PLEASE PUT YOUR POST AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE, NOT AT THE TOP. THANKS.

Puzzled over recent edits

Hi Adrian, In the light of the discussion above, I've aimed for a sort of middle ground, providing some references and trying to report on allegations rather than make them. I see you've removed them, which is fine, but I'd like to understand why, also the historical naming information I put in included references from a reputable source, so I was surprised to see it dismissed as "guesswork. Best Wishes, Chris ChrisHodgesUK (talk) 12:04, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chris, huge apologies, and I have reverted myself back to your version. I had no intention whatever of changing your excellent work. What happened was that I accidentally did today's editing on a version of the article that was weeks old and didn't notice my error. Thank you for your politeness above (I think I would not have been so polite!!) and once again, I'm sorry. In view of my unhappy history of editing on this article, I'm going to take it off my watchlist and leave it to others such as yourself for future edits. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 12:38, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adrian, thanks for that. I know you've been trying to look after this article and that hasn't always been easy - thanks for all you've done, and don't feel the need to take it off your list on my account. I have to admit to being glad the "muckup" wasn't mine though. Best wishes. ChrisHodgesUK (talk) 18:17, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am the anonymous user who edited the Frampton Cotterell page, please don't call me a vandal, just because i'm not as experienced in using wikipedia as you I greatly, GREATLY resent it, I put a lot of time and effort into that page, I'm sorry you used up your afternoon writing to me, you didn't have to be so aggressive.

You: In recent years, as with many English villages its self-sufficiancy has declined dramatically and the village has essentially become a dormitory. Me: The village serves as a dormitory village for Bristol. Mistake: misspelling of self-sufficiency, and its self-sufficiancy has declined dramatically has little meaning. Is this self sufficiency in food or jobs or what? I think most readers will have little idea what you mean. Sorry, I did spell it wrong, I thought I might have. Yes self sufficiency in food and jobs is exactly what I mean, if you need proof then please refer to the Frampton Cotterell Parish website or the book that I referenced, there were between 40 - 50 businesses in Frampton Cotterell around 1900.

You: It’s parish also borders. Me: Its parish also borders. Mistake: “It’s” means It is! Right, sorry wikipedia means so much to you, glad you corrected it

You: 1940's. Me: 1940s. Mistake: 1940’s is possessive case, but nothing here is being possessed. okay

You: and presumably it was the first English settlement to be built along the river, this is deduced from the placename, if there were any other settlements on the river then the name would have been meaningless. Me: removed. Mistake: You are guessing but WP does not allow guessing. Right, I quoted this from a book. 'Frampton Cotterell and Coalpit Heath' from the Frampton Cotterell Local history society, it's a respected book. If you read the rest of what i put you will see that little archeological work has been done in the area so place names are used, it is hardly guess work, place names are used by historians many times. I have reverted this so I believe it is right

You: and a Coal Pit, presumably at Coalpit Heath (although this name did not appear until around 1680). Me: removed. Mistake: guessing No, it isn't, it was first used in 1680, like actually was.

You: There manor house was not at modern day Frampton Court. Me: “There” should be “their”. Mistake: spelling. okay

You: Village's. Me: village's. Mistake: “villages” does not take a capital. okay

You: and at somepoint in the future will probably join with North Bristol. Me: removed. Mistake: guessing. Fine, it probably will, its an estimate based on the current demographic situation, but if it botheres you that much, fine.

You: throughfare. Me: thoroughfare. Mistake: you used the wrong word., I didn't right that

You: This conurbation of estates bordering Coalpit Heath has led to the village gaining a reputation as an unlikely drug's den, with Cannabis and notably, Cocaine being sold. Me: removed. Mistake: totally unacceptable statement without documented proof. Ha!, I know 14 dealers within a 7 street area in Park Farm, how dare you tell me it isnt a drug den! I'm 17. BUT I will accept this will offend people from that area and I was going to delete it.

You: 7 miles north east of Bristol City centre, and 2 miles outside the city's ring road. Me: seven miles……. Mistake: numbers of ten or below have to be written in full. Right px values are not used in Image Code any more so I removed the 350px. Finally telling us about a six hour power cut in the village IS ridiculous (in an encyclopedia). Of the hundreds of village article I've read in WP, no other has such nonsense!!

Right, sorry you find what i put nonsense, i find it really offensive actually, if your going to get upset by this and post something else then fine. DO NOT call me a vandal, I am FED UP OF HAVING MY ARTICLES BECOMING VICTIMS OF WIKIPEDIA 'RED TAPE' I will make edits and if you want to block me that's fine, I wont be able to post anymore, but believe me there are users on here who actually want to vandalise, so you might be better using your time blocking them and not attacking my edits with such passion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrisjackson (talk • contribs) 20:58, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you realise why I wrote to you at all? Because you reverted EVERY SINGLE ONE of my edits, many of which you now accept were correct!! So don't come over all indignant when it was your mass reversion that caused me to write to you in the first place! Most people write to me to thank me for my edits, accepting that they may not be as experienced as I am (I have 19,000 edits in 6 years). I'll reply to three of your comments (your comment is in bold):

1. Ha!, I know 14 dealers within a 7 street area in Park Farm, how dare you tell me it isnt a drug den! That's a silly remark because I told you above that such comments are not acceptable to WP without a reliable printed source. It is not OK that you know it to be true, it has to be documented. This is a serious encyclopedia and such statements have to be proven in print. You can't just "know it's true".

