JohnCD: Thanks for reversing the deletion nomination. I decided to create the page once I heard of the discovery, but I was at work and didn't have the time to put much thought into it. I had meant to improve on it once I got home. I know the article seemed to not provide much information, but it shouldn't have been nominated for deletion in the first place, since the original research was only published a few days ago and presumably, not a lot is known yet.
      • No worries. I have explained to the speedy tagger why this shouldn't have been tagged. It is unfortunately easy for the New Page Patrollers, without whose efforts Wikipedia would not survive, to be so overwhelmed by the continual tidal wave of rubbish that they get into a frame of mind that thinks "How can we get rid of this?" rather than "Could this be improved?" JohnCD (talk) 09:17, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • @J Milburn: Thanks for expanding the article. I do have access to the Science article through my university's library, and was about to read it and improve the article. Also, thanks for the invite to the fungi WikiProject; I will contribute as much as I can, but I am only an undergraduate student with limited knowledge of microbiology, so I need all the help I can get.Avman89 (talk) 00:48, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm an undergrad, and I'm not even a scientist- it's hardly a closed project! If we can squeeze a couple more paragraphs into the article in the next couple of days, we can get it on the DYK section of the main page, which would be nice. I'll give it a look over later tonight, see if I can find much else from the article to include. J Milburn (talk) 19:04, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On 21 August 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Archaeorhizomyces, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Archaeorhizomyces is a class of fungi that was not described until 2011? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Archaeorhizomyces.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thanks from me and the wiki Victuallers (talk) 16:03, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would appreciate if you could save this new updated version of the article http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Polytechnic_Institute_of_New_York_University&action=edit&oldid=530151130 Thanks, --5a90p (talk) 07:16, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:08, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:11, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Avman89. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Avman89. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the company press release of Oct. 2, which details the Additional order for E175 SCs. This release was reprinted by numerous news sources through out Nov. 2017. AirOpsExecnPlt (talk) 02:33, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I updated the sources.Mirza Ahmed (talk) 03:18, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. You updated the fleet total for Air Wisconsin without providing details for the United Express / American Eagle sub-chart to match your new total. Also, no additional reference was provided ...source?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.55.211.7 (talk) 20:43, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I added a source. It's 65 according to Air Wisconsin's website. I don't know how it breaks down between American and United, and if they will retain all of them when flying for United only. The fleet size number didn't have a source given before I edited it either; the 59 aircraft was incorrect according to Air Wisconsin's website. Mirza Ahmed (talk) 22:07, 4 February 2018 (UTC) Mirza Ahmed (talk) 22:07, 4 February 2018 (UTC) Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.55.211.7 (talk) 22:45, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for helping to clean up Spirit Airlines page, I'm glad you could clarify the information I was attempting to contribute. I'm still newer to Wikipedia Contributing and appreciate your help. The page hadn't seen a major overhaul in quite some time and I am happy we could make it more relevant again. I did go in and add a few more constructive things as well as update financials for the company. Please feel free to let me know if it's less than constructive with my most recent edit vs your last one! Angryfa (talk) 06:44, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your edits! You are right that the page needed updating. The new edits look great, especially the service expansion section. Feel free to revert or change my edits if that makes the article flow better. I've been on Wikipedia for over a decade but only started taking an interest in aviation recently, so I'm fairly new to it as well. Do keep contributing; we're all in this together! Mirza Ahmed (talk) 17:12, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Contour Airlines, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Georgia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:28, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you so concerned with this template that you are reverting my wider edits to re-add it? The age of a rail line is not relevant to the average reader; the date is. {{start date and age}} is intended for situations where the age of something is relevant - for example, how long a crisis has been going on - not the age of a fixed thing. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 05:34, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The template is used on almost every transit line's article. Just check any article for a subway line in NYC, light rail in Los Angeles, etc, and the start date/age template is there. There is nothing on the template's page that suggests it is only to be used for a crisis event. Your personal opinion on what is and isn't relevant to readers is immaterial. If it is widely used across Wikipedia, you have no reason to over-enthusiastically patrol a few Muni Metro pages to standards you've defined for yourself. Mirza Ahmed (talk) 05:52, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Use is widely inconsistent across rail line articles - that the NYC articles (which have a variety of different conventions than other rail articles) use it means nothing. And you have failed to give any reason why it actually adds value here, so your standards are equally arbitrary. Also: please use edit summaries, especially when you are making controversial edits. Empty edit summaries come across like you are trying to hide something when you are involved in a dispute. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 06:34, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The casual reader often is interested in how long a service has been in operation. Having to do the math every time to figure out the age (2018 - minus start year, then comparing months, is a lot of work). Yes, it has not been consistently used, but I suspect you prevented its usage on MBTA articles, for example. I always use edit summaries, but when I am making an edit I already made earlier only to have it summarily reverted, I can't be bothered. Mirza Ahmed (talk) 07:30, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The claim you added as an edit summary in your last edit [1] is wrong: most of the list is supported by a single source at the top of it, though I've marked it as unreliable.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 14:01, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Which claim? I added a ch-aviation link for the 737 lease information, which I assume is a "reliable source". The early termination of the 777-200ER leases are also properly sourced, from both ch-aviation and bdnews.com, the latter is widely respected in Bangladesh. The source for the total number of aircraft is, admittedly, Planespotters, which I'm not a fan of, but there aren't any other sources available. Biman's website is out of date and doesn't give totals in any case. Mirza Ahmed (talk) 14:11, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

