User talk:FlightTime/Archive 37

← Archive 36

Archive 37

Archive 38 →

Category:Users willing to set up archiving

Archived discussions

The following page is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

---

Hello, FlightTime,

I was just about to tag this empty category as a CSD C1 when you put your own user page in it and it was no longer empty! Please put this category in the appropriate parent categories so it won't be an isolated category known only to the category creator. Thank you! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:25, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

@Liz: Thank you. I was thinking it could be a sub-cat at Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to provide copies of deleted articles but not sure its the right place, any ideas ? - FlightTime (open channel) 01:40, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Redirects in navboxes

Hi, thanks for your efforts at repair. However, we don't, per policy, list redirects in navigation boxes. I suppose if desperate we might put in a note or something, but the rule is that we just list whole articles. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 21:11, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

@Chiswick Chap: Yes, I know, that's why I fixed them. - FlightTime (open channel) 21:31, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

@Chiswick Chap: Out of all these template edits you're the first one to revert. So.....? - FlightTime (open channel) 21:55, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for discussing. If it's any consolation, I recall that I once tried to preserve redirects in navboxes, and all of them got removed. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 05:35, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Just to be clear, we do not link to subsections within an article as well as to the whole of that article, just as we do not link redirects to those subsections: the two things have the same result, which is overlinking, i.e. providing multiple links to the same article. I do hope this is clear. Many thanks, Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:41, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Monster Mash changes

Extended content

Hello I am Stuart Hersh. I was the manager of Bobby “Boris” Pickett for 18 years up until his death in 2007. I do not know how to use Wikipedia. But I would like to change some incorrect and off color/nothing but self promotion information… Darlene Love continues to claim that she/The Blossoms were the background singers on Monster Mash. Both Bobby and Producer Gary S. Paxton have stated exactly who the studio singers were that day. In Bobby’s 2005 book entitled “Monster Mash - Half Dead in Hollywood” Bobby “Boris” Pickett writes: “I went into the booth, put on the headphones and listened in astonishment to the entire track, including sound effects and background vocals, which were sung by Gary Paxton, his writing partner, Johnny McCrae and Ms. Rickie Paige. In her book, singer Darlene Love claims to have sung background vocals on Monster Mash. In all honesty, I don’t recall meeting her at that session. Hey Darlene, get in touch and let me know just the facts, ma’am” The guy listed at the end about doing a musical based on Bobby’s later years is completely lying unless during those years in which Bobby was alive not one single person ever told us about it. Bobby was alive and very active still performing and doing TV appearances in 2004 the supposed year of this fictitious play. There is no way that this ever happened without our knowledge. The bit about the comic doing the podcast character that sings a version of Monster Mash is absolutely irrelevant to a Monster Mash information page and obviously posted more to promote the comic/podcast There is no External Links section to post a link to Bobby “Boris” Pickett’s Official Monster Mash Website or some great very informative articles. Thank you for your consideration. P.S. Another nice Monster Mash fact is that last year The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame did their first ever Halloween exhibit and promptly featured Bobby “Boris” Pickett’s stage worn Monster Mash lab coat. If you need to reach me please contact me thru the official Monster Mash website where my name, number and email are prominently displayed.

Stuart Hersh MonsterMashter (talk) 20:55, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

@MonsterMashter: If this is true, then you shouldn't be editing the article at all. See WP:COI. - FlightTime (open channel) 21:01, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Hey

Thanks very much for your message! Are you an experienced user here on the wiki?? ConeWalsh978 (talk) 17:52, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

@ConeWalsh978: IDK, been here 14 years. - FlightTime (open channel) 18:12, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Ah, an old user then...I want to edit Wikipedia too, but even over the past hour or so reading some of the constant warring on the talk and project pages...wow, it seems like a really daunting proposition these days. If I might ask you a brief personal question (as an older user), do you think Wikipedia has changed much over the years? Is it for example very easy to get drawn into disputes these days around here? What has been your experience? ConeWalsh978 (talk) 18:15, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

It's always easy to get drawn in, however, in my opinion, it's always been that way. Best advice I can give to that issue is, Pick your battles. - FlightTime (open channel) 18:23, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

