User talk:The Bushranger/Archive 4

Speedy declined - Predator Plane

Hi. I have declined this speedy, because the redirect is not "recently created". If you like, you can take it to WP:RFD, but redirects are cheap and I think it is a plausible one. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 14:43, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I would think it was vaguely plausible myself - except for the capitalisation. I'll RfD it. Thanks for the feedback! - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 16:20, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

LA/AR

In this diff you speculatively added several aircraft to the LAAR potential competitors list without citations or explaining why they belonged. Marcus Qwertyus 18:28, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Okay I see you have added more citations to one but still don't see where it says it was proposed. Marcus Qwertyus 18:28, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

For the Tucano in particular, EMBRAER's proposing it for LA/AR and/or OA-X is throughout the entire FlightGlobal "Irregular warfare..." article. I did add those speculatively back then, but that was when I was just getting back into Wikipedia and didn't entirely grok inline citations yet. All the aircraft you removed as speculation, are now properly referenced as having been proposed. But thanks for the prodding to get them properly referenced! - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 18:33, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Heli-Sport CH-7

Orlady (talk) 12:04, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

you probably noticed that the DYK got some 12.3 k hits! Well posted and hooked! I've not checked DYKSTATS, but will.TSRL (talk) 20:14, 10 November 2010 (UTC) This comment is now where I meant to put it. Do you want to add it to DYKSTATS? I guess you know how to do that. Cheers,TSRL (talk) 20:54, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Heh, I'd actually forgot to check. Adding the two articles together gets 13.7k total - pretty cool indeed! And thanks for the compliment. I'll be adding it straightaway! - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 02:48, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Cad Bane

Is it possible that I can used the article Cad Bane could be used as a redirection for now. And yes it is true that I studied a little bit of information from the databank as well as the Cad Bane Wikia on Wookipedia. But I did try to change the wordings and etc. to be different. I still thought the databank could be used as a reliable source. − Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 20:04, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I don't quite understand what you mean. Use what as a redirection to where? And just changing a few words around has been pretty conclusively stated to still be a copyvio, I'm afraid - there's been a major furor over at WP:DYK over exactly that sort of thing. - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 20:07, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Use the article as a redirection. I would rather let this one just slide if you feel it's a copy violation because I never meant it to be. Star Wars databank. The only words that sounds like copryight infringement is

The season finale leads into a multi-part arc featuring Bane as the primary foe for the Jedi heroes.

and

Originally, supervising director Dave Filoni and series writer Henry Gilroy planned to create a bounty hunter called Durge, a character that was introduced in the 2003 incarnation of Clone Wars comics and animation.

Besides I am sure the databank is a reliable source for this information. − Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 20:43, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Besides if there is any part of it that seems copyrighted just let me know and I will see if I can resolve it. − Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 20:46, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Oh by the way, it was originally redirected to List of Star Wars characters#B so that's where. − Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 20:53, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, I saw several other large parts of the article that looked to be too closely paraphrased to the Databank article. I believe redirecting to the characters article should be fine though. - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 03:35, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Missile name moves

I think you may have been a bit ahead of yourself in moving so many articles. I have moved a few back, where I believe the original name is valid (per Common name or even "official" designation). Other editors may have other opinions, but I think it would be best to have this discussed properly for the record and to check consensus. GraemeLeggett (talk) 11:51, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Ah. Well, I decided to be bold, especially when cases where the disambiguation was just "missile" instead of "(missile)". If there's objections, I certainly don't have any problem with following consensus at all. :) - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 19:22, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Ukraine State Aviation Museum

Thanks for fixing all the redlinks via redirects in this article. I started doing that task and had to go out for a bit, you finished exactly what I was going to do there! Great collaborations think alike, or something like that. - Ahunt (talk) 01:15, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

No problem. And thanks for the thanks. Indeed they do! - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 03:42, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Happy The Bushranger's Day!

