User talk:DonFB

Hello, please feel free to comment on it.

My Help Question: The "My Watchlist" link at the top of the page has suddenly stopped working. I get a "not found" error page. This happens even though I am logged in. The other links all work: Talk, Preferences, Contributions (User Page not started). -- Don

I'm getting a 500 Error as well for my watchlist. It looks like there's some kind of internal server problem, and I'd expect it to be back up in a short time. Hoof Hearted 17:12, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aah, it's back up an running now. Let me know if you're still having a problem. Hoof Hearted 17:25, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From your edit history, you don't appear to be given to vandalism, but I'm puzzled by your recent deletion of six paragraphs of the Wright brothers article, with an edit summary that fails to explain. Would you care to offer an explanation, or was this done in error? TIA, -- Mwanner | Talk 15:45, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was a mistake. Thanks for fixing. - Don

No problem-- I've done the same sort of thing more than once. Cheers! -- Mwanner | Talk 17:25, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For the Wright Flying School, do you think we should list the people from the exhibition team at that article also? Do you have a comprehensive list of people from the school? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 20:37, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, I'm not sure if all the Team members were actually "enrolled" in the school. Perhaps the article could just mention their training, with a Wiki-link to the Team article. I have never seen a comprehensive list of Flight School trainees, but one of the books I've read says Orville compiled a list of about 115 people who trained there. It might require some "original research" to find that list. Below is a paragraph I've been planning to add to the Wright Brothers article. It could be used in the School article, maybe with a few wording changes just for variety:

Between 1910 and 1916 the Wright Company flying school, with instruction almost exclusively by Orville, trained 115 pilots, several of whom became famous, including Henry "Hap" Arnold, who rose to Five-Star General and commanded U.S. Army Air Forces in World War II and later served as first head of the newly-created U.S. Air Force; Calbaith Perry Rogers, who made the first coast-to-coast flight in 1911 (with many stops and crashes) in a Wright Model EX named the "Vin Fiz" after the sponsor's soft drink; and Eddie Stinson, founder of Stinson Aircraft. DonFB 20:56, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I dont think its "original research" because it would be reproducable, it would be "research from a primary source". Wikipedia uses tertiary sources. I prefer primary and secondary sources. I love using the US Census to get info on parents and siblings as a primary source, except people keep deleting the census images I upload. I also love making the bibliographies from the New York Times and the Washington Post with the free first paragraph you get in the archive. I dont post them anymore to Wikipedia since people tend to delete them too, Now I add them to pages.google.com and add a link: http://richard.arthur.norton.googlepages.com/bertacostabibliography. Have you also looked through Corbis? Lots of great images there on early aviators.

Do you know anything about the Wright Flyer Model B? There is no entry for it, and now there are 5 references to it.

The Model B was their follow-on to the original canard design. The elevator was in the tail, and the plane had wheels. I recall reading it was their most "popular" plane. They began making them in mid-1910. I followed a link, possibly from the Beachey article (I'm not sure anymore) and found two items of interest: beautiful color images of an advertisement for the Model B, with specs; and the list of 100-plus aviators who trained at the Wright School. The website is: EarlyAviators.com. The Model B ad is at http://www.earlyaviators.com/ewrico02.htm The list of Flight School trainees is at http://www.earlyaviators.com/ewbfplak.htm The website is quite good; plenty more browsing to do.

The table does have useful information, but it is not directly relevant to the Wright Brothers. That's why I moved it to the Wright Glider article, as it is directly applicable there. The WB article is very long, and need to be more focused. Dhaluza 04:06, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't favor cutting content. If you can cut out useless words without changing the meaning, fine. Otherwise, try to find a home for the content in a shorter related article. Please remove the table as it is now redundant. Dhaluza 22:51, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I thought I moved the table to the Wright Glider article, but now I see it's not there. Anyway, that is where it belongs. The WB article is a biographical, so the quantitative aspects of their work is really not relevant. It's enough to say the 1902 glider had longer wings than the 1901, it does not matter exactly how much--that can be covered in detail in the the WG article, which really needs expansion. So I suggest moving the table there.Dhaluza 02:41, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don, I see no reason to delete the novels simply because they are not available online. Printed versions are available. I will revert your edit. Wugo 13:34, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! I see the duplication. I've deleted paper books from the "online" Novels section. Thank you for the contribution Wugo 14:05, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Don, in the early days many of the pioneers had their own control arrangements. Didnt mean one system was better than the other. Actually the Curtiss was more cumbersome than the Wrights as the pilot had to fight with his shoulders the roll control. But there were many variants. Two others I can think of are the Antoinette and the Hanriot. But rewording of article is okay as it keeps the basic gist of what I was explaining about the two brothers separate control arrangements. thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Koplimek (talk • contribs) 03:10, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted your changes to the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_early_flying_machines. Discuss this on the discussion page of the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_early_flying_machines. See you there. (Roger J.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.249.177.39 (talk) 14:02, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don, Thank you for the "heads-up" note. Some of the wiki-bots are are a real pain. I updated the image summary page, and museum Talk page. Thank you, Lance....LanceBarber (talk) 03:18, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Update... my aol webpage has been updated with appropriate terminology, email sent to Wikimedia and a wiki administrator, and the admin. has cleared the problem. DONE. Chrislk02 happened to be on line and cleared it up. Thanks again. Lance..... LanceBarber (talk) 05:19, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For future reference, notes like that should go on the user talk, not the user page, but it's appreciated anyway! Katharineamy (talk) 13:40, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hi Don, you're exactly right. I thought I would condense info to keep article down to a bare minimum. But you're correct, historical accuracy should come first even if the article is a little longer. The subject of the Wrights and what they accomplished is important. Happy Writings. Koplimek (talk) 17:44, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I notice you've recently edited Alberto Santos-Dumont. I've requested a community GA reassessment and thought you might like to comment. Cheers.

Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Alberto Santos-Dumont/1

APK thinks he's ready for his closeup 13:23, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --Orange Mike | Talk 19:36, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Don, I too for years always believed the photos came from 1905 as I had read in some Time-Life book or other. But upon closer examination on the Wilbur and Orville Wright Timeline the identical facsimilies are posted in late 1903 newspapers dating these photos at their earliest from 1903 but certainly earlier than 1905. The Library of Congress is a great source for old photos but quite often they are in error on dates. The LOC will scratch onto the side of a photo that has litte reference, the date the Library receives the photo, not the actual date or year the photo was taken. With the Wrights the story is two-fold as they were secretive at this time and these were posed portraits that they themselves felt comfortable to release to the press. The two photos personally are incredible in the oblique reference they imply. The photos look like passport photos and in way 'they are'. The brothers in 1903 are about to embark on a historical journey to success at Kitty Hawk. Koplimek (talk) 01:09, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am currently searching for the book I read this from for a citation. Tried Google Books to see if info has been excerpted. Will make trip to Library. Im sure it's in one of the recent biographies or the 1980 series of Time-Life Aviation books. Thanks. Koplimek (talk) 18:45, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Don, actually it was Madame Bollee who was pregnant that summer of 1908. I had right info, wrong person. In 1920 Madame Bollee and her daughter Elizabeth paid a visit to Orville in Dayton to give him a sort memorial package & tribute to Wilbur. Both Wilbur and her husband were deceased by 1920. Some of this memorial of pictures, writings and Madame Bollee's own talks with Orville are in a newer publication by the Smithsonian's National Air & Space Museum. But Harry Combs delivered the gist of it in his 1979 book Kill Devil Hills. Elizabeth Bollee's possessed an inscription Wilbur wrote to her on it: To Elizabeth, the little girl whose bright eyes opened upon this grand world when my flights in France had their beginning. Koplimek (talk) 00:35, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please make a definition for the public what is the difference between Hop and Flight. Are you telling me that Traian Vuia jumped with one leg 20 meters in the air one meter carrying some strange stuff in his back? I tough that Mike Powell (athlete)( by the way I'm not sure any longer if I should thrust this source, I mean Wikipedia) had the world record with only 8.95 meters. How could he beat Traian Vuia's record? --Lsorin (talk) 07:16, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looking over the talk page I see I have at times treated you less well than Wikipedia's guidelines recommend. I'll try to be more polite to you in future.Romaniantruths (talk) 03:38, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you check List of fatalities from aviation accidents and make sure I have it right, I forgot about Johnstone, even though I started his article. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 04:05, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for supplying a third opinion on the BBC Introducing content. However, you've misunderstood the issue. There is no dispute about the content on the dispute between the BBC and Amazing Tunes. What is in dispute is the following paragraph which has nothing to do with Amazing Tunes. Here, it is my view, an IP editor is conducting their own synthesis to highlight what they believe is a key point of "BBC Introducing" licensing terms that everyone should know about (and they personally have a problem with). That is why you were unclear about its relevance. It has no relevance to anything. It has been cherry-picked out of three separate cites, combined and highlighted to suit the point the editor is making. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 22:01, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks from me also. I've added further comments to the BBC Introducing discussion page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.86.115.205 (talk) 23:27, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm a user of the Italian Wikipedia. We're working hard on our own Wright Flyer article, and I wondered if you could help us by providing the source of the following quotation by Wilbur Wright, which you reported in the discussion page of the Flyer article: "While the new machine lifts at a speed of about 23 miles [per hour], it is only after the speed reaches 27 or 28 miles that the resistance falls below the thrust. We have found it practically impossible to reach a higher speed than about 24 miles on a track of available length...."

Thanks a lot, and sorry for any mistakes in my English --MLWatts (talk) 14:23, 31 May 2011 (UTC) (Wait, this is my actual signature: MLWatts (msg). I guess it's better if you reply on the Italian talk page, even if in English of course. Thanks again)[reply]

Thank you very much, I'm sure this is going to help us considerably. Best regards, --MLWatts (talk) 13:01, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

About the Gustave Whitehead article:

DonFB: You refer to two documents as sources for your statement that the article in Bridgeport Herald lacked a byline. But it is mentioned nowhere in any of these documents that the article was "unsigned" or "lacked a byline"

http://www.wright-brothers.org/History_Wing/History_of_the_Airplane/Who_Was_First/Gustav_Whitehead/Whitehead_Articles.htm#herald

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=c2wmAAAAIBAJ&sjid=wf8FAAAAIBAJ&pg=6334,3463341&dq=gustave+whitehead&hl=en

Please remove these statements, as you have no source for your statements, only your own original research, and you know that that is not allowed in wikipedia.Roger491127 (talk) 12:18, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have now added the formulation: "Some source documents mention the article in the Bridgeport Herald of 18 August 1901 without naming the author, some source documents say that the author was (Richard) Dick Howell." to the section Witnesses. I hope this will be accepted as a replacement for the formulations "unsigned" "The article lacked a byline" and "Widely attributed to Dick Howell". This formulation does not require any original research and is based on a large number of source documents. I know that you as well as I have read many source documents and you know that this statement is true. If you like we can add 10 source documents as references to this statement. Roger491127 (talk) 15:46, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have posted a request for help at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research/Noticeboard#Gustave_Whitehead Roger491127 (talk) 04:27, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the section heading written by Roger491127 on this page. It's mistaken and violates Wikipedia guidelines against including a user name in Talk page headings. DonFB (talk) 05:56, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Copied from this noticeboard:

But now, when Binksternet has given DonFB a source document he can use, there is no meaning in discussing this issue further, so I withdraw this request for help. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Gustave_Whitehead#Original_Research for more details. Roger491127 (talk) 06:05, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello, DonFB. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Help desk.
Message added SPhilbrick(Talk) 13:02, 26 May 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

never mind, missed that John was suggesting same thing.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 13:04, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Don, I read somewhere that Wilbur's Indiana High School , over a hundred years later, presented him posthumously with the diploma he earned. In honor of the school's most famous attendee. So in the long run he DID get his diploma. Koplimek (talk) 13:18, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wilbur was awarded the diploma on April 16, 1994, his 127th birthday.(Wayne County Indiana Community Network)

waynenet.org(scroll down to Wilbur Wright)

In 1995 the Richmond High School , school board, named Wilbur a distinguished alumnus posthumously

"The Wright Way to Lead" article (in PDF) . Koplimek (talk) 23:24, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Deborah Hersman, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page President Bush (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:28, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd found it here under her "Biographical Information" section. Therequiembellishere (talk) 18:19, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DonFB, your constant revisions of the History by Contract page show in some cases that you are not reporting facts (as with the exact format of the Wright label), and in other cases attempting, by rewriting things in an insidious and negative manner without citations from factual sources, seemingly to subvert the current information being presented. For instance, you remove facts and substitute innuendo. I ask that you refrain from doing so. I have reported this to Wikipedia to look into. AviationHist1 (talk) 00:27, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DonFB, the neutral ground is that Jane's has accepted Whitehead as first to fly. The Contract exists as it is. Petulant revisions regarding why you think Jane's accepted Whitehead are not appropriate. I think you need to read the link that shows WHY Jane's accepted Whitehead and leave it at that. Editorializing is not appropriate. AviationHist1 (talk) 00:46, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello DonFB. I'd be happy to check this news article for you. While I can't add a full translation of two paragraphs to Wikipedia because that would be a massive copyright infringement, I can skim the content of that news piece for any valuable additions to our Wikipedia articles. So please let me know the news url and which Wikipedia article you'd like to improve with that. De728631 (talk) 12:50, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my talk page for a replies to your statement. De728631 (talk) 19:14, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DonFB. You have new messages at De728631's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

EarwigBot operator / talk 15:36, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The sources clearly state that there is no documentary evidence. Even the L'Aerophile article makes this clear. Furthermore the first footnote in the article clearly states that SOME accounts credit this flight, but does not itself credit it. This is not consistent with saying that such a flight definitely happened. Saying later that it definitely happened is contradictory.

Even if you haven't read the sources that make clear that the claim in question is based on no documentary evidence, that is no excuse for saying it definitely happened in contradiction of a reliable source saying that only some sources make this claim. Ion G Nemes (talk) 04:07, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

==Your reversions at the vuia page. ==

That the vuia 1 never flew is accepted by aviation historians. It only made a few short hops. You know that, so why did you delete the truth? That other planes achieved longer hops before vuia is accepted by aviation historians. You also know that, so why did you delete the truth? That the article from the 1909 flight journal credits him with no flights before Oct 8 is also true. You can read the reference by clicking on it, so unless you refuse to read it you will see that it is also true. So why are you systematically deleting the truth?