2. You: and at somepoint in the future will probably join with North Bristol. Me: removed. Mistake: guessing.

Fine, it probably will, its an estimate based on the current demographic situation, but if it botheres you that much, fine.

It doesn't bother me in any way! I just want the best possible encyclopedia so once again you have to support that with a reference to where you read it (you can't just say it's obvious to you because "you" are not a good enough reference).

3. You: and presumably it was the first English settlement to be built along the river, this is deduced from the placename, if there were any other settlements on the river then the name would have been meaningless. Me: removed. Mistake: You are guessing but WP does not allow guessing.

Right, I quoted this from a book. 'Frampton Cotterell and Coalpit Heath' from the Frampton Cotterell Local history society, it's a respected book. If you read the rest of what i put you will see that little archeological work has been done in the area so place names are used, it is hardly guess work, place names are used by historians many times. I have reverted this so I believe it is right.

Once again, you MUST reference that book or else the reader (as I did) will assume it's your personal opinion.

I think I'll leave the subject now and not write to you again, because I've said all there is to say. Cheers - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 22:02, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mr. Pingstone... I stumbled on your page rather by accident (actually a follow up on some comments I made on Beetle Cat, which I did encounter by accident). I thought you'd be amused by a word I concocted recently for Certain Kinds of Wikipedia Editors, they who wander about causing mischief, misspelling words, removing references, adding unsourced and unreferenced weirdness -- kobolds. When confronted, they turn nasty, even vicious and threatening, and then they need to be kicked back into the woodwork. I will not, in the name of civility, name any individuals as kobolds, but you surely have run into them. Please do keep up the good work, and kick them kobolds outta here. <grin> Timothy Perper (talk) 16:41, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for such a lovely entry to my Talk page. I wonder who you are talking about? Could it be just above?!! Your comments made me happy. Thanks again - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 17:26, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My goodness! Imagine that -- just above! What an amazing coincidence! Timothy Perper (talk) 14:59, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

but see Tolly Cobbold and The Cobbold Family Histroy Trust: "COBBOLD from Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, originally Snow White and the Seven Kobolds, being small people, perhaps miners from the Black Forest in Bavaria. The name Kobold is common in Germany, particularly an umbrella manufacturer." Martinevans123 (talk) 20:30, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How wonderful... apparently, the name arose when German miners tried to extract copper from ore that they thought would yield copper but it never worked. So, they said, the kobolds had gotten into it. Later (much later) a German chemist named Brandt isolated a new metal from this kobold-infested ore and named it "cobalt." I was about to stop there, but I wanted to check how to spell Brandt's name so I checked the Wiki entry for cobalt and found the same story -- without, however, a reference. Well, at least *I* have a reference -- it was in that yellow book my mother gave me about German folklore that I had when I was a child. It had a picture of irritable little kobolds, too. So we are on firm Wiki territory in not citing anything to back up what we say. A propos of which, look at my comment below about miraculous birth and then check the Eastoft talk page for another wonderful example of the strange beings who dwell, well, they dwell somewhere, even if I'm not sure where. Timothy Perper (talk) 20:53, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if I may ask that if you are ever in Topsham, Devon, that you take a picture or two there. There are monuments by Chantrey [1781-1841] to Admiral John Thomas Duckworth, Bart., who died August 31st 1817, and to his son, Colonel George Henry Duckworth, who was killed at the Battle of Albuera [Spain], May 16th 1811. This appears to be the only monument to Admiral Duckworth that I could find with the resources of the internet, but if you can discover another, I'd like a photo of that also :) Somewhere in England is also a bust of Duckworth that used to stand in the family home, now the Exeter gold club--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 08:24, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the infobox given at Eric Williams (American football)‎ you will discover that it says he was born at the age of 46 back in 1962. You strike me as the kind of person who will find this miracle amusing -- I flagged it as {{dubious}}. See? There really are kobolds. Timothy Perper (talk) 20:20, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I enjoyed that! - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 07:34, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're most welcome! In the meantime, someone removed the "dubious" tag -- which is OK with me. But now we know that the kobolds have laid eggs in the infobox template! Timothy Perper (talk) 13:18, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You really are a sarcastic bugger, Arpy! Amandajm (talk) 01:23, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No sarcasm intended, I assure you Amanda. I assume you are commenting on the edit summary to my Rose window edits, which was “The constant use of "famous" is wearing to the reader”. I find that “famous” is much over used on Wikipedia and the meaning of a sentence including it is rarely changed when it’s removed. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 15:32, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help on emerald tree monitor, I've been trying to improve all of the Varanus articles the past 2 weeks!--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 17:03, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're very welcome. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 17:19, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Arpingstone: I was absolutely gobsmacked to see that you have taken a photo of what was very probably our family car in the period 1949 to 1956. I wonder if you know the owner? My father bought the car off a certain Dr Fawcett who practiced in Toddington. My sister and I have the fondest memories of our stately progress in its leather-lined luxury to various destinations in the UK and Belgium. Of course I can't be absolutely certain, but I think that the number plate is right. Anyway thanks for the lovely picture and for posting the picture. Regards Everybody got to be somewhere! (talk) 21:37, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nice to hear from you. I photographed hundreds of cars that day and identified them from the list of entrants that was issued, However I don't keep such sheets so it would have been thrown away once I had identified them all. Sorry!! Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 07:25, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I noticed that you reverted my edit for the stall speed of the Extra EA-300 right after I made it. The stall speed of 55 knots corresponds to about 102 kilometres per hour and not 112. 99.226.77.200 (talk) 18:19, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is a great example of what can happen if an Anon does not provide an Edit Summary to explain the reason for a change. Your edit was immediately suspect with no Edit Summary so I assumed it was vandalism and reverted you. The edit summary could have been something like this - The stall speed of 55 knots corresponds to about 102 kilometres per hour and not 112. It would be good if you get a username (like I have) then your edits will not be immediately suspect. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 18:57, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[[:Image:private.b737-800.oe-ilx.arp.jpg|thumb|right|200px|Private Boeing 737-800 lands at London Luton Airport, England]]