The Bushranger has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, so I've officially declared today as The Bushranger's Day! For being a great person and awesome Wikipedian, enjoy being the star of the day, The Bushranger! Signed, Neutralhomer A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, click here. Have a Great Day...Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:09, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

The above is given on behalf of User:Rlevse. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:09, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

• Awesome. Thanks, and pleas pass on my appreciation! :) - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 05:58, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Congratulations!! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 05:59, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
    • You are quite Welcome! :) Keep up the great work! :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 06:00, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

LearAvia Lear Fan

The link to DeLorean shouldn't be added back without any explanation *in* the article as to the relevance of the link. --Brouhaha (talk) 22:57, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK check

My detection of the error on that DYK was actually insanely simple. It's really easy to check DYK dates and lengths with DYK check. I suggest that you add it to your arsenal. See Wikipedia:Did you know/DYKcheck for details -- and install it in your monobook.js area. (And thank Shubinator for the script.) --Orlady (talk) 04:09, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Connellan air disaster

Thanks for the ref formatting cleanup on Connellan air disaster! Jpatokal (talk) 08:30, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LVI, October 2010

Your Military history Newsletter Project News: Editors for the newsletter, GAN backlog reduction drive Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: EyeSerene sums up our "Five years of military history"

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:04, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Prep3

Just thinking loud: Montevideo and berkelium are core, long, pictured articles. Was it worth stripping pictures from them to complete a set? I know few hooks are reviewed, but if this was the only reason, I could fix that. No slight to your great work. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 05:56, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. :) I debated long and hard about taking those two in a 'Non-pictued' state, but finally decided to do so - primarily to complete the set, but also because, in the case of berkelium, at least, the main pic (as noted) is in "AfD hell", and the alternative pic, to be honest, didn't appear very interesting, IMHO, at DYK-size scale. Montevideo's pics would work better, but.... Anyway, if you'd like to provide alternatives and put those back in the "waiting line", that's cool, and you can shift one or the other to the lead of Prep1 with a pic with my blessing if you do so. I won't be able to add any newly-reviewed hooks to replace them for awhile, though, as I'm off to bed. :) Thanks again, and keep up the great work on those science-y articles! Good to see somebody else giving science and history some love vis-a-vis the pop-culture flood. - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 06:01, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I'll replace them. I won't (and shouldn't) even bother writing this for berkelium alone, as it is my nom, and the alt pic is indeed dull, but Montevideo is a result of intensive work of at least 4 editors over the last week. Cheer. Materialscientist (talk) 06:07, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Can you explain your reasoning?

I'm sorry but why are my edits unconstructive. I am enforcing the word of Jehovah. The Bible teaches against war and activity such as this. It does not please God. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Imitational voice of a Jesus (talk • contribs) 01:58, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I happen to be a Christian as well, but Wikipedia is not a soapbox and endorses a neutral point of view. - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 02:01, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK

Thank you for reviewing my DYK submission. Could you take another look (death panels)? I think any POV issues have been resolved by Orlady's ALT2. Thank you. Jesanj (talk) 15:11, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I just noticed your inuse tag in prep3 - please go on as I'll be gone for an hour at least. I was just reviewing overdue noms, added some to prep3 and deleted some. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 01:53, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

No worries. Good to see that many fewer I need to add to it! :) - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 01:54, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks again. Jesanj (talk) 04:23, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK preps

Hi Bushranger. I see you're working on the preps tonight so I thought I would mention the timed hooks for the British Museum. Here's what I was thinking for the lead (picture) hooks:

• to go live Nov 26, 6:00 AM London time: Guisborough Helmet (currently lead hook in Prep 3)
• to go live Nov 26, noon London time: Jadeite Cabbage (currently in special occasions holding area)
• to go live Nov 26, 6:00 PM London time: John Henry Keen (currently in special occasions holding area)

What do you think? 28bytes (talk) 02:21, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Those sound pretty good to me. The next two will have to wait until the current preps get cleared out though, since Prep3 is at the bottom - I'm currently working through and reviewing hooks so that Prep1 can get filled up nicely and get everything ready to go. :) That Jadeite Cabbage is partciulary fascinating! - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 02:24, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Bushranger. If my math is right those will need to go in queues 2, 3 and 4 respectively. I'll let Materialscientist know too, since he's been working on moving the preps into the queues. 28bytes (talk) 02:36, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Alright, I've fixed up Prep 2, which is in line for Queue 2, to feature that helmet. Somebody else will have to shift the political hook from Prep 3 back to Suggestions to make room for the exploding cabbage though! - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 02:41, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. The prep queues got promoted in a different order than I expected earlier, so as long as we let Materialscientist know what we're thinking we should be OK. 28bytes (talk) 02:48, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

