User talk:Pmsyyz

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 50th Space Wing 2 RoboCop 2 3 AMHS 4 Template:Infobox VG 5 Barnstar 6 Copyright notices 7 Natsumi Abe 8 salutations 9 Featured article for December 25th 10 ? 11 Regarding Kodocha 12 Like You croats solders 13 Thanks for dropping by 14 AFforums link 15 USAF info box? 16 de.wikipedia 17 Interwiki Map 18 high altitude nuclear explosions 19 2nd/3rd/etc 20 a couple things 21 User Mississippi 22 Thanks 23 Re:National Birds 24 Poll: Puerto Rican Spindalis 25 U.S. Army Major Commands 26 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CreationWiki 27 Ghawar and Hubbert peak theory 28 Image characteristics on Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy 29 Imposters of AlexKarpman 30 Anonymous thanks 31 Marking fair use images as not having a rational 32 Inupiaq Wikipedia 33 The Great War (documentary) listed for deletion 34 Mark Musashi 35 Canon Powershot A410 36 Sup? 37 SF Beret Color 38 wah tod tg se 39 Those 'plot' tags are legit... 40 United States Air Force 41 Thank you 42 3d Weather Squadron 43 Train Man 44 I reverted your edit 45 Farscape 46 Question about your RC-135 edit 47 Zunafish 48 wait one second! 48.1 okay one correction 48.2 NPOV 49 310th Space Group 50 NC-135 Big Crow 51 Infoboxneeded 52 Howdy 53 Orphaned fair use image (Image:Dhcpscreenshot.png) 54 Hill City SD Population 55 USAF Image Cleaning 56 Promotion 57 Volapük Wikipedia 58 New EPRs 59 AF ISR Agency 60 ANG Wing Shileds 61 USAF rank abbreviations 62 Fair use rationale for Image:ВикиЗнание.PNG 63 IceWeasel 64 50th Space Communications Squadron celebrates 55th anniversary 65 Manga images discussion 66 ANG Wing Emblems 67 Military Barnstar 68 WS Collaboration project 69 Fair use rationale for Image:KOAA530.jpg 70 You're great 71 154th Training Squadron

[edit] 50th Space Wing

Thank you for your edit to 50th Space Wing. I guess I was just busy reading all their documents to originally write that page, and it didn't occur to me that your way was much clearer. Frankly, I was feeling kind of bad for writing such a comprehensive page on what is inherently a fairly spooky organization. May I ask where you draw your USAF expertise from? Avriette June 30, 2005 23:33 (UTC)

I work at Schriever AFB. See my USAF page. --Pmsyyz 1 July 2005 00:50 (UTC)

[edit] RoboCop 2

I made the move but if you do not want it move back, I suggest that you look at the links and change them to point directly at RoboCop 2. (See what links here to the left of the page to see a list of the links) -- Philip Baird Shearer 10:47, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] AMHS

Are you zoomies implementing it now, or is it still in the planning stages? :). Just curious, heh. Conradrock 22:16, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Planning, though the hardware was supposed to have been already installed. --Pmsyyz 13:43, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Infobox VG

The infobox should be floated on the right. Is there a specific page (also what browser do you use) where this is not happening? The infobox has been changed a number of times fairly recently and it may be just your cache or something to that effect. Let me know either way so I can investigate this more. Thank you. K1Bond007 02:49, August 16, 2005 (UTC)

Ah, it was a cache issue. A shift-reload fixed it. I'm using Firefox through a Blue Coat proxy.

[edit] Barnstar

FireFox 18:36, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Thank you. --Pmsyyz 06:32, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright notices

Please do not remove copyright violation notices as this is against Wikpedia regulations. Also, on the Kuwait Liberation Medal situation, the text of the U.S. portion was very clearly cut and pasted from the Institute of Heraldry website word for word. According to the regs of this website, that constitutes a clear copyright violation. The temp page was set up to replace the copyvio article and will most likely replace the article in question after enough time has past to get opinins and comments from all involved. -Husnock 03:46, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Could you point to those regs you speak of? You can't just slap a copyright violation notice on a page and point to a federal government website without justification. --Pmsyyz 05:03, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Natsumi Abe

Abe Natsumi wasn't "vandalized", it was moved to Natsumi Abe since Abe is her last name. I'm trying to maintain that consistency with every Morning Musume/Hello! Project-related entry here. If you don't mind, I'm going to re-redirect Abe Natsumi to Natsumi Abe again. Cjmarsicano 15:23, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Abe isn't her last name, it is her family name, which in Japan comes first. Since Morning Musume members aren't widely known in English speaking countries, their names should stay in the proper Japanese order. --Pmsyyz 17:34, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Before you go on a rv-spree again, let me point out that a) the great majority of other H!P entries on Wikipedia are done last name last, and common format for rendering Japanese names in most of the English language press that I've seen has been last name last as well. Cjmarsicano 17:46, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