Adrian, am I missing something? You added this pic to the Cessna CitationJet page, along with several CitationJet photos. I am assuming it was just an error, as we all make them from time to time, but I wanted to be sure that I wasn't missing something here. Cheers! - BillCJ (talk) 22:22, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bill! Well, that's a weird mistake! Although I'm 68 I'm not senile yet so that's not the explanation. I've been adding pics all evening to the Business Jet article and Cessna Citation articles but how the 737 pic got transferred to the Cessna Citation article I have no idea. It's certainly my oddest mistake (although I don't make many). Thanks for letting me know. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 22:53, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! You probably tried to cut-an-paste a Cessna, and it didn't take, and when you pasted, it put in the previous copy, which was a 737. Strange none-the-less! And thanks for adding the new Cessna Citation pics. I spent quite a bit of time redoing the whole familiy of Citation articles, so the new additions are definitley appreciated! (ANd that is a nice pic of the 737, wherever it is placed!) - BillCJ (talk) 23:03, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Arpingstone. You recently made this revert on the wedding article. Could I ask what you iobjected to - for the most part the edit seemed to improve the English used (it looks like the original writer was not a native speaker). Thanks. -- SiobhanHansa 12:49, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can't see the issue myself either. The anon IP's changes look (for once!) like good copyediting. If only all IP accounts were so helpful 8-( Andy Dingley (talk) 13:08, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are both correct, the edits were good and I did not intend to revert them, so apologies. What happened is that I reverted a later edit by the Anon, not knowing that Rollback also reverts any earlier consecutive edit (the edit you are talking about) by that person. Sorry, I'll watch out for that in the future - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 13:36, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh! I've done that myself with Rollback. Fortunately not on an article - but that was more luck than judgment on my part :). I have undone your roll back - I'm not sure which bit you actually mean to remove so have will leave that to you to edit. -- SiobhanHansa 14:19, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Arpingstone. I really appreciate your help with these IPs. I am really indebted. Tasos. (Dr.K. (talk) 17:08, 26 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Pleased to help - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 17:13, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Arpingstone. It seems to me that some very valuable changes are being made and that Dr.K keeps undoing them. The issue is very clear: there have been several negative articles on the dismal state of Olympic Airways of Greece. It is fair that some of them are mentioned in the Wikipedia article.

I understand your point well, but WP does not normally allow criticism since it is an encyclopedia and not a Reviews site. I will take no further part on this topic. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 17:43, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure I can agree with his totally. Of course, everyday criticism would be out of place. But these days problems with flights and bad behaviour towards customers seems to be part of Olympic's identity. As it stands, the Olympic Airways article looks as it if is written mostly by their management. Negative reports are excluded, while articles that try to blame the Greek Government or the EU for Olympic's problems are cited. It is honest to give a more balanced picture.

I note your comments on Buckingham Palace, and will point out the following:

• It's a featured article. Part of what makes it featured is the layout and design of the page. That depends on the images consistently being in the right place when juxtaposed against the text.
• Preferences only work for logged-in editors. The sizing that Giano is doing will ensure proper placement in the article regardless of whether logged in or logged out, or what preferences the editor may have.
• Different sized images make for a more interesting article. As it stands now, image sizes are becoming more and more uniform, regardless of their content, which does nothing for the article or the reader.

