![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I have been running VMWare Server 2.0 on Vista 64 since Beta 2. The only restriction is that it you can only run the 32-bit mode version. I believe you are getting confused with running older versions on Vista 64.
Even older versions of Server worked, just with more difficulty. In this case I just installed and it worked, and others have had success as well.
I uploaded an image.
Also if you read the VMWare Server Users Guide you will see that 64-bit Windows OS is indeed supported, but only server additions are officially.
Please stop removing my edits. Clearly you are mistaken.
BTW... the drivers are in fact signed.
Tolstoy143 - "Quos vult perdere dementat" ( talk) 02:20, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
The text you rewrote is in the report that is referenced. I'm sure that such text needs to be preserved in full, in the original language and (mis)spellings as necessary. See this example (outside Wikipedia) of such keeping of original spellings etc. Mjroots ( talk) 13:14, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
I have nominated Category:Ships of the Union Castle Line ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for renaming to Category:Ships of the Union-Castle Line ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 19:27, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Could you either activate your Wiki-email option, or send me a message? JFW | T@lk 09:40, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Fine then. I was hoping to have a slightly more constructive discussion about the gluten sensitivity-related articles. JFW | T@lk 12:44, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
The discussion on the GC-45 howitzer talk page appears to be based on someone who is not terrible familiar with modern artillery, and the "debate", such as it was, appears to have ended. I would like to remove the accuracy tag. If you have any specific points you have problems with please tag them with cite-neededs. Maury ( talk) 20:07, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
You slapped on a "update needed" tag here: Key strengthening#Strength and time. So, do you mind explaining on the talk page of that article why you think that section needs updating and in what way?
-- David Göthberg ( talk) 11:39, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Do you have a URL for Lenovo disk encryption? I've never heard of it before, and their WWW site doesn't list it as one of their products! Nuwewsco ( talk) 18:50, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Hey there, I found an article about SS Yongala, which I have started doing some additional work on. Thought you may be interested in helping. It needs a fair amount of work such coordinates, info box, editing, typos etc. Anyway, if you are interested, I look forward to your imput. Cheers Spy007au ( talk) 00:46, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello Socrates2008
The article on the ship SS English Trader that you have tagged with a Reference tag is in my view unnecessary. My reasoning for this is that all fact that are mentioned in this text can be referenced paragraph by paragraph if necessary using the publications listed below. This would make the article look very unsightly with all the in-text citations. Maybe the odd one would be appropriate such as dates or names. Stavros1 ( talk) 20:02, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
I had the same thought, about it being mostly a list...however when I went looking at the Military History assessment scale, they say that lists are evaluated the same as articles...so I went ahead and gave it a yes based on that. Whatcha think? Thanks for checking up on me tho, I am quite nervous that I'm doing the right thing on these! I did give a no to the Algerian Air Force article that was nothing more than a list of the airplanes they own and nothing about battles or training or heck, even something about their uniforms would be better than just a list of aircraft :) LegoTech·( t)·( c) 20:56, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing it, I've always been a shocking speller... Fosnez ( talk) 13:11, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Hey Socrates2008 - Can you please have a look at RMS Niagara article? I put in the coords of the wreck, but its been 6 months now and it still has not shown up in Google Earth!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigal.nz ( talk • contribs) 20:35, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
One of your careless edits to " List of SIP software" removed Windows Messenger which supports SIP. Probably, you confused it with Windows Live Messenger or MSN Messenger which do not support SIP at all. I cant pinpoint right now but I've noticed several such careless edits of yours to Microsoft-related articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.128.147.176 ( talk) 11:25, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
Okay, I'll assume good faith. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.128.147.172 ( talk) 10:41, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
Can you provide a citation for "slipstreaming has been around NT 3.5"? Please add it to the article. Also, that article is more for functionality which is lost because of removal of features. In some cases, some features have been removed but replaced by more or equally complete equivalents. e.g.Credential Providers are much more full-featured in functionality than GINA, they don't leave out any functionality AFAIK, thus being a true superset of GINA. Same thing applies to the boot loader. So if I were you, I wouldn't have added those. :)
Regarding that slipstreaming ability, I think it was introduced in the package installer at the time of Windows 2000.
And I'm assuming good faith. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.128.181.113 ( talk) 12:22, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
According to this page, WSH first shipped in-box with Windows 98. Accordingly, I've corrected the VBScript article. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.128.181.6 ( talk) 09:31, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
![]() |
The Original Barnstar | |
For your excellent work improving and citing the articles relating to the Battle between HMAS Sydney and German auxiliary cruiser Kormoran Nick Dowling ( talk) 09:28, 5 April 2008 (UTC) |
I have replied on the Talk:HMAS Sydney (1934) page about your issues. Regards and well done again on a very good article. Woody ( talk) 13:28, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your enquiry. There has been long discussions on this, and it has been settled that Macau will be named as such except when "Macao" is used as a proper noun, such as Sands Macao. Retaining it as "Macao" may be apt here thou, provided it is clear that that section is a direct quotation from a primary source, which was not explicite in this article in question. Could this be made clearer, after which I will restore the original spelling? Thank you!-- Huaiwei ( talk) 14:30, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Windows has always allowed a network UNC to mapped without a local drive letter being assigned. At the console, this is "Net use \\server\share" while in Explorer, you chose "(none)" as the drive letter. The latter has been removed from Vista. Socrates2008 ( Talk) 14:15, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
I believe the term "East Indiaman" is also used for ships from other countries or companies than the Honourable East India Company, such as the ships of the Dutch East India Company sailing to the (Dutch) East Indies. See these texts for examples: [1] and [2]. Therefore I believe I correctly tagged the article East Indiaman with {{ globalize/UK}}. Best regards, Ilse @ 22:28, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
hey u know whether using hyper v have any adverse effect on java appications. -- Khi279130 ( talk) 06:10, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi! I noticed this addition: "Typing the initial characters of a filename...displaying the results in a new window" in Features removed from Windows Vista. Have you checked out the last option in this screenshot? Or perhaps it only affects List View and for other views, it carries out a search regardless of that setting? :-) - xpclient Talk 20:48, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
hello socrates2008. i expected you to point out my using cuban sources. indeed, i do, but very sparingly and carefully and there is no reason to doubt them as they only give insight to established events. accounts of generals are the least trustworthy of any accounts in any case: what general would ever put his own actions into doubt?
