User talk:Akradecki/archive/archive 7

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

Welcome to my talk page! Feel free to leave comments, critiques, etc., below. Unless you specifically request that I answer on your talk page, I'll be answering here, as I prefer to keep as much of the conversation in one place as possible. Thanks! Akradecki 23:41, 12 September 2006 (CST)

Antelope Valley

Thanks for adding the reflist to this page. I was just trying to figure out how to do that, and when I returned from the Help page you'd already done it for me. Please forgive my learning curve. Also, I'll leave the section header as just plain "geography", but the problem is that most people don't understand that that means people as well as place. I agree about keeping headers simple and in line with typical wiki format. Meanwhile I'll continue to work on expanding the content in an accurate, descriptive way.Nelsonalyssa 01:12, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi again and thanks for the message. I grew up in AV and am still connected through my family; I may return there.... With all the rapid development and new people moving there it's creating a social and environmental crisis as they don't understand its unique features and issues. Alas. Nelsonalyssa 23:51, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

King Air/Super King Air

Alan, I just ran in the the Beechcraft King Air article again with its merge tag. There hasn't been a vote since Feb. 17. THe tally is 2 yeses (you and me), a qualified yes, and a qualified no. Both qualifications have suggestions on how towo split if if do it, and I see no problems implementing those, as we also mentioned them to each other. Do you want to go ahead and split it now, or tak the tag off, and wait until the article expands some more? - BillCJ 00:02, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I'd say go for it, if you have the time. From the heated battle I've been in over at Extraordinary Rendtion, I've learned that, according to Wikipedia:Consensus, "silence equals consent" as the ulitmate test of consensus...so, sounds good to me. By the way, if you get a chance, the new Boeing NC-135 article I started could probably use a proofread. Akradecki 00:35, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I understand. I've learned this week that if you believe an article is an indiscriminate liste, you aren't obligated to exercise basic courtesy in anyway to communicate with the article's editors, and can go straight to the AFD process.

I've seen the Boeing NC-135 article. do you have any pics slated for there yet? Other tnan that, I haven't looked at in detail, but I will. - BillCJ 01:05, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

On the King Air (90 and 100), I can find only 3 pics, 2 of military modles. DO you know of any more on Wiki somewhere else? I didn't see any others on the King Air commons page. - BillCJ 05:08, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't off-hand, but I'm sure I can come up with some.... Akradecki 05:09, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I've got the split completed, but the Intro/Lead still needs some rewriting. Also, the operators section in both articles still covers both KA and SKA. I might contact Piotr, the resident Operators guru, and see if he can help sort them out. Copy throught the text may still need tweaking to refer to the right modles, and the part on production covers both. Everything else looks pretty good. - BillCJ 05:43, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I found two fairly nice pics on other language Wikis. The Japanese site has a nice pic of a C90 at ja:画像:JMSDF LC90 YokotaAB.jpg. The Polish version has a striking B200 at pl:Grafika:Beechcraft Super King Air B200 vr.jpg. One is PD, and the other is GNU. See what you think. - BillCJ 06:54, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I definitely like the 200, and I think the 90 is a dramatic angle and striking in its own way, but what turns me off about it is the lack of view of the cabin windows. Might be a great one for the PT6A page, and I can see it being used on the KA page until a better one is found. Akradecki 13:55, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Washington, DC Climate

I'm sorry, I don't see what is redundant or confusing about the edits I made. If anything, I believe I corrected wording that was redundant and confusing. —Gintar77 01:47, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, the majority of your sentence had just been stated, and in this country (as reflected in the preceding sentence), they're called "hurricanes". If you say "tropical cyclone", most American's won't have a clue as to what you're talking about. If your point was that it's inland and that's what protects the city, just add a phrase to the existing sentence to that effect. Akradecki 03:06, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I would ask that you pay attention to the changes I actually made vice the ones of my predecessor. Please, be more careful when reverting edits.

