Hello, and thank you for your edits.
Just to make sure, remember to follow the correct format for airport pages. Use “begins,” not “starts” when listing a new route. The correct format can be seen at WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT
Thank you! ( VenFlyer98 ( talk) 22:56, 15 July 2023 (UTC))
Interesting. Thanks for the information and link!
Badr Mohammed Al Meer moved to draftspace
Thanks for your contributions to Badr Mohammed Al Meer. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.
Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Jamiebuba ( talk) 08:23, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
You might want to submit evidence about SimplyFlying to User talk:Headbomb/unreliable. It is a good intermediate step short of getting source onto the Wikipedia deprecated list, which takes a lot of work. Best read the Unreliable/Predatory Source Detector FAQ first. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 ( talk) 17:22, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for this advice. Avgeekamfot ( talk) 10:08, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
I saw you removed a number of citations to Simple Flying by claiming this is not a reliable source. Can you please direct me to the discusssion in which it was stated so? Jetstreamer Talk 20:52, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
- I most recently tried to spark a wider discussion for a clearer outcome but only one editor replied. A past discussion is
here. Per the suggestion of another user above on my talk page, it's also been added to
User:Headbomb/unreliable. Based on my reading of
WP:RS and evaluation of Simple Flying, it seems to clearly fail the requirements. Do you disagree?
Avgeekamfot (
talk) 10:14, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
- If in doubt, let's don't use it. Thanks.--
Jetstreamer
Talk 12:30, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
- I can't see any reason to label it unreliable. RedundancyAdvocate ( talk) 20:42, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- If in doubt, let's don't use it. Thanks.--
Jetstreamer
Talk 12:30, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
- @
Avgeekamfot I cannot see any improvement on deleting the SimpleFlying references and exchanging them with {{cn}} without having a consensus.
- As you have seen by yourself, the discussions you mentioned are not real discussion per lack of participants. Please start a topic on
WP:Aviation about that topic.
- Second before just exchanging the references with {{cn}}, please have a sufficient research first, if you find a reference that is more reliable for you to exchange it with. 80.187.75.188 ( talk) 23:32, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
- "In fact, among aviation enthusiasts, Simple Flying is widely viewed as a content farm which regularly publishes inaccurate and plagiarized articles."
- For this claim there is also a reliable reference missing.
80.187.75.188 (
talk) 23:42, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
- You need consensus for a source to be reliable, not the opposite. There's clearly no consensus that Simple Flying is unreliable so I will be removing them as I see them. If you believe that its use is valid where I've removed it, you are welcome to seek consensus to re-add it.
Avgeekamfot (
talk) 09:43, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
- "You need consensus for a source to be reliable, not the opposite."
- Per which Wikipedia rule? The user Headbomb is a user and does not equal Wikipedia consensus or its regulations.
- References on Wikipedia are stated unreliable or are deprecated by consensus.
- I wonder how you want to know something about reliable sources as you could't give one for the quoted sentence you wrote. Just refering to "aviation enthusiasts" is not a reliable source per
WP:RELIABLE.
80.187.73.104 (
talk) 16:16, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
-
WP:CHALLENGE: "The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material." Burden of proof is on you if you want to use Simple Flying, not on me if I want to remove it.
Avgeekamfot (
talk) 23:17, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
- Reading further: "it is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution." And "Once an editor has provided any source they believe, in good faith, to be sufficient, then any editor who later removes the material must articulate specific problems that would justify its exclusion from Wikipedia (e.g. why the source is unreliable; the source does not support the claim; undue emphasis; unencyclopedic content; etc.)"
- Regarding the second quote, your articulation why SimpleFlying may be unrealiable is not sufficient. Referring to some "aviation enthusiasts" is not enough. Just stating it does not meet WP:RS without further explanation is also not enough. "it seems to clearly fail the requirements" is not a factual argument.
- WP does not have a whitelist for reliable sources. But a blacklist for unrealiable and deprecated sources:
WP:RSP. SimpleFlying is not listed as an unreliable source in that list. Get consensus to get it listed there.