if you come up with government documents, even south african ones, which say the same, that would be a different matter, even if there still would be reason for some doubt. i did point out that the south africans wanted to protect the dam which aleady indicates that they felt it was threatened. but that mpla, swapo or unita acutally spelt out threats is most unlikely - they certainly had more important things on their mind at that time. mpla was not active in the south and unita was already being supported by south africa. also, you cannot compare the south africans witht the cubans: the cubans were not the fox in the henhouse but the ones who came to get them out. for a similar reason, after some thought, i will remove the word "retaliatory" from the raids on anc-offices. we have to keep things in the right order: the anc was already operating "retaliatory", since they were fighting against apartheid oppression. i'm not sure if it still fits the definition, if action against that again is called "retaliation", bacause any action by the anc afterwards would again be retailiatory. there has to be an end somewhere. you have to keep in mind where everything starts. i hope you see my point. Sundar1 ( talk) 10:56, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
I replied on my talk page. SF007 ( talk) 10:13, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi, could you tell me how you make the link of your username in talk pages and so on, so it only links to talk pages (the thing most people want)? thanks in advance SF007 ( talk) 11:01, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, a RfC would probably be more appropriate given that the discussion of the article has been going on for a while. It's not aparant to me that deletion is justified at this stage, as the article looks to be salvagable and is on a viable stand-alone topic - but that's just my opinion. By the way, I've posted a notification of the AfD at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/African military history task force. Nick Dowling ( talk) 11:44, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
We have the complete newspaper following of the events that took place, the owner of these was a SA Medical Services medic on board at the time of the sinking. We're just looking for a place to upload all the detail (would scanned images work, or must it be typed out as well?). Please contact us on wisdumb [at] the pub .co.za —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.41.13.202 ( talk) 15:22, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
From this article, it appears that there is an official workaround. The feature is only disabled/locked down, isn't removed. That tweak also enables it in Local Group Policy. :) - xpclient Talk 07:53, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Have you specifically and explicitly confirmed this on Vista? Bcoz I know that they removed it specifically in Vista. Please confirm before undoing. I don't think it can be turned on for "Connect To" and "Printers". :) - 221.128.202.70 ( talk) 15:33, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Edit: It's there on the classic Start menu in Vista, just not on the Vista Start menu. "Connect To" not expandable is a major PITA and an especially UI overlooked case. - 221.128.202.70 ( talk) 15:34, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Ok, you are correct that the wp page I pointed to as a reference for what I did was incorrect. However, I should have pointed you to this page: wp:hatnotes#Disambiguating article names that are not ambiguous. The problem is that shim is the ambiguous page and no one will end up at shim (engineering) incorrectly, therefore it doesn't need a dab link. Wizard191 ( talk) 12:51, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
As a courtesy, please note WP:DTTR and sign your comments on talk pages. Also please read through WP:V - the status of explosive decompression comes from a reliable source - the pilot - quoted in numerous reliable publications. At this stage it is merely your opinion that this was not the case. -- Rob.au ( talk) 11:47, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on GeoSmart requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company or corporation, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact
one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you.
Mission Fleg (
talk)
08:05, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
"(cur) (last) 08:22, 20 August 2008 Socrates2008 (Talk | contribs | block) (18,005 bytes) (Undid revision 233070465 by WhisperToMe (talk) Ask for a citation) (undo)"
If you want to post information, it is your responsibility to cite things. If you want to add it back, you need to find the citation first. As per WP:V: "The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged should be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation.[1] The source should be cited clearly and precisely to enable readers to find the text that supports the article content in question. Editors should cite sources fully, providing as much publication information as possible, including page numbers when citing books.[2]" WhisperToMe ( talk) 21:11, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
I've removed the copyvio tag you placed. If you look carefully, the website you said was being violated is a U.S. Government website, and it exists in the public domain, therefore copying from it is allowed. If you go to the link you listed in the tag, go to the bottom and click on the security notice, and look at item two, the PD status of the text is clearly noted. AKRadecki Speaketh 16:20, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Does it really work (as in "tested comprehensively")? Reports are rampant over the internet saying it doesn't work always. :-) And just out of curiosity, have you taken the plunge or stayed with XP? - xpclient Talk 10:24, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Hello Socrates, I have reconfigured and added to the notable incidents table, do you think we should add another column: 'Injuries' and list fatalities/injuries? Ex nihil ( talk) 11:17, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
There seems to be a minor misunderstanding here, where I temporarily removed the License to Kill example and you undid it. I didn't remove it because the film's head explosion is unrealistic but because it may be too realistic to demonstrate extravagantly inaccurate media depictions. Since the explosion involves a hyperbaric chamber, it is feasible that the pressure inside the chamber was several times greater ground-level pressure. The scene would then have too much resemblance to the Byford Dolphin accident to be usable, and it should be checked. Are you familiar with the movie? -- Kiz o r 20:09, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I replied to your question yesterday. forgot to say at the time, sorry. -- Cheers, Steelpillow ( Talk) 21:54, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Socrates! I have a fuller explanation on my talk, but the short version is on {{ Talkheader}} - the template should be used only when needed and should not be added to every talk page. Let me know if you have any other questions :) -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 11:09, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
About this: how does the KB article support the statement "Service Pack 2 is currently undergoing private beta testing"? And how is a news article written by a well-known journalist, including quotes from Microsoft spokesmen, unreliable? — Remember the dot ( talk) 18:14, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your help. Please see my proposed revision: Talk:HMAS_Sydney_(1934)#Commission_of_Inquiry_:_proposed__revision
Comments and help welcome. GilesW ( talk) 13:57, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Nice job on the B-52 crash at Thule Air Base article. Though this is my first time reviewing an article for GA, this appears to me as a slam-dunk. Well-balanced, thoroughly researched and commented, stays on point without being wordy, well-written, good use of images. Well done! -- btphelps ( talk) ( contribs) 08:11, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Just to let you know, this image couldn't be deleted at IfD as it was a Commons image. I've posted it at Commons for deletion. Unusual? Quite TalkQu 23:41, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Hello, thank you for helping to clean up this article after the merge. I'm going to try to work on adding more sources and general copy editing in the near future. Would you mind taking a look at the former Ivan Milat article? I haven't performed many merges and want to make sure I didn't omit anything that should have been transferred to the Backpacker Murders. Thanks so much, momoricks make my day 11:14, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
This was added after reading the Knysna section. After visiting that town, the artists and manufacturers of these birds are well known in the region and often sought after by visitors to the town. The article was intended to refer to this interest and was not intended as advertising. If you can offer any suggestions of how to, or if you can personally clean up the article to make it read correctly, please let me know. Printpost ( talk) 13:47, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
You're most welcome. Glad I could help, although I didn't do as much as I would have liked. Dave ( talk) 06:33, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Did you take this picture yourself? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.229.36.78 ( talk) 19:48, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
Socrates, thanks for advising. I am moving from place to place and use computers not my own when I can. I know to add the 4 tildas on Talk page but how do you log on when posting from different computers? 67.186.182.174 ( talk) 12:59, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
foolish...got it! 67.186.182.174 ( talk) 13:01, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
"March, 1993. Another KAL007 families delegation was invited back to Moscow where they were given 93 pictures of plane debris which included floating $50 and $100 bills and the voice transcripts of ground to ground, ground to air, air to ground and air to air communications during the time of the incident and other documents.[citation needed]"
I heard the above from someone on the Amercian Committee for Families but I don't think there is a published source Bert Schlossberg ( talk) 18:03, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
I did not edit this information. I am reporting, though, that I heard some of the same information from someone on the association and that I don't think that there is a published source. It may be best to verify through the person that did the edit Bert Schlossberg ( talk) 10:17, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
hallo, sorry for my bad english, I'm italian and I'm trying to translate the cacls page; I've seen one of your edits about "ACEs" in the cacls article and I don't know what of "ace" meaning is related to: i see this link ACE#Computing but what of these meanings is your edit about? thanks for your contribution. -- Wikit2007 ( talk) 22:39, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
My apologies, i was presuming East sea was neutral, my thoughts should not strain from the discussions currently ongoing at the talk page. Sorry to affect your time.--CorrectlyContentious 10:04, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Since you've been active on the discussion page for the Battle of Cuito Cuanavale recently, I thought you might be interested in the discussion around the requested move of Battle of Cassinga to a new title of Cassinga massacre. The discussion has only attracted three editors so far (including myself), and I think it would be beneficial to have the input there of some of the more regular contributors to Border War articles. — Impi ( talk) 10:31, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
I do apolgise for not getting back to this, but I simply have not had time. I did my best to be thorough with the parts I reviewed, and I hope you found my comments helpful. It is unlikely that I will have much time to spare in the immediate future, so it might be as well to close the review. Brianboulton ( talk)
Thanks for looking at the article Battle of Barry. I could do with some clarification as to what you're after with the 'who' tags though. The location of the supposed battle is referenced in the article. I wasn't aware referencing would also be required in the lead. Or is it the wording that is at fault?
