User talk:Steelpillow

Talk archives (Please do not edit archive pages! All posts should go on my current talk page.)
· 2006-10 · 2011-12 · 2013-14 · 2015 · 2016-17 · 2018-19 · 2020-22 ·

I seem to have burned out on Wikipedia. I said all I have to say long ago. Nowadays it's all about arguing with fanatics and dickheads over what to cut. So I decided to get my life back instead, cleared my Watchlist and faded away.

Sane Wikipedians are welcome to PM me. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 19:40, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of electric aircraft: the Pipistrel G4 is NOT the heaviest

... as claimed in its "note". Its max gross of 1497 kg is eclipsed by the Solar Impulse 2's 2300 kg, even if it is not clear whether that indicates empty weight or max gross or whatever. The article is obviously still in the works so I won't go meddling with it right now, still I thought you would find the information useful. BTW my congrats on the concept of this article! Keep up the good work! Jan olieslagers (talk) 16:36, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. There are a lot of contradictory claims in there, I think most of them need to be stripped out. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 18:24, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Locos and caps

Thanks - I was worried you'd hate it! Cheers DBaK (talk) 11:49, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For your great work on de Havilland DH.88 Sario528 (talk) 20:23, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Much appreciated. Still more to do, though. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 08:54, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Downs Malvern

Apologies. Not quite sure how I managed to do that but it was unintentional. I'll fix it for you. CalzGuy (talk) 12:17, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I see you fixed it. CalzGuy (talk) 12:18, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sweden EHS at Electromagnetic hypersensitivity - reopened discussion

I would appreciate your comments at Talk:Electromagnetic hypersensitivity#Reopening Sweden EHS matter --papageno (talk) 04:38, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

your comment

I suggest that you strike "sneaky lying fakery" here. Jytdog (talk) 11:58, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, you are right. Now done. But dare I say that I find it a bit "bizarre" when an experienced editor calls another one out on a word, without first checking the meaning of it?

— Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 12:43, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

John William Dunne

I don't have a problem with the photo per se. It would be just fine if there was a portrait of Dunne to compare and to avoid misidentification. In the pioneer aviation era shop assistants etc. often sat at the controls for portraits. The Science Museum could also be mislead or wrong if they assumed it was Dunne at the controls and did not back it up with a confirmed portrait of the man. Koplimek (talk) 20:29, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Whether we believe the Museum to be right or wrong is not relevant. The Museum is a reliable source and that's what matters to Wikipedia. It has an enlargement of this image on the wall of its Flight Gallery, with the caption, "J W Dunne. ... " Also, Here is a copy in Getty Images which it took me about 30 seconds to google, with the title, "J.W. Dunne in D.5". It would have taken you all of 30 seconds too, and there are more examples to find out there. (What you won't find on the Internet, as it lies unpublished in the Museum's archives, is a wonderful image of Dunne's sister May sat at the controls of this same machine, replete with Edwardian wide-brimmed floral hat tied with ribbon under her chin. This does not lead me to suggest that one of them was the other character cross-dressing!) — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 07:49, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Getty Images captions are not to be trusted just like Wikipedia is not to be trusted without other source verification. You do know that internet sites copy verbatim what they see elsewhere in other words playing monkey-see monkey-do. I've corrected captions under GettyImages back when they were Corbis. Museums are not beyond scrutiny if the occasion so arises. If something looks out of kilter then it should be questioned. Like I said, I've had a copy of this template photo since 1979 when I bought the book by Munson and Taylor. No where does it say that it's Dunne in the controls, just that it's his D5 model tailless. Munson & Taylor are not beyond reproach either, but should have described the designer sitting at the controls of his own machine.Koplimek (talk) 13:17, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So, go bring us RS that proves the Museum wrong. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 14:28, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Steelpillow, thanks for letting me know the research you did in IDing a photo of Mr. Dunne. An interesting character in his writings on time travel. He sometimes reminds me of Marcel Proust. Were you in direct contact with his granddaughter? All My Best. Koplimek (talk) 22:42, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. I am working on a biography. She inherited all his papers several years ago but had no room for them. Many of them have ended up in the Science Museum archive centre. I have been corresponding with her and met her once when we both visited his home for many years at Broughton Castle, Oxfordshire. There is so much "fake news" about Dunne by authors who should know better, but Wikipedia has to peddle it faithfully until someone like me can get the truth into an RS. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 07:37, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wataniya Airways

