User talk:FoxyOrange

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 31 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

Thanks for the catch, but how did you happen to notice the malware present on the page? I'm not exactly interested in going back to the site and finding out myself... I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 17:55, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jethrobot, on my computer an anti-virus program called BitDefender is running. When I clicked your link, I got simply a white screen with a bold message that the site had been blocked because malware was detected. I'm also using the Firefox browser, where I have the Web of Trust (WOT) addon installed, which marks links to pages which bad reputations.--FoxyOrange (talk) 18:06, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 1 August 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Lufthansa Flight 615, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that West German authorities were accused of having tolerated the hijacking of a Lufthansa jet in order to "get rid of three murderers"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lufthansa Flight 615. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 16:05, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi again FoxyOrange. Cool that you got a DYK for Lufthansa Flight 615. I just wanted to let you know that I've removed Planespotters.net as a support for the fleet table at Libyan Airlines, as it's not a reliable source. Sp33dyphil (talk · contribs) and I had a discussion regarding the inclusion of this source and aerotransport.org, and s(he) pointed out that the inclusion of ch-aviation is more suitable, as this one seems to be more professional (I'm actually in the process of replacing aerotransport for ch-aviation in many articles). Please let me know what you think. Cheers.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 16:35, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, no offense taken. I am under the impression that there is not really any (reliability) difference between planespotters, airfleets and ch-aviation, though. I cannot see why an (alleged) more professional "look" should be used as an argument in such a question. Personally, I prefer planespotters, as no conscription is needed, and seating configurations are displayed, too (as you have removed this source, the configs for the A320 of Libyan Airlines are now unreferenced, btw). Because all three websites are ubiquitiously used as sources for Wikipedia articles, one could argue that their reliability is established by normal editing consensus.--FoxyOrange (talk) 16:45, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I have to add that I really should not have chosen to add that source: You had already caught me once before and said that it is likely not reliable. Compared to your great work, I tend to be quite sloppy with my referencing (though I'd say that I did quite a good job at Lufthansa Flight 615). Unfortunately, news articles about airlines usually only deal with a recent order or delivery, and do not give an overview of the whole fleet.--FoxyOrange (talk) 16:54, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notifying you is the appropriate. Hope you don't mind me inviting people into this discussion (I already did with Sp33dyphil). As with hijackings, maybe it's time for raising this matter at WT:AIRLINE too. In the meantime, MilborneOne (talk · contribs)'s opinion will be appreciated. I'll be watching.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 17:00, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've just posted at WT:Airlines.--FoxyOrange (talk) 17:29, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please familiarize yourself with the latest requirement for cargo destinations at Wikipedia:AIRPORT-CONTENT#Body. You need a proof it is a cargo flight. DHL/Aerologic network map offers no such evidence and doesn't even indicate a direction or stops. Most of your additions should be removed. HkCaGu (talk) 16:52, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear HkCaGu, thanks for your comment. As I have been absent from Wikipedia during 2012, I seem to have lost track about how to list cargo destinations. I will study that guideline now. Anyways, I can't really understand why the (in my opinion properly sourced) statement "AeroLogic operates cargo flights on behalf of Lufthansa Cargo to Atlanta, Chicago, Los Angeles Houston and Toronto" would not be allowed for destination listings. Best regards--FoxyOrange (talk) 17:08, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can only see "AeroLogic serves" which has ambiguous meanings. Is it really a cargo flight? Why isn't it found on LH Cargo's schedule? Does it fly XXX-FRA nonstop? These are the things that we now ask to prevent the unlimited proliferation of listings that have plagued many airports' articles. HkCaGu (talk) 17:17, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Am I correct in thinking you removed the CAA house crest and changed the logo color to black?

If so, the roundel was always Oxford Blue and the house crest was equal to the logo in importance on the aircraft (crest on nose and roundel on tail).

My knowledge is based on my being the draughtsman for the airline and I did the original livery drawings.

Tnuag (talk) 07:10, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]