The article NOW says that he was the first man to ever make a hop with a wheeled aircraft. You know this to be untrue, but will probably leave it there because for some reason you want to propagate this fiction about vuia. I will, of course, change all these things back because this is supposed to be about reliable sources, not your own personal need to perpetrate a fictional account of history.Ion G Nemes (talk) 05:04, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And exactly WHY do you only revert my edits, and not the other edits on the page you disagree with? I know you're watching that page, but when Binksternet or Longtone revert the statements that only some sources credit him with a march 18th flight, you leave it there. In fact, it says that right now. Just what the hell is your problem?Ion G Nemes (talk) 05:11, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Alberto Santos-Dumont may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• In his homeland, Brazil, Santos-Dumont is a national hero, having his name written in [[Pantheon of Fatherland and Freedom, Tancredo Neves|Brazilian Hero Panthéon]. He is credited in
• Airships'']. London, G. Richards, 1904 hos / Follow Your Dreams: The Story of Alberto Santos Dumont)'', (bilingual, Portuguese/English). Rio de Janeiro: Prometheus Press, 2005. ISBN 978-85-99240-02-1.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:51, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Otis Wright (born 25 February 1870 Dayton, Ohio, died 9 March 1870 Dayton, Ohio) Ida Wright (born 25 February 1870 Dayton, Ohio, died 14 March 1870 Dayton, Ohio)

In 1871, the family moved to Dayton, Ohio, where Susan gave birth to her fourth and fifth children, twins Otis and Ida, who died soon after birth.

twins born in 1870 in Dayton, THEN the family moved to Dayton in 1871 ??? is this correct?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.187.93.16 (talk) 14:08, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not correct, fixed; thanks for noticing. DonFB (talk) 21:47, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Good to see it corrected. I found some more information - According to the book "The Bishops Boys" page #45 (reference #5 on the Milton Wright wikipedia page) "The wright family came to Dayton in June 1869, immediately after Milton's election as editor of the Religious Telescope. They rented a house on Third Street until November of that year,...." ---the way the book reads, I suspect that this info came right out of Milton Wright's diary. The way you corrected the page, I don't think any changes are necessary - I just thought you might like to know. Thanks

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) 13:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your correction on Everest (2015 film). When I reverted the edit, the bogus wikilink Oded sofer was showing on my screen as the version that I was reverting from. I am not sure what was happening, but I am glad you caught it. Peaceray (talk) 18:30, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To You and Yours!

FWiW Bzuk (talk) 15:57, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I made that edit in response to an editor who removed any mention of Brazil...I thought that Brazilians should be mentioned. Your edit effectively restored the status quo. Cheers.TheLongTone (talk) 13:07, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I like that heading title. DonFB (talk) 20:11, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Eritrea. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Diesel engine. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Han Chinese. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Cold War II. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Diego Maradona. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Female genital mutilation. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DonFB. 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]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Fidel Castro. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Traian Vuia's flight described ad "Power Hops" although the wording is not used in similar achievements from other pioneers of flight". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 16 December 2016.

The request for formal mediation concerning Traian Vuia's flight described ad "Power Hops" although the wording is not used in similar achievements from other pioneers of flight, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Disruptive editing by Florinbaiduc on Romanian aviation history. Thank you. Andy Dingley (talk) 02:12, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:New York. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to wish you a very merry Christmas and a very happy New Year. Soham321 (talk) 21:28, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 22:01, 26 December 2016 (UTC) [reply]

Thanks for adding the WLOB logo to the infobox, Don. But that leaves me with three questions...

--How did you get past the copyright deletion? --How did you crop only part of a webpage's logo and size it correctly for the infobox? --Why didn't it take you an hour to figure out how to get the logo from the webpage to the infobox?

I suppose there are logical answers to all these questions. But it would take a long time to explain it all to me. And you'd probably say to yourself these are things I have to learn on my own, through trial and error, trying to make sense of the Wikipedia tutorials.

Steve1reg (talk) 01:28, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Disputed status of Gibraltar. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Thanks alot for the info and the well wishes, DonFB. I'm new at this, so... hopefully this star helps you out a bit. :) Sincerely, Mike Beerley Mike Beerley (talk) 07:23, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please, help me polish the Czech Chemical Society and Association of Czech Chemical Societies pages to meet the wikipedia standards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by R Liboska (talk • contribs) 12:37, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've red that guidelines and I am still sure, that the page of the Czech Chemical Society should not be deleted. It is the same category as e.g. Hungarian or Duch or any other Chemical Society which have Wikipedia pages. R Liboska (talk) 13:36, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So, finally the page was deleted -for no reason (G11 ??? wtf). Will never donate a dime to Wikipedia. No help, just an arrogance. R Liboska (talk) 14:53, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Philip J. Cohen. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have proposed this change.

They need different pages. Industry standard is to have a separate page for discography. They do not need to merge.

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Katherine Johnson. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Germany. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Forest Lawn Memorial Park (Glendale). Legobot (talk) 04:25, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Andrew II of Hungary. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Winston E. Willis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Neutral Point of View. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:49, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.

Mz7 (talk) 17:45, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jewish diaspora. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Blue Army (Poland). Legobot (talk) 04:25, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:First Cameron ministry. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Winnipeg. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:McMahon–Hussein Correspondence. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Middlebury, Connecticut. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of elevation extremes by country. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Whataboutism. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Blue Sky with a White Sun. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Syrian Civil War. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:David Ferrie. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Historicity of Jesus. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Iyoki Station. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Mausoleum of Abu Huraira. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2017 Las Vegas shooting. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DonFB, Greetings. The NavSource site is going to be correcting this Battle credits issue in the immediate future. I submit my correspondence with their Webmaster below. They based their Battle Credits assessment on the 1953 version of the NAVPERS publication on the topic. But there are occasional and understandable errors in that. The Samuel Eliot Morison's 15 Volume "History of U.S. Naval Operations in WWII" would support this correction, as would the most definitive work on the U.S. Asiatic Fleet at the beginning of WWII: "The Fleet The Gods Forgot".

If you prefer waiting for NavSource's correction, that is fine. I was just doing this because I noticed it, and was just moving on. One of those "Do it while you're thinking about it" sort of things. If you care to take the initiative from here and make the actual correction on the USS Langley's page, then please feel free. I am still a newby at making any serious corrections such as graphics. Doubtless an image of the Pacific Theater Ribbon with two bronze stars can be found on NavSource for another ship, and maybe just copied over. At some point this will have to be done anyway.