I see...thank you very much, although as someone who browsed Wikipedia a lot years ago but not so much recently, I must say, even from browsing some pages over the past few hours...well, things seem to have become more intense. I truly hope for the day when Wikipedia (which I think was founded on such noble ideals) can live to its highest possible potential, where people can cooperate peacefully without angry emotion or fighting, truly. Thanks again, friend! :) ConeWalsh978 (talk) 18:35, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Agreed. - FlightTime (open channel) 18:37, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

If I may ask, do you personally enjoy editing Wikipedia still, for all its flaws? And have you for example, ever considered quitting? ConeWalsh978 (talk) 18:55, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

I probably do every time I login , but no, you have to love it to be here as long as I have and I don't see me ever quitting. - FlightTime (open channel) 21:32, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

I see, haha...thank you very much, friend. I guess, I just don't have it in me to edit Wikipedia long-term, is it b/c others are too jaded, or b/c I'm too sensitive? Sigh, I personally think it's actually changed quite a lot from years ago, lots of things for example seem to have massively removed and deleted, but others are free of course to disagree.

I've spent several hours kind of randomly browsing while waiting for replies, and I've reading another user's last message now before he left this site: "Single-issue activist-editors firmly committed to one side will always be willing to devote more time and fight their corner more aggressively than a half-interested editor with varied interests and no strong opinions on the issue either way - this problem is effectively insurmountable. Frankly I can no longer trust that the information on Wikipedia on controversial topics is free from bias, and I will stop looking at these articles henceforth. It seems to me that Wikipedia is essentially a legacy site from Internet 1.0, a more innocent and naïve age when people still thought the internet would bring people together rather than drive them apart." In reality, I too for one kind of miss the older Wikipedia from 10 years ago.

Some of Wikipedia is very awesome and interesting, I think. But other divisive pages and articles...well, I too think have their real issues that make me kind of uncomfortable. But again, thanks for your welcoming message, it was very kind if unexpected. But in life, perhaps not everything is meant to be otherwise. Thank you very much. I wish you the best, and I hope people like can still use Wikipedia (hopefully) to do some good for this world. :) ConeWalsh978 (talk) 21:55, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Hey @ConeWalsh978, please excuse me from butting in here, but I've also been around Wikipedia for some time. Please don't feel discouraged by other editors' conduct. At the very least, when behaviour gets disruptive, there are excellent guidelines such as WP:3RR and WP:BRD which can help resolve a lot of disputes. You can also join various projects in areas that interest you, as they generally have an already established supportive community that can help you feel welcome and make a constructive contribution to Wikipedia. Please persevere! Cheers, Kiwipete (talk) 02:49, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much, but I must tell you, even browsing Wikipedia's talk and project pages, it's hard not to sometimes feel turned away by the amount of intense debate. I don't think I have the time or the energy right now to sustain argument after argument for anything. I wish more people remembered that there are actual human beings editing these pages, not computer algorithms. For example, I've noticed lots of user pages for long-time editors who have contributed a lot stating that they've decided to permanently leave and never return because of endless disputes. I mean, out of curiosity, has your editing experience been mostly positive over the years? ConeWalsh978 (talk) 06:26, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps a connection

Does this case have a connection with current events? Binksternet (talk) 20:42, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

@Binksternet: Wow, I don't really remember, I don't think so though. - FlightTime (open channel) 20:53, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Meat Loaf

Hi FlightTime, I hope my edit summary about the "dumb-ass imperial system" wasn't offensive. If it was, please accept my apologies. :) Kiwipete (talk) 02:43, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

@Kiwipete: No, no you're good, I was just glad to see you used the templates instead of the way it was, thank you, - FlightTime (open channel) 02:49, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Art Laboe

2600:1702:2350:20F0:4919:9D1C:7D06:A9B0 (talk) 23:49, 11 October 2022 (UTC)Not sure what you changed. Looks the same to me. But...most of the info I added was from an indepth piece on Art circa 2015. If THAT is what you removed, how can we insert that back in as it's both germane and illuminating.

