User talk:GW Simulations/Archive 2008
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Red Bull Task Force
The Red Bull task force is fairly quiet, and has a grand total of 21 articles in its scope, and 4 members. Since there are many articles in the air sports area that have no project to look after them, and since Red Bulls articles would fall under the air sports scope, would you object to the scope of the task force being expanded to include air sports, and the task force being renamed and retasked as the Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Air sports task force? - Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) —Preceding comment was added at 16:03, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] STS-400
Have I done that correctly? :S Rudget. 12:25, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
- Ah, I didn't move it. One minute I'll delete it and do it again. Rudget. 12:26, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks, that's great. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 12:43, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] The Technology Barnstar
 |
The Technology Barnstar | |
| For your numerous major contributions to articles regarding space and technology, including, but not limited to, creating the STS-400 article. Nat682 (talk) 16:47, 13 January 2008 (UTC) |
[edit] Merged Portal "mock up"
Hi! I would suggest to adjust the schedules of the "selected" items, after I gained some experience running the Portal:Space exploration by myself for "forever": Images are much easier to come by than articles! Cycle the "selected image" once per week, and cycle articles/bios once a month.
Also, I experimented with the "random" feature on the portal, and this may be something useful for the merged portal, as well.
HTH, Awolf002 (talk) 21:43, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 03:23, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] RE: Deletion Review for Template:Progress spacecraft/Launch
Request fulfilled. In the future it is not necessary (and undesirable) to submit a delrev before conversing with the deletion admin. A non-controversial request such as this does not require a delrev. JERRY talk contribs 20:28, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- Okay. I only used delrev this time because the lines of authority were unclear (two deleting admins for two pages). Thanks for completing the request, and moving the pages. Now the templates are in their correct locations, I'll go ahead and nominate the redirects for deletion again under G6. Sorry for the confusion. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 20:44, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] TfD nomination of Template:Redirect-acronym
Template:Redirect-acronym has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Hairy Dude (talk) 22:40, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've decided to support the proposal. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 23:44, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Space travellers WikiProject
Hi, I noticed that you are a member of the Space travellers WikiProject. A couple of weeks ago, I proposed that the Space missions and Space travellers projects, which both appear to be inactive be merged into the Human Spaceflight project. Whilst this is being done, the capitalisation of the Human spaceflight project's title would also be corrected (ie. Human Spaceflight → Human spaceflight). The projects are all doing the same/very similar things, and in my opinion, a single, larger, project would be more effective than three smaller, and somewhat inactive projects.. In light of very little response to messages on the project talk pages, I am now sending this message to all members of all three projects, inviting them to discuss the proposal on the Human Spaceflight project's talk page. I would appreciate your opinion on this. Thanks. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 22:48, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] {{Launching}} tag for space shuttle launches
Do you have a preference: {{Launching/STS-122}} or {{Launching/Atlantis}} or {{Launching/STS}}? (sdsds - talk) 00:52, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
- {{Launching/STS}} is probably best. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 00:07, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Plan for Category:Space exploration articles by quality
Subsequent to the merge of WikiProject Space exploration into Wikiproject Spaceflight, it seems there might need to be a plan for converting Category:Space exploration articles by quality and its ilk to something like Category:Spaceflight articles by quality, and perhaps similarly for importance ratings categories. These are tightly coupled to to the Template:WPSpace ratings mechanism. Is there a good place to start discussing a plan for this conversion? (sdsds - talk) 21:53, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
- Yes. We'll need to check at WP:SPACE. We'll also have to drag it through CFD as well, because we are moving categories. It would probably be a good idea to leave notes on the project talk page, and Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team as well.
- In reply to your comment at the CFD for the member category, I think the best way to minimise self-references would be to merge the members into the main project category, and Category:WikiProject Spaceflight seems the best place for this to go. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 22:15, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not exactly wanting to suggest we could avoid "wiki-process", but what if the new categories were created and then the {{WPSpace}} template were changed to automatically populate the new categories rather than the old? Then it would be a "trivial" janitorial task to remove the old (and now empty) categories.... (sdsds - talk) 06:46, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] launching template
I have decided to remove the "launching" template from the NASA page. If have had doubts about this usage in the past, and have only seem them grown. I'll explain my reasons, and perhaps you can comment with your ideas.