But I thank you for noticing, and for your diligence for sourced accuracy. Accuracy here is my goal as well, even if it means starting by correcting a source error. Anyone who pays ANY attention to these mostly forgotten ships and men is appreciated. Here's my correspondence with NavSource:

• On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 3:01 AM, Matt Underwood <mluklu@yahoo.com> wrote:

Greetings, It has occurred to me that your page on the USS Langley (CV-1 / AV-3) has an omission. The Langley earned two battle stars on its Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Streamer. One for the Philippine Islands Operation December 8, 1941 - May 6, 1942; and one for Netherlands East Indies Engagements January 23 - February 27, 1942. Thanks you for correcting this as soon as possible. The battle record of our very first Fleet Carrier was short and bitter, but she did the best she could under the circumstances, and must be remembered as well as we can. Thanks again. Matt Underwood

• From: Fabio Peña <carrierinfo@gmail.com>

To: Matt Underwood <mluklu@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2017 10:19 AM Subject: Re: USS Langley (CV-1 / AV-3) Matt, Thank you very much for contacting NavSource. The official Navy and Marine Corps Awards Manual (NAVPERS 15,790, Rev. 1953) does not list Langley (AV-3), but it seems reasonable that she should have been awarded both stars. I'll update the page as soon as possible. Thanks again. Fair winds & following seas, Fabio Peña Manager, Aircraft Carrier & Escort Carrier Archives NavSource (http://www.navsource.org)

• On Thurs, Nov 16, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Matt Underwood <mluklu@yahoo.com> wrote:

Thanks, Fabio. I had assumed it was an official source screw-up. All Asiatic Fleet ships from 8 Dec 1941 onward would automatically qualify for the Philippine Islands Operations star; and those who survived long enough to be part of ABDAFLOAT or be operating alone in NEI waters---perhaps making their way to Australia under orders but separated and with crippled communications ability---would have automatically qualified for the NEI Engagements star. Even the loner ships and surviving VP squadron planes were in a continual fight as they headed south, as vividly told in such first-hand works like "The Fleet The Gods Forgot" and so forth. I wonder how many more omissions there are in NAVPERS printed sources? I know the Army's DA PAM 672-1, 1961, has omissions---some of which are explained, and others which were errors. Given the billions of words of data these historians had to work through, these are easy errors to forgive, but sometimes not as easy to rectify. I believe your site provides a tremendous resource, and also serves to intervene in setting the record straight in some instances such as this. I have no doubt that the last surviving veterans of these harsh and now obscure campaigns would thank you for vindicating these two stars on their PTO campaign ribbons that they have worn with honor these 75 years. I believe their shipmates who are still on duty would also thank you. And I believe that all members of NAVPERS would thank you as well. I know I am grateful. Thanks again! Matt Underwood

Mluklu7 (talk) 16:51, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Continent. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DonFB. 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]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ireland. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

...to you and yours, from the Great White North! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 22:50, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Balkans. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rivers. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Battle of Mosul (2016–2017). Legobot (talk) 04:25, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Iranian Majlis. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Kingdom of France. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Matthew Island and Hunter Island. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Husan. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:WFDD radio logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:37, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of English monarchs. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Anatolia. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Alaska. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Theosophy (Blavatskian). Legobot (talk) 04:24, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Żegota. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:March 1947 martial law in Mandatory Palestine. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DonFB, I'm so sorry if this is not the right way to ask but I seen you make some edits i the Tham Luang cave rescue article, you seem like you know what you are doing.

I'm having trouble with this edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tham_Luang_cave_rescue&diff=850040372&oldid=850040248

I put the source "washingtonpost" in my edit details but I cant figure out how to put it in the article, so it has that little number next to it with the link. Any help? I tried it in preview and broke the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Historyguy1966 (talk • contribs) 05:57, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you got it working now. It's good information, but needs a little bit of editing for brevity and to fix "abandon-->abandoned". DonFB (talk)

You reverted my most recent edit that I thought was a typo and in the edit summary, you said “anatomy.” What does that mean? HorsesARENice^{Ride me to my talk page} 18:30, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Thigh" is part of human anatomy. "Thy" is an old-fashioned form of speaking, which means "your". DonFB (talk) 05:02, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Political views of American academics. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2016 in aviation. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Thanks for moving it to the correct section. However, please note that I am not trying to promote anything - I have nothing to gain. Just like to share the documentary with others who may be interested but are not be aware such a documentary exists.Jjaey (talk) 11:57, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

All right. It was written in a promotional style, but glad you're ok with location in External Links. DonFB (talk) 19:38, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Saudi Arabia. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Flag of Australia. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Hamas. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rivers. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DonFB. 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]

Hello, DonFB. 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]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2019 Japanese imperial transition. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for clarifying the chronology of 2019 Boeing 737 MAX groundings for me. I got confused by the first article I read on this subject. Aceus0shrifter (talk) 02:58, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks much. DonFB (talk) 03:30, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of surviving Messerschmitt Bf 109s. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Germanic peoples. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Solomon's Pools. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think your point is well taken, namely that Lemme statement is equivocal and vague. Since it adds confusion to that part of the article, I recommend you remove it entirely. Then, if another editor thinks that idea should be returned to that section, he should ensure any similar statement is very clear, relevant and with all equivocation filtered out. EditorASC (talk) 21:42, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Since I've been trying to guide/help Aron, I'm reluctant to nuke it. Presumably, he's going to see message and will make improvement, which is needed. DonFB (talk) 21:46, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Don, regarding your edit here, you provided no indication of what sources might have been copied. Could you please rectify that so I can investigate the matter? Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 22:25, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I asked our resident copyvio guru, User:Diannaa, about this, and she found more copyvios, and has removed them. Good catch! - BilCat (talk) 23:25, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Yep, I've seen her work a lot--a fount of knowledge and skill in that area. I guess I was sort of hoping she'd get an alert about a new tag; user bell-ring plus tag prolly preferable. DonFB (talk) 23:39, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki-collaboration at its best. - BilCat (talk) 00:29, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:1948 United States presidential election. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Don, Thanks for keeping the article up to scratch, but you are close to an editwar with Marc and need to stand back for a bit. If you lay off the ping-pong reversion, I will be happy to step in as needed next time. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 08:22, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

Seriously dude, you should refrain from reverting just because you are unconvinced. We had a tacit rule not to cite lead facts but everyone has an ambiguous memory of what's on the page already. You rarely introduce content, you merely react to your watch list by undoing and reverting. Shencypeter (talk) 16:42, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Falun Gong. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

I very much appreciated when you collected the relevant guideline and the policy at the start of the Move request discussion. It's now in review phase, which progresses quickly and hilariously. It was time for me to make some summaries of the present state, that might interest you:

• Review, summary of arguments: Wikipedia:Move_review/Log/2019_June#Summary1
• Review, reason to review the close: Wikipedia:Move_review/Log/2019_June#Summary2
• Refutation of faulty opposing arguments: User:Aron_Manning/737_Max_RM — see the lines starting with " Note:" —Aron M🍂 (🛄📤) 07:46, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of wars involving the United States. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately I had to revert your well-intentioned edits to the Tidal locking article because they are not quite correct, as a read-though should have made clear. Please read section 3.3 of Heller et al. (2011), particularly section 3.3 where it states, "A widely spread misapprehension is that a tidally locked body permanently turns one side to its host". Thank you. Praemonitus (talk) 21:54, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I had the idea to add a clause to your edits explaining this is a "special case" of tidal locking. Other examples can be found in astronomical papers, for example. If you don't agree then please take it to the talk page so we can hash it out. Praemonitus (talk) 22:34, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Schoharie limousine crash. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You are about to triple-revert. Is my writing really that inferior, or do you just take pride in what you do to other people's text? You are persistently disregarding other people's calls to make the lead shorter and less redundant. It has become all encompassing, but to me it has been elongated with unrelated subjects in lengthy paragraphs. Shencypeter (talk) 08:22, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your writing endeavors to be helpful, but not all of it is. The lede should present the basic facts in a clear straightforward unambiguous manner. Multiple times other editors besides myself have corrected some of your edits in the lede to restore clarity. A well-referenced article does not need several editorial explanatory footnotes in the lede. Marc has tried to shorten the lede with big cuts, but your frequent changes gradually lengthen it again. An occasional tweak to the lede could be helpful, but your continual top to bottom rewrites are not productive. DonFB (talk) 08:51, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your thoughts, @DonFB:. There is much dispute over what is to be emphasized. There was too much weight on on AoA sensor being a SPoF (and this fact is reiterated on MCAS page), relative to other analysis details, like simulator, microprocessor, or the EASA autopilot directive, so I contributed to the full list and Pierre5018 tried to emphasize the fact that the system was changed after the analysis. I feel compelled to edit out some awkward phrasings (e.g. "The FAA identified a new issue, found by Boeing,"), and failed to understand why (you other editors) would reinvent new terms for an "AoA disagree" light, calling it conflict (e.g. a term used for collision avoidance) or discrepancy. I appreciate your rephrasing that retain introduced information, although I may not agree with your emphasis of first airline and first regulator in two different sentences -- just as you don't agree that the "FAA grounded after days of defending the aircraft." -- all efforts to concisely represent information. Such details could be expanded in consecutive order in the Groundings section (where the Trump tweet now lives), thus the pslink. Not all edits are well received, I know, and I apologize for venting out frustrations in the editing remarks Shencypeter (talk) 03:08, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Constantinople. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Kirkland & Ellis. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Great Famine of 1876–1878. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I've added a restoration, and also pointed out the text on the image that shows the movies were in colour. Could you have another look? Cheers! Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.9% of all FPs} 04:01, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:NYC Pride March. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Sturmabteilung. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the feedback, but an opinion would have been appreciated even more. Thanks. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:45, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Fred Hampton. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:History of Christianity. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:International Brigades. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 6 November 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) 00:07, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Maps. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The PBS logo is non-free; you should change the licensing info and add a fair use rationale. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 04:38, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Other logos in tv articles all seem to be public domain, non-copyrightable. Difference? DonFB (talk) 04:41, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@DonFB: Many of those logos are non-free as well. One user in particular, Many Radiator, uploads copyrighted logos on Commons and claims them as his "own work." Mvcg66b3r (talk) 04:50, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll change licensing to be abundantly cautious. DonFB (talk) 04:58, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I put "citation needed" on the statement "Boeing claims that MCAS is not an anti-stall system." You removed this with the comment "Boeing statement of MCAS purpose is referenced in 'MCAS's role in the accidents' subsection of the 'Introduction' section."

That is not a citation. Skepticalgiraffe (talk) 21:21, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake; I specified the wrong section where the reference is located. It is in the first sentence of the subsection, "Purpose of MCAS and the stabilizer trim system' in the Introduction section. DonFB (talk) 00:21, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: References are not required in the Lead section if the material is cited in the body of the article. However, you are free to copy the reference into the Lead section, if desired. DonFB (talk) 00:26, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You undid my edit in which I added a link to the Netflix series "The Pharmacist" to the article about Purdue Pharma. Why do you consider "The Pharmacist" to not be a documentary? why do you consider it to be spammy? — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Link (talk • contribs) 04:29, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, insufficiently checked; thought it was a mini-series drama. Reverted my edit, removed "rampant" (used in the network's blurb) to make description more neutral. DonFB (talk) 05:48, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. After I added the link I wondered about the neutrality of the description, which I more or less copied from the Netflix page for the documentary. John Link (talk) 18:13, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

A community discussion has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).
The specific details of these sanctions are described here.

Broadly, general sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Doug Weller talk 15:40, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:No-go area on a request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. Sent at 08:28, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:First Jordan Hydro-Electric Power House on a request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. Sent at 08:42, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please see: Talk:Santa Claus#RfC about the wording lead section of the article. Félix An (talk) 16:03, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:31, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:White Flags on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 06:31, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:People's Mujahedin of Iran on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:30, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Hungary in World War II on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:31, 12 October 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) 01:32, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is an active discussion on the talk page ~ do you think you might want to discuss it before you made your changes? Not saying your changes do not improve the article but you know, discussion is nice I have reverted all your edits, lets talk. By the way nice to meet you! ~mitch~ (talk) 01:29, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

	Nice to meet you ~
	By the way Nice to Meet you ~ ~mitch~ (talk) 01:37, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:PragerU on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:31, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Crusading on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 08:30, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Buffalo, New York on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:31, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I started a discussion about time zone shifts beeing routine calculation: Wikipedia talk:No original research Schrauber5 (talk) 08:28, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notice. I've also posted a reply to latest comments on the Ingenuity talk page. DonFB (talk) 08:36, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with that, except the one point that I consider time shift by adding Sols is routine calculation. And (?) that the Mars time given in the images is a realiable source. Schrauber5 (talk) 09:36, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but that reliable time is only a starting point, and most readers, I believe, do not know what steps to take from that point to get the final result. That means they are not able to verify that the information shown is correct. DonFB (talk) 09:49, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can I ask that you engage the discussion on the talk page. I'm a psychologist. The Flying Monkey is not a psychology concept, formal or popular. Something needs to be done about the article. I'm open to anything reasonable. Thanks Wiki-psyc (talk) 20:01, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:B-segment on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 04:32, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, DonFB! As I see you are heavily involved in improving references in the Ingenuity article. The list of links I've just posted on the talk page of that article may be a kind of help in rearranging references. "Cutting the descriptive tails" in some URL's helps me much to follow visually the contents of 'cite web' templates. Yours, Cherurbino (talk) 06:52, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for compiling all of that. Nasa seems to want to spread around their helicopter info at multiple subpages...can get somewhat confusing. DonFB (talk) 08:16, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Shencypeter (talk) 16:24, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Shencypeter (talk) 00:53, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Hispaniola on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:31, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey DonFB, earlier I posted an answer to your message on my talk page but I just wanted to confirm that I fixed the Infobox. One important thing though, the parameter is now lowercased and not capitalized (distance_flown_or_driven_at_destination). Best, --Deansfa (talk) 14:30, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Afghanistan on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 7 September 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) 00:13, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

	Thx
	This is LightningCow and thanks for just greeting me to Wikipedia :) Thanks :) LightningCow (talk) 11:42, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Crusades on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:31, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Mass killings under communist regimes on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:31, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Banaras Hindu University on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:31, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, saw your edits at the Webb telescope (although I haven't gone through them). Just wanted to mention that 'Moon, when referring to Earth's Moon, is uppercased on Wikipedia as a proper name. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 10:25, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, thanks for noting that, and for clarification on Webb's tenure, and for dropping launch clock time--I retained it as "courtesy", but agree it's not needed there. DonFB (talk) 11:44, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Webb rules (or something). Thanks for your edits, and you're welcome. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:17, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Jeffrey Dahmer on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:30, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Francisco Franco on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:31, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Anti-Armenian sentiment in Azerbaijan on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:30, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