This is what I removed, it's not part of his nobility, trivial. You can start a discussion on the article talk page and seek consensus - FlightTime (open channel) 23:58, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, everything I put in there, is still there... 2600:1702:2350:20F0:4919:9D1C:7D06:A9B0 (talk) 01:29, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

A message from Masato.harada

Hi there. You reverted my addition to the article 'The End', questioning the 'nobility of this information', by which I infer 'notability'. Before I discuss this on the article's Talk page, can you clarify your objection? Is it the notability of Nico? Or the notability of her having created a cover version? I think these are indisputably notable. Or is it the notability of her having had an affair with Jim Morrison? Thanks. Masato.harada (talk) 08:17, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

@Masato.harada: My concern was the nobility of the cover. As far as the relationship, (why are we talking about a relationship between the song's artist and someone, on an article about a song?) I couldn't care less, this is an Encyclopedia, not a tabloid. I tend to become skeptical at "New found important information" for a 18 year old article. One why to find out "how notable" this is to the song, is to have a discussion and see how others' feel. Thanks for the poke. Cheers, - FlightTime (open channel) 16:29, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

I’m sorry, I’m still having difficulty understanding your concern. I accept that the Nico/Morrison relationship may not be appropriate, so let’s put that aside for now. However, I don’t understand your reference to the ‘nobility’ of the Nico cover. Apart from aristocracy, the only WP reference to nobility I can find is the essay https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not_here_to_tell_the_world_about_your_noble_cause

Is your concern that I am promoting the cover as a ‘noble cause’? I think that would be an unjustified judgment by you.

Alternatively, you later go on to query how ‘notable’ the cover is to the song. So, is your concern that the cover is not notable? In which case my justification is that:

- Countless WP articles on songs include lists of covers, many of which are of microscopic importance or notability

- Whereas a cover by an artist as well-known as Nico must be notable (you and I are of the same generation, so I hope I don’t have to argue a case for Nico). Just because an article is 18 years old doesn’t mean it can’t be improved or made more complete

- If this cover is not notable (why not?), then why allow the lengthy section on the Marilyn Manson cover to be included? That section show all the signs of a topic that should have its own article, eg infobox, chart table

Sorry to labour this, but I really do not follow your thinking. I’m quite happy to open a wider discussion, but only when I understand what we are discussing.

The significance of a particular cover version is not established simply by the artist being notable (having their own Wikipedia article.) According to WP:SONGCOVER, the cover version should be discussed in WP:SECONDARY sources that are discussing the song itself. That is a very high bar. In practice, we also allow cover versions that have charted, and cover versions that were specifically discussed in the media. Binksternet (talk) 14:11, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Brian Johnson

Hi - you reversed my edit. Just to note, Brian Johnson is a family member. Wikipedia states his middle name is Francis. It’s not. Not sure how this was ever added because it’s entirely inaccurate 🤷🏻‍♀️ 86.182.89.79 (talk) 22:07, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

If he's in your family, please, do not edit the article. Thank you. - FlightTime (open channel) 22:12, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Binksternet has found that your change was correct, I had checked an earlier revision that had the middle name included, the revision was obviously after what he describes in the edit summary. - FlightTime (open channel) 22:40, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Editing

Why did you do that?Why did you reversed my editing that i did on the Hobbit An Unexpected Journey?The character that is credited as Bolg in the first Hobbit film is completely different visually from Bolg as it appeared visually in the next two Hobbit films.Do you deny that or not?If you deny that, you can check it.Do you understand what I am saying? Γιάννης Ευαγγελίου (talk) 01:10, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Γιάννης Ευαγγελίου: Take two seconds to read the edit summary, which is "Unsourced OR". Wikipedia requires a citation to a reliable source. Your edit does not have a citation and is based on your personal observation, which is original research. Sundayclose (talk) 01:51, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Test wiki

Confirm my request on test wiki. - FlightTime (open channel) 22:01, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

A message from AlexionStar

AlexionStar (talk) 14:27, 28 December 2022 (UTC) I'm sorry, but you mentioned my edit at Talk:Parasite_Eve_(video_game) featured an edit/delete of a comment, while I didn't mean to do anything else other than including a new section at the top, no edits or deletions were intended. Can you please point out which comment was deleted/edited and so I can fix my edit and repost the added section while fully complying to Wikipedia's guidelines?

EDIT: Ok, I reposted the topic but this time I used the "New topic" feature of the talk page, instead of editing it directly. I figured this is the correct way of posting there? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlexionStar (talk • contribs) 14:47, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

I'll let other page watchers determine the way it goes. Cheers, - FlightTime (open channel) 21:58, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Crooked contents box

I like your crooked contents box. How can I build that on my page? — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 18:48, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

@Moops: It might need some adjusting on your page, but this is what I have.

