User talk:DB

Please place your comments under the appropriate category (if you don't, I will).

Positive Comments

Welcome

Hi DB, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for your contributions to the coolest online encyclopedia I know of =). I sure hope you stick around; we're always in need of more people to create new articles and improve the ones we already have. You'll probably find it easiest to start with a tutorial of how the wikipedia works, and you can test stuff for yourself in the sandbox. When you're contributing, you'll probably find the manual of style to be helpful, and you'll also want to remember a couple important guidelines. First, write from a neutral point of view, second, be bold in editing pages, and third, use wikiquette. Those are probably the most important ones, and you can take a look at some others at the policies and guidelines page. You might also be interested in how to write a great article and possibly adding some images to your articles. Be sure to get involved in the community – you can contact me at my talk page if you have any questions, and you can check out the village pump, where lots of wikipedians hang out and discuss things. If you're looking for something to do, check out the community portal. And whenever you ask a question or post something on a talk page, be sure to sign your name by typing ~~~~. Again, welcome! It's great to have you. Happy editing! --Spangineer (háblame) June 29, 2005 14:41 (UTC)

Airline Infoboxes

Thanks for updating that information on the Southwest Airlines and Westjet pages. Phoenix2 04:59, August 11, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting and updating counter:)

Thanks for reverting and updating counter:). These vandals to my user page, courages me for fighting against them:) We must stay cool as cucumber:)--Ugur Basak 22:49, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I think the user's been blocked, fortunately. Dbinder 22:55, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually user names or ips doesn't matter. One goes, one comes. By the way, you organized your usertalk page interesting.--Ugur Basak 23:00, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Constructive Criticism

787 infobox

I see you've added a specs infobox to Boeing 787 despite there already being a specs table at the bottom. Also, the aircraft wikiproject has abandoned the infobox in favor of an inline list-based format, so adding an infobox (with the old colors, no less) to a new/ongoing article is a bit out of fashion. So—just letting you know that if you don't change/remove it, someone else very probably will. Have a good one! -eric ✈ 16:49, 12 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Despite the modifications to the infobox, it's still not really acceptable. Here's one reason why. For various others, as discussed at the wikiproject, I'm removing it from the 3 or 4 other Boeing airliners you've added it to. If you can work out the issues of page alignment without moving the images then go for it, otherwise please refrain. -eric ✈ 20:41, 13 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Asiamiles

The main thing that tipped me into keeping it is the fact it's still used on a couple of fairly major airline articles. If you could get that sorted out, I'm sure it could be re-listed and would probably go through unopposed. Dan100 (Talk) 14:25, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

Middle East Airlines Wikipedia page

Hi, could you please stop renaming the name of the airline to Middle East Airlines, Air Liban.

Air Liban was Lebanon's other major airline which ceased to exist as an independent entity in 1963 when it merged with MEA.

For a brief while after the merger, the airline marketed itself as "Middle East Airlines - Air Liban" however, the Air Liban part quickly disappeared and it just became "Middle East Airlines" again.

The only remnant of the Air Liban name is in the title of the parent company which is Middle East Airlines / Air Liban SAL. This is the equivalent of AMR Corp and UAL Corp. However, you don't say "I'm flying on UAL Corp." you always say "I'm flying on United Airlines" or "I'm flying on United."

SAL stands for Société Anonyme Libanaise (it's French) which is just the incorporation form of a basic Joint Stock Company offered by the Lebanese government.

I hope this clears the misunderstanding. I know the press releases about MEA joining SkyTeam as an associate member have used "Middle East Airlines, Air Liban" but this is incorrect. Air Liban is only left in the name of the parent company and it is even sometimes left out. Sometimes you will just see "Middle East Airlines SAL." The only reason why it is officially left is for nostalgic and historical purposes.

You can check out their website for more information: http://www.mea.com.lb

And for historical information, this is an amazing website: http://wassch71.tripod.com/cedarjetpages.html

Thank you for your understanding.

Hello, as I have stated, Middle East Airlines / Air Liban is only left in the name of the parent company.