Images are supposed to help inform the article. Let's use them to their greatest advantage rather than futzing on some standard that almost nobody who actually writes articles (or reads them) ever asked for. Risker (talk) 21:28, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since px sizing is now being removed all over Wikipedia, I think you can expect to meet the problem of px removal again and again by other editors who are following well-established and written-up policy. I don't say this unkindly but you can't select to follow policies you like and ignore policies you don't. It simply doesn't matter what you think, a policy has been set and I am quite correctly following it. Nevertheless, if you feel strongly that the policy should be ignored then please revert me and I'll leave the article alone. By the way the word "futzing" is new to me (I live in England). Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 21:50, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It would be helpful if you spelled my username correctly in your edit summary so that I know you are replying to me. It would also be helpful if you would become fully familiar with the relevant policy section before trying to enforce it; it's very clear that image size forcing is acceptable under the policy. As to "futzing", I picked it up from some UK friends, but perhaps it is a regional expression; it means "fiddling about" more or less. Risker (talk) 21:58, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. I'm sorry I mistyped your name, but I pressed Save Page before I noticed the error.

Yes, I've read the statement about resizing many times and I think the relevant statement there is Images should generally not be set to a fixed size (i.e. one that overrides the preferences settings of the individual users, see the Manual of Style). The statement about image forcing is, I believe, for special cases like panoramas or centralised images (which can obviously be big) and is not a carte blanche to adjust image sizes all through an article. I notice that px sizes are being removed all over WP which suggests that others feel as I do. I have said all I want to say on this topic so signing out - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 22:18, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Ilfracombe.longview.arp.750pix.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:Image:Ilfracombe.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[Image:Ilfracombe.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 14:13, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:Giraffe.zoo.500pix.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Giraffa camelopardalis rothschildi.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:20, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:BathRoyalCrescentAirial.morecontrast.jpg is now available as Commons:File:BathRoyalCrescentAirial morecontrast.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 12:12, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Balloon.1.arp.600pix.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Balloon 1.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 14:25, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bearded.dragon.arp.750pix.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Pogona vitticeps1.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 07:27, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lockheed Constellation, Air France.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Lockheed Constellation, Air France.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 22:49, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Adrian, Thanks for adding the RV-6 panel photo to the article. The other RV-6 panel photo (Image:VansRV-6C-GLRVinstrumentPanel.jpg) is one I took, so I can vouch for it being of an RV-6. In fact the external photo right above it (Image:VansRV-6AC-GLRV01.jpg) is the same aircraft (check the file names). Each RV panel is made up by the builder so each will be quite different, just part of the fun of home-builts. No problem having two panel photos there, it shows the variety of work done. - Ahunt (talk) 21:36, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. I really didn't believe they could both be Van's aircraft! Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 21:44, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem - just part of the fun. Making your own instrument panel can be the hardest part of building a kit aircraft! Getting the holes in the right places and making everything fit is a challenge. Cutting all the holes with a fly-cutter can be something else! I greatly enjoy your photos on Wikipedia, they are everywhere and add a lot to the articles! - Ahunt (talk) 21:52, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(next morning) I've just realised I need to apologise for putting a doubting comment in the Edit Summary where I can't erase it. So I'll do a minor edit to the RV-6 article and put things straight in that Edit Summary. Sorry! See the change here [1] - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 09:34, 30 September 2008 (UTC)I[reply]

Hi Adrian: No need at all to apologize. I think all content in Wikipedia should be challenged on a regular basis! That is the only way to improve it and make it more accurate over time. When you left that note I went and checked to make sure that I had actually uploaded an RV-6 instrument panel photo and not something esle by mistake. In this case I had, but these things should always be checked for accuracy. So thank you for challenging this, it was worth double checking. No apology required. - Ahunt (talk) 11:06, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adrian, an article for the Concorde's engine, the Rolls-Royce/Snecma Olympus 593 has been split off from the Rolls-Royce Olympus page. I note you were the one who took the pic we now have in the infobox, and so I thought I'd check to see if you had any other pics of the Concorde's engine that we could use, now that we aren't sharing space with the other Olympus variants. Thanks, and as usual, take your time checking! - BillCJ (talk) 03:37, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bill. No, I couldn't take any more pics on that occasion and I‘ve never been close to a 593 with a camera since. I remember feeling uneasy at the Bristol Industrial Museum because my camera flashes were annoying other visitors. I was not sure if pictures were even allowed, so I just took a quick shot of each engine and didn't take other angles.

However your request has prompted me to reupload the picture of the Rolls-Royce/Snecma Olympus 593 (the lady in it is my wife), with some rubbish removed from the left hand side. Also I've added a second pic to the Rolls-Royce Olympus article and I’d like you to comment. The two pics on that article (mine and someone elses) seem to have little resemblance. Perhaps we are looking at different sides or perhaps the Marks were different. Unfortunately the Bristol Museum didn’t give the Mark of my photo. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 21:08, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I recently stumbled upon your name in a local magazine. If you are still here, i would love to meet you. --190.98.12.251 (talk) 14:15, 5 October 2008 (UTC) Horacio Stjeward. Paramaribo Suriname.[reply]