<div style="{{#invoke:RexxS|wobble}} float:left">__TOC__</div>

- FlightTime (open channel) 18:52, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Trying it now. Didn't seem to work right and actually "wobble", also it now seems to be on the same line as the latest content on my talk page. Any help would be much appreciated, and feel free to edit my TP directly, no need to ask for permission about any changes in support of this wobble or aesthetics generally like getting the actual contents on its own line and not wedged beside the comment as it is seen now. TY — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 18:57, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

@Moops: It was working in the preview before I saved it. Regular position might be one of the intended position, also with just one section on your page might have something to do with it. Try it out for a while. - FlightTime (open channel) 20:36, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

I'll let you remove the test section. - FlightTime (open channel) 20:41, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

All done then. Thanks for all your help one last time. :) — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 03:13, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Whiskey in the Jar

Hello. Take a look at Whiskey in the Jar song page (Thin Lizzy version). User Progrock70s was persistently adding websites like Discogs, Rateyourmusic, genres in the Allnusic sidebar... Which you'll agree are unreliable sources. I added "Rock" using an Allmusic review as a source. I'm not adding unreliable sources, but Progrock70s was even previously using different IPs from Iran like this one: 151.246.129.30 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)

All I'm saying is, removing your concerns needs to be discussed on the talk page. I'm not saying the information is correct or incorrect. you don't just show up and start removing things, there might be a valid reason why those genres are still there. Cheers, - FlightTime (open channel) 00:36, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

"Good faith" edit

Hi what was the reason that you labeled my edits as "good faith" on Whiskey in the Jar, does that mean you're agree with my edits or what? Progrock70s (talk) 20:45, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

@Progrock70s: No, it means the edit I reverted was not considered (to me) to be vandalism. - FlightTime (open channel) 22:04, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

A message from 76.111.141.168

Hi, I am unsure why my edit was deleted, I don't believe it to be slanderous or libel towards Levar Burton and nor did I intend it to be. If you are willing, I would love to understand the reasoning behind deleting my edit. The item in question should already be sourced. I know you were not the one to delete the edit, put you did provide me a warning. 76.111.141.168 (talk) 23:20, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Please show me where I said slanderous or libel? My concern is it wasn't reliable sourced nothing else. - FlightTime (open channel) 23:55, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

A message from Ziggy Coltrane

Hello, you reverted my edits on Seth MacFarlane twice now. Im just confused as to why? You said I was adding unsourced controversial information??? The significant information I put was related to the Naked Gun reboot with Liam Neeson. Just want to know what it is that is controversial? Ziggy Coltrane (talk) 22:59, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

@Ziggy Coltrane: The message I left on your talk page explains my concerns. - FlightTime (open channel) 23:50, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Again, there are sources. Are the sources the issues here? You’re making it seem like I’m adding major controversial topics to the page when that’s not the case at all. Ziggy Coltrane (talk) 00:40, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

A message from Ziggy Coltrane

Hello, again I want some clarification. You said I added stuff that was “unsourced or poorly sourced defamatory or otherwise controversial content into an article”, please tell me between these 3 choices what I did? The material was sourced, nothing defamatory about the the topic or controversial. Again was it the sources? Please be direct with me, I want to know. Ziggy Coltrane (talk) 17:45, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

@Ziggy Coltrane:  Reverted my edit. - FlightTime Phone (open channel) 18:00, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

A message from 2001:4C4C:1ED1:9B00:A174:D435:88A7:5E7B

Hi, you archived basically the entire talk page of https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Legality_of_child_pornography , but several edit requests were still pending implementation, further info, review by others, or discussion. Specifically the long one I spent half a year on compiling, had not been fully implemented yet, so pleas undo that! Thanks! @FlightTime: 2001:4C4C:1ED1:9B00:A174:D435:88A7:5E7B (talk) 08:22, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Well, un-archive the topics you're interested in. Cheers, Or better yet, start a new discussion, with a link to the related discussion.

