User talk:Targetboy2498

March 2024

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Northwest Arkansas National Airport, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. VenFlyer98 (talk) 01:59, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good afternoon I only make changes that are accurate to scheduled operations for US Airlines, not all schedule changes are independently announced, as in this particular case. Please do not un-due accurate changes based off scheduled flights according to the airlines themselves. Thank you kindly for your understanding. Targetboy2498 (talk) 19:41, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Northwest Arkansas National Airport, you may be blocked from editing. You need to provide independent sources per WP:V and WP:RS. Your edits can be reverted/removed if you do not provide reliable sources.

Thank you. VenFlyer98 (talk) 22:27, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are currently no independent articles that states the aircraft upgrade on May 23. If you can find the source than add it. Nonetheless it still is scheduled. I will have you banned if you continue to change accurate information if you continue to do so. Thank you for your understanding. Targetboy2498 (talk) 18:27, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Targetboy2498:

Again, you need to provide independent sources. This is stated at WP:RS and at WP:V. These are part of the rules of Wikipedia. Reverting for not including reliable sources is not something you can ban over. You are also not an administrator so I'm not sure how you'd even ban me in the first place. Other people shouldn't have to find sources for you, if you're making the edit, include a reliable source or wait to make the edit until one becomes available.

Thank you.

(VenFlyer98 (talk) 20:01, 27 March 2024 (UTC))[reply]

Good afternoon again. I appreciate your resilient persistence in following guidelines. In regards to a source unfortunately there probably won't be. But that's okay because United Airlines themselves have it scheduled as I have mentioned numerous times. Look up the flight. I'm glad we have reached an understanding. From one aviation enthusiast to another. Have a good one. Targetboy2498 (talk) 20:52, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Targetboy2498:

Again I reverted, Wikipedia's policies require independent sources. WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT states you need independent sources. Give the guidelines a read when you have the chance.

Thank you. VenFlyer98 (talk) 23:40, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. I’m not sure if you’ve been getting my messages. I think I got banned but I was able to get off of it. I think someone banned or reported me for no good reason. But the flight for United on A319 starts May 23. I wanted to get approval from you first because I didn’t know you were Wikipedia Jesus. Would it be okay to edit that service start? Thank you very much kind sir. Targetboy2498 (talk) 01:45, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Targetboy2498:

Well, I don’t appreciate the sarcasm. You don’t need my approval for anything, but you clearly aren’t reading WP:RS, WP:V, or WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT. You need an INDEPENDENT, verifiable source when adding content, which you repeatedly are not doing. If you continue to do so, your edits will be reverted. It doesn’t matter what the flight schedules say. No independent source, it shouldn’t be on Wikipedia. Not sure how many times I can say you need an independent source. VenFlyer98 (talk) 07:48, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I completely understand your worry. I truly do. Fortunately truth always prevails in the end whether there is a source or not because regardless if someone else is out there in the world proclaiming it or not, it can still be proven fact. I do apologize for the sarcastic comment however, way out of line. I consider myself a truth seeker. Passionate for all to know how XNA works and what airlines operate out of this magnificent airport. Targetboy2498 (talk) 13:25, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Targetboy2498:

This will be my last comment here. I understand about the truth and all that. I do. However, this is Wikipedia. You need verifiable, independent sources and your content needs to include inline citations when you add information to a page. Again, I point you to WP:V, WP:RS, WP:CS, and WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT. Please give these a read, it will help you better understand what I am talking about. As I said, this will be my last comment here since this does not seem to be going anywhere. Feel free to add whatever content you want, but understand it will be reverted without a independent source. Just keep in mind that if you are constantly reverted, this may be seen as edit warring, so keep WP:3RR in mind as well.

Thank you. VenFlyer98 (talk) 19:24, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am very sad that you will no longer be replying to me. I was very much enjoying our conversation learning more about each other and resolving our differences. Please take however long you need to process and reflect on this time. I’m sure the truth will do us right and shine bright to everyone about the wonder of United using Airbus A319s at XNA. What a glorious time to be alive. I appreciate our new friendship that we have created but sad to see it end so shortly. Thank you Targetboy2498 (talk) 15:37, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

December 2024

Hello, I'm The Banner. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Philadelphia International Airport have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Removal of sources contrary of WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT The Banner talk 10:35, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Northwest Arkansas National Airport. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. The Banner talk 10:36, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I reviewed the community “guidelines” and nowhere does it say that a reference must stay attached to the route after the launch date. What “vandalism” are you witnessing? The route started, so remove the eye sore. The reference still exists in the reference section. Targetboy2498 (talk) 15:35, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to remove maintenance templates without resolving the problem that the template refers to, as you did at Northwest Arkansas National Airport, you may be blocked from editing. The Banner talk 23:34, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

‼️⚠️ Please stop adding unnecessary corrections for no reason. Doing so can cause immediate removal of you off the platform. Targetboy2498 (talk) 01:58, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I hope that you know that editing Wikipedia is a privilege, not a right. Community guidelines are there for a reason. Administrators have the right to protect the encyclopedia by taking that privilege away... The Banner talk 10:24, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto. So why undue things for no necessary reason? Targetboy2498 (talk) 23:51, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you should follow the advice of Venflyer98 a bit and take WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT serious instead of ignoring it. The Banner talk 00:19, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1. Then I expect you to add a source to all routes for every single airport on Wikipedia. There’s a lot of messing references. Be consistent.