List of flights by Ingenuity helicopter on Mars, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as List-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Artem.G (talk) 06:05, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:North Carolina on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:30, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Hypothetical Axis victory in World War II on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:30, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Robert E. Poli, PATCO union president.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:36, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:July–August 2022 United States floods on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:30, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Horn of Africa on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 09:30, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Reactions to the death of Elizabeth II on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:30, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have got involved in an epic struggle regarding Gustave Whitehead, and pobably need somethin stronger than a beer TheLongTone (talk) 13:52, 15 November 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) 00:34, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Métis on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:30, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Template talk:Infobox country on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:30, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Scythians on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:30, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Could you clarify why my edit on the Federal Aviation Administration article is considered mischief (even if my edit is clearly wrong, please assume good faith instead of calling it mischief)? While I'm not familiar with the topic, it seems to me that the history section is in great need of proper citations, with entire subsections going unreferenced. In particular, the Background, Formation, and 1960s reorganization subsections are completely unreferenced, and it seems the 1970s and deregulation subsection probably needs some too. TheGEICOgecko (talk) 07:00, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that in multiple places in the article, you substituted "Florida man" for mentions of President Trump, including in a NY Times reference. DonFB (talk) 07:02, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my God, I didn't realize that at all, I have a Daily Show extension that replaces "Donald Trump" with "Florida Man", but it should only be while reading text and I checked to be sure it did not make that change when I edited, but I guess I was mistaken, and have removed the plugin. Sorry about the confusion. TheGEICOgecko (talk) 15:41, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, understand. DonFB (talk) 21:27, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

I need help to understand a template. Thanks. DonFB (talk) 06:22, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You haven't asked a question, really. What template? What don't you understand? — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:52, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for responding. This topic has a couple of twists and turns. My question relates to a template that calculates Earth UTC time based on the local time on Mars of each new flight of NASA's helicopter Ingenuity. Currently, the template is unofficial, but is being used for the purpose. At present, it is the only source for UTC time for the majority of flights, but the information it creates is not verifiable, because the template is no longer documented in template space. It was briefly visible, but was removed after a deletion discussion. It was created by another user, who now seems to not want to promote it, but does not mind if I do. I was not aware of the deletion discussion at the time; I believe it should not have been removed. Finally, although it seems to produce correct results (by comparison with a few officially published UTC times by NASA and another reliable source), I do not fully understand its arithmetic steps and want to gain such understanding before I "adopt" it and move it into template space. As you will see, it probably needs some consolidation. For the moment, I have put "xxx" for name of the user who wrote it.

Template "Mars2020time" (produces result in "unfriendly" format):

{{User:xxx/Marstime|Sol_ref=232|Mars_time_ref=04:01:31|UTC_ref=2021-10-14 17:36:41|Sol={{{Sol}}}|Mars_time={{{Mars_time}}} }}

It appears to "call" the template below:

"Marstime":

{{#time:c| @{{#expr: ({{#time: U | {{{UTC_ref}}} }} + (({{{Sol}}}-{{{Sol_ref}}})*24*3600 + {{#time: U | 1970-01-01 {{{Mars_time}}} }} - {{#time: U | 1970-01-01 {{{Mars_time_ref}}} }})*1.02749125) round 0 }}}}

Below is a second version that produces result in reader friendly format:

Template "testMars2020time":

{{User:xxx/testMarstime|Sol_ref=232|Mars_time_ref=04:01:31|UTC_ref=2021-10-14 17:36:41|Sol={{{Sol}}}|Mars_time={{{Mars_time}}} }}

It appears to "call" the template below:

{{#time: F d, Y \a\t G:i (e)| @{{#expr: ({{#time: U | {{{UTC_ref}}} }} + (({{{Sol}}}-{{{Sol_ref}}})*24*3600 + ({{#time: U | 1970-01-01 {{{Mars_time}}} }} - {{#time: U | 1970-01-01 {{{Mars_time_ref}}} }}))*1.02749125) round 0 }} }}

I understand the general principles, but am not yet able to discern precisely what the calculations are. I am hoping to get a very clear plain English step by step description of the calculations and an explanation why the template(s) work to give UTC Earth time.

The following is an explanation given by the template author:

Verbose explanation

The idea is to have a reference event were Earth time and Mars time are given (parameter marked with _ref) and then calculate the difference to the requested time and multiply it with the ratio of the scale see Proportionality (mathematics)

Earth reference is the time of the reference event in Earth time

Sol difference is the difference of the reference Sol number from the given Sol number. When the Sol reference was Sol 3 and template shall be used for an event at Sol 5 the sol difference = 5 - 3 = 2

1 Sol / 1 day: one Sol_(day_on_Mars) has a duration of 24:39:35.244, one day has the duration of 24:00:00. A division results in the value 1.02749125

Time difference: is the difference of the reference Mars time from the given Mars time . When the reference Mars time was 12:35 and template shall be used for an event time of 12:37 time difference = 12:37-12:35 = 00:02. The time difference is also multiped with a scale ratio since the length of a Mars second is stretched compared to an earth second, so that a Mars sol also consists of 24h of 60 minutes consisting also of 60 seconds.