  - FlightTime (open channel) 20:23, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

January 2023

This is your only warning; if you purposefully and blatantly harass fellow Wikipedian(s) again, as you did at User talk:ThatOneFilipinoGuy, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. ThatOneFilipinoGuy (talk) 01:10, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

@Ad Orientem: that harassing user is now posting as an IP, seems range block is warranted. Also can you please semi my talk for a couple days, Thanx ~~

Holy shit, when will this nonsense stop? And now your talk page's history is clogged with vandals! Sarrail talk 01:31, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

@Materialscientist: Maybe you can help? - FlightTime (open channel) 01:33, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

MS doesn't get pings (see talk page). I see the immediate range has been blocked and this page has been semi'd. If it continues you could also try dropping me a shout. Also, here's a name: User:Wolfman5580 (no comment on the IPs). -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 01:53, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Lost count

Damn Rick Lyon (talk · contribs · count) - FlightTime (open channel) 04:37, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Regarding Template:Recent death

Hello, FlightTime. I am a bit confused by your edits regarding removing the {{recent death}} template a few times on the Lisa Marie Presley article and was wondering if you would be willing to explain so that I can better understand when to use it, as I was one of the editors that added it. You edit summary for the later removals was Activity levels no longer warrant use. This template is used to alert editors of rapid changing edits, it is not used to advertise or confirm the death itself. I am confused about the activity levels part in particular. What was the criteria that you were using for the activity levels? --Super Goku V (talk) 10:11, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

@Super Goku V: The guidelines for this template states HERE,

"This template warns readers that the information presented in an article may not be the most up-to-date or accurate due to unconfirmed or inaccurately reported information about a recently deceased person. Readers should therefore be cautious. This is generally true for all of our articles, but in cases of extraordinary public attention the risk of misinformation is elevated.

As such, this template should be used only in cases where many editors (perhaps dozens or more) are editing the article on the same day. It should be removed as soon as this editing subsides. Do not use it merely to tag the article of a recently deceased person, as that is not the template's purpose." (emphasis NOT mine) - FlightTime (open channel) 15:49, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Gotcha, so we are using the same criteria, but somehow that isn't the same result. Should I not be counting IPs and should be using a 24-hour rolling period, or something along those lines? --Super Goku V (talk) 06:38, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