I agree with what Cjmarsicano, the way H!P members articles are being made are with first name first, surname last. Sploggers 05:39, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] salutations

I saw your addition to the list of Wikipedians by military branch under the U.S. Air Force heading, and came here to your user page to read up. As it turns out, I've actually been following your blog for quite some time now. I just thought I'd drop in to say "Hi" and tell you I read your blog. — THOR ^=/\= 06:10, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Cool, nice to meet you. I need to update my blog more. I'm heading to the Middle East in January. --Pmsyyz 07:39, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Featured article for December 25th

I noticed that you have listed yourself as an atheist Wikipedian. You will probably be interested to know that Brian0918 has nominated Omnipotence paradox as the front page article for December 25th. You can vote on this matter here. The other suggestion being supported by others for that date is Christmas, although Raul654 has historically been against featuring articles on the same day as their anniversary/holiday. AngryParsley ^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:14, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit]  ?

Why thank you for screwing around with my user page. I appreciate it. Zer0fighta 20:56, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

I could have sworn people didn't want to have obviously misspelled words on their user page. I wasn't aware of any English dialect in the world that left the apostrophe out of "I'm". Helpfully screwing around[1] is the whole point of a wiki. --Pmsyyz 23:49, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding Kodocha

The reason why "Kodocha" comes before "Kodomo no Omocha" in the intro is because EN caters towards English speaker - they usually live in the US, Canada, the UK, etc... and TOKYOPOP publishes the only English copy that I know of. WhisperToMe 07:46, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

The Kodocha article is not just about the English publication of the manga. It is about the original manga, the anime based on it, and the translations of both into English. The original name should come first, followed by the nickname. --Pmsyyz 08:29, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Like You croats solders

Croats forces for You are defonded, sergent? Colonel of Croats forces in Bosnia - Tomislav Dretar.--213.49.211.99 11:57, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

This must be about the small bit of cleanup I did on Tomislav Dretar. I don't know enough about the situation or that person to say which side I would "like". --Pmsyyz 12:01, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Dear sergent, I'm very, very sorry. I have to be wrong! Please excuse me! --Tomislav Dretar 17:43, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for dropping by

Had I seen the edit before i would have thanked you sooner. I do appreciate input from wikipewdians especially since i'm still struggling with the web (CSS now, it's horror) but i want to learn! My father served as a petty officer in the Italian Air Force (40 years), since WW2 and served under Gen Alexander. By the way, the Italian Wikipedians have just opened the Italian Aviation Portal. Sorry about my poor English :-) --Wikipedius 11:29, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AFforums link

I'm going to restore the link to USAF; they've stated they're only going to link it there and not spam it anywhere else and I think it's at least a valid link. RasputinAXP _{talk contribs} 02:21, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] USAF info box?

I don't know if you'd be interested in implementing it or not, but I have somethine similar to the following on my user page (I edited the below for you).

This user is a Staff Sergeant in the United States Air Force.

That's quite nice, but I try to keep my userboxes to a minimum. Perhaps I'll add it in the future. --Pmsyyz 03:33, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] de.wikipedia

hi, i´m wondering about these edits? --GrummelJS 13:44, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Not sure why I'm getting triple Image: prefixes. Looks like Bild: is the correct German anyway. Fixing. --Pmsyyz 14:07, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

yeah sometimes it´s weird. Image: should work too. but sometimes... ;) --GrummelJS 14:25, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Interwiki Map

Dear Philip,

Thanks for your suggestion about adding OrthodoxWiki to the interwiki map, and sorry for the delay in replying. It's been awhile since I logged in here. I'll take your advice though! Best wishes, Fr. John

[edit] high altitude nuclear explosions

Hi Philip, I was wondering whether you'd be able to contribute to an article I'm putting together at High altitude nuclear explosion. It looks like you're deployed, so this may be a non-issue. Specifically, I am not sure how I'd get ahold of some of the sources listed in the bibliography of this paper. There are a few of them, such as:

• HEMP Electromagnetic Pulse from a High-Altitude Nuclear Burst. Washington, D.C.: Defense Special Weapons Agency, undated.
• Secretary of the air force to chief of staff, Air Force, memorandum, Subj: “Program 437,” 20 March 1963. Document is now declassified.
• Secretary of the air force to deputy chief of staff, research and development, memorandum, Subj: “Program 437,” 28 March 1963. Document is now declassified.
• Director of advanced engineering to AFSC, memorandum, Subj: “Program 437,” 20 March 1963. Document is now declassified.
• Director of advanced engineering to AFSC, memorandum, Subj: “Program 437 Operational Phase,” 5 July 1963. Document is now declassified.
• Wayne R. Austerman, Program 437: The Air Force’s First Antisatellite System (Peterson AFB, Colo.: Air Force Space Command, 1991), 13.
• Space Systems Division (SSD), Program 437 Partial System Program Package (Los Angeles, Calif.: Headquarters, Space Systems Division, 1963), 2-3. Document is now declassified.
• Austerman, Wayne R. Program 437: The Air Force’s First Antisatellite System. Peterson AFB, Colo.: Office of History, 1991. Document is now declassified.
• Curtin, Brig Gen Richard D., to AFSC. Subject: Program 437, 1 April 1963. Document is now declassified.