I've cleared two preps for the event. Other preps can be reshuffled or delayed. Materialscientist (talk) 03:18, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Materialscientist. I believe prep 2 (with the helmet lead) is ready to go to to queue 2; I'll put the other two hooks in prep tomorrow morning unless Bushranger or someone else beats me to it. 28bytes (talk) 03:27, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

I've taken the liberty of adding the two hooks to Preps 3 and 4 (with the cabbage replacing the Palin mugshot :P). Neat stuff. - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 03:56, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Bushranger. I'm sure she won't mind being replaced by a cabbage. 28bytes (talk) 04:06, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Awww shucks. A cabbage? Maybe she can make it back to the top of another with a picture. Jesanj (talk) 04:23, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Consider it done. Didn't really work as an ending hook anyway. :) - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 04:29, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for HMS Whiting

Hi. Thanks for pointing out the issue with the DYK, didn't realise that all the paragraphs had to be cited! I've fixed the problem, and I really appreciate you mentioning it on my talk page so I didn't miss it! Thanks Worm 08:57, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

No worries. Glad to help! - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 09:45, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Hello!

Hi, Bushranger! Can you check my DYK, and tell what do you think? That would be great, as it is on page for some time, and i don't know should i really do anything more regard it? Thanks! --WhiteWriter ^speaks 15:51, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi there! Glad to help out. Sometimes the DYK articles can be on the nomination page for quite awhile, but I've given yours a review. Nice work translating an intriguing subject! - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 17:32, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it really is! Thank you very much! All best! :)) --WhiteWriter ^speaks 16:49, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Apollo 18 (film)

CBALL does not state that covering future events is against policy... only that if such prospects for success or failure of such projects are being discussed, the discussion must be well and properly sourced and not contain original research or personal opinion. That said, and in agreement that this one does not quite yet merit a mainspace article, I am of the opinion that the project is nicely served by this one being incubated for a few weeks... as it is getting coverage[1][2] that would allow development of a nicely encyclopedic article. Its simply a little bit too soon, and incubation serves the project by allowing editors to expand and source the article as it awaits its return. Might you be willing to consider incubation? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 05:09, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, I always forget about incubation. That sounds good, thanks for reminding me of that. :) - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 05:10, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Well... had this thing less coverage... or been something slated for a year or two from now... then I'd be on the delete side too. I like to offer options... just hate sounding preachy (chuckle). Best, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 05:15, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Sperrbrecher Article

The Sperrbrecher article has improved greatly. Couldn't have done it without you! Keep up the good work. Adamdaley (talk) 08:27, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 08:28, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Have you noticed the Sperrbrecher has reached Class B? Anything I could help you with that is on the english wikipedia, I would certainly look at it and give my thoughts and opinions on it. Just leave a message on my talkpage. Appreciate your help and hope we can create or improve more articles together! Adamdaley (talk) 23:52, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Indeed I did. Pretty cool, innit? I'll certainly give you a ping if there's anything to colloberate on, thanks! :) - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 23:56, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

The photo you found at Cornelius XFG-1

Dear Bushranger, Where did you find that great photo? Also, I had to eat a lot of crow on that article, and without mustard or ketchup. I hate it when I know I am wrong, and my own research proves that I am wrong. <GRIN> But TRSL was 100% right. Jack Jackehammond (talk) 07:29, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

A bit of google-fu turned up the Century of Flight website, with the picture here. And hey, it's all good, if we were never wrong, we'd never learn anything! Hopefully you at least had some mayo with that crow though. ;) - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 07:31, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

And then there are a few other images... The drawing here shows the foward swept wings to advantage: [3] And another: [4] Here's one of the few that still exist, on display at the Freeman Air Museum: [5] Aparently it was covered in April 1946 Model Airplane News: [6] Here's a picture of a constructed model: [7] And another: [8] Cool concept. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 10:41, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