Strange! Please explain more. I live in Bristol, England, and the furthest I've ever travelled is into Europe for holidays and on business, and on a Concorde test flight to Casablanca Airport in Morocco. Regards, - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 16:04, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Adrian, Do you have a photo to illustrate the article on Leigh Court? I've been expanding the article & think a picture to illustrate the architecture would help. I've looked on Geograph & can't find one.— Rod ^talk 15:40, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Rod, I don't have a pic but will bear it in mind if I'm out that way (I live north of Bristol). Regards - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 15:10, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just fyi, you made a critical mistake naming the a/c in the photo as a Northrop F-5 when it is in fact a T-38 Talon. I thought you should know about this, hence this notice by me. Cheers~! ...Dave1185 (talk) 22:16, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder why the OFFICIAL website of the Turkish Stars says they fly F-5s? see Official website - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 12:38, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adrian, this appears to be an F-5B/F to me. I've not seen many pics of T-38s with tip tanks, and there appears to be small LERX in front of the wing just visible over the nose of the left tank. These strakes are not used on T-38s, to my knowledge. I'm curious as to Dave's rationale for concluding this is a T-38! - BillCJ (talk) 17:44, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have just added the image back into F-5 article and left a note on the image talk page the aircraft is a Canadair built NF-5B serial no 4017 (ex Netherlands Air Force K-4017), and an NF-5B is not a T-38. Also added it the Canadair CF-5 for good measure as well! MilborneOne (talk) 18:50, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Milborne and Bill,, thanks for your confirmations that I made no mistake, Regards - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 20:45, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Sorry for the late reply, stuck with SQ's 380 these few days (trust me, you don't want to know). Thousand apologies to all, I was making so many edits on so many articles that day itself and I don't think I took more than a glance at that photo before deciding that it was a T-38 instead of a NF-5B. Most importantly of all, did anyone notice the auxiliary air inlet located about 1/3 from the aft, that was the clue I missed out that tells me it is actually a F-5 and not a T-38. My bad, I apologize to all for making such a big blunder and its about time I get myself some old-man's glasses... sheesh! Have a great weekend and Cheers~! ...Dave1185 (talk) 08:19, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your very handsome apology. Don't worry about the mistake, I make mistakes too! Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 08:28, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Chillon.castle.arp.750pix.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 01:21, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree it should be deleted and have said so in the "discussion" link above - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 09:25, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Mathematics#Inverse_fourier_transforms. Thanks a lot for your support! Bo Jacoby (talk) 15:32, 23 November 2008 (UTC).[reply]

I couldn't let such rudeness go unremarked! Thanks for writing - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 15:55, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Arpingstone. I notice that you have contributed considerably to the guidelines on images, and also that you keep an eye on vandalism on the Fishing article. As you will have noticed, the fisheries and fishing articles are templated with narrow gutted navigation panels at the top right. These are currently being attacked by beginning editors because they are not standard layouts. They are either attacking the layout (removing images) or attacking the templates themselves. In particular User talk:Wikigi. Can you offer me some advice on how to handle this. --Geronimo20 (talk) 11:26, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The beginning editor in question has been contributing to WP since November 2006 with a total of over 9000 edits on French Wikipedia, just for you to know... I have alerted Geronimo20 regarding his use of images as headings located at the upper left corner of the articles (before the introduction) with 2 screenshots demonstrating the layout problem (see image 1 and image 2). Regards. - Wikigi | talk to me | 11:54, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The so-called "layout problems" claimed by Wikigi are easily fixed with {{clear}} or {{clearleft}} commands. However Wikigi ignores these fixes so he can continue to claim there is a problem. --Geronimo20 (talk) 19:29, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You two must clear this up between you so I've decided not to get involved. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 23:23, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm feed up with having to defend, without sane support, these templates from ill considered, and what sometimes feel like malicious attacks. Is there some forum where I can get these issues properly considered by capable editors without axes to grind? --Geronimo20 (talk) 01:32, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Geronimo, my expertise is in photography and graphics processing. Sadly, I have no knowledge of templates nor of where you should go for further help. I'm sorry I can't help you further. However, thanks for writing. Regards, - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 08:36, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You edited a photo I uploaded for the Falconry page. Your comment says that text is not allowed on photos. Can you please refer me to the rules regarding photos. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcdill (talk • contribs) 05:38, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!! You are referring to the Saker pic at the head of the Falconry article. Everything about images is explained in this link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IUP

Below I've copied the relevant bits from the link to save you reading it all. The link says that the photographer's name or date or copyright information is is not allowed on the photo itself, only on the page that you receive when you click on the photo.

Always specify on the description page where the image came from (the source) and information on how this could be verified. Examples include scanning a paper copy, or a URL, or a name/alias and method of contact for the photographer. For screenshots this means what the image is a screenshot of (the more detail the better). Do not put credits in images themselves.

Also, user-created images should not be watermarked, distorted, have any credits in the image itself or anything else that would hamper their free use, unless, of course, the image is intended to demonstrate watermarking, distortion etc. and is used in the related article. All photo credit should be in a summary on the image description page.
Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 09:59, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I note these Public domain images were uploaded some time ago. However, for whatever reason it is not possible to confirm these as Public Domain because the source site 'blanks' out in Firefox.