... Basically a lot of things related to "Program 437." The rest of it is largely available through DTRA over the internet. Since 437 seems to have focused largely on using high-altitude nuclear events to disrupt satellites, it would be pretty useful to have that content.

I'm not sure how I'd go about finding these. I'm not military, so I'm not sure how I would get ahold of them. It's not as if I can head to the local disa search engine and look for them. I noticed a couple of the above were published from Peterson, so I figured you might be able to obtain them. Best, Avriette 01:29, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

The author, Clayton K. S. Chun, doesn't appear to still be in the Air Force, so I can't email him to ask. But it looks like most of the photos in his book are from the Air Force Space Command History Office. Try emailing [2], hopefully they will help you out if they have the documents you are looking for. At worst you might have to do a FOIA [3] [4] request that costs a little bit of money. --Pmsyyz 14:45, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 2nd/3rd/etc

Is that so? http://www.bragg.army.mil/82dv/default.htm. [5] If anything, they are inconsistent. And this brings it in line with proper English. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 05:01, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Well, maybe it is just the Air Force that uses the abbreviated form. --Pmsyyz 05:29, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] a couple things

First, your suggestion, above, to make "program 437" program 437 was a good one. The information I was able to find on the web was sufficient to get it featured in DYK. Neato. Also, I saw your edit on (the name escapes me) the NSA device. I was wondering whether you knew anything about the new quantum encryption devices that are presently on the market. They're limited to, I think, 1.5mbit, and they have to be direct-connected over fiber (repeaters would break the quantum entanglement). I saw a very good presentation on this at Supercomputing 05 in Seattle. Would you be interested in an article on the devices? aa v ^ 13:12, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Cool. No, I didn't think quantum cryptography was practical yet, but I see that there are at least a couple vendors out there. [6] [7] The military takes forever to adopt new technologies though. --Pmsyyz 20:31, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Sometimes the line between "military" and "non-military" gets blurred. The presentation I saw at SC05 was from Magiq. It was really quite good. And, he mentioned that a certain organization in Maryland is using their products. So I'm not sure how much you'd consider it military, nor do I think it is really "wide" use (especially because of that length-of-line restriction). However, "in use" certainly applies. I'll have a look and put an article together. aa v ^ 20:52, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm sure the NSA takes a look at all new things related to cryptography, but it just takes a lot of time for new tech to filter down to the actual users because of testing and everything else. --Pmsyyz 07:25, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User Mississippi

This user is from Mississippi.

This user graduated from Mississippi State University.

This user supports the troops.

As you say, sir, you keep userboxes to a minimum; but I thought you might be interested in this one:

and likewise since there are so few of us.

I must add good luck and Godspeed to you and your unit. Alba 18:55, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

I like the Mississippi one, but I more like the look of the larger flag on my page. I did graduate from Mississippi State University, but I don't think there is anything special about MSU. Thanks for letting me know about these userboxes though. --Pmsyyz 12:41, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

For making a correction on my userpage! Cheers Bertilvidet 14:04, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:National Birds

Since I do not wish to engage in a revert war I will explain my point regarding the article here. You say Taiwan is a de facto nation thus it it qualifies as a nation. De facto as defined in Wikipedia is "a technical or other standard that is so dominant that everybody seems to follow it like an authorized standard". From this I can then say that even though everyone considers Taiwan a nation it does not make it so. Now regarding the article per se, if we are to remain consistent then Taiwan should also be given the same treatment as Puerto Rico. I do not wish to engage in political or ideological debates of what constitutes a nation. I just want consistency in the articles. Joelito 17:02, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps de facto is not the best term. Anyway, the status of the Republic of China isn't germane. Puerto Rico isn't a nation by any measure and shouldn't be on List of national birds. It should be at List of U.S. state birds if anywhere, though perhaps that article should be renamed to include other U.S. territories such as Puerto Rico and Guam. --Pmsyyz 17:57, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Actually the status of China and Taiwan is very relevant to the discussion. I am not arguing whether Puerto Rico is a nation or not. My argument is that Taiwan is given a different treatment when its political status is very similar to Puerto Rico's. Taiwan as defined by Wikipedia and the United Nations is not a nation therefore it should be listed as Puerto Rico is listed in the national birds page. Furthermore I see you deleted a reference I inserted into the Puerto Rican Spindalis article. I assume it was in good faith but the execution was poorly done. First, it inhabilitated every reference in the article. Secondly you could have replaced it with a "proper" reference and lastly I had two "proper" references: one is a website that Wikipedia identifies as spam and the other is in Spanish. So please try to be more thoughtful next time you delete a reference. Joelito 12:44, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