MEA does not market itself as Middle East Airlines / Air Liban. When you fly them, you will not once hear them announce themselves as Air Liban. It is always just Middle East Airlines.

Take a look at the message left by the chairman: http://www.mea.com.lb/MEA/English/Corporate/ChairmanMessage.htm

In his message, he always refers to the airline as MEA or Middle East Airlines. Middle East Airlines / Air Liban is the name of the company, but they market themselves as Middle East Airlines.

Go on Airliners.net and check out some photos of MEA, you will not find anywhere the word "Air Liban." The word "Air Liban" ceased to exist after the merger and was kept in the name of the parent company for historical and nostalgic purposes, but the airline no longer markets itself as Middle East Airlines / Air Liban. They only marketted themselves "Middle East Airlines - Air Liban" after the merger, then it disappeared entirely.

To give you an example, check out the American Airlines page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines

The title of the airline is American Airlines and the title of the parent company is AMR Corporation. To change the airline name to Middle East Airlines, Air Liban as you did would be the equivelant of changing the airline name from American Airlines to AMR Corporation when this is not true.

I stress again, the name of the airline is Middle East Airlines, not Middle East Airlines / Air Liban. Only the parent company is called Middle East Airlines / Air Liban. The CEO, Mohammed El-Hout is the CEO of the company Middle East Airlines / Air Liban SAL, but the airline markets itself as Middle East Airlines.

Again, go on Airliners.net and look at some pictures of MEA. You will not see the name Air Liban anywhere because the airline hasn't marketed itself Middle East Airlines / Air Liban in more than 30 years.

The full legal name of the airline is Middle East Airlines or MEA. The name of the parent company is Middle East Airlines / Air Liban SAL. There is a difference.

Middle East Airlines / Air Liban SAL owns three other subsidiaries, they are Middle East Airports Services (MEAS), Middle East Airlines Ground Handling (MEAG) and Mideast Aircraft Services Company (MASCO).

Age of consent

Thanks for your non-anonymous edit on this page, it's refreshing change. However you didn't leave a comment as to why you ~~deleted~~ edited the text. Could you please give us the reasons behind your edit? Also if you have any authorities to back up your edit perhaps you would like to cite them as per the notes in each section and the talk page's "AoC Challenge" topic. Cheers :) Monotonehell 06:19, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry that was meant to read 'edited' not 'deleted' up there. That's great that you've cited an authority! Thank you very much. Only a few hundred more entries to go - lol. Monotonehell 10:54, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Friendly Reminder

When using template tags on talk pages, don't forget to substitute with text by adding subst: to the template tag. For example, use {{subst:test}} instead of {{test}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template.

FYI, this reminder was sparked by your not subst'ing the afd2 template on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Singapore Airlines fleet, making it impossible to edit it from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 17:05, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/O.A. Accidents

Please read my comment in this AFD discussion. If material is merged its edit history needs to be retained. Therefore it's not allowed to delete it. Please finish a merge with the creation of a redirect. - Mgm|^(talk) 22:39, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Airline Logotypes

I've noticed many of the logotypes you've added to airline pages appear to be from the Aerosite.net logotypr library. Use of the logotypes is OK, but I do ask that you credit Aerosite as the source of the images. Thanks! Aerosite 14:55, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Civilized Discussions

Special Branch

Hi Dbinder I noticed your edit summary to list of intelligence agencies. Perhaps you'd be interested to take a look at the lengthy discussion at its talk page. :-) — Insta ntnood 19:20, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks so much Dbinder. Hope your input can help resolve the dispute. :-) — Insta ntnood 21:27, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

Northwest international gateways vs. focus cities

Hi, thanks for your edit on the focus cities. I agree with you about that. I added those cities only because there were some there that I didn't think were already some cities (like SFO and JFK and HNL) listed there which were gateways and not more. And once I added those cities. I was considering that I had made a mistake by placing them there.