That last one's actually a Convair jet bomber, but still pretty cool. And those are awesome pics and great finds. I'd really have hated to have been the guy(s) tasked to fly the things though! - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 20:36, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

And here I thought the last was simply an artist's conception model of the XFG-1. The literature on it seems to indicate that it was a surprisingly stable ride. But yes, pretty cool pics. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 20:46, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK question

Should the hook have mentioned what the successor was (CH-54/S-64), or at least linked to it, or is that what the reader is suppoed to discover by reading the article (hence "hook")? - BilCat (talk) 05:04, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

That's the point of the hook, yeah. It's supposed to be short and catchy and "hook" the reader into clicking on the article to find out more. :) - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 05:07, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the answer. - BilCat (talk) 05:17, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Categories created in error

Thanks for your advice - will do so in the future. Davshul (talk) 07:09, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Space reorganization

Hello WikiProject Space member! A discussion has been started regarding the future of WikiProject Space here; any comments you might have would be welcome! There are mainly two competing ideas:

1. Centralize all the Space-related WikiProjects, such as Astronomy and Spaceflight, and merge them into WikiProject Space, or
2. Separate the Astronomy and Spaceflight "sides" of WikiProject, and remove WikiProject Space.

If you can think of other options, that's great too. Your contribution to the discussion would be much appreciated. Thanks! :)

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Space at 00:14, 29 November 2010 (UTC).

Why don't you...?

You're really pimping that essay, aren't you? :P Why don't you put it out into essay-space, rather than keeping it as a user subpage? Silverseren^C 05:59, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Heh, well, it's my first essay so I'm a bit happy with it, I suppose. :P I might move it to Essay-space tomorrow, once I make sure I have the final wording I'd like. Thanks for the note! :) - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 06:58, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

endless Korean War

Thank you Bushranger, for coming back to your comment and adding your view on the expansiveness of the Korean War edits. With your initial quick reply to my [9] comment, I feared that MilHistory Group would not see the merit in my plea. I'm hoping to gather support and a consensus for getting these recent and not so recent events out of the KW templates, cats, etc. Best regards, --S. Rich (talk) 15:21, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

You're quite welcome. :) A lot of times I realise I should say more right as I click the 'Save page' button, so I tend to 'add on' a fair bit. But yeah, I agree with you - the de jure situation of beligerernce shouldn't affect what's added to the infoboxes and cats and such, that should be the de facto ceasefire (a variation on WP:COMMONNAME, perhaps!).- The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed}

Emirates 407

The accident did involve serious damage to both aircraft and airport infrastructure. Aircraft suffered sustantial damage meaning it could not be pressurised, whilst the airport's ILS antenna was damaged and put out of action. The airport's lighting system was also damaged. ATSB summary (p58) ATSB preliminary report. Mjroots (talk) 21:27, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Hm, I'll strike part of my comment then. Thanks for the clarification. - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 21:27, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Cyrus Pitt Grosvenor

Thanks for the review at DYK - I've addressed those issues. Victuallers (talk) 21:37, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

1961 F-84 Thunderstreak incident

Nice work, mate! Calistemon (talk) 08:24, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks! Glad to help out, and these "hidden history" type incidents fascinate me - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 08:25, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Same. I only remebered the incident because of a newspaper article I read many, many years ago. Incidently, the article claimed that the pilots flew to Berlin on purpose, as part of a dare, or bet, but I havn't been able to find any source repeating this claim. Calistemon (talk) 09:30, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

AfDs

Hi. As you just participated in discussions on a closely related topic (also a current AfD re a Jewish list), which may raise some of the same issues, I'm simply mentioning that the following are currently ongoing: AfDs re lists of Jewish Nobel laureates, entertainers, inventors, actors, cartoonists, and heavy metal musicians. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 08:36, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations

		The Writer's Barnstar
		For placing second in the November 2010 Military history WikiProject Contest with 56 points from 11 entries, I am delighted to present you with The Writer's Barnstar. Well done! Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 22:57, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks muchly! :) - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 22:58, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

for extending the reach of the notice for the AfD on List of Russian aviators. More input = better feedback.