• For it is an honor to write to someone who has served his country well. You and all the others are true heroes. I just wanted you to know that the status of Puerto Rico shouldn't have become a political issue but, which is clearly defined. This is what I posted in the mediator page: It is sad that such a graet article as the Puerto Rican Spindalis should be converted into a controversial political issue as to whether Puerto Rico is a nation or not. Puerto Rico is not a sovereign nation, however Puerto Ricans share a common language (it has its' own Spanish dialect which is different from the other Hispanic countries), customs, culture, history and traditions and therefore it is a "nation" as defined in various forums. Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913): Nation \Na"tion\, n. [F. nation, L. natio nation, race, orig., a being born, fr. natus, p. p. of nasci, to be born, for gnatus, gnasci, from the same root as E. kin. [root]44. See Kin kindred, and cf. Cognate, Natal, Native.] "1. (Ethnol.) A part, or division, of the people of the earth, distinguished from the rest by common descent, language, or institutions; a race; a stock. All nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues --Rev. vii. 9.", FWDP "NATION: A self-identifying people who share a common history, often language, a common culture and a homeland. A nation is the most persistent and resistant organization of people-culture- territory. There are between 7,000 and 10,000 nations.", and the Free Online Dictionary by Fralax sec 3: " A people who share common customs, origins, history and frequently language, a nationality." There are various nations within the United States, amongst them the "Cherokee Nation", the "Navajo Nation" and the "Chickasaw Nation", they, like Puerto Rico, are not independent but, non-the less are a nation. Before Puerto Rico became a posession of the United States, it was already a nation in the process of obtaining more autonomy from Spain. Let me point out that Puerto Rico participates as a nation in the Olympics and that Puerto Rico's Basketball team is known as "El Equipo Nacional de Puerto Rico" (The National Basketball Team of Puerto Rico). There are many verifiable websites which site the Puerto Rican Spindalis as the National Bird of Puerto Rico these some of the many sites: "www.welcome.topuertorico.org", "www.Enciclografica.com" and "www.puertoricoinfo.com - Geography". This should not be a big deal. The facts stated clearly shows that Puerto Rico is a "Nation" (not an independent one) and that the Puerto Rican Spindalis is the Puerto Rican National Bird. This is my opinion which is not based on politics but, on cited facts. Thank you and God bless, Tony the Marine 02:48, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Poll: Puerto Rican Spindalis

Tony the Marine has started a poll on the national/official question, and has informed certain people about it on their user pages. Please come and register your opinion. Talk:Puerto Rican Spindalis Algr 21:00, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] U.S. Army Major Commands

I noticed after I created the category there were some that weren't MACOMs - go ahead and tag it for renaming - I'll support it. For example, CASCOM isn't a MACOM. --Nobunaga24 22:19, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Military_history/United_States_military_history_task_force"

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CreationWiki

As a contributor to the page CreationWiki, I feel it fair to warn you that it has been nominated for deletion. Please make your opinion known. PrometheusX303 21:04, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ghawar and Hubbert peak theory

Why the change to Hubbert peak theory? There's no controversy over whether Ghawar is the largest oil field in the world; no other field is even close. See the Ghawar article. There's controversy over whether Ghawar has peaked yet, but that wasn't the issue. --John Nagle 17:18, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

appear to have peaked in recent months is the unsourcable info about Ghawar since the Saudi's don't give out that info. I accidentally removed the next sentence about Burgan Field. --Pmsyyz 17:32, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

I see the problem. Most recently, you deleted Two of the world's largest oil fields after Saudi Arabia's Ghawar Field (the world's largest) appear to have peaked in recent months. That's just a way of talking about the second and third largest oil fields. The problem is that, while Ghawar is definitely #1, and Cantarell and Burghan are definitely the next two, there's argument over whether Cantarell or Burghan is bigger. That's why I couldn't write about #2 and #3. I'll reword that section. Thanks. --John Nagle 17:55, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image characteristics on Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy

As you may not be aware of the situation on that article any altering of the display characteristics for the main cartoons image is a very sensitive issue. Please do not casually alter their characteristics without consensus. Thanks! Netscott 15:43, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Imposters of AlexKarpman

Can someone please block them?132.70.50.117 10:55, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