As far as the term "tropical cyclone" goes, when referring to my edits, I chose "tropical cyclones" over "hurricanes" because a hurricane is a type of tropical cyclone, along with tropical storms and tropical depressions. (This is the definition by the US National Hurricane Center (see here). The hurricane page after all redirects to tropical cyclone. —Gintar77 03:45, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

My apologies. I reset the page to your edit. When I saw it, only part of your edit showed up...if I'd seen what the diff shows now, I wouldn't have done that. Akradecki 04:08, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

MD 500

I just saw the new pics you added there. Thanks! I don't have chilren, you know, I have Wiki articles! - BillCJ 04:19, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I've got kids and wikiarticles! That 500 was the Kern Co. Sheriff's, which stopped by for lunch the other day. Akradecki 04:49, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

MiG-21 edit

Alan, I didn't removed past operators, just split operators to current and former. I've removed North Vietnam entry only, but it was doubled with Vietnam so no data was lost. --Piotr Mikołajski 14:37, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem. In fact when I saw over 900 bytes removed I thought that I removed sth important but it were "no longer in service" phrases only. --Piotr Mikołajski 15:24, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

IMHO it should be posted into Foreign versions - India. There is some info about bad reputation of IAF MiGs and you can put few words and references there. --Piotr Mikołajski 18:35, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

For catching and fixing my mistake - quite embarrassing given that I routinely admonish everyone else about it. I inadvertently dropped the link when I pasted the wording from the article. Thanks again, Crum375 23:51, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey, no problem. I don't know if you work in aviation, but I do, and we always watch each other's back.... Akradecki 23:56, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Let's say I work 'with' aviation, and I do appreciate the help. Crum375 00:04, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Good article nominee

I just saw that 1999 South Dakota Learjet crash has been nominated for a Good Article review. You did great work on putting that together, so congratulations! - BillCJ 05:26, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I was taken aback a little when I saw that...of course, that was probably one of the most fascinating ones to write. We'll see how it goes. Akradecki 13:47, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations! It has made Good Article! Anyway, it was fascinating to watch you put it together, and is a great read on a interesting though sobering topic. Good job, and the GA is well deserved. - BillCJ 17:37, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

1989 and other '80s articles

I don't know if you were being sarcastic, but I'd be willing to help you with sprotecting those other articles.

Which years are the ones with the heaviest amount of reverts and vandals?

Bkissin 00:30, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Citation dab - your "Take it ti the talk page" edit summary

I thought you had already removed my entry again and so did not reply immediately to your comments on my Talk page. I have other things going on in life and didn't know I was on your timer. I'll leave the entry out; I've run out of energy for wikilawyering trivial issues. I still think all those Cessna entries belong in the Cessna Citation article, I haven't seen any similar model-number enumerating dabs elsewhere. --CliffC 01:22, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

CV-22 Images

Akradecki, why make these images smaller? The detail shown at the level I intentionally put them at allows for detail not otherwise visible (i.e. the two in formation, you cannot now see the back one's windows at all. Nothing in Extended image syntax explicitly states that it MUST be in the THUMB format. If it must be, then all of the aircraft pages need to be redone since almost all use the Infobox Aircraft layout and those pictures are too large. I am reverting your changes accordingly. BQZip01 18:28, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I have the max resolution available, so size is the issue here. While the picture size can be controlled by adjusting your preferences, the default is 180px. By increasing the size, it will increase the picture quality for almost everyone unless their settings are higher (most people don't adjust this setting). Please leave it as-is. BQZip01 02:30, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I moved this discussion to the V-22 discussion page so everyone can have input on this.BQZip01 14:20, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back

Welcome back! -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 14:52, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! It was nice to get away with the family for a while. Hope all has been quite.... Akradecki 14:54, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Wiki world got a little crazy april fools. But aside from that, all iw well. I did get a good april fools on BillCJ, when i "retired" as part of an april fools joke. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 14:58, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

S-64

Could you check out the CH-54 Tarhe, S-64 Skycrane, and Erickson Air-Crane‎ pages for me? I have full, dulicate explanations on each article's talk page. Just do whatever you think is necessary, clean-up, expansion, copy-edits, whatever you see needs to be done. If you see anything major that needs fixing and really don't want to do it yourself, just let me know. Thanks. - BillCJ 20:04, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Bill, a quick note b/c I didn't want your request to go ignored...I've been a bit swamped since getting back...(9.5 hours of track-and-balance on the 412 yesterday also took its toll!), will try to take a look at them this afternoon. Akradecki 15:21, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