Georgejdorner (talk) 03:03, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

• No problem. :) Glad to help. - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 03:04, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

same old DYK again

so, over here an editor said they would make changes but nothing happened in a week, i started editing the page and then the willing said they weren't willing anymore even after i offered to back down. so, might you be able to take a look? it seems a little odd that this DYK hook is getting stalled but those that are stalling aren't doing much to fix it. kind of like tagging and not fixing an article... anyhow... thanks for whatever you can do. i figure you may not want to "stick your head out" on this one again as people have been stalling. but if these so called "POV problems" aren't being fixed or no one is bothering to point them out on the talk page, etc., then what is the big deal? thanks. Jesanj (talk) 01:15, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

i appreciate your specific suggestion on what to add to the article in order to add balance. thank you. Jesanj (talk) 04:41, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

• No worries. Glad to help. :) - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 04:46, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Citations and References for red link aircraft on aircraft A-

Bushranger I have come across in articles some photos of rare aircraft that are listed in List of aircraft that are red links. There is a request that no references of citations be posted next to aircraft names. But I was wondering if the WP community could reach some type of agreement that if it is not a red link then a citation or reference can be posted, and maybe in the future then a stub article can be done from the various citations. A good example is the Lanier aircraft listing. Lanier and his son did some very interesting research on STOL aircraft (ie their aircraft could out perform a Helio Courier in STOL). Here is one article I found on one of his earliest designs the "Lanier XL-4 in a 1931 magazine. Just a thought. Jack Jackehammond (talk) 07:18, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

• That's pretty nifty. Great find! As for the cites and agreements, you could bring it up at WikiProject Aircraft, they're a pretty good buncha folks there. Keep up the good work! - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 18:06, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

• THANKS. It is good to know there is someone who has been around the block on WP aircraft pages who freely gives both help and advise. Again, thanks. Jack --Jackehammond (talk) 07:10, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
  

• Oops' I actually posted the first message so I could maybe secretly pick you brain and vast knowledge on aircraft. I have read a lot of crazy 1920-30s aircraft concepts. But I have read over and over the XL-4 vaccumplane concept and I have been studying aircraft since my 20s and I have not a clue what the concept is. Does it make sense to you???? Jackehammond (talk) 07:16, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

• Hmm. I honestly can't say I have a clue how it's supposed to work. It probably makes more sense than that one 'corkcrew' helicopter from the early days though... - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 01:24, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK for World War II Allied names for Japanese aircraft

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for nominating this article. Cla68 (talk) 00:29, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for being so late to say this, but thank you for taking the time to add the table listing all the names to the article. Cla68 (talk) 12:03, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

No worries. It was lots of fun, and I learned a lot too. Glad to help! - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 15:49, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Well, she does make for an attractive banner!

Apparently this was her inspiration: [10]--Milowent • ^talkblp-r 18:56, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

• More background. User_talk:Tarc#porn_bios. Not trying to be disruptive, just trying to lighten the mood a bit.--Milowent • ^talkblp-r 19:00, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
• You're right, she does make an attractive banner, at least. :P - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 19:02, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

		The Epic Barnstar
		I appreciate your expanding of the Peacekeeper Rail Garrison Car page. Thanks for going above and beyond on an article that frankly I was unsure of its notability. Also, thanks for the other things as well on this project, but mainly that. Have a nice day! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 06:13, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

• Wow. Much thanks! And glad to be able to help, that was pretty fun to work on and learn about. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 06:21, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LVII, November 2010

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors, "Military Historian of the Year", New Incubator, Black Project Report Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: bahamut guides us through "Nominating military biographies for deletion"

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:25, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Johanna Long image

I see that you added a fair use image of her and she's a living person. That's not a valid reason to upload an image from her website per WP:NFC#UUI point #1. I'm certain that her image is capable of being obtained by fans when she races. Royalbroil 04:23, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