I think you posted this request in the wrong place. I'm not an admin. Try Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. --Pmsyyz 10:56, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Anonymous thanks

Thank you for serving your country —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.161.110.89 (talk • contribs) 12:17, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Marking fair use images as not having a rational

Why is OrphanBot continuously marking Image:20ency1.1.jpg as not having a fair use rational when it does via the {{fair use in}} template? --Pmsyyz 05:07, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Because the image doesn't have a fair-use rationale. {{Fair use in}} only asserts that the image is in compliance with Wikipedia:Fair use, it doesn't explain why. --Carnildo 06:07, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Inupiaq Wikipedia

An anonymous user created the legitimate text in ik:Iqsrabutilik within the last little bit, meaning that there is indeed potential users. Does this effect your view of the project? -- Zanimum 14:56, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

No. That is still the only article 7 months later, and the wiki is always being spammed/vadalized with no native community. It should be deleted and its future re-creation should meet the standard criteria. --Pmsyyz 00:11, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Great War (documentary) listed for deletion

--Tuspm ^{Talk | E-Mail Me} 01:01, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mark Musashi

Check the interview link I added a while back at the bottom of that page. It is indeed spelled Piece. Straight from the horse's mouth.--Aresef 04:22, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Ah, interesting. Thanks for the correction. --Pmsyyz 04:26, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Canon Powershot A410

You said on the article's discussion page that there was a copyright infringement. Tell me what it is. --Koolgiy 02:56, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I added that to the discussion page on 2005-09-24. The earliest version of the article is now from 2006-03-07. So the version of the article that the comment was about was deleted in the past. There is no copyvio in the current article. --Pmsyyz 05:07, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sup?

Keep up the good work ;) Crimson30 15:55, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SF Beret Color

Air Force security forces do wear blue berets, not black. It's pretty easy to look up in the official sources. I would expect better from an Air Force member. According to Table 3.4 in AFI 36-2903, security forces wear blue berets, and according to Table 3.6, black berets are only authorized for Air Liaison Officers and Tactical Air Command and Control Specialists. You can check for yourself by downloading the AFI from the AF Publishing website or directly from here. Nathanm mn 06:33, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I see now that in the AFI it does say they are blue, but I have asked several people and they all think they are black. I even asked a SF person and they thought it was black. Photos: [8] [9] --Pmsyyz 23:45, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

"I would expect better from an Air Force member"?? Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. "Do not make personal attacks anywhere in Wikipedia. Comment on content, not on the contributor. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users." Please keep this in mind while editing. Thanks. aard 19:24, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Are the berets de facto blue or de jure blue? For example, officially the Naval beret in the CF is "navy blue", but in reality it is the same beret (and has the same NATO stock number) as the armoured black beret — the Navy's uniforms are also black, but called "navy blue". On the other hand, they put "HMCS" on the sides of buildings and call them ships, so... :) --SigPig |^{SEND - OVER} 12:27, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

They are de facto black and de jure blue. See photo.--Pmsyyz 00:11, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] wah tod tg se

well i was trying to use wikiality to change your deployment from the desert to dessert but the Wikipedia Gestapo were having none of that.  :(

[edit] Those 'plot' tags are legit...

The IP is a valid contributor...we just haven't convinced him to create an account yet. -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 11:28, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, an IP is a valid contributor. But I just don't consider making a dozen articles look ugly a good contribution. --Pmsyyz 11:30, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

See Talk:Variable_Star#Imbalance.2C_overly_long_plot_summary -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 11:33, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. --Pmsyyz 11:38, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] United States Air Force

I just wanted to recommend to you the 10th entry on the "external links" of the United States Air Force, the Air Force Enlisted Forums. Isaac Crumm 22:44, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

For reverting the vandalism on my home page. It makes me sad that what seems like multiple people from around the country feel the need to do that. I am left wondering what I did to them, or what about me inspires them to do that. Anyways, I thank you for changing it back to how I left it. -alex ... aa:talk 18:03, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Don't sweat it. That's what some people do when they get bored on IRC. I think aard was upset at you reverting his cake userbox additions. --Pmsyyz 21:48, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 3d Weather Squadron

Thanks for the cleanup of the article. It was online for only 1 hour 3 min until you saw it. You are quick! Again, thanks for looking out. --DesertCondor 02:40, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I saw you add yourself to Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by military branch. I checked out your user page and followed the link to 3d Weather Squadron. Nice addition. For a better quality emblem image, I would suggest finding a PowerPoint document from the squadron and exporting a nice looking image to PNG. Since these are usually public domain, they can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons so all projects can benefit from them. http://www.af.mil/art/ is also a good place for finding emblems. --Pmsyyz 03:03, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Train Man

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Densha_Otoko&diff=68594820&oldid=68576372