Are co-ordinates for a battle that never actually occurred really required?
Thanks -- Catfish Jim and the soapdish ( talk) 14:41, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
"All" the cleanup issues? I see a couple ill-placed cleanup tags on sections that happen to be lists or mostly lists. If an article could really be quick-failed because it's got those tags, then we have an error in the system. However, should this be the case, please point me to the area of MOS that outlines the proper formatting and presentation for sections like that, and I will be happy to bring them up to code compliance. Glass Cobra 10:46, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
I submitted to A-Class review, but the the prose/copy edit problem keep shooting the article down. Then there was also an edting war between the original article creator and one of the copy editors on "whose english is better", and I believe the copy editor quit. So I decided to wait for a while, and the entire article has to be rewritten before I could consider anymore reviews. Jim101 ( talk) 15:03, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
Good $TIME_OF_DAY. I have inspected the article and removed the globalize tag because (a) an effort to follow the tag was recorded on the talk page, and suggests that there's little imbalance to fix (plus I'd rather eat my own teeth than trust The Register alone as a reliable source), and (b) the situation in the UK has now kicked up a lot more dirt, making any disproportionate focus less of a problem. ;-) If you disagree, let me and/or (preferably) the good folks on tghe article's talk page know. Thanks, Kiz o r 13:06, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi, wp:mos says no images directly under === headings or less. it also says for images to face in towards text, Tom B ( talk) 10:01, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Sorry for the slow response as well by the way. Nick-D ( talk) 10:55, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Hello, Socrates2008. I see that you have nominated the page Able Archer 83 for FAR. Thanks for the message. Unfortunately, though, I am bogged down with last minute studying and examination work, and will not be able to get to this until at least May 16, maybe later. Additionally, although I am listed as the FAC man that is in fact incorrect, for I was not the one who did the initial work to bring the article up to FA status. As you can see from this post the original posts were from the two primary article contributors, Melchoir ( talk · contribs) and Natebjones ( talk · contribs). I only got involved and an offer to take the article FAC materialized owing to the apparent absence of Natebjones. In this respect, you could say that I "stole" the article. For some time now I have been meaning to straighten that out, but I never seem to find a free moment to do that. At any rate, I wish to reassure you that I will get to this sometime after school ends, and in the meantime I would recommend adding FAR messages to Natebjones and Melchoir's talk pages so they are made aware of the FAR. -- (an unlogged in TomStar81 ( talk · contribs)) 71.153.240.194 ( talk) 23:17, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
I noticed that you removed the Category Kimberley from the article on the McGregor Museum. Just curious as to why? Blarcrean ( talk) 05:39, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations on getting that passed! I hadn't noticed it until I saw it on the Signpost. Well done! JKBrooks85 ( talk) 09:43, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
I've reinstated the Brazil category, reasons given on talk page. Mjroots ( talk) 10:44, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Speaking of this, I notice you removed some external links: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Air_France_Flight_447&diff=294540699&oldid=294540611 Even though they are used as references, they are so important and central that they should not be removed. The reason why they are in the external links section is that they are easy to find there. WhisperToMe ( talk) 18:54, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Heh - you're right it's grammatically incorrect, but correct grammar doesn't always make for engaging prose. I just think it reads better. Funnily enough split infinitives came up in a recent FA ( Operation Perch I think), where another reviewer admitted he rather liked them :P Incidentally, thank you for your work on the article - another set of eyes is always welcome. EyeSerene talk 11:08, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Your username in 'Leave a mesage' syntax is incorrect Ex nihil ( talk) 06:55, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
File:Air France Flight 447.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot ( talk) 06:40, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I am not clear on your comments 12 June about the air speed inconsistency paragraph on Flight AF 447.
Would you expect to see a citation when the words I used directly reference material from other reputable Wikipedia pages? The next sentence then quotes what the French transport minister was reported to have said on the matter. Is that not enough?
Thanks for you help in advance 84.175.85.143 ( talk) 13:35, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
In the Windows 7 RC I'm currently using, under Group Policy -> SRP -> Security Levels/Additional Rules, I can assign a Basic user level to any new rule I create except a certificate rule. Is that what you mean can't be done by this or are you referring to something else? - xpclient Talk 13:42, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
Military history reviewers' award | |
By order of the coordinators, for your help with the WikiProject's
Peer and
A-Class reviews April to June 2009, I hereby award you this
Military history WikiProject Reviewers' award.
Roger Davies
talk
12:27, 5 July 2009 (UTC) Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste |
![]() |
User:Socrates2008/Archive 2 has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, Peace, A record of your Day will always be kept here. |
For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it.
It appears to me that you might be an experienced editor, given some comments from you that I have seen. I wonder whether you might have the time to look at the "Preliminary Report" section of the AF 447 article and comment on the discussion at the end regarding whether or not to include press reports that might or might not contradict the offical BEA report. I'm a newcomer to Wikipedia and I'd like to learn best practices.-- Gautier lebon ( talk) 13:58, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi Socrates2008: I added CCleaner yesterday to Registry Cleaner page in Wikipedia with all the best intentions. You deleted it 10 hours later & I'm very upset because CCleaner is very good software free of viruses
Socrates2008 ( Talk) 09:18, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
For the record, I responded to your closing comment with [3]. Thanks. -- Abd ( talk) 00:16, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Yes, I'm aware that it's in hours. I goofed with the number of significant figures, but ten days is too short a period; I'm going to bump it to 30. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 12:16, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Hiya. During my improvement of the Collins class submarine article, you commented on the potential to run this up to GA class or higher, to which I responded that I'd like to get it as finished as possible first. I think I've reached that point, and the article appears quite stable (a single edit over a month-long period).