DonFB (talk) 07:42, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As best I can tell, the template at User:Schrauber5/Marstime is using the normal earthly time parsing functions to handle conversions between just seconds and time expressed as days, hours, minutes, seconds. Adjusting the seconds number by the day-length ratio, which is remarkably close to 1.0, lets the rest of the conversions proceed normally. My guess is that this helps the NASA people keep track of when it's "daytime" at the landing site on Mars in a way that seems more natural than having to do some more complicated calculation or consulting a "Mars clock". The explanation at User:Schrauber5/Marstime/doc seems pretty good. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:39, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your input. DonFB (talk) 06:42, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Khartoum Resolution and Talk:Kosovo on "History and geography" request for comments. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:36, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:44, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have violated the sanction placed on the article, details of which are located on the talk page and an edit notice visible when editing the article. Please self-revert this edit. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:44, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A fanatical resistance to even the slightest "unqualified" quotation from a (Republican/conservative/MAGA) politician in these articles is not particularly helpful, and only increases my perception of a misguided groupthink effort to spin these articles in a particular political direction. That's a personal attack and bad faith. I invite you to strike and withdraw. Andre🚐 19:18, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I regard it as a clinical observation of a particular editing style that I see around these articles. DonFB (talk) 05:12, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Doubling down, then? Interesting choice. Well, consider that I tried to engage civilly in good faith. Andre🚐 06:08, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've been doing the same (since our little spat earlier), just a bit more bluntly than usual. DonFB (talk) 06:35, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, no, your tendentious rants and wild accusations of bias without evidence are casting aspersions and are sanctionable, so cut it out or I'll take you to AE or ANI to report you for same. Thanks. Andre🚐 06:37, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, they are rants, but reasoned just the same. I haven't kept a list of the comments I've seen that revealed political bias, but I have seen numerous by different editors; perhaps it's time to start taking names, so to speak, in order to have evidence if needed, if you saddle up again and take me to a dramah board or elsewhere. DonFB (talk) 07:11, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you mean by that, but attacking editors for calling Marjorie Taylor Greene Mrs. Jewish Space Laser is extremely silly since it's the sound bite she's most well-known for. And some of us do find amplifying the message of antisemitic politicians to be rather distasteful and personal. Still, none of that is an excuse to allege bias or make grandstanding soapbox rants untethered from anything constructive whatsoever. So go ahead and take down your names and evidence. And ensure that you do not engage in such grandstanding casting of WP:ASPERSIONS, WP:RGW and attacking editors which is a WP:NPA violation. Good night to you. Andre🚐 07:32, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment perfectly illustrates what I'm talking about: "some of us do find amplifying the message of antisemitic politicians to be rather distasteful and personal". Grin and bear it. MTG is a public figure who speaks publicly. As an editor, taking personal offense at her remarks does not constitute a criterion used by this encyclopedia for deciding what, or what not, to write about her. In the context of writing and editing material that should be neutral, "taking offense" is a form of demonstrating bias. If your personal offense over someone's political speech (that other citizens find thrilling) influences how your write or edit an article, you are violating NPOV. So, I'll put your name on the list of people whose Talk page comments show bias regarding politics. DonFB (talk) 07:55, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think you misunderstand me, quite badly. As you well know, WP:V: Verifiability does not guarantee inclusion. The point of my comment was not that we should exclude MTG's false statements because they are distasteful. We do not include them because there is a consensus that they are not informative. Additionally, unsubstantiated claims violate WP:BLP. Ask yourself whether the source is reliable; whether the material is being presented as true; and whether, even if true, it is relevant to a disinterested article about the subject Additionally, MTG is a WP:FRINGE actor. She should not be afforded WP:UNDUE weight, and in many cases none at all for her outlandish claims. We do not uncritically amplify propaganda and misinformation here. Again, not based on my personal opinion, but based on what reliable sources say, who have universally described Greene as a conspiracy theorist. I never said a word about "taking offense." The only issue is your unevidenced allegation of bias which you have continued to triple down on. Andre🚐 08:54, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't assert the Impeachment quote must be included because it's verifiable. That's your false argument. As I've repeatedly repeated, the quote illustrated the connection between the impeachment action and the topic of the article. Without making that connection, the "Congress" text deserved no place in the article. Verifiability had nothing to do with it. You might argue that the Impeachment resolution, sponsored by MTG, is "not informative". That leads to the question why the article should have text about the impeachment at all. But it was in the article, and whoever added it failed to show why it was relevant. I fixed that problem and was met by fanatical resistance to a relatively innocuous quote from the resolution. I reworked it to drop the quote in favor of a brief paraphrase and was met by fanatical resistance. Your argument about BLP seems to say that nothing from the impeachment resolution can be quoted or even paraphrased, because you and your fellow-traveler editors have adjudicated its contents and found no part of it to be eligible for inclusion--the contents of an official Congressional document. That's a misuse of the policy. Fringe can apply to MTG beliefs, but not to MTG, who is a U.S. Congress member. So that's a silly argument. The quotation or paraphrase from the resolution in no way could be construed as UNDUE. That's a really silly argument. The excerpt was--as I have repeatedly repeated, a simple, brief explanatory excerpt that salvaged a non sequitur passage and showed how it was relevant to the article in which it appeared. You said, We do not uncritically amplify propaganda and misinformation here". Fine, but fanatically excluding one sentence, or a brief paraphrase, from an official impeachment resolution is a clear matter of unjustifiable suppression of public information published by the U.S. Congress. None of your sweeping policy arguments hold water in the context of the particular text under discussion. All that's left is your clear expression of personal feeling that MTG's message is "distasteful". Multiplied by the phalanx of similarly inclined editors who specialize in these articles and you get fanatical resistance to even a small explanatory piece of text. DonFB (talk) 10:14, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. An official congressional document would be a WP:PRIMARY source. We only use reliable analysis from secondary sources. We don't uncritically quote fringe ideas from a single far out congressional member without contextualizing them with their criticism or analysis as appropriate. Please study and learn the policies. Andre🚐 18:16, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from using talk pages for general discussion of this or other topics. They are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways, based on reliable sources and the project policies and guidelines; they are not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See the talk page guidelines for more information. Thank you. Andre🚐 06:23, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of African countries by population on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:30, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Bengal Presidency on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:30, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:PBS 12 logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:50, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:History of Transylvania on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:31, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, what is your source of the flight data (duration etc), since its not in the flight log? And thanks for adding it! Schrauber5 (talk) 05:24, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's in "Status Updates" in Mars Helicopter Tech Demo page of NASA website: https://mars.nasa.gov/technology/helicopter/status/477/flight-57-preview-by-the-numbers/ It's a "preview"; that's why I parenthesized "awaiting confirmation". DonFB (talk) 05:31, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Since that was published at 1 Sep thats just a plan (if not updated), whereas the date is confirmed by the image. I wouldnt have added the planned data to the list of the actual flights. But we can leave it like that. Schrauber5 (talk) 05:38, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sol number and local flight clock time are in "Raw Images" page of NASA site: https://mars.nasa.gov/mars2020/multimedia/raw-images/?af=HELI_NAV,HELI_RTE#raw-images. DonFB (talk) 05:36, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I know. That was my source when I added the flight. Have a nice day! Schrauber5 (talk) 05:39, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Moscow Uprising (1611) on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:30, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Battle of Kosovo on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 09:30, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DonFB, I saw your question at VPT (now archived) and was trying to confirm details before replying. As it's been archived, I'll reply here instead: Yes, the functionality for previewing changes before publishing does does not currently exist in the mobile-web’s wikitext editor, however it does exist in the mobile Visual Editor. The reason for this discrepancy is that MobileFrontend has historically omitted many "advanced" features to avoid overwhelming new editors. One possible solution for offering "Show changes" functionality in the mobile-web’s wikitext editor would be to prioritize work on phab:T159971. I've mentioned your feedback to the team that works on this area. I hope that information helps. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:01, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Quiddity (WMF) Thanks very much for response and telling phab team. I explored and saw I can view Changes in visual edit mode. Hopefully, the feature can added to mobile wikitext mode at some point. Thanks again for reply. DonFB (talk) 21:11, 27 November 2023 (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) 00:29, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To enforce an arbitration decision, and for violating consensus required at Hunter Biden laptop controversy, you have been blocked from editing Wikipedia for a period of 72 hours from certain pages (Hunter Biden laptop controversy). You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard, I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page. 

ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:11, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

---

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

Thanks for the updates to my additions to List of air show accidents and incidents in the 20th century. Regarding a Natalia Sergeeva citation, I attended WAC 1996 and remember the tribute flight at the end flown by outgoing champion Xavier de Lapparent in honor of Len Perry, Rick Massegee, Natalia Sergeeva and other aerobatic pilots who died since WAC 1994.

While there is no doubt about the death, the only English language sources I could find might not be considered sufficiently reliable to be cited. The sources I found include: http://www.haute-voltige.com/about_us/souvenir.html and https://web.archive.org/web/20220627181246/https://acro.aerobaticsweb.org/threads/950329/thr950329.html

If you have better information, or are able to use either of these sources, please update accordingly. Thanks again!