But, that's the title used in North America. WhisperToMe 00:20, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Not on all North American releases. Replied at Talk:Densha Otoko. --Pmsyyz 00:33, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I reverted your edit

Hi! I just wanted to let you know that I reverted your recent edit to Jackson, Mississippi, and to explain why. Some of the people who are redlinked in the list deserve articles even though they don't happen to have them; Margaret Walker Alexander is the best example that I noticed. In her case, the fact that there is no Wikipedia article on her says a lot more about Wikipedia than it does about her. Some of the other people you removed are strictly of local interest (I think this is probably true of Barbara Blackmon, for example), but by no means all. Feel free to make a second pass at this, but please don't assume that everyone who is redlinked needs to go. Thanks, and Happy New Year! Best regards, --Tkynerd 23:59, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Understood. That list is just getting too long and red links was the criteria I used to shorten it. --Pmsyyz 00:11, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree that it could use trimming. BTW, I found that there actually is an article at Margaret Walker and piped that for that particular link. As I said, feel free to make a second, somewhat more judicious pass. :-) --Tkynerd 00:32, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Farscape

Seeing that you have spent time on the List of Farscape episodes page, thought I'd let you know we've started creating articles for individual episodes. So far, I have created them for the entire first season although many are just place holders at the moment. Obviously, much new info will be needed (expanded synopsis, pop culture references, production trivia). RoyBatty42 19:52, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Question about your RC-135 edit

I'm not sure I understand what you were trying to do with the redirect. RC-135 redirected to Boeing RC-135, and you changed it to RC-135 Rivet Joint, which then redirects to Boeing RC-135. Is there a particular reason you were introducing a double redirect, because that's generally a bad practice at Wikipedia, because of issues with the software. I've reverted your edit for now, but want to find out if there's something more to this that I should know about. Thanks. Akradecki 05:24, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I temporarily incorrectly moved Boeing RC-135. See Special:Contributions/Pmsyyz. I missed reverting that redirect change. --Pmsyyz 05:34, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh, ok, no problem. I wasn't sure if I'd missed something there. I take it you saw the old discussion that moved it from RJ to the generic RC-135 name? Akradecki 05:56, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

No, I just actually looked at the article and saw it still used with multiple configurations and names. :P --Pmsyyz 06:03, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Zunafish

A tag has been placed on Zunafish, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group or service and which would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Cocoaguy ここがいい _contribs^talk 15:18, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] wait one second!

Wait one second. The fact that I’m an employee of USAA does not automatically mean that I violated NPOV.

1. 1. SGLI is listed in the USAA wiki entry.
2. 2. SGLI and USAA both target the US military as their primary customers – that makes them competitors.
3. 3. I listed companies besides USAA on the SGLI wiki entry (in fact I listed the same companies that are listed in the USAA wiki entry - only seems fair!!!).

You were wrong to use my open disclosure as a rationale for removing the data. Prove I wasn't neutral. Maybe you are an employee or customer of SGLI? If so, then maybe you lack NPOV?

Either way here’s my offer. You remove the SGLI data from the USAA wiki entry and I’ll refrain from putting a competitor section in the SGLI wiki entry.

Please respond or I'm putting it back.

Hillcountrygrump 01:27, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

USAA may compete with SGLI, but SGLI doesn't compete with USAA since SGLI doesn't advertise and all service members have to explicitly turn it down. --Pmsyyz 05:13, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] okay one correction

I see you are in the armed forces. That means you have done a lot for me and my family. Thank you. It also means I trust your motivation and intentions by default. So, I appologize for implying that you might not be neutral about SGLI. But, I stand by the rest.

Thank you for serving. Hillcountrygrump 01:33, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV

I see you have now removed the competitor section from NFCU. Are you also going to remove the competitor section from the USAA entry? Are you bringing a NPOV? 207.155.4.175 04:18, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Removing the competition section from the SGLI article made sense because it doesn't really compete again anyone. Military people don't think about getting SGLI or some other life insurance, they almost all have SGLI since it is so cheap. As for NFCU, I just didn't think that the since sentence section was very useful. --Pmsyyz 05:13, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 310th Space Group

Didn't mean to step on your toes on the 310th Space Group chronology order - most of the pages I write are in reverse chronological order (most current base/aircraft/designation first, and work backwards from there) - usually it does better if you need to see things quickly, and look at historical information better... but I won't have an edit conflict with you over the format. TDRSS 22:04, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] NC-135 Big Crow

Thanks for the addition of the redlink for the NC-135 to the C-135 article. The link being red prompted me to check for info, and I found enough to write the beginnings of an article on the Boeing NC-135. Since it's had other missions besides Big Crow, I dropped that name from the title and link. However, I was only able to find one reference to the Big Crow program. If you are aware of more information and refs, please add them! Thanks. Akradecki 19:35, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I saw it mentioned in Airborne Laser fires tracking laser, hits target. Nice job on the article. --Pmsyyz 01:39, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Infoboxneeded