If these are genuinely public domain in the US and source country, please get the gallery concerned to i) File a release with the permissions queue at OTRS
ii) Fix the source website listed so that it is possible to confirm the status of the source work. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:47, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but I moved on from adding pics of uncertain status years ago and now only add pics taken with my own camera (that I declare as Public Domain). Regrettably I don't have the time to look into the status of those Painting pictures. Just delete them, or comment them out, as you wish. Sorry I can't be more helpful - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 17:58, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning, I am the editor of Young Archaeologist magazine. In the next issue I will be including a two page article about aviation archaeology and I am currently trying to source images. I was wondering if you would be happy for me to use an image of a Lockheed P38 Lightning. I would need a high resolution jpeg file - the higher the better for our designer's purposes. You would be properly referenced and I will gladly send you a copy of the magazine for your records.
I'm afraid I am on a bit of a tight schedule and so if you could get back to me asap then that would be great. Please contact me directly on amclean (atsymbol) britarch (dot thingy) ac (dotthingy) uk,
Many thanks,
Abi
213.2.190.34 (talk) 10:11, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. I have no picture of a P-38 Lightning anywhere on Wikipedia and indeed have never photographed one, so can't help you. Incidentally, it is unwise to give an undisguised email address (spam harvesters will love you) so I have disguised it. I have sent an email with a fuller reply - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 21:27, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for adding the picture on the static discharger page.It's better than what was there before. I actually own one,somewhere,if I can find it would you mind me adding a picture of it? p.s. the Jet Provost pictured on your page was actually my first paintstripping job.It took a lot of hard work to scrub the etch off of it.Brutaldeluxe (talk) 00:50, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for writing. Yes, a pic of a full discharger would be great, I didn't think to bring one way with me when I retired from British Aerospace! - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 09:54, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Adrian,
I'm an editor at Pearson Education and need a hi res version of your photo of the Supreme Court in Parliament Square (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_the_United_Kingdom). You would be fully credited in our publication. I can supply any further details you need via email. If you are able to email the hi res to me it would be much appreciated: philippa (dotsymbol) fiszzon (atsymbol) pearson (dotsymbol) com. Many thanks in advance,

Philippa —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.69.214.5 (talk) 12:13, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are very welcome to use that picture. When I looked at it (on the Middlesex Guildhall article) I noticed the quality was low because of oversharpening and the parallels converged. So I have uploaded a new version with both those faults corrected. The pic is 2288 pixels by 1712 pixels and 3.5 mB. I do not possess a larger or better quality version.

There is no need to email it to you because to acquire it you can:

• left click once on the thumbnail in the article
• A larger one will appear, left click it once
• A yet larger one will appear, RIGHT click it once
• Choose SAVE PICTURE from the menu that appears and you've got it.

(Incidentally, it is unwise to give an undisguised email address (spam harvesters will love you) so I have disguised it).

Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 21:50, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just a thank you for posting the gravestone poem in the public domain - very helpful to me at a time of loss. My dad was a WWII Lancaster pilot - he would have loved your work. LilyLilyRose (talk) 23:00, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad I helped you a little. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 09:54, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

During last week few attempts had been made to remove Gallery of Tata Airlines timetable covers, reason given behind this was galleries are not encyclopedic and Galleries are for wikicommons. They are not encyclopedic.

Notabley there is one more gallery present on the article i.e. Gallery of superseded liveries which was never altered.

If there is any logic and rationale (I couldn't find any in Gallery template page, help page, etc.) behind removal of the said gallery both galleries should be removed. On the contrary featured article like Flag of Belarus, Flag of Canada, Postage stamps of Ireland, etc contain Gallery (which means Galleries are accepted even in Featured Articles not to say about unfeatured ones).

As you have been active on this article you are invited to discuss this issue here on talk page.

--Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider Rizvi (talk) 06:06, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Adrian,
I am a PhD student at the University of Southampton working on a project on high lift device noise. We are currently writing a review article on high lift noise for undergraduate students in which we would like to use your picture of an Airbus A300 titled "Wing.slat.600pix.jpg" which better illustrates the mainsources of high lift noise e.g. slat, slat tracks and flap side-edge. I am writing to ask your permission to use this image in the article. We would be grateful if you could provide us with a higher resolution copy of the image for publication. Many thanks in advance for your help. Kkanjere (talk) 16:10, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are very welcome to use the picture, from the Slats article. Unfortunately I don't have it at a higher resolution (600 by 809 pixels), nor in colour. To capture it off the article:

• LEFT click on the thumbnail in the article
• RIGHT click the picture that appears
• Choose SAVE PICTURE from the menu that appears and you've got it.

For your interest I took the picture at Airbus in Toulouse while I was an aerodynamicist for British Aerospace (I‘m now retired). Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 16:34, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can i ask why you reverted my edition of the Zu Online article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.127.152.81 (talk) 21:36, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because the sentence "The appearance of the pet may be changed by feeding inner bolus and feet decorations" made no sense to me whatever so I assumed it was vandalism. So what is an "inner bolus" and what are "feet decorations"? If in fact that sentence makes sense then my apologies and please revert me. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 21:42, 17 February 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Its a Chinese game, has a lot of typos and bad English like me :P, anyways inner bolus are like suits to change between a cat for a dog for example, feet decorations are like shoes for the pets, they both add stats (more HP, and attack for example) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.127.152.81 (talk) 21:45, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for explaining - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 21:50, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why have you deleted my additions to the fleet table whick says which routes are oprated be each aircraft? There are many others company articals that is like that on them, like singapore airlines.