No problem! - BillCJ 15:51, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Mojave Storage

Alan, Thanks for your note on my talk page. No, I don't live in the AV area and haven't been "down there" in years. We moved to the Seattle area when I joined Boeing and the anchor is really down here for us. I retired from the Big B in '93 and have been busy, busy, busy with my "other wife", who floats in Lake Washington and has taken us up the Inside Passage to SE Alaska and back during 5 different boating seasons. If I lived where you do all the moss would dry out between my toes from your sunshine and heat. I'll try and do some digging, re your Mojave storage question. I'm familiar with the A-12 and SR storage that was done in the Palmdale area for many years, but not at the Mojave airport. If I find any answers I'll pass them on to you. Also, if you, or Bill CJ ( who I see visits in here ) ever want to contact me directly with a Blackbird question, my email is dpdemp@comcast.net. The Blackbird Reunion will be in Reno this year on 21-24 June and during 14-16 September our Seattle Museum of Flight will conduct a Blackbird Forum. Perhaps you'll attend some of these events ( 30 Habus will be here for the seattle Forum ) and we could swap lies, er I mean stories! David Dempster 05:04, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Fixed width issue again

Alan, I've posted this issue on User:BillCJ's talk page. User:M Van Houten (his talk) didn't understood my comment about removing fixed width in images and started revert war in Albatros D.III and Pfalz D.XII articles. Please look at comments in history of these articles, seems a bit offensive. Maybe you will be able to explain him why his editions are senseless? Thanks in advance, Piotr Mikołajski 20:38, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Done. Will watch these. Akradecki 20:53, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Fixed width issue

I always edit/read on a 800px wide monitor. I agree that large, fixed thumbs are a serious annoyance, and I routinely reduces pictures that are sized at 500px, 400px, and sometimes even 350px. I fail to see, however, why pictures hardsized at 255 px are a serious annoyance. In fact, I put them at 255 px because it then comforms to the width of the infobox. If the infobox is hardsized at a width, why can't the pictures match that width? Moreover, I see that highly ranked articles like the B-17 and F-105 articles contain hardsized pictures. Several of the F-105 pictures are hardsized at 300 px, which is considerably larger than anything I use. I frankly don't understand these selective enforecement policies, nor do I understand the concern with 255 px hardsizes. M Van Houten 21:05, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, you're entitled to your opinion that I am a presumptous person who likes to force my view on others. In my opinion, it seems a bit presumptous of you give a detailed explanation which you apparently abandon because you simply believe I should do as you tell me to do. You tell me that hardsizes are inappropriate because they leave insufficient room for text. "[B]ecause not everyone around the world (or in the US for that matter), have nice big hi-res monitors. I sometimes edit/read on a 800px wide monitor, and having large, fixed thumbs is a serious annoyance." I argue that I do nothing that an infobox doesnt also do. Most infoboxes contain a hardsized image at the width of 255 px. Seems to me that must therefore be acceptable per the MOS. M Van Houten 19:30, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I really don't mind your name calling. In my experience, when people can't come up with a coherent argument, they almost always denounce others with name-calling, in hopes that they can brow-beat others into submission, and because they're offended that someone has questioned them. I'm familiar with your ilk, and I don't hold it against you. That said, I'm pretty sure we're at the end of any constructive discourse here. M Van Houten 20:09, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm not often accused of being a team player, but I don't recall holding myself out as one. I make a concerted effort to improve a few articles that I'm interested in, but I'm not all that concerned with teamwork, especially in the form of people telling me to follows their rules when they don't make much sense to me. In the legal world, you would be correct, rules are rules. And in wikipedia, there are some hard and fast ones. Don't spam, don't vandalize. Here, I see you and another guy ordering me to follow a rule that seems advisory at best and illogical at worst. And I don't frankly feel compelled to obey you or the other guy. It's kind of a petty issue, but that's where I'm at. M Van Houten 22:11, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Tepper Aviation

Hi, I see you have pasted an apparently full-formed article into Tepper Aviation with the edit log "created article with GNDL-licensed text". Do you mean the GFDL? In that case, you must give attribution to the original authors, for example, with a link to the history of the original wiki it was copied from. --bd_ 17:25, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, my fat fingers failed to type properly for the edit summary. I'll go correct that and add the appropriate links. It also needs a lot of cleanup, which I'll be doing as the day progresses. Akradecki 17:31, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

If you have a moment, please check Tepper Aviation#References to see if I got it worded right. Akradecki 17:37, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey - - -

Tepper has had three Hercules registered - c.n. 4129, N9205T, which crashed in Angola 27 November 1989, c.n. 4582, N2189M - Lars Olausson's most recent note for it has it spotted in Basra, April 2005, and c.n. 4796, N8183J - Olausson lists comment, "op for US govt," November 2004.