• Ah. I wasn't aware of that, thanks. I'll have a look around, and also I might email her website to request explict permission for the image to be used on Wikipedia. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:25, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
  • I hope that you succeed with getting their permission! I had uploaded several images (years ago) before I was told about it. Also, I see that you used the generic Infobox for racecar drivers instead of the NASCAR driver's template (Template:Infobox NASCAR driver). I'll take care of it. Royalbroil 04:31, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
    • Yeah, I used that one because it allows spaces for her ARCA racing last year and Snowball Derby win. I think it looks better than Infobox-NASCAR, actually. But either's cool. :) - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:34, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
      • The NASCAR drivers template has been used for many years and it's standard for any NASCAR drivers, even drivers with Formula One World Championship experience like Juan Pablo Montoya. ARCA is considered a feeder series for NASCAR so racing in is not considered a big deal except if they win a championship. Lots of upcoming NASCAR drivers are given a chance to do races in ARCA to see how well they'd do in NASCAR and to gain experience in a similar vehicle. The NASCAR template just underwent some changes that I'm bringing up right now because there used to be a section for Achievements like winning major events in other racing genres like the Snowball Derby, Indy 500, 24 Hours of Daytona, etc. Royalbroil 04:45, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
        • Ah, gotcha. I'll use it first and foremost in cases like this then. Thanks for the heads-up! - The Bushranger _{One ping only}
          • Yep. I know you do a good job at DYK which I especially appreciate. I wish I had more time to help there more - but I don't if I ever want to any editing. I'm lucky to have enough time to upload all of the images that I take on vacations/road trips and while traveling to race tracks around Wisconsin. Royalbroil 04:57, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

My note at ARS

I think MickMacNee is trying to say that I canvassed support for the retention of the article. I did no such thing of course, as you will have seen. I merely asked whether the ARS considered that the article would be worth saving. Mjroots (talk) 20:30, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Semi-professional football

I've put up a discussion on semi-pro football at Wikipedia:WikiProject American football/Semi-professional football discussion. You appear to have edited articles in the semi-pro arena in the past and are invited to participate.--Paul McDonald (talk) 15:11, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Mr. Monk Goes to the Dentist (2nd nomination)

I withdrew that second nomination and decided that DRV was the better route. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 22:06, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

• Sounds good. Sorry if I was a bit snappish, it's been a tough week. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 23:17, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Question

Hello The Bushranger, thank you for your comment on the talk page of shark article. I'd like to ask your opinion about DYK hook here? I see you have lots of experience with DYK. All your articles got more than 5000 views. That's great! Please feel free to offer an alternative hook for the article I started. Thank you for your time.--Mbz1 (talk) 05:46, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Well, not all of them, but thanks! :) I'm a bit sleepy here (it's after midnight in my time zone), but I'll have a look at the sharky hook in the morning and see what I can do. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 05:51, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

How much is "poorly sourced" ?

Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous.

There's an attempt to post about a plagiarism allegation on KAT-TUN's wiki when there's only a few internet sources reporting. No TV reports and no newspapers mention about this. So I wonder how much is the word "poorly sourced" stated in wikipedia rules. I have seen other artists with plagiarism mention in their biography ONLY when there're TV reports, newspapers, or legal actions about those incidents. But there's none of those available in this case. Could you please clarify ? Thanks. Kmwolm (talk) 17:56, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Well, I'm afraid I don't read Japanese, so I can't check the actual sources. I can, however, note that one of the sources in the references has a "headlines.yahoo.co.jp" URL, which I assume is Yahoo News, Japan version. I'd call that a reasonably reliable source if so. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 17:58, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

• • That's not an original article by Yahoo Japan as you can see it's written by 【ITmedia】 and there's absolutely not any other powerful sources. (I have search Yomiuri, Sponichi, and such. There's no mention.) I wonder if it's fair enough to write this down their biography when it hasn't been proved legally (that's why there's been no mention in powerful sources). As I said that I've only seen plagiarism mentions in wikipedia only when the artists get accused legally so why let it on KAT-TUN. Thanks.Kmwolm (talk) 18:14, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

If you believe the information violates WP:BLP, then by all means, Be bold and remove it - but please leave an edit summary explaining why you are removing the information. :) - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 18:25, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

KAT-TUN

Thanks for coming to my aid on the KAT-TUN article. Much appreciated! - Onlysoaa (talk) 18:04, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

No problem! - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 18:05, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Category:Music, mind and body DRV

The discussion that you participated in that resulted in the deletion of Category:Music, mind and body has been taken to deletion review. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 21:55, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Paul Colin (journalist) Article.