80.187.73.104 (
talk) 00:30, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
- That's not how it works. You need consensus for reliability, not the other way around.
Avgeekamfot (
talk) 15:47, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
- If you want to take a source considered reliable by everybody else on Wikipedia and flip it on its head, you do indeed need a damn good argument as to why. RedundancyAdvocate ( talk) 20:52, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- That's not how it works. You need consensus for reliability, not the other way around.
Avgeekamfot (
talk) 15:47, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
- Reading further: "it is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution." And "Once an editor has provided any source they believe, in good faith, to be sufficient, then any editor who later removes the material must articulate specific problems that would justify its exclusion from Wikipedia (e.g. why the source is unreliable; the source does not support the claim; undue emphasis; unencyclopedic content; etc.)"
-
WP:CHALLENGE: "The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material." Burden of proof is on you if you want to use Simple Flying, not on me if I want to remove it.
Avgeekamfot (
talk) 23:17, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
- "You need consensus for a source to be reliable, not the opposite."
- You need consensus for a source to be reliable, not the opposite. There's clearly no consensus that Simple Flying is unreliable so I will be removing them as I see them. If you believe that its use is valid where I've removed it, you are welcome to seek consensus to re-add it.
Avgeekamfot (
talk) 09:43, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
Hi.. There is a discussion about reliability of SimpleFlying on RSN. More opinions are welcome. Thank you. Ckfasdf ( talk) 00:08, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
Hello. In a recent edit to the page
Aerolíneas Argentinas, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to
respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.
For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, India, or Pakistan, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the first author of the article used.
In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. Jetstreamer Talk 12:23, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Regarding the above,
MOS:RETAIN applies.--
Jetstreamer
Talk 12:42, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Hey, assume this is regarding Aerolíneas Argentinas. I understand that MOS:RETAIN applies but the article was already inconsistent which goes against WP:ARTCON. I'm not comfortable enough in British English which is why I switched it to be consistently American English. According to MOS:RETAIN: "When no English variety has been established and discussion does not resolve the issue, use the variety found in the first post- stub revision that introduced an identifiable variety." I reviewed the earliest versions of the article which is clearly in American English ("recognizing" not "recognising", "traveled" not "travelled", "airplane" not "aeroplane") so it seems to me that, given the inconsistency in the article as it stands, standardizing things to American English is appropriate. Obviously, open to your thoughts here but otherwise will re-implement. Avgeekamfot ( talk) 19:17, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Wikipedia:Simple Flying
A tag has been placed on Wikipedia:Simple Flying requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:
This a page unilaterally created by a user that claims a source is not reliable. A clear consensus is required before proceeding with this.
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Jetstreamer Talk 12:41, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @ Jetstreamer - I did create the essay but I don't believe a consensus is needed to do that given the consensus on Simple Flying. The essay tag in the header states: "contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors". In this case, the essay reflects the consensus reached on the Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard regarding Simple Flying and just gives me/others an easy place to link for explanation. Looks like the tag was removed but I obviously have no objection if you feel anything in the essay does not represent the consensus or best practice want to collaborate on it. Avgeekamfot ( talk) 18:40, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
The article Merger of Alaska Airlines and Hawaiian Airlines has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
The limited information in this article could be covered on the Alaska Airlines and Hawaiian Airlines pages.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
RickyCourtney (
talk) 18:10, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
Nomination of Merger of Alaska Airlines and Hawaiian Airlines for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Merger of Alaska Airlines and Hawaiian Airlines until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.RickyCourtney ( talk) 21:13, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at
Talk:LiveJasmin on a "Economy, trade, and companies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 06:31, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
Dispute on Talk:LiveJasmin#Latest_proposed_"Controversy"_section_improved_after_a_number_of_suggestions_from_the_community
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.
Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!
Alexfotios ( talk) 21:24, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello, and thank you for your edits.