- NASA launches stuff every week. This opens a precedent to having the template included year round
- I can see the point in having the template on payloads, sattelites, the general "Space Shuttle" article, the mission article, because those are all search terms that might lead people to wikipedia looking for that information. In my eyes anyone that looks for a "launchschedule" on the NASA page is just not using google correctly.
- It needs and invites constent updating troughout the week simply to fix the "countdown" which really shouldn't be in Wikipedia at all. We say "something happens within the next" week, but we should not be "counting down".
- Combined I think this is starting to violate WP:NOT in that wikipedia is not a TV guide, and it isn't a launchschedule or countdown either.
I'm interested what your opinion on this is, and what we should do address these concerns --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 01:29, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
- This template was only designed for use on rockets and satellites. Its use seems to have spiralled out of control. I don't really have an opinion either way on the issue, so it is probably best if you talk to Sdsds (talk · contribs). GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 08:36, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Speedy deletion of Template:Launching/GLONASS
Actually I'm rather OK with deletion of {{Launching/GLONASS}}. I see it as deprecated by {{Launching/Proton}}. Every GLONASS payload is going to fly on Proton, eh? Maybe it's fine to have only launch-system-specific subtemplates of {{Launching}}. No two Proton missions are going to be on the pad at the same time. And although once more in history there will be two STS vehicles at 39A and 39B simultaneously, can't we handle that as a special case, e.g. {{Launching/STS}} and {{Launching/STS-LON}}? (sdsds - talk) 08:08, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
-
- No, starting late this year, or early next, we are going to see GLONASS launches on Soyuz, and even a couple on a GSLV. There are four Proton pads, and Russian pad turnaround times are pretty fast, so it is not unusual to have two Protons going within the reccommended two week period for this template (Today's Proton launch, and the one on 28 January, for example). As for STS-400, I would advise not using a tag unless it is called up (by which time the main {{Launching/STS}} tag would have freed up. -GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 09:07, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Orbit data
I wonder what orbit data we should use at USA 193, since the orbit is decaying? Evercat (talk) 21:30, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not sure. I would say some current data (like I added), and possibly some data from around the time of launch, if any can be found. What do you think? --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 21:34, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Reasonable. There's a post from January 2007 by Ted Molczan at [1]. I'm not qualified to interpret it though. :-) Evercat (talk) 21:36, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
- I need to check. I'll get back to you. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 21:38, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
There are also other posts from him on the list around the same time period. Evercat (talk) 21:46, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
- I was looking at using something slightly less technical from JSR. [2]. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 21:49, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Made a suggestion re: this (not) being an ASAT on the USA 193 talk page. Evercat (talk) 14:23, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- Replied on Talk:USA 193 --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 22:00, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Stratellite edits
They seem to be. I'm no expert on the subject, and I reverted a page blanking that appeared on Recent Changes. While leaving a message on the user's talk page, I noticed that others had also flagged concerns about inappropriate edits to the same article. However, these edits seem fine, an apparent attempt to make the article more comprehensive and factually accurate (though, unfortunately, without references, but hopefully they'll appear soon :) Does this help you? Thanks, PeterSymonds | talk 21:55, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. I just wanted a second opinion because of the substantial nature of the changes he was making, linked with his history of vandalism to the page, and his username, which suggested a potential COI. I'll leave him be for now, unless he blanks it again. For the record, the other "inappropriate edits" which you mentioned seemed to be exactly the same as the one you reverted. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 21:58, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- Sure thing. It's a difficult one, but I think s/he is trying to rewrite the article. I just had a look at the Stradeditor's full contributions, and his first edit summary mentioned the removal of content. Maybe s/he's just finding their feet; I'll welcome them officially, and see if s/he needs a hand. However, if I've got it wrong, then obviously further action must be taken.