I would like to see if you are able to rate its class for the following article Paul Colin (journalist). I will also be sending the same message to the following users User:1ForTheMoney and User:AustralianRupert. If you can help with this I'll appreciate it. Adamdaley (talk) 23:40, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Peacekeeper Rail Garrison Car

Materialscientist (talk) 18:02, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Phew, you were credited for this. I was going to do this if you weren't. Thanks again for your hard work. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:24, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

No worries. You're welcome, and thanks for finding such a fascinating subject! :) - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 05:33, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Congo Free State campaign against the Arabo-Swahilis

Materialscientist (talk) 00:06, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for all your help with this article Bushranger, and thanks for the nomination! Merry Christmas! --Cerebellum (talk) 01:47, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Glad to be able to help. :) Merry Christmas!

The Downlink: Issue 0

The Downlink
Your source for news on WikiProject Spaceflight	Issue 0, December 2010
Welcome to The Downlink · Reorganisation of Space WikiProjects · User Activity Checks Welcome to The Downlink Welcome to The Downlink, a new monthly newsletter intended to inform members of WikiProject Spaceflight about the latest developments in the project and its articles. Future issues will contain information on issues under discussion, newly featured content, and articles written by members of the project to appear in the newsletter. All members of WikiProject Spaceflight are invited to contribute any content that they would like to see in the newsletter. If you were not aware of being a member of WikiProject Spaceflight, membership of the former Human spaceflight, Unmanned spaceflight, Timeline of spaceflight and Space colonization WikiProjects was merged into WikiProject spaceflight during the reorganisation of the spaceflight projects, for more details, please see below. Reorganisation of Space WikiProjects The ongoing discussion of the future of Space WikiProjects has been making progress. WikiProject Space was abolished on 5 December 2010, with the Spaceflight, Astronomy and Solar System projects becoming independent of each other. On the same day, an assessment banner, {{WikiProject Spaceflight}} was created for WikiProject Spaceflight to replace the generic space one which had been used previously. On 9 December, WikiProject Space Colonization was abolished, with its tasks being subsumed into WikiProject Spaceflight. On 12 December, the Human spaceflight and Unmanned spaceflight WikiProjects became task forces of WikiProject Spaceflight, whilst WikiProject Timeline of spaceflight became a working group. A number of issues are still under discussion: Introducing better defined assessment criteria and an A-class review process Setting clearer importance criteria for assessing articles Establishing a joint task force with the Astronomy and Solar System projects to cover space telescopes and planetary probes Defining the roles of projects, taskforces and working groups, and processes for establishing new ones Improving the profile and activity of the project Much of the current discussion is taking place on the WikiProject Spaceflight talk page, however there is still some discussion on the original proposal page. User Activity Checks A series of checks are underway to establish the numbers of users who are still active within WikiProject Spaceflight, its task forces and working group. All usernames on the members lists were struck out, and members were asked to unstrike their own names if they were still an active member of the project. If you wish to do so, and have not already, please unstrike your name from the master list, plus the lists on any applicable task forces or working groups Published by WikiProject Spaceflight, if you have any content you wish to include in future newsletters, please contribute

You have recieved this newsletter because you are currently listed as a member of WikiProject Spaceflight, or because you are not a member but have requested it. If you do not wish to receive future issues, please add your name to the opt-out list.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Spaceflight at 16:28, 16 December 2010 (UTC).

Your improper removal of speedy deletion tag

Hi, could you explain [edit]? In case you didn't notice, in the big red box it specifically states:

• Do not remove this notice from pages that you have created yourself. If you created this page and you disagree with its proposed speedy deletion, please add:

• {{hang on}}

directly below this tag, and then explain why you believe this category should not be deleted on its talk page."