Sorry if I did wrong, just revert me - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 18:43, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Adrian,

It's me again. I saw a picture on airliners.net that I liked of the new Libyan Airlines livery, so I emailed the photographer asking whether I could upload it on Wikipedia and he agreed. This is the image. What should I do? The first thing I've already done is saved the image on my desktop, and removed the copyright tag at the bottom, because he agreed to release the rights into the public domain. I did the same before with this image File:TsinjHLLT020106.jpg. But, how can I prove the author wants to release the image. Do I copy the email he sent me into the information box?Jaw101ie (talk) 11:09, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks and best wishes.

Hi from Adrian. Sorry to seem negative but I haven't a clue what you do! The reason is that all my pics are self-made and public domain so I've not needed to find out how to deal with other peoples photos. Try asking at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Help_desk . Best Wishes Adrian Pingstone (talk) 13:42, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers mate, I would appreciate it if you could proof read PIA too. Its a big task sorting this article out! haha --Fast track Also would welcome more PIA pictures from Heathrow. Nice to see you caught Mugal 773ER. --Fast track (talk) 22:43, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I am writing a business strategy book partly based on U.S. Air Force Colonel John Boyd's Maneuver Conflict. I would like your permission to use your photograph of a Eurofighter Typhoon to illustrate the importance of maneuverability. Kind Regards,
Henrik Mårtensson
P.S. Sorry about the anonymous address below. I have logged in three times, but keep getting logged out every time I reach your talk page. I'll check your talk page for your response. If you wish to reach me directly, you can do so at mailto:self@henrikmartensson.org.

217.214.0.91 (talk) 14:41, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I would be delighted if you use my picture. The photo is public domain so you are free to republish it wherever you wish. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 14:47, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent removal of two incidents associated with the airport is surely incorrect. The first at Wythenshawe occurred on the final approach to the airport, just metres from the boundary fence.

The Stockport air crash also occurred on the approach to the airport nearing the final positioning beacon and under the the airport's air traffic control, after the aircraft had been circling awaiting a landing slot.

Surely neither of these incidents can be considered to have "have no connection whatever with the airport", and are equally worthy of inclusion as the 1972 Staines air crash is at London Heathrow Airport and the 2001 Belle Harbor air crash is at John F. Kennedy International Airport.

The general consensus on Wikipedia appears to be that incidents do not have to occur within the boundary of the airport to be associated with it, and these two incidents should surely be restored.

The other edits you made considerably improve the style of the article. Well done. Skinsmoke (talk) 10:57, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, please revert me. I didn't realise that incidents outside the airport boundary were acceptable in an airport article but still feel that if they did not occur within the airport boundary then they are not airport incidents. Nevertheless I'll go along with policy. Thanks for your nice compliment about the edits. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 20:28, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Adrian, no problem, your photos are great! I thought that photo was of value, so I just put it back in. - Ahunt (talk) 12:54, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If Heathrow Airport is convenient for you, would you mind photographing the British Airways headquarters? Thank you WhisperToMe (talk) 18:28, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll be up there in about 2 weeks time (depends on good photographic weather at a weekend!) - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 21:15, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That works! Hopefully the weather will be great :) WhisperToMe (talk) 23:50, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is your trip to the Heathrow area coming up soon? If so, please don't forget to get a photo of the BA headquarters :) WhisperToMe (talk) 00:28, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Whenever you get the chance to get the BA HQ photo, please let me know - Thank you WhisperToMe (talk) 05:35, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I found a photo of it on Flickr, and the photographer agreed to relicense it for use on Wikimedia Commons. You are still welcome to take additional photographs of Waterside if you want to. WhisperToMe (talk) 23:09, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Arpingstone,

We are using one of your images

(from the article Birefringence) in our photonics kit lesson book. We are planning to sell the kit together with the booklet to high schools and colleges. We want to be sure we can use your image within the booklet.

Thank you. Radka —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.94.78.174 (talk) 18:10, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, no problem whatever. Use the image anywhere you like in anything you publish, because I make all my photos Public Domain. If you wish you can say somewhere something like "Photograph by Adrian Pingstone" but that's not compulsory. Best Wishes, - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 19:15, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I am not english so sometimes even if I check, i can make mistakes... excuse me --Gian piero milanetti (talk) 12:47, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I apologise for my edit comment in Supermarine Spitfire about checking spelling using Preview before pressing Edit. I had no idea a non-English person was doing the edit. Apologies again. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 15:50, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear sir,

I appreciate your rather task force approach in removing the above contribution. Quite some work is involved in retirieving various newspaper documentation on the airline that I opted to summarize the situation that way.