-
- I'm also concerned about the conflict of interest issue; an eye on the page to check that everything's written from a neutral point of view will be necessary. I'll add it to my watchlist (I assume you'll keep an eye on things as well) and hope that the edits were made in good faith. Any assistance, please let me know. Thanks, PeterSymonds | talk 22:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi GW, thanks for the tips! I am just learning my way around Wikipedia as a contributor, it's very interesting and seems to be very open in terms of contributors having access to each other. I'll eventually get the hang of it. Peter Symonds had written to tell me I had to sign the edits using 4 tildes. I guess I misunderstood where I had to place those tildes. Thank you again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Strateditor (talk • contribs) 23:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- It is. I hope you enjoy using it. I've replied on your talk page. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 09:49, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Boilerplate dispute
GW, You dropped a dispute template on Boilerplate (rocketry)#Space Shuttle OV-101, and I responded:
- I agree the Enterprise is not a boilerplate. Paragraph is written from the wiki article links and sources as a "boilerplate configuration". This gives depth to the article in how NASA used the Enterprise as IF it were a boilerplate for the vibration test. Don't you agree? I have not investigated enought of Pathfinder to voice an opinion, at this time. How would you write and reference Pathfinder as a boilerplate? LanceBarber (talk) 08:46, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
It was not I who came up with the "boilerplate configuration" term, but another wiki article: boilerplate test program used the term, and I built upon it, and added the necessary reference for the vibration tests.
Could you please be more specific in your dispute. Thank you. High regards, Lance.... LanceBarber (talk) 02:52, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] User:84.13.164.204 and Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism
Just to let you know I've closed your report without action at WP:AIV because I placed the site that the IP was adding on the spam blacklist. That should shut him down. If there are further problems, let me or any other admin know. Stifle (talk) 10:20, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Brace matching
By the way, I submitted this enhancement request, asking that brace matching be implemented on Wikipedia. I think it would make it easier to keep track of what is going on with these complex templates. Obuibo Mbstpo (talk) 22:59, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Great. Sounds like it is a really useful idea. Hope they introduce it. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 23:57, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- There is also a link on the bottom right of that page that will allow you to vote for the bug to have priority, if you wish. However, they note that actually providing a fix is much more effective than voting for it. I guess I'll hang out in the technical IRC group sometime and try to figure out how to get involved in that kind of thing. Obuibo Mbstpo (talk) 06:42, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Team game of chess
Would you like to play Tparker393 and I at a nice game of chess? Obuibo Mbstpo (talk) 22:51, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, sure. I've set up a game here. Sorry for the late reply, I was in the middle of reprogramming a rather complex template. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 22:52, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Nice work on the launching template, by the way. I guess for something temporary like that, the top-of-the-page box is better than a sidebar? Obuibo Mbstpo (talk) 00:12, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- A box at the top is the traditional system for such templates. Most of the articles it is used on have infoboxes anyway, and you can't put a sidebar on an article with an infobox. I wrote most of the template from scratch, and even I don't understand it fully. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 00:18, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, I had all kinds of trouble with templates until I started reading the help files (e.g. Help:Template, m:Help:ParserFunctions, etc.) Unfortunately, MediaWiki doesn't seem to be powerful enough to do all the things I want it to do. Or at least, the implementation here doesn't have all the stuff I need. Obuibo Mbstpo (talk) 00:22, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- What were you looking to do? I agree that it is not powerful enough. As an experienced VB6 programmer, I get frustrated by not being able to store information in variables and then use it later on in the template. If MediaWiki had support for VB6, then I could have written {{Launching/Count}} in about six or seven lines of code. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 00:25, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- There's a magic word called {{CURRENTUSER}} which could be used to do all kinds of stuff, such as providing different messages to different users using #if statements. This could help automate/idiot-proof certain complex changes. This would have been very helpful for making changes to the proxy table I was working on, because it was based on individual proxy pages transcluded from different users' userspace. However, CURRENTUSER is not active here. Obuibo Mbstpo (talk) 00:38, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
-
- You could try filing a a request for it. I think that's how you get new features installed. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 01:13, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Whoa! I just looked at Template:Launching/Count. That's amazingly intricate. How long did that take you? Obuibo Mbstpo (talk) 00:41, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