I do not have a source handy to confirm the Tepper - CIA link, but I will point out that the CIA is known to have operated out of Duke Field where the 711th Special Operations Squadron flies gunships, no more than eight miles south of the Bob Sikes Airport in Crestview.

Major CIA proprietary aviation concerns have included Civil Air Transport ,(CAT), its offshoot - Air America, Air Asia, Intermountain Air (which handled the illegal export of B-26s to Portugal in 1965, in violation of U.S. sanctions - they also operated the B-17G fitted with the Robert Fulton recovery system seen at the end of Thunderball), Southern Air Transport, and several other charter companies. Marchetti and Marks state in "The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence" (1974), that by the early 1970s, the powers-that-be at Langley decided that Southern Air Transport's usefulness had passed. There was a real risk that the operation might turn a profit, and, by law, the excess would have to be returned to the treasury, and agency officials wanted no paper connection tieing them to SAT operations. The CIA tried to quietly dispose of Southern Air Transport in 1973, but had trouble finding a buyer, especially when three legitimate airlines raised protest that SAT was a subsidized operation competing with them for government contracts. The book describes it as "something of a fiasco for the agency". It was sold at a fire sale price to a former employee who was based in Miami, but the airline remained based in Nepal. A short while later, he liquidated much of the assets for a handsome profit.

Mark Sublette 22:39, 11 April 2007 (UTC)Mark SubletteMark Sublette 22:39, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the info! Some of that, since it can be sourced, might be good to add to the SAT article, since it's rather bare. Two C-130s using Tepper call signs have recently been to Mojave, visiting ASB Avionics, who have been converting the aircraft to glass cockpit configurations. N2189M was here in April 2006, and N3867X was here in November, 2006. I've got pics of both, and will be adding a couple to the article. Akradecki 23:57, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

I have just detailed the best data and i.d.s I can give for the list of Tepper aircraft, listed in the article.

Mark Sublette 00:33, 12 April 2007 (UTC)Mark SubletteMark Sublette 00:33, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Qantas 747

I was wrong on one side but they in fact have 41 747s they have some on order also. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sparrowman980 (talk • contribs) 22:43, 11 April 2007 (UTC).

Macchi C.202

Alan, could you be so kind and look on recent changes in Macchi C.202 article? Personally I think that Egypt Air Force bought some original MC.205Vs and some refurbished and reengined MC.202s, but I may be wrong. --Piotr Mikołajski 18:07, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I really don't have much expertise in this area, but it seems that if a 202 was modded to a 205, then that should be listed in the Variants section as well, and it would be legit to put Egypt as a user. Akradecki 19:01, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

OK, I'll add this as separate version and add Egypt as a user. Piotr Mikołajski 19:47, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Mojave Mystery

Hi Alan, and after running my trap lines we have a mystery. First, I asked the last Lockheed SR-71 site manager at Beale AFB ( now retired ) and he answered : "All the J-58 engines were stored there for some time when NASA was flying and we were trying to restore the program but I don't think any of the birds we ever stored there." Next I asked the USAF Colonel, Retired, who was an RSO in the bird at Beale, but became the Program Money Manager after his stint as a crew member. His answer: "I am not aware of any SR assets ever being at Mohave. I didn't get into program til 74 but as the SR-71 PEM at the Pentagon from 80-84 and the Det 6 CC from 84-90 I pretty became aware of all the history before that. I also can't think of any reason why they should have been since we had plenty of storage at Palmdale and Norton. If they were it would have had to have been before the logistics were moved to Norton but the two previous locations were in the Chico area between San Bernardino and LA. Me thinks the "Mojave storage" was probably a cover for a lot of assets we kept at " the Ranch". But if you find out anything different I would be interested." So, there you are: a mystery! Can you email a JPEG of the storage you told me about? If you can, I'll try and find out some more data.