Do be informed however, that it is of no personal opinion as you wrongly suggested . There were indeed a number controversial factors at play in the setup of the airline, which could provide sufficient material for a qualitative research thesis in which business, technical and organizationl aspects to do with the airline's creation could be more critically examined and from which conclusions could be drawn which would tend to favour the view that the Nigeria Airways liquidation and subsequent setup of its Virgin Nigeria replacement could have been handled differently with the emphasis being on the lessons to be learned from this in order to improve business practice in the future, especially with the current national air transport situation. But again , I understand this is only a Wikipedia platform and the topic can better be treated in the context of dedicated academic research, better suited to an institution.

I only request you see enough reason to at least allow this User Talk entry to remain so that it could be viewed by others who are better equipped with documented material on this topic to be able to publish it fully in due course.

Until then, kind regards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.180.139.25 (talk) 12:58, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough though. The Admiralty article had them all set to a mere 150px, which was just too small to see properly. I do find it a shame that the default size is so small (180px, if I'm not mistaken), as most modern computers are more than capable of viewing them as 250px or so without causing the text too much grief, and a lot of users aren't aware that it can be changed... Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 21:29, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can't decide if you are quietly telling me off or thanking me! In any event, I'm following the Manual of Style (quoted below). I notice that finding px values is now rare so I'm far from alone in my px removal "crusade". As you say, 180px is the default value and I agree that the default should be larger.

Quote from Manual of Style:

In articles, if you wish to have a photo beside the text, you should generally use the "thumb" (thumbnail) option available in the [[WP:Image markup|image markup]]. This results in a display 180 pixels wide (140 pixels if the "upright" option is used as well), except for those logged-in users who have set a different default in their user preferences. As a rule images should not be set to a fixed size (i.e. one that overrides this default), but see the [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Images|Manual of Style]] for exceptions. Where size forcing is appropriate, larger images should generally be a maximum of 300 pixels wide, so that they can comfortably be displayed on 800x600 monitors.

Thanks for writing - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 21:55, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I’m looking to add free-licensed photographs to the articles of the various seasons of the American reality television series The Real World, so I’m contacting editors whom I find have edited the articles for those cities. I know Bristol is a bit of a way off from London, but I notice you're an avid photographer. Do you venture frequently to London, and if so, would you be able to take some nice pics of the London residence, and upload them here if I give you the location? If not, do you know anyone who can? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 04:37, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but I can't help you. My visits to London nowadays are only to Heathrow Airport and I don't ever go into central London (Heathrow is 20 miles outside London) and I don't know any other London photographers. Thanks for writing - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 10:00, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. Just out of curiosity, though, I also noticed that you added some Paris photos too. Do you live in or near Paris? Nightscream (talk) 16:12, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose as an established user you are familiar with the 3RR rule. 76.117.1.254 (talk) 05:00, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am. Have I done three reverts? I'll leave the article alone now and leave it to others to watch out for the Anon. Thanks for writing - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 08:36, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The removal of File:Eurasian coot2.JPG was probably the right thing to do - your right it is a bit grannie and small. I'm still only learning the arts of photography so if you see any other pictures of mine that are bad quality, don't hesitate to delete them. --Skinips (talk) 23:53, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Welcome to the wonderful world of Wikipedia. First, an apology - had I realised you were a new editor I would have phrased my Edit Summary much more gently (I've been editing since 2002). I'm pleased you understood so well the reasons for the removal and that you wrote to me in such a nice way about it. Thanks!

Because there are so many (too many) pictures of Coots on that article, only first class pictures should now be added (and at least one poor one taken away at the same time, in my opinion). Huge Galleries are not Wikipedia policy. One day an editor might take away the lot and just leave those embedded in the article, I’m surprised that hasn‘t happened yet (I‘m not bold enough to do it!).

I have several thousand pictures on Wikipedia (I`ve lost count), mostly civil and military aircraft. The aircraft pictures are taken with a low-price D50 Nikon DSLR with a x10 telephoto lens but when I can't be bothered to carry the weight, like on holiday, I use a Canon A720IS compact. (As an aside you'll notice that I've Wikilinked the article name (two square brackets each side) so that I could go to it to remind myself what it looked like). Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 09:15, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well thanks for the comment Arpingstone.

Also thanks for sorting out the miscellaneous Information section on the King of Saxony Bird of Paradise article, I couldn't think of anywhere to put all those random facts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skinips (talk • contribs) 11:16, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Adrian. On my User talk page, at Image creation, a Wiki friend of mine, Logger9, has asked me for assistance with creation of images for use in Wikipedia. I am illiterate on the subject of photography but I am hoping you might be able to give Logger9 a few suggestions. Thanks in anticipation. Dolphin51 (talk) 11:30, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happily a few months ago I wrote a very complete guide to uploading Public Domain photos to Commons and then using them in Wikipedia. I'll check it over and update it, and let you know in a few days where on my User Page to locate it. - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 18:05, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much. Dolphin51 (talk) 00:07, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all the information about photographs in your Sandbox. I have passed this link to Logger9. Best regards. Dolphin51 (talk) 13:15, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For others who may read this, the link to the instructions is a few lines down at User:Arpingstone - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 13:51, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello
You added a lead image to this page a while ago; there is a discussion on the lead image for this page here. You might want to comment...Swanny18 (talk) 16:17, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]