Just to make sure, remember to follow the correct format for airport pages. Use “begins,” not “starts” when listing a new route. The correct format can be seen at WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT
Thank you! ( VenFlyer98 ( talk) 22:56, 15 July 2023 (UTC))
Interesting. Thanks for the information and link!
Badr Mohammed Al Meer moved to draftspace
Thanks for your contributions to Badr Mohammed Al Meer. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.
Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Jamiebuba ( talk) 08:23, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
You might want to submit evidence about SimplyFlying to User talk:Headbomb/unreliable. It is a good intermediate step short of getting source onto the Wikipedia deprecated list, which takes a lot of work. Best read the Unreliable/Predatory Source Detector FAQ first. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 ( talk) 17:22, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for this advice. Avgeekamfot ( talk) 10:08, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
I saw you removed a number of citations to Simple Flying by claiming this is not a reliable source. Can you please direct me to the discusssion in which it was stated so? Jetstreamer Talk 20:52, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
- I most recently tried to spark a wider discussion for a clearer outcome but only one editor replied. A past discussion is
here. Per the suggestion of another user above on my talk page, it's also been added to
User:Headbomb/unreliable. Based on my reading of
WP:RS and evaluation of Simple Flying, it seems to clearly fail the requirements. Do you disagree?
Avgeekamfot (
talk) 10:14, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
- If in doubt, let's don't use it. Thanks.--
Jetstreamer
Talk 12:30, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
- I can't see any reason to label it unreliable. RedundancyAdvocate ( talk) 20:42, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- If in doubt, let's don't use it. Thanks.--
Jetstreamer
Talk 12:30, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
- @
Avgeekamfot I cannot see any improvement on deleting the SimpleFlying references and exchanging them with {{cn}} without having a consensus.
- As you have seen by yourself, the discussions you mentioned are not real discussion per lack of participants. Please start a topic on
WP:Aviation about that topic.
- Second before just exchanging the references with {{cn}}, please have a sufficient research first, if you find a reference that is more reliable for you to exchange it with. 80.187.75.188 ( talk) 23:32, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
- "In fact, among aviation enthusiasts, Simple Flying is widely viewed as a content farm which regularly publishes inaccurate and plagiarized articles."
- For this claim there is also a reliable reference missing.
80.187.75.188 (
talk) 23:42, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
- You need consensus for a source to be reliable, not the opposite. There's clearly no consensus that Simple Flying is unreliable so I will be removing them as I see them. If you believe that its use is valid where I've removed it, you are welcome to seek consensus to re-add it.
Avgeekamfot (
talk) 09:43, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
- "You need consensus for a source to be reliable, not the opposite."
- Per which Wikipedia rule? The user Headbomb is a user and does not equal Wikipedia consensus or its regulations.
- References on Wikipedia are stated unreliable or are deprecated by consensus.
- I wonder how you want to know something about reliable sources as you could't give one for the quoted sentence you wrote. Just refering to "aviation enthusiasts" is not a reliable source per
WP:RELIABLE.
80.187.73.104 (
talk) 16:16, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
-
WP:CHALLENGE: "The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material." Burden of proof is on you if you want to use Simple Flying, not on me if I want to remove it.
Avgeekamfot (
talk) 23:17, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
- Reading further: "it is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution." And "Once an editor has provided any source they believe, in good faith, to be sufficient, then any editor who later removes the material must articulate specific problems that would justify its exclusion from Wikipedia (e.g. why the source is unreliable; the source does not support the claim; undue emphasis; unencyclopedic content; etc.)"
- Regarding the second quote, your articulation why SimpleFlying may be unrealiable is not sufficient. Referring to some "aviation enthusiasts" is not enough. Just stating it does not meet WP:RS without further explanation is also not enough. "it seems to clearly fail the requirements" is not a factual argument.
- WP does not have a whitelist for reliable sources. But a blacklist for unrealiable and deprecated sources:
WP:RSP. SimpleFlying is not listed as an unreliable source in that list. Get consensus to get it listed there.