Would you be interested in giving the article a once-over before I start dragging this article through the various processes towards a GA, or even an FA, nomination? -- saberwyn 04:25, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for helping on the arb case today. I posted a stmt on the PD talk page and my own talk page you may want to read. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:29, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi, were you ready for this to be submitted to FAC? Dabomb87 ( talk) 15:07, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
I noticed you withdrew your nomination of this article after only 4 days because it was taking too long. I also think they take too long but typically it sits there for about 4 or 5 weeks before its reviewed, just FYI. So if its an article such as this one that yuo are going to try for A or FA it is frequently quicker to submit it for A or a peer review and skip GA. -- Kumioko ( talk) 18:01, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
You are doing some excellent work on these articles. I am planning a trip to the Northern Cape next month, primarily to go to Augrabies Falls, but I will be spending at least a day in Kimberley as well. If there are any specific photos that will help to enhance the articles, let me know and I'll see if I can get them. -- NJR_ZA ( talk) 15:11, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Socrates. I've added my support to the ACR for Siege of Kimberley as you've addressed most of my concerns and I believe the article is very good. I've got a couple more comments, however, that you might like to look at if you are thinking of taking it to FA status. I have included them here, rather than on the ACR as they are really only very small points, in my opinion. Anyway, please look at them at your leisure and do with them what you wish:
I hope this helps. Anyway, good work on the article. — AustralianRupert ( talk) 01:37, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
Will fix it. Only recently started to take categories seriously and made a few similar mistakes. JMK ( talk) 10:14, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Promoted, congratulations! EyeSerene talk 09:15, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
I have added further information on the discussion page - please read that, before you start to undo in the Alvin Snyder part in "Aftermath". Have a nice day Understandable science 17:54 , 7 september, 2009 —Preceding undated comment added 15:56, 7 September 2009 (UTC).
I have posted a response to your comments, on the talk page of Cabin Pressurization ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cabin_pressurization): EditorASC ( talk) 09:17, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
I have posted a response to your comments, on the talk page of Cabin Pressurization ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cabin_pressurization): EditorASC ( talk) 09:17, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
I have posted a response to your comments, on the talk page of Cabin Pressurization ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cabin_pressurization): EditorASC ( talk) 09:17, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
I just wanted to say thanks for your massive improvements to the article. I knew there were POV problems with it, and the history section was needed, but I didn't really know enough to fix it or have the time to research it myself. Well done! -- TexasDex ★ 02:47, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
I just wanted to say thanks for your massive improvements to the article. I knew there were POV problems with it, and the history section was needed, but I didn't really know enough to fix it or have the time to research it myself. Well done! -- TexasDex ★ 02:47, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
I note you restored the previous citation in the cabin pressurization article, which is a word doc seeking an exemption for the A380, from the current FAR limits on cabin pressure designs.
I have no problem if you want that one in there too, however it does not provide a citation source for this statement:
How have you determined that a majority of commercial aircraft cannot operate above 40,000 feet, because of that FAR restriction? I cannot find any numbers in your citation document that shows a majority cannot meet the limits, if they fly above 40,000 ft. It isn't in footnote number 1, of the cited document, or in any other part of that document, that I could find. It seems to me, that there must be a citable source to verify that more than 50% of commercial aircraft are thus restricted, or the statement will have to be removed. EditorASC ( talk) 11:19, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
The number of airplanes approved to fly above 40,000 feet, for which no high altitude special conditions were required, is approximately 6,000. For comparison purposes, the total number of airplanes in worldwide fleet are approximately 50,000 airplanes (but this includes general aviation, private airplanes, company owned and some military variants).
Comments
Sure, glad to do that. Very big article, including all the Talk Page archives.
The first statement I have a problem with, is this one:
Wow! While I cannot say that KAL did not have OMEGA receivers on board their planes, I would be astonished to know of any airline that would have them installed, if they had INS, or that they would have as pilot navigation SOP, the checking of INS position with OMEGA.
United airlines had OMEGA on only three planes in their entire fleet: Three 727s, that were used solely for the Chicago to Cancun flights. Installation of INS on 727s would have been much more expensive, so they used the much cheaper (and far less accurate) OMEGA system for those three planes. It was only needed for about 1/2 hour over the Gulf of Mexico, when we couldn't receive any VORTAC land signals.
I have flown all over the world with both INS and GPS and I cannot imagine any flight crew trying to confirm their INS position with OMEGA. That is kinda like a modern GA pilot, who has dual VOR and DME receivers, trying to confirm his position with old radio range dots and dashes, in his headphones... If KAL did have and use OMEGA navigation, in addition to INS, then that helps to confirm just how incompetent that airline and its pilots really were. KAL is one of the airlines that I would never set foot on. Their pilots had a terrible reputation----as bad or worse than China Airlines. While it is possible that they were so incompetent that they did not recognize they were in autopilot heading mode, and that they were getting further and further off their programmed INS track line, I think it is more likely that they were deliberately taking a shortcut, to save both fuel and time and that it had been done before and they didn't think they were taking any serious risk by doing so.
I gotta get some sleep now, but will read more tomorrow. Let me know if you have any specific questions about specific passages, in that KAL 007 article. EditorASC ( talk) 14:56, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
Unless anyone has severe objections (supported by good reasons), I am planning on deleting note # 6, which currently says:
My reason for deleting is that it is a very confusing statement, with the latter part not being true at all. The autopilot heading mode is not used to make approaches and landings, nor for takeoff. When the AP heading mode is used to vector to intercept the final approach course of the typical ILS approach, the autopilot is armed to capture that final approach localizer and fly it inbound to the runway with the ILS mode of the AP, not the heading mode. It would be both dangerous and illegal to try and use the AP heading mode to make a landing. And, for takeoff, the autopilot is not allowed to be on at all, so it would be impossible to be using the AP heading mode for takeoff. I could find nothing in the Degani chapter 4, where he discusses the functions of the AP modes, to support that incomprehensible statement of note # 6. Degani did not say anything like that, so the citation is worthless. EditorASC (talk) 03:53, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Actually if you check SPD can only edit SharePoint websites. It can't create a new website from scratch and publish it to any server like Expression or FrontPage. Expression is the successor to FrontPage and SPD is SharePoint specific which is why MS made it free. :-) - xpclient Talk 09:13, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
I have recently overhauled WikiProject South Africa with the following:
Comments, constructive criticism and suggestions for improving it further are welcome -- NJR_ZA ( talk) 07:32, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
I would note that I have declined to act on your report (although another reviewing admin might) since I feel the issue is generally one of a content dispute - and as such I have suggested dispute resolution as a more appropriate avenue. I note what you say regarding poor edit summaries, and would further suggest you might consider opening a WP:WQA report to deal with that aspect if you feel DR may not address all the issues. LessHeard vanU ( talk) 21:41, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
I saw you were working on cleaning up the references, and I though the article might be improved by List-defined references. I recently converted B-17 Flying Fortress to this style. What do you think? - Trevor MacInnis contribs 22:23, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
As a major contributor to Battle between HMAS Sydney and German auxiliary cruiser Kormoran, HMAS Sydney (D48) (formerly "HMAS Sydney (1934)") and German auxiliary cruiser Kormoran, I am asking for your opinion on my expansion/improvement of these three articles. Before I start the climb towards a possible FA nomination, I was hoping you could have a look at the articles' current conditions and make a few observations (either here, on my talk page, or on the relevant article's talk page).
For transperancy, this expansion was prompted by a desire to get the articles looking solid before they appeared in "On This Day" (the entry for the battle was scrubbed a couple of days ago in favour of another WWII event). The article for Kormoran is not yet complete: content relating to the post-war searches and rediscovery needs to be expanded and cited, and will be updated in the next few days. -- saberwyn 01:57, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I have been running VMWare Server 2.0 on Vista 64 since Beta 2. The only restriction is that it you can only run the 32-bit mode version. I believe you are getting confused with running older versions on Vista 64.