You improperly removed the speedy deletion tag to that category, even though you yourself originally created the category, voilating this rule. Additionally, and more importantly, there is absolutely no basis for your removal of the tag, improperly replacing it with the "empty category" notice. This is inappropriate because it is not in fact the type of category intended to be exempt from C1 deletions. The exemptions from C1 are clearly listed in the criteria - "Unpopulated categories that have been unpopulated for at least four days. This does not apply to disambiguation categories, category redirects, featured topics categories, categories under discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion (or other such discussions), or project categories that by their nature may become empty on occasion (e.g. Category:Wikipedians looking for help)." This category does not appear to meet any of these exceptions. The only justification you gave was "no reason to delete it when it will only need to be re-created later". While this is your personal opinion, it is not grounded in Wikipedia policy. I properly tagged the category for deletion, and will be re-tagging it. If you object, instead of removing the tag you should place the hang on notice on the category's talk page to appeal to the reviewing admin. Thanks, 69.59.200.77 (talk) 18:57, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Note that there is now a post regarding this at WP:ANI, see here. I'm sorry you didn't get a chance to respond to this before the post was made, but another editor's actions forced my hand. 69.59.200.77 (talk) 20:35, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Hey BR: you might find this relevant to this issue. - Ahunt (talk) 21:42, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

<replied there>

No problem, mistakes happen and no harm done. The cat is now being discussed at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2010_December_16#Category:International_military_aircraft_2010-2019. - Ahunt (talk) 17:58, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

I've followed some of the discussion, could the former occupant of the category have been Sukhoi/HAL FGFA (which currently resides at Category:Fighter_aircraft_2000-2009 for some reason)? GraemeLeggett (talk) 18:11, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Hm, I don't THINK that was it (I haven't edited it, at least) but that's certainly one that should be there! - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 19:20, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

A couple more and the issue should be sorted then. Any international cooperation prototypes flown for the first time this year?GraemeLeggett (talk) 20:56, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Port of Miami Tunnel

Hey look on the talk page Talk:Port of Miami Tunnel, I think that infobox will work. Thanks for helping, there is a lot that can be added to many south florida articles. Daniel Christensen (talk) 21:14, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

• Oh wow, infobox tunnel, would have never even looked for something like that. Daniel Christensen (talk) 21:15, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

I basically doubled the size of the article, it looked really bad when I got to it and it had not been updated since 2008 information. I hadn't gotten to formatting it, but thanks, you did better than I would have. I also created an article for the Port of Miami Deep Dredge Project, which currently has no headlines, if you want to look at that. Daniel Christensen (talk) 21:21, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for working on it, it needed a lot of work. And glad to be able to help! :) - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 05:50, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Vilyam Genrikhovich Fisher Article

The Bushranger,

Once again I am here for a little help. It's concerning the Vilyam Genrikhovich Fisher Article. Would like you to look at my discussion and the points I've made on its Talkpage. I noticed today in the last 20 minutes that there is only 2 members of the WP Espionage! I am surprised only 2 members! Would like some feedback on the information I have placed on the Talkpage concerning the information that I have compared to the information on the article itself. Feedback would be appreciated either here or under my discussion on Vilyam Genrikhovich Fisher Talkpage. Adamdaley (talk) 21:52, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Espionage.

I have added my username to the list of members and made it semi-active. Hope we can rebuild this WikiProject back up again. Adamdaley (talk) 04:02, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Merry, merry

Bzuk (talk) 15:54, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Whoops

Artur Balder

Just to ask you for participation at the discusion:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2010_December_23#Artur_Balder

Please, if you can look the listed references and read some commentaries, you will see there is special and personal interest from an editor named Orland, and the discussion is going out of the subject, and of course out of the references. Some other editor say, for instance, IMDb references are edited by everyone who wants it. This is by far not true. You can submit information, but must be proof of theatrical release or important media in orther to accept the credits of a new film for instance. Thanks anyway. All what I am asking for is neutrality. --Lolox76 (talk) 21:01, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

CR 4040 / 4050

I will look back in 2 weeks. --Admrboltz (talk) 04:47, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

• Much thanks. I'll see what I can do. Won't be any hard feelings if I can't notability-bridge them. :) - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:49, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

• I saw your note as well. I started a little work in my sandbox a while back and took several photos. There were several bridges built at this location, the very first bridge crossing at Daytona on the Halifax River as well. Gamweb (talk) 05:05, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Sandbox:Main Street Bridge (Daytona Beach)

Main Street Bridge at Wikimedia Commons