You removed airlines historic destinations, why? all were referenced and in new table format, now it's just current routes in old text list style, I requested to stop vandalising historic referenced content, not remove it.139.190.254.44 (talk) 02:49, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Because there was an edit war going on and it needed to be stopped. That was my only reason. Now that it has calmed down, the place to - politely - discuss the content of the article is at Talk:Wataniya Airways, not here. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 08:37, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not getting what you admin are up to, I created a list of former and new routes with refs in table format per wiki standards, this other chap is removing it and creating an old text style list with just new destinations, which part needs consensus and what are you people deliberating over? where is admin jetstreamer? 139.190.254.44 (talk) 01:59, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am not an admin, just an ordinary editor with a bit of experience. You seem unable to grasp that I intervened because of bad behaviour, I am concerned only with stopping a futile ping-pong revert war and getting two strong characters to talk over their disagreement rationally and amicably before genuine admins apply more and worse sanctions. I am not concerned with the article content and will not respond to questions about it (and especially not on my user talk page), though I will try to get other more concerned editors to respond on the appropriate article talk page, The usual answer to your last question would be User talk:jetstreamer. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 08:55, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Destinations article.139.190.254.44 (talk) 09:27, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you will not discuss the issue politely on the article talk page then I cannot help you further. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 10:18, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fighter effectiveness RFC

You are right, I'm allowing the other guy to get to me. I started the RFC in an attempt to take the heat out of the discussion and to allow others to have a say. I have hardly posted in the RFC, but the other editor just seems to be taking it all way too personally. I particularly object to having words put in my mouth that I did not say, never mind the snide allusions to what I might or might not do or think. I cannot promise that I will not take him to AN/I if he has another go at me like his last couple of posts, but I will try to bite my tongue. - Nick Thorne ^talk 14:11, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If he takes a seriously outrageous pop at you, fair enough. Otherwise you'd need to go through the attempt to discuss on his talk page, etc. etc. before escalating to ANI, it's the first thing they'll ask. Softly, softly catch'ee monkey, as they say. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 15:45, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Thanks man. - Nick Thorne ^talk 16:14, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tethered balloon

Hi Steelpillow, I dont understand why you undid my revision 793707357 on the Tethered balloon article. Thx to let me know — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fallon64 (talk • contribs) 10:26, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, in my edit comment I wrote, "stay on-language". You linked to an article on the French Wikipedia. This is not appropriate to the See also section, which is meant for links within the same Wikipedia. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 11:17, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

mediawiki2latex

Hi, mediawiki2latex can handle collections now. See here http://mediawiki2latex.wmflabs.org/ and try for example with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book:River_martin Yours --Dirk Hünniger (talk) 10:03, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

no update of book creator so far

You announced in the template bookcreatorstatus that an update was scheduled to be rolled out on first of October. Up to now I can not see that this has happened yet. Yours Dirk Hünniger (talk) 11:54, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I just checked and it is still as before. All I can do is to report on current plans. According to this, the Book Creator is now to be turned off for some months - starting yesterday! — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 13:24, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Will the new software be MediaWiki2LaTeX? — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 13:32, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I got no information whether mediawiki2latex is going to be used in the new book creator. So I think it won't be used. Still mediawiki2latex is open source software and anybody can use it, even without contacting me. Dirk Hünniger (talk) 13:53, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Flying wing

Hello, I would just like to know why you canceled my ad when it was actually sourced, without discussion? thanks --Otto Didakt (talk) 15:16, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In my edit comment I wrote, "rm original research claims". "rm" is short for "remove". Your claims for Pénaud and Gauchot are not made in the source. Specifically, a) that this was the birth of the concept and b) that it included "all the characteristics of a flying wing as we know it today" both need sourcing from a reliable third party. Without such WP:RS, your claims amount to your own original research (WP:OR) which is not allowed on the English Wikipedia. Hope this helps. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 18:28, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clancy's Aerodynamics

Hi Steelpillow. If my memory serves me correctly, you sometimes cite Aerodynamics by L.J. Clancy in your work on Wikipedia. If you have a copy of Clancy you might feel like responding to the following request: diff. Regards, Dolphin (t) 12:17, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I have done so. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 13:06, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why was content removed (multiple time dimensions)?

Dear Steelpillow

Could you briefly elaborate why you removed my editing in the Wikipedia article about "Multiple time dimensions"?

Thx Darkch2 (talk) 22:54, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have just revisited your edit and I owe you a sincere and profuse apology. I misread it the first time round and misjudged it badly, I don't know what came over me. I will restore it and, perhaps, do a little tidying but will make no change of substance. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 10:13, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Way to contact me

Dear steelpillow thank you for your work and for your message. But please, if you have just something send me informations only with the wikipedia e-mail [1] or may on some of the articles talk page (if you see in the history that "some" person was not also editing on this page). I think after the last message you left on my talk page and what happend after.. my talkplage.. you knew i am wikihoundet by some since many years. Thank you.FFA P-16 (talk) 10:40, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]