Even older versions of Server worked, just with more difficulty. In this case I just installed and it worked, and others have had success as well.
I uploaded an image.
Also if you read the VMWare Server Users Guide you will see that 64-bit Windows OS is indeed supported, but only server additions are officially.
Please stop removing my edits. Clearly you are mistaken.
BTW... the drivers are in fact signed.
Tolstoy143 - "Quos vult perdere dementat" ( talk) 02:20, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
The text you rewrote is in the report that is referenced. I'm sure that such text needs to be preserved in full, in the original language and (mis)spellings as necessary. See this example (outside Wikipedia) of such keeping of original spellings etc. Mjroots ( talk) 13:14, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
I have nominated Category:Ships of the Union Castle Line ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for renaming to Category:Ships of the Union-Castle Line ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 19:27, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Could you either activate your Wiki-email option, or send me a message? JFW | T@lk 09:40, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Fine then. I was hoping to have a slightly more constructive discussion about the gluten sensitivity-related articles. JFW | T@lk 12:44, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
The discussion on the GC-45 howitzer talk page appears to be based on someone who is not terrible familiar with modern artillery, and the "debate", such as it was, appears to have ended. I would like to remove the accuracy tag. If you have any specific points you have problems with please tag them with cite-neededs. Maury ( talk) 20:07, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
You slapped on a "update needed" tag here: Key strengthening#Strength and time. So, do you mind explaining on the talk page of that article why you think that section needs updating and in what way?
-- David Göthberg ( talk) 11:39, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Do you have a URL for Lenovo disk encryption? I've never heard of it before, and their WWW site doesn't list it as one of their products! Nuwewsco ( talk) 18:50, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Hey there, I found an article about SS Yongala, which I have started doing some additional work on. Thought you may be interested in helping. It needs a fair amount of work such coordinates, info box, editing, typos etc. Anyway, if you are interested, I look forward to your imput. Cheers Spy007au ( talk) 00:46, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello Socrates2008
The article on the ship SS English Trader that you have tagged with a Reference tag is in my view unnecessary. My reasoning for this is that all fact that are mentioned in this text can be referenced paragraph by paragraph if necessary using the publications listed below. This would make the article look very unsightly with all the in-text citations. Maybe the odd one would be appropriate such as dates or names. Stavros1 ( talk) 20:02, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
I had the same thought, about it being mostly a list...however when I went looking at the Military History assessment scale, they say that lists are evaluated the same as articles...so I went ahead and gave it a yes based on that. Whatcha think? Thanks for checking up on me tho, I am quite nervous that I'm doing the right thing on these! I did give a no to the Algerian Air Force article that was nothing more than a list of the airplanes they own and nothing about battles or training or heck, even something about their uniforms would be better than just a list of aircraft :) LegoTech·( t)·( c) 20:56, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing it, I've always been a shocking speller... Fosnez ( talk) 13:11, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Hey Socrates2008 - Can you please have a look at RMS Niagara article? I put in the coords of the wreck, but its been 6 months now and it still has not shown up in Google Earth!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigal.nz ( talk • contribs) 20:35, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
One of your careless edits to " List of SIP software" removed Windows Messenger which supports SIP. Probably, you confused it with Windows Live Messenger or MSN Messenger which do not support SIP at all. I cant pinpoint right now but I've noticed several such careless edits of yours to Microsoft-related articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.128.147.176 ( talk) 11:25, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
Okay, I'll assume good faith. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.128.147.172 ( talk) 10:41, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
Can you provide a citation for "slipstreaming has been around NT 3.5"? Please add it to the article. Also, that article is more for functionality which is lost because of removal of features. In some cases, some features have been removed but replaced by more or equally complete equivalents. e.g.Credential Providers are much more full-featured in functionality than GINA, they don't leave out any functionality AFAIK, thus being a true superset of GINA. Same thing applies to the boot loader. So if I were you, I wouldn't have added those. :)
Regarding that slipstreaming ability, I think it was introduced in the package installer at the time of Windows 2000.
And I'm assuming good faith. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.128.181.113 ( talk) 12:22, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
According to this page, WSH first shipped in-box with Windows 98. Accordingly, I've corrected the VBScript article. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.128.181.6 ( talk) 09:31, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
![]() |
The Original Barnstar | |
For your excellent work improving and citing the articles relating to the Battle between HMAS Sydney and German auxiliary cruiser Kormoran Nick Dowling ( talk) 09:28, 5 April 2008 (UTC) |
I have replied on the Talk:HMAS Sydney (1934) page about your issues. Regards and well done again on a very good article. Woody ( talk) 13:28, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your enquiry. There has been long discussions on this, and it has been settled that Macau will be named as such except when "Macao" is used as a proper noun, such as Sands Macao. Retaining it as "Macao" may be apt here thou, provided it is clear that that section is a direct quotation from a primary source, which was not explicite in this article in question. Could this be made clearer, after which I will restore the original spelling? Thank you!-- Huaiwei ( talk) 14:30, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Windows has always allowed a network UNC to mapped without a local drive letter being assigned. At the console, this is "Net use \\server\share" while in Explorer, you chose "(none)" as the drive letter. The latter has been removed from Vista. Socrates2008 ( Talk) 14:15, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
I believe the term "East Indiaman" is also used for ships from other countries or companies than the Honourable East India Company, such as the ships of the Dutch East India Company sailing to the (Dutch) East Indies. See these texts for examples: [1] and [2]. Therefore I believe I correctly tagged the article East Indiaman with {{ globalize/UK}}. Best regards, Ilse @ 22:28, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
hey u know whether using hyper v have any adverse effect on java appications. -- Khi279130 ( talk) 06:10, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi! I noticed this addition: "Typing the initial characters of a filename...displaying the results in a new window" in Features removed from Windows Vista. Have you checked out the last option in this screenshot? Or perhaps it only affects List View and for other views, it carries out a search regardless of that setting? :-) - xpclient Talk 20:48, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
hello socrates2008. i expected you to point out my using cuban sources. indeed, i do, but very sparingly and carefully and there is no reason to doubt them as they only give insight to established events. accounts of generals are the least trustworthy of any accounts in any case: what general would ever put his own actions into doubt?