David Dempster 02:07, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Norton brat

'Scuse me for jumping into your discussion, but I have a few thoughts about the SR-71 storage issue.

I was a teen-age air force brat at Norton AFB, San Bernardino, California, living in adjacent Redlands, from 1968-1972. I kept flightline serial notes and inhabited every hangar I could get into. My father was with SAMSO, at that time managing the Minuteman II program, and would tell the security police that I was not a threat.

From my familiarity with Norton, with having seen a published photo of jigsaw puzzle of SR-71s and A-12s shoe-horned into a hangar at Plant 42, Palmdale, where Lockheed once built the L-1011, and the awareness that Norton, an airlift base hosting the 63rd Military Airlift Wing, the Inspector General's office, and the Air Force film library, was placed on the BRAC list in 1995, all makes it very unlikely that any SR-71/A-12 airframes were stored at Norton.

Now, secret Rivet Chain and Rivet Yard C-130s? THEY passed through Norton!

Mark Sublette 03:08, 20 April 2007 (UTC)Mark SubletteMark Sublette 03:08, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Pictures

Actually I have a question. I have a lot of pictures that I took & of course they're mine. What shell I do to put them in the pages? Is there any special procedure? Thanks Coimbra68 10:45, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Thorpe

Didn't mean to re-insert the bolding, I was reverting other changes and put that back in by accident. Quadzilla99 06:55, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Not a problem...I've done the same thing myself...can get quite confusing sometimes! Akradecki 04:00, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Blue Angels

Good work getting the 2007 Blue Angels South Carolina crash article up today. The mass edits seemed to have died down quite a bit since yesterday. The same thing happened with the NASA page this week with the JSC shooting (and I'm sure with VT also, though I didn't watch the VT pages directly). Anyway, good job, and thanks for helping out last night. When I watch foreign-language DVDs, I can't edit Wiki at the same time :) - BillCJ 20:04, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 23 April, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 2002 Jalandhar India MiG-21 crash, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--ALoan (Talk) 12:35, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Pioscale.JPG listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Pioscale.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Ysangkok 17:13, 23 April 2007 (UTC) --Ysangkok 17:13, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Palmdale, California notability

Good job on watching the Palmdale article. And while I agree that whomever is adding people shouldn't be, notability isn't defined only by having a Wikiarticle; there are plenty of redlinks that will be filled in one day (hopefully soon). I look forward to editing with you again! —ScouterSig 21:13, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

In a general sense, I fully agree with you, but typically for lists of names on Wikipedia, inclusion is a result of have notability documented within a wikiarticle. Akradecki 21:14, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Chinook helicopter crash page

Alan, could you look at the Chinook helicopter crash page? You have a better grasp of the naming conventions for crash articles, so I'd like your advice on what the appropriate name would be. Feel free to rename it yourself. Thanks. - BillCJ 17:34, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Done...it's now 1994 Scotland RAF Chinook crash. Akradecki 17:47, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Looks good, thanks! You might want to place links to the project pages you mentioned on the crash's talk page, just in case. - BillCJ 18:01, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Boeing manf template

Alan, is there a Boeing military aircraft (incl. helicopters) template? I know we have the airliners, 707/-135, and B-29, but I haven't found one for the other miltary types. If there's not one, I going to try to put one together, while tying not to duplicate the other templates. I'll be quite a job, and I could use any help guidance on it. We might convert the airliner template to include other civil aircraft like the BV107 and BV234. I don't know of any other non-airliner civl aircraft by Boeing, but there may be a few. THanks. - BillCJ 23:34, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm starting to work on something at Template:Boeing military aircraft. THanks. - BillCJ 00:29, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Ping on coaching

Hi Guinnog, at one point you and Lar were going to start some pre-admin coaching with me...after an extended delay, I'm interested in getting back into it. I've already started discussing this with Lar at User talk:Akradecki/Admin coaching. Are you interested in continuing this? Thanks muchly! Akradecki 21:43, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

I'll be happy and honoured to help you in any way I can. --Guinnog 04:54, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Saw your comment over on the other page, will be quite interested in your guidance there. Akradecki 05:13, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