See Template talk:Infoboxneeded. If the infobox banner is on the article, it is changed quickly. If the infobox is on the talk page, it goes unnoticed for months. --Timneu22 12:36, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Better than it take a bit longer to be fixed by an editor than to make the article look ugly for a short time. --Pmsyyz 09:03, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Howdy

Hey there pmsyyz. Nice history on CMSgt. I added Tubb on there as a retired chief. It's good to see an active duty airman active on wikipedia. --Mack Scruggs 16:35, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey, I see you are having some issues with uploading images. Only images that have a clear source and are under certain licenses are allowed. See also the Wikimedia Commons, where images can be uploaded so that all Wikimedia Foundation projects, such as all the various language Wikipedias, can use them. I've been working on the United States Air Force gallery there. --Pmsyyz 06:08, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Dhcpscreenshot.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Dhcpscreenshot.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 21:32, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I just cropped it. Perhaps the original person should have gotten this. Doesn't really bother me if it gets deleted. --Pmsyyz 02:58, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hill City SD Population

Hi I am making updates to the article Hill City, South Dakota. I noticed in 2006 you edited the page to say the current population of Hill City of 650 - not the 780 given by the 2000 census. Can you tell me where you got that info. Thanks Lmielke359 20:04, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

From the sign at the city limits. --Pmsyyz 21:09, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

OK that makes sence - however, I am pretty sure the sign was there before the 2000 census and may reflect the 1990 or 1980 census data- I will try to find previous year's census data to colloborate this. Thanks for quick reply. Lmielke359 14:59, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Alright I just found that the pop. from the 1990 census was in fact 650. Hill City really needs to update their sign! Lmielke359 15:10, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I'm glad you got to the bottom of it. And know I know to be less trusting of such signs. --Pmsyyz 15:18, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] USAF Image Cleaning

Just wanted to drop you a quick note of thanks for you cleaning up the Air Force unit insignias / crests. I keep on getting the "New Message" icon - I thought I'd return the favor to you!!!  :-)) - NDCompuGeek 04:34, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Coolness. :P If you upload any new ones in the future, please upload them to the Wikimedia Commons. That way other language Wikipedias can use them. I've noticed a few articles on USAF wings at the French Wikipedia such as fr:28th Bomb Wing. --Pmsyyz 04:47, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll remember that.... I do plan on continuing my trudge through the historic USAF divisions, so I'm sure they'll be more unit insignias to come. By the way - you ever thought of becoming more active at the USAF portal? I could certainly use some more competent help! (Since I'm MCSE, MCP, 3Com certified, etc. etc., my wife brags on me that I'm certifiable. At least I hope she's bragging....  :-)) - NDCompuGeek 05:37, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

The portals just don't fit into the way I use Wikipedia, sorry. --Pmsyyz 06:22, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Promotion

Congrads from one Tech Select to another. -- JDBlues

Thanks, congrats to you also. --Pmsyyz 06:13, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Volapük Wikipedia

Hi! Just in case you didn't see my reply on your Volapük user page (vo:Geban:Pmsyyz), I'd like to ask what you plan to do there. Are you just adding photos to articles on cities, or do you plan to add other kinds of things as well? Did you pick Volapük for some reason, or are you doing this for various Wikipedias? --Smeira 04:02, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I just replied over there about the city articles. I'm just adding photos to improve whichever city articles exist in other languages. --Pmsyyz 07:22, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New EPRs

As a fellow NCO, please check out the edit i just made at Enlisted Performance Report and see if you can improve it at all. Thanks! JDBlues 02:17, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AF ISR Agency

Hi, I saw your edits to the article on the Air Force Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Agency. While you are correct that AFIOC was reassigned to 8th AF and will eventually be part of the Cyber Command, we left AFIOC in the ISR article because ISR will still have some support and oversight of AFIOC. I can't quote what ISR will be doing for them off the top of my head, but they will be supporting AFIOC just as they support the 67th, 55th, and 480th (all of which are still under 8th AF and ACC). Perhaps rather than zapping all the information there, especially since there is no AFIOC article, you could just include the fact that AFIOC was pulled from under the old AIA. --Brownings 23:38, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ANG Wing Shileds

Pmsyyz, you seem to be the man regarding USAF wing shields I thought I’d pass this along to you. The site below contains all of the ANG wing shields in .pdf and .ai file formats. The images on this page are of a much better quality than most of the ANG shields currently on Wikipedia. It’s a government site so there are no copyright issues. As I don’t have the tools or expertise to convert them to .jpg or .png files myself so I thought I’d pass it along to you in case you’re inclined to convert the file format and add them to Wikimedia Commons.