if you come up with government documents, even south african ones, which say the same, that would be a different matter, even if there still would be reason for some doubt. i did point out that the south africans wanted to protect the dam which aleady indicates that they felt it was threatened. but that mpla, swapo or unita acutally spelt out threats is most unlikely - they certainly had more important things on their mind at that time. mpla was not active in the south and unita was already being supported by south africa. also, you cannot compare the south africans witht the cubans: the cubans were not the fox in the henhouse but the ones who came to get them out. for a similar reason, after some thought, i will remove the word "retaliatory" from the raids on anc-offices. we have to keep things in the right order: the anc was already operating "retaliatory", since they were fighting against apartheid oppression. i'm not sure if it still fits the definition, if action against that again is called "retaliation", bacause any action by the anc afterwards would again be retailiatory. there has to be an end somewhere. you have to keep in mind where everything starts. i hope you see my point. Sundar1 ( talk) 10:56, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
I replied on my talk page. SF007 ( talk) 10:13, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi, could you tell me how you make the link of your username in talk pages and so on, so it only links to talk pages (the thing most people want)? thanks in advance SF007 ( talk) 11:01, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, a RfC would probably be more appropriate given that the discussion of the article has been going on for a while. It's not aparant to me that deletion is justified at this stage, as the article looks to be salvagable and is on a viable stand-alone topic - but that's just my opinion. By the way, I've posted a notification of the AfD at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/African military history task force. Nick Dowling ( talk) 11:44, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
We have the complete newspaper following of the events that took place, the owner of these was a SA Medical Services medic on board at the time of the sinking. We're just looking for a place to upload all the detail (would scanned images work, or must it be typed out as well?). Please contact us on wisdumb [at] the pub .co.za —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.41.13.202 ( talk) 15:22, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
From this article, it appears that there is an official workaround. The feature is only disabled/locked down, isn't removed. That tweak also enables it in Local Group Policy. :) - xpclient Talk 07:53, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Have you specifically and explicitly confirmed this on Vista? Bcoz I know that they removed it specifically in Vista. Please confirm before undoing. I don't think it can be turned on for "Connect To" and "Printers". :) - 221.128.202.70 ( talk) 15:33, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Edit: It's there on the classic Start menu in Vista, just not on the Vista Start menu. "Connect To" not expandable is a major PITA and an especially UI overlooked case. - 221.128.202.70 ( talk) 15:34, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Ok, you are correct that the wp page I pointed to as a reference for what I did was incorrect. However, I should have pointed you to this page: wp:hatnotes#Disambiguating article names that are not ambiguous. The problem is that shim is the ambiguous page and no one will end up at shim (engineering) incorrectly, therefore it doesn't need a dab link. Wizard191 ( talk) 12:51, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
As a courtesy, please note WP:DTTR and sign your comments on talk pages. Also please read through WP:V - the status of explosive decompression comes from a reliable source - the pilot - quoted in numerous reliable publications. At this stage it is merely your opinion that this was not the case. -- Rob.au ( talk) 11:47, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on GeoSmart requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company or corporation, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact
one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you.
Mission Fleg (
talk)
08:05, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
"(cur) (last) 08:22, 20 August 2008 Socrates2008 (Talk | contribs | block) (18,005 bytes) (Undid revision 233070465 by WhisperToMe (talk) Ask for a citation) (undo)"
If you want to post information, it is your responsibility to cite things. If you want to add it back, you need to find the citation first. As per WP:V: "The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged should be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation.[1] The source should be cited clearly and precisely to enable readers to find the text that supports the article content in question. Editors should cite sources fully, providing as much publication information as possible, including page numbers when citing books.[2]" WhisperToMe ( talk) 21:11, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
I've removed the copyvio tag you placed. If you look carefully, the website you said was being violated is a U.S. Government website, and it exists in the public domain, therefore copying from it is allowed. If you go to the link you listed in the tag, go to the bottom and click on the security notice, and look at item two, the PD status of the text is clearly noted. AKRadecki Speaketh 16:20, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Does it really work (as in "tested comprehensively")? Reports are rampant over the internet saying it doesn't work always. :-) And just out of curiosity, have you taken the plunge or stayed with XP? - xpclient Talk 10:24, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Hello Socrates, I have reconfigured and added to the notable incidents table, do you think we should add another column: 'Injuries' and list fatalities/injuries? Ex nihil ( talk) 11:17, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
There seems to be a minor misunderstanding here, where I temporarily removed the License to Kill example and you undid it. I didn't remove it because the film's head explosion is unrealistic but because it may be too realistic to demonstrate extravagantly inaccurate media depictions. Since the explosion involves a hyperbaric chamber, it is feasible that the pressure inside the chamber was several times greater ground-level pressure. The scene would then have too much resemblance to the Byford Dolphin accident to be usable, and it should be checked. Are you familiar with the movie? -- Kiz o r 20:09, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I replied to your question yesterday. forgot to say at the time, sorry. -- Cheers, Steelpillow ( Talk) 21:54, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Socrates! I have a fuller explanation on my talk, but the short version is on {{ Talkheader}} - the template should be used only when needed and should not be added to every talk page. Let me know if you have any other questions :) -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 11:09, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
About this: how does the KB article support the statement "Service Pack 2 is currently undergoing private beta testing"? And how is a news article written by a well-known journalist, including quotes from Microsoft spokesmen, unreliable? — Remember the dot ( talk) 18:14, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your help. Please see my proposed revision: Talk:HMAS_Sydney_(1934)#Commission_of_Inquiry_:_proposed__revision
Comments and help welcome. GilesW ( talk) 13:57, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Nice job on the B-52 crash at Thule Air Base article. Though this is my first time reviewing an article for GA, this appears to me as a slam-dunk. Well-balanced, thoroughly researched and commented, stays on point without being wordy, well-written, good use of images. Well done! -- btphelps ( talk) ( contribs) 08:11, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Just to let you know, this image couldn't be deleted at IfD as it was a Commons image. I've posted it at Commons for deletion. Unusual? Quite TalkQu 23:41, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Hello, thank you for helping to clean up this article after the merge. I'm going to try to work on adding more sources and general copy editing in the near future. Would you mind taking a look at the former Ivan Milat article? I haven't performed many merges and want to make sure I didn't omit anything that should have been transferred to the Backpacker Murders. Thanks so much, momoricks make my day 11:14, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
This was added after reading the Knysna section. After visiting that town, the artists and manufacturers of these birds are well known in the region and often sought after by visitors to the town. The article was intended to refer to this interest and was not intended as advertising. If you can offer any suggestions of how to, or if you can personally clean up the article to make it read correctly, please let me know. Printpost ( talk) 13:47, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
You're most welcome. Glad I could help, although I didn't do as much as I would have liked. Dave ( talk) 06:33, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Did you take this picture yourself? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.229.36.78 ( talk) 19:48, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
Socrates, thanks for advising. I am moving from place to place and use computers not my own when I can. I know to add the 4 tildas on Talk page but how do you log on when posting from different computers? 67.186.182.174 ( talk) 12:59, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
foolish...got it! 67.186.182.174 ( talk) 13:01, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
"March, 1993. Another KAL007 families delegation was invited back to Moscow where they were given 93 pictures of plane debris which included floating $50 and $100 bills and the voice transcripts of ground to ground, ground to air, air to ground and air to air communications during the time of the incident and other documents.[citation needed]"
I heard the above from someone on the Amercian Committee for Families but I don't think there is a published source Bert Schlossberg ( talk) 18:03, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
I did not edit this information. I am reporting, though, that I heard some of the same information from someone on the association and that I don't think that there is a published source. It may be best to verify through the person that did the edit Bert Schlossberg ( talk) 10:17, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
hallo, sorry for my bad english, I'm italian and I'm trying to translate the cacls page; I've seen one of your edits about "ACEs" in the cacls article and I don't know what of "ace" meaning is related to: i see this link ACE#Computing but what of these meanings is your edit about? thanks for your contribution. -- Wikit2007 ( talk) 22:39, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
My apologies, i was presuming East sea was neutral, my thoughts should not strain from the discussions currently ongoing at the talk page. Sorry to affect your time.--CorrectlyContentious 10:04, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Since you've been active on the discussion page for the Battle of Cuito Cuanavale recently, I thought you might be interested in the discussion around the requested move of Battle of Cassinga to a new title of Cassinga massacre. The discussion has only attracted three editors so far (including myself), and I think it would be beneficial to have the input there of some of the more regular contributors to Border War articles. — Impi ( talk) 10:31, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
I do apolgise for not getting back to this, but I simply have not had time. I did my best to be thorough with the parts I reviewed, and I hope you found my comments helpful. It is unlikely that I will have much time to spare in the immediate future, so it might be as well to close the review. Brianboulton ( talk)
Thanks for looking at the article Battle of Barry. I could do with some clarification as to what you're after with the 'who' tags though. The location of the supposed battle is referenced in the article. I wasn't aware referencing would also be required in the lead. Or is it the wording that is at fault?