P.S. If I am posting this message incorrectly, feel free to yell at me. 99.119.109.20 (talk) 23:04, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. Yeah, those sources don't seem to be eligible. I'm not aware of anything better. I only found the Motorsport site by searching the pilot's name. That looks like a good site to use if you add new entries. DonFB (talk) 03:04, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm asking you to 'leave' my message at the bottom of the 'discussion (continued)' subsection, so newbies will see it & not misplace their 'vote'. PS - Your responding to that note 'there', isn't helping. GoodDay (talk) 14:56, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please take some time to review WP:TPG. This comment of yours is not constructive, after I (among others) advised you to avoid personalizing talk page discussions and disparaging your colleagues there. The links you cite relate to narratives in RS references on article talk pages, where editor interpretation is one of the modes of discussion and discrimination among sources and prospective alternatives for article text. SPECIFICO talk 20:38, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Let's not pretend that personalizing discussions is at all unusual on that talk page or most others. See examples from you and from me. Two things seem evident to me: Some truths are best left unsaid on article talk pages; and one should avoid criticizing others for things they do themselves. ―Mandruss ☎ 01:35, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mandruss, how does this help elucidate the part of WP:TPG that Don appeared not to recognize wrt talk page discussion of sources? In that long discussion, only a few of us have discussed the content of the various RS books that discuss the subject - and by "read" I don't mean finding random selections that pop up on a google books page? The sources do not treat Trump's AA event kindly. That's just what the mainstream says. It's unfortunate that roughly half the country prefers alternative narratives, but Wikipedia has dedicated itself to the weight of mainstream sources. Naturally there will be many editors to whom that mainstream narrative appears to be untoward or personal opinion, or who are not familiar with what RS say. Of course I don't know whether either of those is the case in this instance. It is certainly ou of place to make an extended personal allegation with a long list of diffs on an article talk page. Personal attacks etc. are always welcome on my user talk page. SPECIFICO talk 03:07, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You know better than to attack a fellow editor, especially with ridiculous straw man insinuations, on an article talk page. If you have some concerns about me, then approach me civilly on my talk page. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 05:48, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at Herostratus' comment to learn about the appropriate attitude you--and all editors--should have when editing these, or any, articles. You're in a bubble and obviously don't know it, or don't care.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Donald_Trump&diff=prev&oldid=1204856598&title=Talk%3ADonald_Trump&diffonly=1 DonFB (talk) 06:18, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm well aware of my biases and have never claimed to be neutral. People who think they are neutral are delusional. Discussion and editing are two different matters. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 07:04, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a question of being a neutral person. It's a question of approaching the subject matter neutrally, regardless of personal bias. Your inveterate pov-pushing in conversations belies your protestations of neutrality toward the subject matter. There is absolutely no point in harping on political depredations by any office holder or candidate in article discussions. Are you trying to persuade fellow editors to hold certain political views that will support edits to an article? Your job is not to score political points in conversations. Confine yourself to argumentation about accurate summary of sources, due weight, and matters of source reliability. Leave your political diatribes at the door. They serve absolutely no purpose, other than raising the most serious questions about your ability and willingness to be a neutral editor. DonFB (talk) 07:30, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand and agree with your observations (I have written similar ideas before), although we appear to see this differently. I was summarizing what RS say, and discussion pages are used to analyze the realities and narratives of how RS describe situations, and editorial OR, synth, and personal POV are allowed in those discussions. Was there any attempt to convince? Not to convince those who are familiar with what the RS we already use are saying, but more for the benefit of those MAGA editors who always object. (In an article about Russiagate conspiracy theory, I suspect we would likely take opposing sides, at least I get that feeling simply because you objected to what I said.)

My review of the facts will hopefully prevent more disruption in article editing and discussions by those editors. This is a real problem because they are currently ignorant of the facts and getting their info and POV from unreliable sources. (IOW they are "fringe" editors.) Everything MAGA/Trump is unreliable. The information I provided should make them more informed. That is not improper, whereas objecting is improper. Defense of fringe POV is always improper here. You're trying to frame my presentation as a diatribe, rather than a review of the facts from RS, the same ones we use in our articles. Which side of the RS and facts are you on? Editors are supposed to side with RS, and if they can't, they can still edit in non-controversial ways. Wikignomes do a lot of good here.

You seem to be objecting to something I said. What do you find to be wrong? (Let me make a distinction to guide you: Advocacy of fringe opinions is not allowed at Wikipedia, while editors are expected to advocate/support what RS say. That is not forbidden, yet you are objecting to what I said.) So what's faulty with the facts I mentioned? -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 20:33, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In your conversation on the Russian Inteference Talk page about "Russiagate", you wrote:

"even mainstream media fell for Trump's denial rhetoric and lost interest in 'collusion' and 'cooperation' when Mueller was unable to prove 'conspiracy'"

"The media's failure to continue their coverage is an unforgivable lapse in logic and due diligence on their part. They should have continued to pursue Trump for his cooperation with Russian efforts. They should be uncovering why he never criticizes Putin"

"Mueller just gave up and didn't subpoena Trump or force him to testify in person. He allowed Trump to lie again and again and didn't prosecute him for it."

None of these contribute to improving that article. They do nothing more than advance your personal political point of view on these matters to no effect and for no purpose that serves this encyclopedia. Perhaps you can explain why those comments should not have been closed as NotForum.

In your reply:

"Everything MAGA/Trump is unreliable"

A sweeping and undefined statement that seems to grant carte blanche to exclude any text that makes an argument for that side. Of course, there are very few conservative sources that can be used in Wikipedia, because most of them have been quarantined by RSP. The Wall St Journal and National Review come to mind as about the only conservative outlets regarded as RS. I question whether you would accept a summary of even their reporting whenever it makes a point in support of "MAGA/Trump" as you might choose to define it.

In your reply:

"editorial OR, synth, and personal POV are allowed in those discussions"

Yes, they are allowed in Talk--but they cannot serve any useful purpose. What point is there to engaging in such rhetorical gambits when the output cannot be used in an article? Such behaviors are divorced from Policy by definition and should therefore be eschewed by editors. But you seem quite willing to engage as a way of influencing editors, and content, with your pov. DonFB (talk) 03:32, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:33, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wright brothers has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Andy Dingley (talk) 02:23, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, please tone down the way you address other editors. Your behaviour at Talk:Pudella_carlae#Extant was significantly subpar. Chewing out an editor like that when they were trying to increase the visibility of a cool article with a fact they thought people would find interesting is unbecoming of an editor who's been here as long as you have. We're here to build an encyclopedia together, not to act all high and mighty like you did. I understand you might've had constructive intentions, but it reads nothing but. — ♠ Ixtal ^{( T / C )} ⁂ Non nobis solum. ♠ 13:28, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just happened to see this because this page is in my watchlist (no idea why). I read that whole longish thread and don't see what you're talking about. DonFB's tone is characterized by words like No self-flagellation needed. and Thanks. One more request, if I may. Where's the all high and mighty, may I ask? ―Mandruss ☎ 08:09, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ixtal: I belatedly notice the ~19-hour time gap. You may have already moved on, so I'm pinging you. I'd like to hear you justify your comment, since as I see it you have trouble identifying tone that warrants correction on a user talk page. ―Mandruss ☎ 08:21, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Israel–Hamas war on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:30, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Russian Civil War on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:30, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"the McQuade comment belongs in the article"

not even a hint of a suggestion of it

I do not appreciate your misrepresentation of what I said

really don't

that's as far as I can go without resorting to personal attacks soibangla (talk) 02:21, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be having it, or wanting to have it, both ways. You did not explicitly say the comment should go in the article, but you now say you're showing it in an effort to "improve the article". It would be more straightforward to say you're showing it to see if editors think it should be included. But your strenuous rejection of the idea you suggested its inclusion suggests you don't actually think it's worth including, so why bring it up at all and waste people's time in a drawn-out NOTFORUM wall of editors' text? DonFB (talk) 03:16, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"you're showing it to see if editors think it should be included" and "you suggested its inclusion" is absolutely false.

absolutely never happened.

you have misrepresented me, and doubled-down on it. I will never consider anything you ever say again. goodbye. soibangla (talk) 03:55, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your selective quotations are like those in movie review blurbs that reverse the meaning of the critic's commentary. DonFB (talk) 04:14, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Maurya Empire on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 10:30, 15 November 2024 (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) 00:13, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]