-
- There's a magic word called {{CURRENTUSER}} which could be used to do all kinds of stuff, such as providing different messages to different users using #if statements. This could help automate/idiot-proof certain complex changes. This would have been very helpful for making changes to the proxy table I was working on, because it was based on individual proxy pages transcluded from different users' userspace. However, CURRENTUSER is not active here. Obuibo Mbstpo (talk) 00:38, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- About 3½-4 hours from start to finish, but it was my fourth attempt (the three previous attempts didn't work). --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 01:07, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Hey, if you ever want to collaborate on doing some MediaWiki extensions or something in Java, let me know. I could use the experience (I'm trying to become a software developer) and MediaWiki certainly does need some enhancements. I'm not sure how much leeway Wikipedia's developers (Brion Vibber et al) allow for implementing that kind of stuff, although Bugzilla notes that the most effective way to get fixes implemented is to provide the fix yourself. Obuibo Mbstpo (talk) 01:12, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- I'm hopeless at programming in Java. VB6 and HTML are my main languages. I'm trying to learn though. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 01:15, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, Java is definitely a paradigm shift from VB. However, Java is a big improvement on C++, even though it's easier to learn once you know C++. Now the big thing seems to be this .NET phenomenon. I bought a bunch of books on .NET certification, but for some reason end up being drawn to Wikipedia editing a lot more easily than to actually cracking open those War and Peace-length tomes. I guess I better pry myself away from this thing... Obuibo Mbstpo (talk) 01:21, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- I tried VB.NET, and I can write basic programmes in it, but I quickly went back to VB6. I've been using it for at least seven or eight years (possibly more, I can't quite remember), and I'm just used to it. It does pretty much everything I need, so I have no reason to change. I'm trying to pick up a bit of C++ to write a couple of specialised DLLs, but apart from that, I'm happy with good old VB6. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 01:28, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
By the way, it's your move. :) Obuibo Mbstpo (talk) 20:53, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] SpiritWorldWiki
Hi GW, I am writing to you since you are a fellow software developer and Wikipedian. I was wondering if you would like to comment on some of my ideas at m:User:The Unknown Rebel/SpiritWorldWiki? I believe that some of the drama and fights over Wikipedia policy and culture (specifically, the great inclusionism/deletionism debate) might be rendered unnecessary by certain technological advancements. Specifically, I propose the replacement of the current model – in which the world of online, mass-collaborative encyclopedia-writing is largely dominated by a single monolothic entity, Wikipedia – by a "wikisphere" of independent but interconnected wikis. Under this system, users disenchanted with the rules and culture of Wikipedia can contribute elsewhere, and their contributions will be as accessible and crosslinkable there as if put on Wikipedia. I am reaching out to various individuals in hopes of putting together a development team to implement the technology needed to make this succeed. (For instance, we need a watchlist that can track changes to watched articles on many wikis simultaneously.) Of course, if I don't get any other skilled participants, it will be necessary to begin work on my own. Also, please let me know if there are other individuals who might be interested. Thanks, SpiritWorldWiki (talk) 05:27, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- It's an interesting proposal. I certainally think there should be more collaboration between wikis, and would be strongly in favour of moving deleted content to other wikis rather than simply getting rid of it. Obviously there would be exceptions - attack pages and pure vandalism, for example. I don't know whether completely linking the wikis would be a practical option or not, but if it is, then it would be a great development. If we could get Uncyclopedia involved in the project then that would be fantastic, as we could dump the whole of BJAODN onto them. We could also create a vanity wiki, and move vanity articles there. As a VB6 programmer, I don't know if I can be much help with developing it, but I broadly support the proposal. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 07:59, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
|
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 18:06, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Wop Wop
Hey GW Simulations. I rarely enter on en.wikipedia, and I have seen your message today. I won't run the bot in the templates, the interwikis are wrong in the most important part of the templates. Thanks for the advert. Greetings!! Rastrojo (talk) 15:48, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Adrianne Calvo
Could I convince you to withdraw your AfD nom on this article? I think it's shown sufficient notability to be kept, and I'd like to nominate it for DYK. GlassCobra 14:15, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Speedy deletion of Now That's What I Call Music! 70