If we look at all the AS flights that connect to SEA and PDX flights to HNL and NRT, that kind of makes them look like focus cities as well as gateways. But I think that if we are strict about applying the focus defnition, then only MKE and IND are focus cities, not PDX/SEA with their AS code-share flights.

What do you think about another category in the table for international gateway cities which are not hubs? For instance, SFO is a gateway city for NW, but a hub for UA.

Airline infoboxes v lists

Notice quite a few of these getting added, and then edited to remove the "redundant" code & callsign info in the list based format (in particular for CSA Czech Airlines). Do you have a pointer to some background on this? Wangi 13:53, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

About the BDL thing

most airport destination lists I've seen on wikipedia only use Hartford. And I'm generally in favor of keeping destination lists as short as possible - people have already complained that there sort of long and unsightly and possibly should be removed. My general impression is that most people just refer to the airport as Bradley, rather than any city name. And entering the code BDL into a bunch of online price comparison pages, I got 4 that list it as Hartford, one that lists it as Hartford/Springfield, and one that lists as Windsor Locks. Anyway, like I said, if I thought the destination list were a place where being long and more precise was better (such as the page of the airport itself), I would definitely advocate including Springfield.Rdore 00:36, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! That was fast!

So, what brought you to my talk page? I agree with you, the affair is rather comical... Thanks for thinking of me! Paul Klenk 15:49, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I get it; thanks for replying. If you can think of any way to help, let me know. Paul Klenk 15:59, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The bold text in oneworld (airlines)

Hi, I just read your discussion in the talk page and subsequent decision. I have to say that I don't agree with your conclusion that it "can be formatted for first use". First, I'll admit I don't agree that this should apply to font sizes or bold or italic text, unless, as the style guide says, "it has to". Second, and more importantly, it contradicts with Wikipedia:Style#Article_titles, which says that the first use of the title should be in bold. I think this section is pretty clear, and I think it is an important convention to keep Wikipedia consistent. I agree with another user that the formatting is clearly displayed in the logo, which is also at the top of the page. I didn't want to just change it back though. Your thoughts? --Renesis13 01:22, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD votes

Hello,

Sorry if I ruffled your feathers with my comments about the AfD process. In the short time that I've been observing AfD's - a couple weeks or so - I've noticed that groupthink is a common problem. Starting off the discussion with a redundant Delete. doesn't seem to me to do anything to alleviate that problem; it may worsen it. Since AfD is not a majority vote, there's no reason for the nominator's opinion to be counted; assuming good faith on the nominator's part, his opinion is assumed to be obvious (in favor of deletion), and its grounds verifiable by others (or else he would not be submitting it for consideration).

WP:AGF is fine as far as it goes, but by the time that deletion of an article and all its past edits are being considered, that guideline is being weighed against many others. Many of the articles that get deleted on AfD were actually originated in bad faith; occasionally even an AfD is submitted in bad faith. Because of this, I would submit to you that AfD is not a part of Wikipedia where it is safe to assume good faith all the time. In this, indeed, it differs from the main namespace, where article editing rests on the assumption of good faith.

I appreciate your devotion to Wikipedia and its various policies and processes, whether we continue to disagree or not. Ikkyu2 09:58, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, just for your information, I don't know which AfD you were involved in, and I have posted similar comments in a few AfDs. I've tried not to leave such comments in any AfD in which I have either voted or have an opinion as to how the vote should go. This is my way of trying to act in good faith. -Ikkyu2 10:03, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE: G.W. box

Could you give me the link, I didn't know about it. --Ter e nc e Ong (恭喜发财) 03:46, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oops....I meant where is the link of what Jimbo said about this. --Ter e nc e Ong (恭喜发财) 03:59, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Singapore Articles

Dbinder, you're right, those SGpedians have their own way of writing an article. I don't deal with illogical people. But so as to be clear, I made an explicit notation in both Wikiprojects that the articles of Changi Airport and Singapore Airlines are not part of the project, thus, not standardized. Elektrik Blue 82 14:36, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adria Airways: Russia/Russian Federation