Are co-ordinates for a battle that never actually occurred really required?
Thanks -- Catfish Jim and the soapdish ( talk) 14:41, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
"All" the cleanup issues? I see a couple ill-placed cleanup tags on sections that happen to be lists or mostly lists. If an article could really be quick-failed because it's got those tags, then we have an error in the system. However, should this be the case, please point me to the area of MOS that outlines the proper formatting and presentation for sections like that, and I will be happy to bring them up to code compliance. Glass Cobra 10:46, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
I submitted to A-Class review, but the the prose/copy edit problem keep shooting the article down. Then there was also an edting war between the original article creator and one of the copy editors on "whose english is better", and I believe the copy editor quit. So I decided to wait for a while, and the entire article has to be rewritten before I could consider anymore reviews. Jim101 ( talk) 15:03, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
Good $TIME_OF_DAY. I have inspected the article and removed the globalize tag because (a) an effort to follow the tag was recorded on the talk page, and suggests that there's little imbalance to fix (plus I'd rather eat my own teeth than trust The Register alone as a reliable source), and (b) the situation in the UK has now kicked up a lot more dirt, making any disproportionate focus less of a problem. ;-) If you disagree, let me and/or (preferably) the good folks on tghe article's talk page know. Thanks, Kiz o r 13:06, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi, wp:mos says no images directly under === headings or less. it also says for images to face in towards text, Tom B ( talk) 10:01, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Sorry for the slow response as well by the way. Nick-D ( talk) 10:55, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Hello, Socrates2008. I see that you have nominated the page Able Archer 83 for FAR. Thanks for the message. Unfortunately, though, I am bogged down with last minute studying and examination work, and will not be able to get to this until at least May 16, maybe later. Additionally, although I am listed as the FAC man that is in fact incorrect, for I was not the one who did the initial work to bring the article up to FA status. As you can see from this post the original posts were from the two primary article contributors, Melchoir ( talk · contribs) and Natebjones ( talk · contribs). I only got involved and an offer to take the article FAC materialized owing to the apparent absence of Natebjones. In this respect, you could say that I "stole" the article. For some time now I have been meaning to straighten that out, but I never seem to find a free moment to do that. At any rate, I wish to reassure you that I will get to this sometime after school ends, and in the meantime I would recommend adding FAR messages to Natebjones and Melchoir's talk pages so they are made aware of the FAR. -- (an unlogged in TomStar81 ( talk · contribs)) 71.153.240.194 ( talk) 23:17, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
I noticed that you removed the Category Kimberley from the article on the McGregor Museum. Just curious as to why? Blarcrean ( talk) 05:39, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations on getting that passed! I hadn't noticed it until I saw it on the Signpost. Well done! JKBrooks85 ( talk) 09:43, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
I've reinstated the Brazil category, reasons given on talk page. Mjroots ( talk) 10:44, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Speaking of this, I notice you removed some external links: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Air_France_Flight_447&diff=294540699&oldid=294540611 Even though they are used as references, they are so important and central that they should not be removed. The reason why they are in the external links section is that they are easy to find there. WhisperToMe ( talk) 18:54, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Heh - you're right it's grammatically incorrect, but correct grammar doesn't always make for engaging prose. I just think it reads better. Funnily enough split infinitives came up in a recent FA ( Operation Perch I think), where another reviewer admitted he rather liked them :P Incidentally, thank you for your work on the article - another set of eyes is always welcome. EyeSerene talk 11:08, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Your username in 'Leave a mesage' syntax is incorrect Ex nihil ( talk) 06:55, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
File:Air France Flight 447.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot ( talk) 06:40, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I am not clear on your comments 12 June about the air speed inconsistency paragraph on Flight AF 447.
Would you expect to see a citation when the words I used directly reference material from other reputable Wikipedia pages? The next sentence then quotes what the French transport minister was reported to have said on the matter. Is that not enough?
Thanks for you help in advance 84.175.85.143 ( talk) 13:35, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
In the Windows 7 RC I'm currently using, under Group Policy -> SRP -> Security Levels/Additional Rules, I can assign a Basic user level to any new rule I create except a certificate rule. Is that what you mean can't be done by this or are you referring to something else? - xpclient Talk 13:42, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
Military history reviewers' award | |
By order of the coordinators, for your help with the WikiProject's
Peer and
A-Class reviews April to June 2009, I hereby award you this
Military history WikiProject Reviewers' award.
Roger Davies
talk
12:27, 5 July 2009 (UTC) Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste |
![]() |
User:Socrates2008/Archive 2 has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, Peace, A record of your Day will always be kept here. |
For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it.
It appears to me that you might be an experienced editor, given some comments from you that I have seen. I wonder whether you might have the time to look at the "Preliminary Report" section of the AF 447 article and comment on the discussion at the end regarding whether or not to include press reports that might or might not contradict the offical BEA report. I'm a newcomer to Wikipedia and I'd like to learn best practices.-- Gautier lebon ( talk) 13:58, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi Socrates2008: I added CCleaner yesterday to Registry Cleaner page in Wikipedia with all the best intentions. You deleted it 10 hours later & I'm very upset because CCleaner is very good software free of viruses
Socrates2008 ( Talk) 09:18, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
For the record, I responded to your closing comment with [3]. Thanks. -- Abd ( talk) 00:16, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Yes, I'm aware that it's in hours. I goofed with the number of significant figures, but ten days is too short a period; I'm going to bump it to 30. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 12:16, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Hiya. During my improvement of the Collins class submarine article, you commented on the potential to run this up to GA class or higher, to which I responded that I'd like to get it as finished as possible first. I think I've reached that point, and the article appears quite stable (a single edit over a month-long period).