2. Specifically for XNA none of the other routes that have started this year or at all for that matter have kept the references, including other airports. WHATS EXTRA STRANGE IS THE REFERENCE IS STILL LISTED IN THE REFERENCE SECTION AFTER REMOVING IT FROM THE TABLE. So why cherry pick this one?

3. Still specifically talking about XNA. I still never got an answer for why the Breeze flight to Orlando is still listed as a non-stop flight when that’s not actuality. I removed it and then it got added back with a reference. Interesting you didn’t need to see that. Hmm.

4. The table you added with missing context references is inaccurate because everything that’s starting has a reference attached already. IF SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE FIXED THEN FIX IT. But since there’s nothing wrong in the first place you can’t. Be consistent.

My point is these “rules” were subjectively created and are barely somewhat ever followed when looking around at the other pages. What’s funny is I agree with the “rules & regulations” when they make sense. Moreover, you’re unbearably frustratingly to following as you leave out 95% of the other “issues” still at hand with other airports. God Speed to you pal. Targetboy2498 (talk) 16:45, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These rules are not subjectively created, but I have to admit that they are poorly enforced. I made a start with it. That you do not like that, is not my problem nor the problem of the community that created the rules. Just your WP:IDONTLIKETHAT. You also need to take WP:NPA seriously. The Banner talk 17:04, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Never once have I said I didn’t like something. You’re the only one that’s mentioned “not liking”. I’ve only ever said none of your reversions make any sense as it all appears to be cherry picked or reverted in poor manner. In addition every reference is attached to the airport page itself.

None of my points were addressed by you probably because its exhausting as I designed them that way to showcase how absurd your reversions have been. Seeing how you’ve taken this issues to bat, I expect to see massive improvements from The Banner from this point forward. Targetboy2498 (talk) 17:18, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well then, I’d be happy to answer your points for you instead:

1. The Banner has been going through airport pages adding CN tags to multiple airport tables. There’s so many articles, this obviously takes time, but they are doing it.

2. They absolutely should’ve kept their references. Them being removed does not mean you should keep doing it.

3. Not sure why it was added back.

4. ALL ROUTES, including ones that already started, should have references. This is what we are trying to tell you. It’s just a lot of work to add them or request references, but there’s been some slow progress to getting there.

While you never said you don’t like the rules, complaining about them and saying you’re frustrated conveys the same message. As The Banner said, watch for WP:PA. VenFlyer98 (talk) 23:33, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking the time to answer my questions VenFlyer. My point still stands and will never be addressed due to poor guidelines and regulations (not from you). These “rules” are deficient and need to be revised to add to better consistency. I reviewed the guidelines with the reference not being taken down after a route has started. It’s poorly worded and depending on how it’s read barely translates to keeping the reference after the route has started in which it’s already proven. In addition of the reference remaining kept at the bottom of the page. I would say “complaining” about the rules can convey way more than just “not liking” them. As I have explained in tremendous detail. If I believed the consistency was there I would be more supportive in taking on a patrolling role. Adding references are important I understand that. It’s the display and function of them that is poorly managed and regulated as proves the subjectivity of them. Nothing personal just business. These “rules” are relatively young and need a rework that I will be working up a plan to ensue. Targetboy2498 (talk) 01:40, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

When you are unhappy with the guidelines, you should start a discussion at the talk page of WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT. The Banner talk 02:36, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely, I will be drafting up a complete overhaul post regarding the meticulousness of the reference display and the maintenance up-keeping of them. This will save us both time in you not having to update/reverse repetitive information and for me to be able to display tables and charts in a neat and orderly fashion and not having them ruined by twisted “rules and regulations”. Not from doing obviously. I don’t dabble in editing other topic posts. As I don’t have the vast knowledge of update consistent information other than airport/route/airlines. This is my area of expertise. Targetboy2498 (talk) 02:46, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Give WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT a read. “…airlines and destination tables may only be included in articles when independent, reliable, secondary sources demonstrate they meet WP:DUE. A review of the closure of that RfC yielded no consensus to overturn it.” Independent source should not be removed. VenFlyer98 (talk) 03:36, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]