Hi, I'm just wondering what difference does it really make it if Russia or the Russian Federation is written. I just think it's a bit odd to editing an article just to change the name from Russia to the Russian Federation since the country's article is under Russia, and 90% of the references made are to Russia, not to the Russian Federation. edolen1 16:18, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, okay, I can agree with that. It was just that I did take a quick glance at some other articles and the 4 or 5 articles I checked out all had Russia, not the Russian Federation. edolen1 16:43, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unprovoked Attacks

787 Infobox (Continued)

I see that you chose to ignore my request and haven't brought this new addition up with wp:air at all. That really would be the most polite of your options, especially if anonymous users are going to claim that I'm "vandalizing" the article that I and several other users have been cooperating on for quite some time. We just had a survey as well as an ongoing discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aircraft that has arrived at not using infoboxes for aircraft information. If you worked with us, rather than parallel to us, we might be able to improve the article in a more effective manner. There really are a dozen or so reasons why tables in general are unwanted, particularly at the top of the page; they're in the survey linked from the talk page as well as on the talk page itself. Thank you in advance for cooperating with the project. -eric ✈ 00:52, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Clarifications / Answers

787 infobox (continued)

Sorry if I came off wrong; I'm not attacking or accusing you of anything (although I kind of wish the infobox had been a less intense shade of green). Please note that I've not removed the boxes a second time. I'm simply asking - since some other users feel the infobox contains useful information, and because I think it could be worked into the article more smoothly - that you work with the project. If you don't want to, that's fine. We'll figure something out.

I'm not the only one in the project who dislikes infoboxes, but as I'm a web designer who works with semantic code and web standards, I'm the most vocal about it. Because the Wikipedia is addicted to infoboxes, I need to be vocal to make the reasons understood. For example: adding the boxes, particularly to the 767 article, really messes with how pages look in the browser - I'm not sure if you'd noticed or checked. This is my biggest issue with them, that they force wikipedia editors to write and lay out their pages around the infobox rather than the other way around. Images, additional tables, headers - they all get forced around by the table. They're also inaccessible to less-able readers, a group which I feel the Wikipedia should go out of its way to accommodate in ways a print encyclopedia never can.

As writer, I feel that the information you'd placed in the infobox might as well be threaded into the introduction rather than presented as a standalone block. Some of the information you've added to 787 (in particular) contradicts what is in the main body: launch is scheduled for 2008, and the 3 is short, not medium-range. As I already said - I'm not going to remove them again. If or when you (or someone) else ever integrates them better into the articles or cleans up the infobox (which is why I dropped a message to user:xmnemonic, cleaning up wikipedia tables is what he does) then I'll do what I can. Again - sorry for the miscommunication on my part. -eric ✈ 16:53, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Glad we've gotten this worked out. The wikiproject doesn't have any real rules by a long shot, mostly replacing them with opinionated loud people, so thanks for agreeing to work on how the information is presented. For some examples of some articles we in the project have been able to really refine, check out B-36 Peacemaker (ex-Featured Article) and PBY Catalina (ongoing). -eric ✈ 17:13, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Swiss & South African

In regards to your question about LX and SAA joining the Star Alliance, I read a thread on airlines.net stating the move, must've been a rumor. But according to UA's website the two airlines will be joining on the 31st of this month, with codeshares beginning immediately. We can edit Star Alliance page then. Apologies if my message is in the wrong category Jendeyoung 07:22, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bold text in oneworld

replied Thanks/wangi 14:48, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Airline articles

Wow. I was only trying to remove a single external link, I have no idea how all that happened. Sorry about that. // Pathoschild 23:29, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

On a related note, would you mind telling me why you replaced my user page with text from my talk page? // Pathoschild 23:36, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Narita

It is just common sense that this is NOT a hub. They offer very little in the way of connections from NRT. Where is the Vietnam flight oritionating from. Use your head man, Narita is far far far from a hub for united.

Read this one. NRT may have been at one time, but it is not anymore. A hub is define loosely as more than 50 departures a day. NRT is not a hub Hubs