Would you be interested in giving the article a once-over before I start dragging this article through the various processes towards a GA, or even an FA, nomination? -- saberwyn 04:25, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for helping on the arb case today. I posted a stmt on the PD talk page and my own talk page you may want to read. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:29, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi, were you ready for this to be submitted to FAC? Dabomb87 ( talk) 15:07, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
I noticed you withdrew your nomination of this article after only 4 days because it was taking too long. I also think they take too long but typically it sits there for about 4 or 5 weeks before its reviewed, just FYI. So if its an article such as this one that yuo are going to try for A or FA it is frequently quicker to submit it for A or a peer review and skip GA. -- Kumioko ( talk) 18:01, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
You are doing some excellent work on these articles. I am planning a trip to the Northern Cape next month, primarily to go to Augrabies Falls, but I will be spending at least a day in Kimberley as well. If there are any specific photos that will help to enhance the articles, let me know and I'll see if I can get them. -- NJR_ZA ( talk) 15:11, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Socrates. I've added my support to the ACR for Siege of Kimberley as you've addressed most of my concerns and I believe the article is very good. I've got a couple more comments, however, that you might like to look at if you are thinking of taking it to FA status. I have included them here, rather than on the ACR as they are really only very small points, in my opinion. Anyway, please look at them at your leisure and do with them what you wish:
I hope this helps. Anyway, good work on the article. — AustralianRupert ( talk) 01:37, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
Will fix it. Only recently started to take categories seriously and made a few similar mistakes. JMK ( talk) 10:14, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Promoted, congratulations! EyeSerene talk 09:15, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
I have added further information on the discussion page - please read that, before you start to undo in the Alvin Snyder part in "Aftermath". Have a nice day Understandable science 17:54 , 7 september, 2009 —Preceding undated comment added 15:56, 7 September 2009 (UTC).
I have posted a response to your comments, on the talk page of Cabin Pressurization ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cabin_pressurization): EditorASC ( talk) 09:17, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
I have posted a response to your comments, on the talk page of Cabin Pressurization ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cabin_pressurization): EditorASC ( talk) 09:17, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
I have posted a response to your comments, on the talk page of Cabin Pressurization ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cabin_pressurization): EditorASC ( talk) 09:17, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
I just wanted to say thanks for your massive improvements to the article. I knew there were POV problems with it, and the history section was needed, but I didn't really know enough to fix it or have the time to research it myself. Well done! -- TexasDex ★ 02:47, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
I just wanted to say thanks for your massive improvements to the article. I knew there were POV problems with it, and the history section was needed, but I didn't really know enough to fix it or have the time to research it myself. Well done! -- TexasDex ★ 02:47, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
I note you restored the previous citation in the cabin pressurization article, which is a word doc seeking an exemption for the A380, from the current FAR limits on cabin pressure designs.
I have no problem if you want that one in there too, however it does not provide a citation source for this statement:
How have you determined that a majority of commercial aircraft cannot operate above 40,000 feet, because of that FAR restriction? I cannot find any numbers in your citation document that shows a majority cannot meet the limits, if they fly above 40,000 ft. It isn't in footnote number 1, of the cited document, or in any other part of that document, that I could find. It seems to me, that there must be a citable source to verify that more than 50% of commercial aircraft are thus restricted, or the statement will have to be removed. EditorASC ( talk) 11:19, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
The number of airplanes approved to fly above 40,000 feet, for which no high altitude special conditions were required, is approximately 6,000. For comparison purposes, the total number of airplanes in worldwide fleet are approximately 50,000 airplanes (but this includes general aviation, private airplanes, company owned and some military variants).
Comments
Sure, glad to do that. Very big article, including all the Talk Page archives.
The first statement I have a problem with, is this one:
Wow! While I cannot say that KAL did not have OMEGA receivers on board their planes, I would be astonished to know of any airline that would have them installed, if they had INS, or that they would have as pilot navigation SOP, the checking of INS position with OMEGA.
United airlines had OMEGA on only three planes in their entire fleet: Three 727s, that were used solely for the Chicago to Cancun flights. Installation of INS on 727s would have been much more expensive, so they used the much cheaper (and far less accurate) OMEGA system for those three planes. It was only needed for about 1/2 hour over the Gulf of Mexico, when we couldn't receive any VORTAC land signals.
I have flown all over the world with both INS and GPS and I cannot imagine any flight crew trying to confirm their INS position with OMEGA. That is kinda like a modern GA pilot, who has dual VOR and DME receivers, trying to confirm his position with old radio range dots and dashes, in his headphones... If KAL did have and use OMEGA navigation, in addition to INS, then that helps to confirm just how incompetent that airline and its pilots really were. KAL is one of the airlines that I would never set foot on. Their pilots had a terrible reputation----as bad or worse than China Airlines. While it is possible that they were so incompetent that they did not recognize they were in autopilot heading mode, and that they were getting further and further off their programmed INS track line, I think it is more likely that they were deliberately taking a shortcut, to save both fuel and time and that it had been done before and they didn't think they were taking any serious risk by doing so.
I gotta get some sleep now, but will read more tomorrow. Let me know if you have any specific questions about specific passages, in that KAL 007 article. EditorASC ( talk) 14:56, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
Unless anyone has severe objections (supported by good reasons), I am planning on deleting note # 6, which currently says:
My reason for deleting is that it is a very confusing statement, with the latter part not being true at all. The autopilot heading mode is not used to make approaches and landings, nor for takeoff. When the AP heading mode is used to vector to intercept the final approach course of the typical ILS approach, the autopilot is armed to capture that final approach localizer and fly it inbound to the runway with the ILS mode of the AP, not the heading mode. It would be both dangerous and illegal to try and use the AP heading mode to make a landing. And, for takeoff, the autopilot is not allowed to be on at all, so it would be impossible to be using the AP heading mode for takeoff. I could find nothing in the Degani chapter 4, where he discusses the functions of the AP modes, to support that incomprehensible statement of note # 6. Degani did not say anything like that, so the citation is worthless. EditorASC (talk) 03:53, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Actually if you check SPD can only edit SharePoint websites. It can't create a new website from scratch and publish it to any server like Expression or FrontPage. Expression is the successor to FrontPage and SPD is SharePoint specific which is why MS made it free. :-) - xpclient Talk 09:13, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
I have recently overhauled WikiProject South Africa with the following:
Comments, constructive criticism and suggestions for improving it further are welcome -- NJR_ZA ( talk) 07:32, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
I would note that I have declined to act on your report (although another reviewing admin might) since I feel the issue is generally one of a content dispute - and as such I have suggested dispute resolution as a more appropriate avenue. I note what you say regarding poor edit summaries, and would further suggest you might consider opening a WP:WQA report to deal with that aspect if you feel DR may not address all the issues. LessHeard vanU ( talk) 21:41, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
I saw you were working on cleaning up the references, and I though the article might be improved by List-defined references. I recently converted B-17 Flying Fortress to this style. What do you think? - Trevor MacInnis contribs 22:23, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
As a major contributor to Battle between HMAS Sydney and German auxiliary cruiser Kormoran, HMAS Sydney (D48) (formerly "HMAS Sydney (1934)") and German auxiliary cruiser Kormoran, I am asking for your opinion on my expansion/improvement of these three articles. Before I start the climb towards a possible FA nomination, I was hoping you could have a look at the articles' current conditions and make a few observations (either here, on my talk page, or on the relevant article's talk page).
For transperancy, this expansion was prompted by a desire to get the articles looking solid before they appeared in "On This Day" (the entry for the battle was scrubbed a couple of days ago in favour of another WWII event). The article for Kormoran is not yet complete: content relating to the post-war searches and rediscovery needs to be expanded and cited, and will be updated in the next few days. -- saberwyn 01:57, 19 November 2009 (UTC)