Dear GraemeLeggett, HAPPY NEW YEAR Hoping 2015 will be a great year for you! Thank you for your contributions! From a fellow editor, --FWiW Bzuk (talk)
This message promotes WikiLove. Originally created by Nahnah4 (see "invisible note").
Telephone spelling alphabet thanks
Thanks for undoing my deletion; it made me reevaluate how to handle the telephone alphabets. I was going to consolidate them in the NATO phonetic alphabet article, but your action made me realize that was silly, and take a closer look at the IITS alphabet. When I finally realized the Western Union alphabet was used over the telephone, it suddenly became obvious the right path was to take all of the telephone spelling alphabets and put them in one place.
That, in turn, made me realize that the telephone spelling alphabets likely were the direct ancestor of the radiotelephony alphabets. This should have been obvious, but wasn't to me and cleared up a big mystery I had with why there was so much confusion over when the first radiotelephony alphabet was created. So double-thanks! :-) PetesGuide (talk) (K6WEB)
The oleo strut of the F.E.2's undercarriage is of course well known - and well referenced. Just two sources that come to mind are:
Hare, Paul R. The Royal Aircraft Factory. London: Putnam, 1990. ISBN 0-85177-843-7, pp.208-209.
Cheesman, E.F., ed. Fighter Aircraft of the 1914–1918 War. Letchworth, UK: Harleyford, 1960. pp. 44-45.
I have nonetheless run into a bit of conflict with someone with interests from "a later war" who disputes this - perhaps on the authority of works documenting more modern "oleo struts". I wonder if you could apply an impartial eye on this one? --Soundofmusicals (talk) 23:51, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
When you made this edit to a source in the Reference section, it introduced an author and so it broke the links in the short citation to that source using editors.
BTW a reason for using {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}} rather than {{notelist}} is because some editor who see it reformat the section into two although both lists are footnotes. They are less likely to separate them if both templates have the name reflist in them. -- PBS (talk) 16:28, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, GraemeLeggett. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
On rereading the sentence in question, I see that we differed in our interpretations. I think that mine is just as valid as yours, but won't object to the reversion. 71.235.184.247 (talk) 14:51, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
a comment
"a lot of bad formatting...." tell that to yourself "smarty" one!
a lot of bad "formatting" is you!
"revert to earlier good version" wasn't "good" version either
