User talk:Drutt

Old stuff moved to User:Drutt/Archive

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Drutt! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

From where do you know it was Paul Jaray? [1],[2] I had nothing found about Juray or Jaray and antenna. And Lehmann wrote nothing about Jaray. It seems logical, because Jaray was for aerodynamic. But for Luftschiffbau (airship) he worked from 1915. (He had coud work as an externist from the airoplane company) Lehman tested his Butter churn und the Spy basket between 1914-12-14 (finish of LZ26 / ZXII) and 1915-01-19 (L24 / L3 & LZ27 / L4 bombing as the first the England coast. Lehman had waited to be the first, but had troubles with the ship to this time.) --Franz (Fg68at) de:Talk 16:34, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo, I did not write the original article but saw the reference to Jaray (or Juray) and linked it to him. I assumed it had to be him. A list of his patents is here, but I don't see any reference to antenna gondolas. Drutt (talk) 20:46, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. As you seem to have created the redirect from Manchester Evening Chronicle to Manchester Evening News, I thought you might like to see an issue raised at Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Miscellaneous#Regional_Newspapers. Do we have any particular reason for the redirect, or was the Chronicle another newspaper entirely? If it was, the redirect seems misleading, and if there is a reason for the redirect, we should probably add something to the MEN article to explain why. AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:12, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind - the redirect seems to have been explained, in that the MEN took over the Chronicle in the 1960s. AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:19, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article List of Japan Societies has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:LINKFARM; anything that is notable enough to have an article is handled by categories.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 03:48, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article Brian Gould has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Does not meet WP:GNG. No reliable secondary sources. WP:COI as well.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Nikki♥311 07:10, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, BAE Hawk 200. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – BAE Systems Hawk. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at BAE Systems Hawk – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Shibbolethink ^{(♔ ♕)} 05:08, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:37, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Drutt. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Shriving is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shriving until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 05:21, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]