I use a few conditions, edits per hour, once the "New death" information seems stable I'll remove it under those grounds. Many IP & new users, use it to advertise and confirm the death, but as you now know that not its purpose.

````

No, I understood that. I was checking to see if 12+ users had edited in the last 24 hours and was seeing that in all instances. If you think that I should also check edits per hour, then I will make a note of that for the future. I just couldn't figure out the activity levels part as it wasn't making sense. --Super Goku V (talk) 22:29, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

PAGENAME/Archive 1

@FlightTime: Hi there! Could you please check the page you created called PAGENAME/Archive 1? I'm sure it was an accident - maybe when trying to archive Talk:Ruby Bridges? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 06:45, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Userbox request

Hello. Im taking up your offer and I request a userbox for Wikiproject religion (it already has two) in the form {{User WikiProject Guatemala}}. I made a userbox but I don't know how to abridge all the code in the aforementioned concise template form.

This user is a member of Wikiproject Religion. What's the truth?

Cheers! --Thinker78 (talk) 22:27, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

@Thinker78: Not sure what you're looking for. You want some kind of adjustment to this one? - FlightTime (open channel) 16:25, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. If you look up the wikitext of my userbox is a long mess. I was hoping to have instead an easy to use template like {{User WikiProject Religion}}. Regards, Thinker78 (talk) 04:11, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

@Thinker78: User:Thinker78/UBX/Wikiproject Religion Will this work ? - FlightTime (open channel) 16:58, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

That looks nice. If you have the time, sorry if I push it, would it be possible to make parameters for editors to be able to customize the colors they want to display? Regards, Thinker78 (talk) 18:18, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

@Thinker78: Yes, it's completely possible, however that part I'm not good at. @Xaosflux: is the best coder I know, maybe...... - FlightTime (open channel) 18:34, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

@Thinker78 FlightTime is doing a great job on this already - think they can take it to end of job! — xaosflux <sup>Talk</sup> 18:36, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

I can peek at this later in the day. — xaosflux <sup>Talk</sup> 18:37, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Do you want the input to be color names like "|background=red"? — xaosflux <sup>Talk</sup> 18:38, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

@Xaosflux that would be fine. Thanks for helping out with the userbox! Thinker78 (talk) 22:00, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

@Thinker78 @FlightTime - see User:Thinker78/UBX/Wikiproject Religion. — xaosflux <sup>Talk</sup> 22:34, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

It is looking nice! Would it be possible to add customizable instead of standard parameters for the colors so the user can choose the combination of colors they want (all rainbow colors plus grey and white)? Cheers! Thinker78 (talk) 22:58, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

A message from Foxx247

Please create a userbox that says: This user is a fan of The Shawshank Redemption.

Foxx247 (talk) 12:03, 15 March 2023 (UTC) Foxx247 (talk) 12:03, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

---

@Foxx247: How's this for starters? - FlightTime (open channel) 17:12, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

This user is a fan of
The Shawshank Redemption

• It's amazing. For a starter it is incredible. Thank you so much. Foxx247 (talk) 20:32, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

@Foxx 247: You're very welcome. You might want to put that code at something like User:Foxx 247/UBX/Shawshank, if you want. Cheers, I love that movie also - FlightTime (open channel) 20:42, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Will do. Also if it's not too much to ask could you make a few more userboxes for me please? 1. This user believes that Dimensions in Time IS canon. 2. This user is interested in holography. 3. If you love The Shawshank Redemption too, maybe check out a certain page called Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/ProposalsThe Shawshank Redemption. Foxx247 (talk) 22:57, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

@Foxx247: No problem, however I'm not as fast as I used to be. Can I ping you in a couple days to get the particulars, (colors, wording, links, ect...)? - FlightTime (open channel) 22:05, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Yeah sure, that's fine. Take all the time you need/want. Foxx247 (talk) 10:07, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Graphic Designer's Barnstar
	For services to the creation of userboxes, I award FlightTime the Graphic Designer's Barnstar. Congratulations mate. You've earned it. Foxx247 (talk) 20:35, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much! :) - FlightTime (open channel) 22:09, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

No problem at all. You deserved it. Foxx247 (talk) 10:08, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

A message from Thinker78

		The Special Barnstar
		Thanks for your work in the userbox! Thinker78 (talk) 20:54, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Thinker78 (talk) 20:54, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

You're welcome, thanx - FlightTime (open channel) 20:55, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

A message from 184.146.11.171

Why did these IP addresses accountants and Wikipedia log in account abuse every articles. Like as we did to Kurt Russell. 184.146.11.171 (talk) 12:37, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Have no idea what you're talking about, sorry. - FlightTime (open channel) 19:10, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Jayson Alexander Ang was born on October 17, 1993 Scarborough Toronto Ontario Canada. He volunteers to work at the Daily Bread food drive company and is looking for a part time job 184.146.11.171 (talk) 19:22, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

184.146.11.171 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) Well, then you'll need to prove it - FlightTime (open channel)

Concern regarding Draft:Bertie Gregory

Hello, FlightTime. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Bertie Gregory, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 23:02, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Issue over Purple Rain (album)

It would appear that you deleted information and claimed it was "unexplained changes"? The source is an equipment archive that has a list of all the equipment that Prince and the Revolution used on that album (among many others by Prince) and there are several sources that back up most of, if not all, of the credits there. It's not really an unexplained change either, since I did leave comments on most of the edits I did on that page. 2601:147:4700:B420:84CB:59B7:57A4:E199 (talk) 18:51, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Well, you're changing an established section, so you need to open a discussion on the article talk page and seek consensus. Cheers, - FlightTime (open channel) 18:56, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, Special:Diff/1149199068. - FlightTime (open channel) 19:14, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