Regarding the page Now That's What I Call Music! 70, which you tagged for speedy deletion on the basis of CSD A1 tag used, I wanted you to know that I have removed the speedy deletion tag. This page does not qualify for speedy deletion under that criterion because it does have context and albums are not normally speediable under the CSD. If you still want the page to be deleted, please re-tag it under a CSD criterion that applies, consider redirecting the article, or use the proposed deletion or the articles for deletion processes. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Redfarmer (talk • contribs) 16:39, 9 April 2008
- Thanks. Personally I don't feel there was context, but I'm not going to argue about something that is subjective. I have endorsed your PROD. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 17:21, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] offend
hmm, i DID NOT MAKE ANY SORT OF THREAT AGAINST THE PERSON IN WHICH YOU SPEAK OF. you are being undeniably unreasonable. yes i said, that they have an ego. that is no reason to THREATEN ME with deletion. and you are proving my point even more that the mechanics of this site are currupting valid points idea's and information. making most here no better then the FCC. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thedevilishere (talk • contribs) 10:02, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
- Firstly, please calm down and stop shouting. I am being perfectly reasonable. Here are a couple of quotes from your comment on User talk:Bonadea: "what is your problem?" "your own selfish ego?". I am not threatening you, I am merely making you aware of Wikipedia policies. I never accused you of threatening him, I stated that you made a personal attack, which is supported by the two quotes above. I'm not sure what the FCC is, but with your current attitude towards the community, you will not last long here. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 10:10, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
( fyi ) FCC
alright i'll calm down and stop trying to pick fights, but im really frustrated, that i can't post info about Vision Of Mara, with out receiving protest. -sorry
Thedevilishere (talk) 10:19, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
alright, no you can delete that LS studio's shut down, it was actaully tagged somehow on the 2004 Ukrainian child pornography raids i edited, it was a tag that didn't exist so i just briefly made it exist. i know allot more information about the "modeling agency." that i'll eventually post but right now i dont have the time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thedevilishere (talk • contribs) 10:29, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks. I'm not an admin, so I'll find one and ask them to do that. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 10:35, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Atv docked real.jpg
Thank you for the notice! I haven't seen the NASA logo, but it's logical, because the docking tests the previous day were also telecast by NASA. No need to change it back to ESA fair use ;) ColdCase (talk) 02:38, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
- The logo can easily be mistaken for detail on the Zvezda module unless you know what you are looking for. If you look closely, the lightest detail in the top right corner spells out the word "NASA". I've changed the licence tag on the image to {{PD-NASA}}, and suggested that it should be moved to Commons. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 08:01, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
- Oh, sorry, I thought it had already been changed. I have removed the "Image: ESA" text from the image description (which is required for ESA pictures) since its no longer ESA fair use. Thanks for your effort! ColdCase (talk) 16:46, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 10:09, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. Let's hope the bot will archive this one. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 10:10, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Answer to Question
Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I did not know that this had occurred. I just tried to paste a userbox format on my page. I will correct this formatting error immediately. I am sorry to bother you. -Basketball123456 (talk) 21:29, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
- It's not a problem, and it wouldn't work anyway. I just found it confusing. Thanks. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 21:58, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] ICO Satellite Management now ICO Global Communications
Your reversion in the article ICO Global Communications has been undone. While I know you meant well, please understand that simply having a conflict of interest is not grounds enough for a reversion, especially when the edit is not really controversial (like the company's name). Please look at WP:COI#How not to handle COI. The scenario listed there pretty closely reflects what happened in this case (including the bitter complaint at the help desk). The corporate user was playing it straight, and we bit them for it. All's well that ends well in this case, but I wanted to let you know what happened if you should ever see this kind of thing again. -- ShinmaWa(talk) 19:53, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for picking me up on that. The user in question had previously added copyrighted and POV information (see the article's talk page), so I guess I jumped to a conclusion when I saw him editing it again. Thanks. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 20:30, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Neutral dialect
Hey there! While I have absolutely no objection to your change at Portal:Spaceflight/On This Day/25 May regarding the name of the Apollo lunar exploration efforts, I admit to a fascination with your Edit summary comment, "Neutral dialect." Is either way of describing the Apollo effort in some way biased or inflammatory? Is it an English/American thing? Does wikipedia cover this anywhere, in Article, Talk or Wikipedia namespaces? Thanks! (sdsds - talk) 00:59, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