″most aircraft listed here have no source given″ is a claim.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 14:16, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That reference has been on the article for years without anyone questioning it. I find it curious you are now pointing to it to refute my claim that there isn't a source, while simultaneously marking it as unreliable. Regardless of the source, the list seems reasonable to me; I grew up in Bangladesh and had family members who worked in aviation (though not for Biman), so I knew which aircraft they operated. Also, I don't need a source for adding the 777-200ER to the list; the source was already in the article where I added the information about the early termination of the lease. Mirza Ahmed (talk) 14:23, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I know that but it's always better to follow WP:V and WP:IC, mostly considering the article is a GA one.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 14:31, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Avman89. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

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

Hello, Avman89. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

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

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Contour Airlines, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Beckley, Crescent City and Georgia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:14, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Just recently moved to New London and glad to help out with local transit pages. Mirza Ahmed (talk) 03:50, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring as you did at Market urbanism. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:37, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Avman89 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Did not violate three-revert rule; only reverted twice. Block was made in the interest of "fairness", purely subjective on the part of admin above.

Decline reason:

You are not blocked for violating the three-revert rule, you are blocked for edit warring - see WP:EW where it says "The three-revert rule is a convenient limit for occasions when an edit war is happening fairly quickly, but it is not a definition of "edit warring", and it is perfectly possible to edit war without breaking the three-revert rule, or even coming close to doing so." Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:58, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and you actually reverted three times between 02:35, 18 February 2019 and 02:07, 19 February 2019, after a change you made was reverted. When your changes are reverted, you should start a discussion and seek consensus, not just revert right back and edit war over it. You should know that after having been here for nearly ten years. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:05, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Consensus was sought, but was not forthcoming from the other party, whose MO was the automatic gainsaying of anything I suggested.Mirza Ahmed (talk) 19:44, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't have a consensus for a change, you don't make the change. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:46, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

So if I post on the talk page and no one else weighs in, whose edit gets preference? Currently it's just me vs the other guy. If there isn't consensus, his quotes shouldn't be allowed either. Mirza Ahmed (talk) 19:50, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see where you even attempted to seek a consensus. Generally, if an article is in a stable state and you want to make a disputed change, the onus is on *you* to seek a consensus for it. If you can't get a consensus, your desired change does not get made. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:09, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I received your email, although it does not really address the reason you have been blocked. As Boing says you reverted 3 times within 24 hours. You did not actually violate 3RR so my block summary was incorrect in that regard. If you promise not to continue the edit war I would be happy to unblock. I would do likewise for the other editor. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:44, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have already posted on the article's talk page saying I won't be editing anything else, so any further edit wars are out of the question. Regardless, I am left with a bitter taste and I remain convinced I was blocked only to be made an example of, without actual reason as per Wikipedia policy. Mirza Ahmed (talk) 23:13, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The policy is at WP:EW, and it is quite clear. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 23:21, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:Avman89 has been unblocked by User:MSGJ per the discussion here. EdJohnston (talk) 16:03, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article Holiday Airlines (US airline) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Does not appear to meet WP:NCORP.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. SITH (talk) 20:15, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:12, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Re: this edit, as per Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Lead_section#Citations you usually don't need to cite stuff in the lead of the article if the same information is elsewhere in the body (there are exceptions when the content is controversial) WhisperToMe (talk) 05:11, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:25, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing—Director of football—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Seany91 (talk) 18:18, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiEagle

The WikiProject Aviation Newsletter

Volume I — Issue 1
Aviation Project • Project discussion • Members • Assessment • Outreach • The WikiEagle
Announcements After over a decade of silence, the WikiProject Aviation newsletter is making a comeback under the name The WikiEagle. This first issue was sent to all active members of the project and its sub-projects. If you wish to continue receiving The WikiEagle, you can add your username to the mailing list. For now the newsletter only covers general project news and is run by only one editor. If you wish to help or to become a columnist, please let us know. If you have an idea which you believe would improve the newsletter, please share it; suggestions are welcome and encouraged. On 16 December, an RfC was closed which determined theaerodrome.com to be an unreliable source. The website, which is cited over 1,500 articles, mainly on WWI aviation, as of the publishing of this issue. Luft46.com has been added to the list of problematic sources after this discussion. The Jim Lovell article was promoted to Featured Article status on 26 December after being nominated by Hawkeye7. The Raymond Hesselyn article was promoted to Good Article status on 4 December after being nominated by Zawed. The Supermarine Sea King article was promoted to Good Article status on 22 December after being nominated by Amitchell125. The William Hodgson (RAF officer) article was promoted to Good Article status on 26 December after being nominated by Zawed.
Members New Members KingAviationKid (Joined on 17 December) PatrickChiao (Joined on 22 December) Wp9097 (Joined on 16 December) Number of active members: 386. Total number of members: 921. Closed Discussions Featured Article assessment Jim Lovell (discussion) – Closed as promoted on 26 December 2021 Good Article assessment HAL Tejas (discussion) – Closed as not promoted on 30 December 2021 William Hodgson (RAF officer) (discussion) – Closed as promoted on 26 December 2021 Supermarine Sea King (discussion) – Closed as promoted on 22 December 2021 Raymond Hesselyn (discussion) – Closed as promoted on 4 December 2021 Deletion Timeline of Berlin Brandenburg Airport's construction (discussion) – Closed as delete and redirect on 30 December 2021 Evergreen International Airlines Flight 17 (discussion) – Closed as keep on 25 December 2021 Requested moves Akbarpur (Ambedkar Nagar) Airstrip → Akbarpur Airstrip (discussion) – Closed as moved on 30 December 2021 1983 Avensa Douglas DC-9 crash → Avensa Flight 007 (discussion) – Closed as moved on 30 December 2021 Garuda Indonesia Flight 035 → Garuda Indonesian Airways Flight 035 (discussion) – Withdrawn on 28 December 2021	Article Statistics This data reflects values from DMY. Aviation pages by quality Quality Total FA 142 FL 15 A 56 GA 505 B 4,573 C 11,878 Start 15,082 Stub 18,754 List 2,539 Category 11,638 Disambig 653 File 2,713 Portal 629 Project 89 Redirect 1,518 Template 2,489 NA 66 Assessed 73,339 Unassessed 1 Total 73,340 WikiWork factors (?) ω = 251,875 Ω = 4.91
New/Ongoing Discussions Featured Article review D. B. Cooper (discussion) – Since 14 December 2021 A-class Article assessment Granville Gee Bee Model A (discussion) – Since 21 April 2020 List of aviation shootdowns and accidents during the Iraq War (discussion) – Since 22 February 2010 Good Article assessment Romanian Air Corps (discussion) – Since 25 December 2021 Jean Batten (discussion) – Since 2 October 2021 Merger proposals List of astronauts by name → List of astronauts by year of selection (discussion) – Since 10 August 2021 List of cosmonauts → List of space travelers by nationality (discussion) – Since 10 August 2021 List of space travelers by name → List of space travelers by nationality (discussion) – Since 10 August 2021 Holidays Czech Airlines → Czech Airlines (discussion) – Since 23 June 2021 Bendix Aviation → Bendix Corporation (discussion) – Since 30 May 2021 Airport Movement Area Safety System → Airport Surface Surveillance Capability (discussion) – Since 29 May 2021 ASDE-X → Airport Surface Surveillance Capability (discussion) – Since 28 May 2021 Splitting proposals Family Airlines (discussion) – Since 23 November 2021 2021 Kabul airport attack (discussion) – Since 24 September 2021 List of military aircraft of the United States (discussion) – Since 16 August 2021 Braniff International Airways (discussion) – Since 8 September 2019 Deletion List of maiden voyages (discussion) – Since 29 December 2021 Requested moves Hot-air balloon → Hot air balloon (discussion) – Since 30 December 2021 Aeropostal Alas de Venezuela Flight 108 → Aeropostal Alas de Venezuela Flight 109 (discussion) – Since 28 December 2021 Garuda Indonesia Flight 150 → Garuda Indonesian Airways Flight 150 (discussion) – Since 28 December 2021 Garuda Indonesia Flight 206 → Garuda Indonesian Airways Flight 206 (discussion) – Since 28 December 2021 Garuda Indonesia Flight 708 → Garuda Indonesian Airways Flight 708 (discussion) – Since 28 December 2021 Garuda Indonesia Flight 892 → Garuda Indonesian Airways Flight 892 (discussion) – Since 28 December 2021 TWA Flight 800 → TWA Flight 800 (1996) (discussion) – Since 27 December 2021 Dynamic Airways Flight 405 → Dynamic International Airways Flight 405 (discussion) – Since 26 December 2021 CommutAir Flight 4281 → CommutAir Flight 4821 (discussion) – Since 25 December 2021 Thai Airways → Thai Airways International (discussion) – Since 13 December 2021 Thai Airways fleet → Thai Airways International fleet (discussion) – Since 13 December 2021 List of Thai Airways destinations → List of Thai Airways International destinations (discussion) – Since 13 December 2021 Did you know Ravish Malhotra (discussion) – Since 30 December 2021 Alexander Tahy (discussion) – Since 26 December 2021 Veronica Volkersz (discussion) – Since 6 December 2021 Rudolf Szepessy-Sokoll (discussion) – Since 3 December 2021 On The Main Page Did you know... ... that the aerobatic demonstration aircraft used by SoloTürk is also used in military operations of the Turkish Air Force? (24 December)
Discuss & propose changes to The WikiEagle at The WikiEagle talk page. To opt in/out of receiving this news letter, add or remove your username from the mailing list. Newsletter contributor: ZLEA

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:35, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:40, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:32, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]