A message from Spoiledspider

Hello flight time!! I just wanted to say that your dogs are the cutest!! Spoiledspider (talk) 00:11, 14 April 2023 (UTC) Spoiledspider (talk) 00:11, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, we think so also. Cheers, - FlightTime (open channel) 00:14, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

A message from Djjamesfalk

This discussion/section is closed. Absoulty no iea what you're talking about, if I was wrong, fix it. If your just trying to jog my memory, good luck, otherwise I'm done. Cheers

The following discussion/section is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion/section.

---

Noticed you corrected my edit.

Canada's Year End Chart (as they appear on Wikipedia) are always from RPM Magazine up until the magazine folded in 2000.

One of the hardest issues to find is the January 13th issue from 1973 as the Library of Canada never published this issue on their website.

https://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/discover/films-videos-sound-recordings/rpm/Pages/search.aspx

I sourced this issue directly from our National Library in Ottawa so that this missing year could finally appear within my meta data as I've embedded this information within both by .flac library & .mp4 library which I use as a professional background music provider. I have the RPM chart from 1962-2000 embedded at my finger tips as well as the history of Billboard.

I had the same issue in 2019 when I corrected "American Pie" by Don McLean to be the #1 song of the year on Canada's Year End chart. It was corrected several times by others users until an interaction like this one after which I believe a fellow user help correct whatever missing information wasn't included that was causing issue.

Checking thru other Year End info fro 1972, I notice the bulk of it is entirely incorrect. Canada's only other official chart was Soundscan's "The Record" which was published from 1975-2000. Since this chart is from 1972, predating Soundscan's footstep into Canada's music scene, this information could not have bee obtained there.

I'd assert that whomever posted all that data for Canada's 1972 Year End charts in the first place either created it off the top of their head, or used whatever RPM Magazines they could find to tabulate the results on their own using a points system likely similar to Fred Bronson has used in all his Billboard releases.

Should you wish a copy of page 20 from RPM January 13th, 1972 I can email it to you.

Canada's chart archives have been a large project I've worked on for the past decade & I'l often update Wikipedia when I find errors, although it's been a good three years since I;ve been active in that regard.

Please feel free to reach out to me. Djjamesfalk (talk) 00:32, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Care to link what edit you're referring to? - FlightTime (open channel)

Ah, We don't place sources in edit summaries, they go in prose with the edit. - FlightTime (open channel) 00:46, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

The edit a few years back was to American Pie.

American Pie (song)

I've went thru old correspondence & found the conversation regarding this was 2019. I then went thru the edit history to see how it was worked out, but was unable to see further back than 500 pages of edits, all of which post date this interaction.

I'm just in the process of updating my personal library & noticed an error between The Searchers vs. The Hillside versions of "I'd Like To Teach The World To Sing" (I had the chart info reversed), so sourced Wikipedia as it responds faster than the crawl speed of Canada's Archives. Found the info I needed but noticed the Year End Chart was off. I compared another few tracks from 1972 & noticed all were wrong (other than American Pie)

As of 2019 no Year End Chart for 1972 appeared within any Wikipedia entry due to that chart being missing as previously mentioned.

This information being placed incorrectly within that field of meta data is a relatively new issue.

Should you be curious, the top 10 of 1972 were.

1) American Pie - Don McLean

2) Alone Again (Naturally) Gilbert O'Sullivan

3) Cotton Jenny -Anne Murray (MAPL)

4) Heart Of Gold - Neil Young (MAPL)

5) A Horse With No Name - America

6) Puppy Love - Donny Osmond

7) I Am Woman - Helen Reddy

8) You Could Have Been A Lady - April Wine (MAPL)

9) Day After Day - BadFinger

10) Long Cool Woman (In A Black Dress) - The Hollies

Looking them each up perhaps may lead to the same source for all the incorrect entries I've referred to.

I'd be more help if I wasn't knee deep in a project of my own here.

James Falk Djjamesfalk (talk) 01:27, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion opened on Talk:David Gordon (choreographer)

This discussion/section is closed. I said I'm done with this issue, do whatever you want.

The following discussion/section is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion/section.

---

I have opened a discussion about the proper spelling of "improvise" at Talk:David Gordon (choreographer)#Spelling dispute, as per request on WP:EWN. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:42, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

@Ohconfucius: You might be interested in this issue, seems your script is changing improvize to improvise. See this thread. Someone's wrong. Just thought I'd let you know. Cheers, - FlightTime (open channel) 01:54, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Serial comma removal

First, thanks for reverting some of the unnecessary and disruptive edits at Top Gun: Maverick. Always nice to have an extra set of eyes watching it. A recent edit of yours, however, seemed like an unnecessary removal of serial commas. Some of the commas you removed were also embedded in quotes or followed the full date format (which should remain per MOS:DATECOMMA). Although I didn't undo every instance, most of them were restored. If you'd like to discuss further, be sure to ping me in any of your replies here, thanks. -- GoneIn60 (talk) 07:19, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanx for pointing that out. - FlightTime (open channel) 15:44, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Sherrilyn Kenyon

I am Sherrilyn Kenyon and I have spent HOURS correcting defamation and the Tortious Interference with my Business on my page. I have corrected mistakes and added current information that isn't over a decade old. Please help me make sure the correct information is out there. Stop making edits. The information you are reverting to is INCORRECT and legally actionable. It is ridiculous that you wholesale reverting a page with misinformation and liable on it. You are VIOLATING your own policies: Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard. If you are connected to one of the subjects of this article and need help, see this page. Jdhillock (talk) 02:03, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Please read WP:COI regardless of who you are. - FlightTime (open channel) 02:04, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

---

The page above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.