80.187.73.104 (
talk) 00:30, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
- That's not how it works. You need consensus for reliability, not the other way around.
Avgeekamfot (
talk) 15:47, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
- If you want to take a source considered reliable by everybody else on Wikipedia and flip it on its head, you do indeed need a damn good argument as to why. RedundancyAdvocate ( talk) 20:52, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- That's not how it works. You need consensus for reliability, not the other way around.
Avgeekamfot (
talk) 15:47, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
- Reading further: "it is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution." And "Once an editor has provided any source they believe, in good faith, to be sufficient, then any editor who later removes the material must articulate specific problems that would justify its exclusion from Wikipedia (e.g. why the source is unreliable; the source does not support the claim; undue emphasis; unencyclopedic content; etc.)"
-
WP:CHALLENGE: "The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material." Burden of proof is on you if you want to use Simple Flying, not on me if I want to remove it.
Avgeekamfot (
talk) 23:17, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
- "You need consensus for a source to be reliable, not the opposite."
- You need consensus for a source to be reliable, not the opposite. There's clearly no consensus that Simple Flying is unreliable so I will be removing them as I see them. If you believe that its use is valid where I've removed it, you are welcome to seek consensus to re-add it.
Avgeekamfot (
talk) 09:43, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
Hi.. There is a discussion about reliability of SimpleFlying on RSN. More opinions are welcome. Thank you. Ckfasdf ( talk) 00:08, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
Hello. In a recent edit to the page
Aerolíneas Argentinas, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to
respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.
For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, India, or Pakistan, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the first author of the article used.
In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. Jetstreamer Talk 12:23, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Regarding the above,
MOS:RETAIN applies.--
Jetstreamer
Talk 12:42, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Hey, assume this is regarding Aerolíneas Argentinas. I understand that MOS:RETAIN applies but the article was already inconsistent which goes against WP:ARTCON. I'm not comfortable enough in British English which is why I switched it to be consistently American English. According to MOS:RETAIN: "When no English variety has been established and discussion does not resolve the issue, use the variety found in the first post- stub revision that introduced an identifiable variety." I reviewed the earliest versions of the article which is clearly in American English ("recognizing" not "recognising", "traveled" not "travelled", "airplane" not "aeroplane") so it seems to me that, given the inconsistency in the article as it stands, standardizing things to American English is appropriate. Obviously, open to your thoughts here but otherwise will re-implement. Avgeekamfot ( talk) 19:17, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Wikipedia:Simple Flying
A tag has been placed on Wikipedia:Simple Flying requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:
This a page unilaterally created by a user that claims a source is not reliable. A clear consensus is required before proceeding with this.
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Jetstreamer Talk 12:41, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @ Jetstreamer - I did create the essay but I don't believe a consensus is needed to do that given the consensus on Simple Flying. The essay tag in the header states: "contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors". In this case, the essay reflects the consensus reached on the Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard regarding Simple Flying and just gives me/others an easy place to link for explanation. Looks like the tag was removed but I obviously have no objection if you feel anything in the essay does not represent the consensus or best practice want to collaborate on it. Avgeekamfot ( talk) 18:40, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
The article Merger of Alaska Airlines and Hawaiian Airlines has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
The limited information in this article could be covered on the Alaska Airlines and Hawaiian Airlines pages.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
RickyCourtney (
talk) 18:10, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
Nomination of Merger of Alaska Airlines and Hawaiian Airlines for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Merger of Alaska Airlines and Hawaiian Airlines until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.RickyCourtney ( talk) 21:13, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at
Talk:LiveJasmin on a "Economy, trade, and companies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 06:31, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
Dispute on Talk:LiveJasmin#Latest_proposed_"Controversy"_section_improved_after_a_number_of_suggestions_from_the_community
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.
Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!
Alexfotios ( talk) 21:24, 9 April 2024 (UTC)