EgyptAir 990 GA and air crash notability guidlines

Per your comments on my talk page, I would be delighted to see Flight 990 at GA and would love to help out with that project; the controversy sorounding the disaster has allways interested me. As for air crash notability guidlines, we badly need them, and they shouldn't be too hard to draw up, either. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 10:04, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, that's sorted, then - I'll just keep going on the new "Search and Rescue" section, and will likely expand on the reactions and media speculation bits, too (which will include what can be tracked down on the Egyptian gov.s reaction). Some time, I might see what I can do with Gameel Al-Batouti, too. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 06:28, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Ping

ping! whats up? -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 14:09, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi Chris...thanks for pining back. I have a nav box question, since you use them on your user page. In some articles, the nav boxes at the footer automatically come up in hide mode, while in other articles, they come up in show mode. Your user page has them come up in hide mode as well. I've looked but can't find the switch that defaults to hide or show mode. How do you get them to default to hide, like you your page? I plan on using them in a way similar to how you've done it, as I think it results in a much cleaner-looking user page.

On another note, I just wanted to let you know that I really appreciate you coming back. Your wikibreak, despite causing my heart to skip a beat when I saw it, did result in at least one positive thing for me: the prospect of the Project losing you motivated me to get off my duff and resume pre-admin coaching. I'd started it back in December, before Mercy 2 crashed and complicated my life, and I just never got around to picking it back up. Guinnog and Lar have agreed to do the coaching, but if you ever want to throw suggestions/advice in, it would be most welcome.

Many thanks! Akradecki 19:29, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I am unsure of what causee them to default either way. To the best of my knowlexge, from what I have seen, it depend son the number of them on the page. If there is 1 only, i am pretty sure it defaults open. If there are multiple they default closed. I am sure you can expirement, poke around and see. You could also probably throw a request in at the technical village pump ( go to WP:VP and click on technical, they could prob help ya! Sorry I cant be of more help, good luck with admin coaching, if you ever need anything feel free to ask! Thanks. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 19:32, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Email

Hey; I was going to retrieve that essay for you but you'd need to enable your email first. --Guinnog 19:43, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for doing that! Hmm, that's odd. I'd changed the email and confirmed it a few days ago. Don't know why it wasn't working. I've changed it back to the old address and reconfirmed. Would you mind trying again? Thanks! Akradecki 19:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Still not working, sorry. --Guinnog 19:50, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Oops...my bad...for got to check the "Enable e-mail from other users" box on user preferences. One more time? Thanks! Akradecki 19:51, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Asymmetric blade effect

I'm not sure I understand why you created this article when we already have one on P-factor. Both articles say that these are just two names for the same effect. When such is the case, we prefer a single article, with the alternate name redirecting to the primary article name. I've posted merge tags on both articles...please feel free to respond either there or here if there's a compelling reason to have two articles rather than one combined one. Thanks. Akradecki 20:20, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I edited the P-factor page to include the alternative name(s). I'm not certain which term is used where, but I've always known the effect as asymmetric blade effect. In any event since the effect was covered (as I subsequently realised) in P-factor it seems worthwhile simply deleting the page on asymmetric blade effect and creating a redirect, while leaving the commont on the p-factor page about the several terms. Furthermore, I try to avoid cliques - I do hope you understand. Cheers. (Weirpwoer 00:34, 1 May 2007 (UTC))

Flight 990 times

Hmm... A tough question. I guess we should use local times, since that's more meaningful to the context of the article - If you say 1:00 AM local time, people immediatly know it was pitch black when (fill the blank) happened. We should probably convert to UTC in brackets, though i.e. X local time (Y UTC). That way we have what I feel is more descriptive first, with the other supplied to keep people happy. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 06:30, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good! Akradecki 13:51, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikibreak

Gotta run for a while. Will pop in when I can. Watch Helicopter, Svetovid will probably be in there to give the Slovak inventor credit for everything in the whole article. --Born2flie 08:24, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

E-3 Sentry

Alan, could you take a look at Talk:E-3 Sentry? GOt a user who thinks having lots of {{fact tags}} is a "tragedy". Unfortunately, the whole article is unsourced, including some material he added today. Thanks. - BillCJ 05:43, 5 May 2007 (UTC)