http://www.ang.af.mil/history/Emblems.asp

--Ndunruh 13:59, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Cool, thanks. I'll see what I can do with them. I wonder what the best way to convert .ai to .svg is. Worst case, I can make good PNGs from the vector images inside the PDFs. --Pmsyyz 19:54, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] USAF rank abbreviations

You asserted that periods aren't being used anymore by the USAF in the rank abbreviations. Could you provide a source? While I haven't come across a definitive source either way, the Air Force's own website [10] does use periods with the rank abbreviations. Caerwine Caer’s whines 23:02, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Look in official publications, such as the "Certified by:" sections of all AFIs. See also, AFHRA abbr. Still looking for an official policy document that is the equivalent of the Enlisted Force Structure. But there are no periods in official email signature blocks or email display names or paper signature blocks. --Pmsyyz 00:17, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:ВикиЗнание.PNG

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:ВикиЗнание.PNG. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 12:40, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] IceWeasel

What made you think it was renamed to GNU IceCat? I could find no reference to that anywhere and reverted your change. --Danny Rathjens 22:29, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

An existing reference in the article: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnuzilla/2007-09/msg00004.html --Pmsyyz 23:17, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I see now. I just thought it looked a bit odd since no other reference to the name was changed in the article and that an existing project named Open_ICEcat already exists. That dev says "We haven't made any public changes yet", though, so I don't think it's appropriate to change the name yet. I put it back clarifying the name change is in the future. (I also see that Iceweasel redirects to Naming conflict between Debian and Mozilla. That should reduce confusion as well. (The reason I was there was a debian user asking in debian irc channel why we changed the name to icecat (using the GNU IceWeasel article as his source. :) --Danny Rathjens 22:49, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 50th Space Communications Squadron celebrates 55th anniversary

You haven't forgotten about this article, I hope. --SVTCobra 06:35, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

The article has been tagged "abandoned" and will be deleted in a couple of days unless development resumes. --SVTCobra (talk) 23:27, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry but I don't think it should be tagged as ready as it is too late to publish it (see talk page of article for more info). By the way I am user anonymous101 on wikinews so my comments will be from him --Smallbig (talk) 17:05, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Manga images discussion

Please offer your input in a current debate on the use of manga covers in articles at Talk:List of Hunter × Hunter chapters#Use of Images. Thank you! Shimawa zen (talk) 01:25, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] ANG Wing Emblems

I know that the site has changed for the sources of the Wing emblems but how do you upload them. I'm trying to do the same with the squadrons with no luck whatsoever. Thanks for any help ahead of time. --Kevin Rutherford 01:38, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Since such images are public domain, you should upload them to the Wikimedia Commons instead of just the English Wikipedia so they can be used from any Wikimedia project, such as Wikinews or a diffferent language Wikipedia. Please give each file a good filename, such as the name of the unit. Check out commons:Squadron emblems of the United States Air Force and commons:Wing emblems of the United States Air Force as well as individual image pages to see how they are set up.

For example, for Image:Otis w2.gif, I would convert it to a PNG, renamed it to "101st Fighter Squadron.png" and upload it to the Commons. --Pmsyyz (talk) 02:34, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Question time. How do you convert that? --Kevin Rutherford 19:45, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

There are several different graphics editing software that can do the job of just opening the file and then saving it as another format. I use the GIMP, but Adobe Photoshop or even Microsoft Paint could do it. --Pmsyyz (talk) 22:31, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Military Barnstar

In recognition of your long history of contibutions to military, particularly Air Force, pages I'd like to award you a Military Barstar.Ndunruh (talk) 18:17, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Mostly busy with an ORI this week. :P --Pmsyyz (talk) 19:13, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WS Collaboration project

G'day, this weeks Wikisource collaboration project is G. W. Bush and I see that you have contributed to this page in the past. It would be great if you could put some time this week into this very prominent person who is relevant to us all, as we need help identifying important works that should be transcribed. John Vandenberg (talk) 02:44, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:KOAA530.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:KOAA530.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 05:30, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] You're great

You are so helpful on wiki you must be one of the best wiki editors. --81.1.101.198 (talk) 23:36, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 154th Training Squadron

Could you support the existence of the 154th Training Squadron. I think that it has been unfairly tagged due to the fact that is has 'training' in it's name. I'd also like to add that I support your 104th Fighter Wing move and I believe that the '(United States)' addition is ridiculous concerning USAF units. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:53, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with that squadron, but I'll check it out. I too believe that disambiguating most USAF units is unnessecary. Many armies may have 1st and 2nd Infantry Divisions, but only the US has many of the unique and high numbered AF units. --Pmsyyz (talk) 03:49, 30 May 2008 (UTC)