-
- It is a similar issue to the Long March issue which we discussed last year (User_talk:GW_Simulations/Archive_2007#Variant_spellings). I have absolutely no problem with either dialect, but seeing as both are used, it sometimes looks a bit scrappy. It is always best to use a "neutral" dialect - ie. words which are spelled the same in both British and American dialect (your suggestion, I believe). I think that without realising it, I sometimes use words that are not in the American dialect, so if you notice any of those on the portal, feel free to change them to make them neutral. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 08:49, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Thor-Able vs Thor Able launches and me
I spent some time poking around that massive image collection at the commons trying to find something to do that would be useful. My physics teacher (mechanics) was also a lover of rockets and rocketry -- I have two quotes from him about the subject "A rocket without a payload isn't that big of a deal" (that is paraphrased) and "It is not the sound, it is that it goes up." One of our exams involved determining the angle of the launch of a water rocket in the classroom, heh -- these were very good days for me.
I have left a half done thing at the commons. I was trying to categorize each rocket image with where they were launched from and if they were carrying a probe or some gizzmo, put the launch images with the gizzmo. NASA helped this by their letters for launches that turn into numbers upon success. And also the rocket launches from the site they were launched from.
While attempting to do this, I became a little upset with my situation lately. I spent decades with younger people around me (college and younger via being at college and also the busboys when I was waiting on tables and bag boys at the store, local kids). I was thinking that as much as I was enjoying it, the task was overwhelming and there should be plenty of others who are infinitely more qualified who would get so much more out of doing what I had been doing.
I am kind of glad that I became more involved first at the image dump -- I don't think it is an image dump but a lot of people seem to treat it that way. The mess I made isn't that messy. -- carol (talk) 01:11, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
-
- And with regard to the hyphenation, either is correct, but in my experience it is more commonly hypenated than not. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 08:29, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, that one page is nice, I am not sure about the launch numbers though. I was talking more about how I tried to tackle all of the rockets and manage them via categories. I actually really appreciate that you wanted to move the launch article and not delete it. -- carol (talk) 09:05, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
- It's a very useful page. I've been working on simmilar pages (without illustrations) here. For example List of R-7 launches. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 09:27, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
- I stopped responding here to think of how much I do not know about the Russian space program. The shuttle departed for the last time from the MIR right in the zenith of where I was living -- it was a star trail photograph that I should have taken (and could have). There are many more enthusiastic and knowledgable amateurs than me. The secret enemy of the 50s, 60s and 70s -- they can say anything that they want to say happened now, can't they? I stopped and thought about your table.... -- carol (talk) 13:37, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
- And with regard to the hyphenation, either is correct, but in my experience it is more commonly hypenated than not. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 08:29, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
- The R-7 list is really incomplete - there have been several thousand launches. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 14:13, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Template:Infobox Spacecraft
That template is used on hundreds of pages and changes like this that break things affect all of those pages. It's not an article where a bad edit affects one page. So please at least drop a note on the talk page when making changes. Also please be sure to update the documentation when you edit the template. -Ravedave (talk) 17:35, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for your comment. It is not standard practice with regard to anything on Wikipedia to keep a log on the talk page of every single action and change made to a page. This is the function of the page history, and frankly I have no sympathy for anyone who expects others to go out of their way to make available information which they could easily find out through other means. Talk pages are for raising issues and proposing major changes. They are not for discussing every edit before it is made. If every minor edit had to be discussed and voted on, then nothing would ever get done. Sometimes it is more important to be bold and get on with editing. I am not sure how this edit "broke" the template, however I can assure you that I did check it after making this edit, and I could find no problem in any article that I checked. Finally, I am slightly curious as to why you seem to be critisising me for not discussing changes when you don't seem to have done so yourself, in a more recent edit. Please can you clarify this. Thanks. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 18:26, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
