User talk:Metrosfan: Difference between revisions

Line 107: Line 107:

::::In what sense? It just means that Aeroroutes isn’t classed as a reliable source any more. It’s one of the reasons that the discussions are ongoing around these route tables [[User talk:Danners430|Danners430]] [[Special:Contributions/Danners430|tweaks made]] 23:15, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

:::::@[[User:Danners430|Danners430]] Would it be possible to reopen the discussion? I feel like the discussion had far less people there compared to in the RfC, I feel like there’s more that needs to be said [[User:Metrosfan|Metrosfan]] ([[User talk:Metrosfan#top|talk]]) 23:24, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

::::::I don’t think it’s possible to reopen as such, as it was inactive for quite some time – but there’s absolutely nothing saying you can’t start a new RSN discussion and ping the editors that contributed to the old discussion [[User talk:Danners430|Danners430]] [[Special:Contributions/Danners430|tweaks made]] 23:27, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi Metrosfan! I noticed your contributions to Talk:List of metro systems and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Valenciano (talk) 21:34, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of metro systems, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Salem. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It’s OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, —DPL bot (talk) 17:48, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to check in on you and say how proud I am. You are one of my only mentees to be so successful! I hope you continue to have a great time here! — Grapefanatic (Talk) 13:10, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(replying here so Liz doesn’t get unneeded pings) You should request it as a draft so you can improve it and address the reasons for its deletion, it won’t be restored as an article if it has been deleted before. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 14:52, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Chaotic Enby Im not restoring because I wanna improve it, there are some complicated stuffs about the article, I wanted to have the article restored as a draft because I want to read the article since I find it interesting Metrosfan (talk) 13:36, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I’m Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Sultan Abdul Aziz Shah Airport, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator.
Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 04:56, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Metrosfan. Thank you for your work on Keelung Mass Rapid Transit. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good start

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 20:24, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I’m Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Discover Airlines, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator.
Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 05:49, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,
Please read WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT direct flights, which are flights that continue to another destination under the same flight number, are fine to list in airport destination lists. As this is the case, a note is not needed and they can be included just like any other destination.
Thank you! VenFlyer98 (talk) 07:25, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@VenFlyer98 Hello, I have already known about WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT about direct flights, while I would agree that it isn’t completely necessary, I do think it would still have been good if such notes are added because they are still informative, after all, just because it isn’t necessary doesn’t mean it cannot be included, besides some other airport articles already have such notes before I even added them at KUL and SYD, Thank you. Metrosfan (talk) 12:27, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Metrosfan: The notes add unnecessary clutter. The flights are fine to be added per WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT and don’t need notes. Most pages list direct flights without notes. Thank you. VenFlyer98 (talk) 14:59, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@VenFlyer98 Hello, I already know about WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT but once again, just because they are unnecessary doesn’t mean they cannot be added, besides, wouldn’t it had been better if people can know about what route has two sectors? Please keep such notes on airport articles, Thank you. Metrosfan (talk) 01:10, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Metrosfan:

The notes violate WP:NOTTRAVEL and are too specific. Wikipedia is a general encyclopedia and is not made for enthusiasts or very specific information. Keep those notes off of the tables. Thank you. VenFlyer98 (talk) 09:22, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I’m Danners430. I noticed that you recently removed content from Shanghai Pudong International Airport without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don’t worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 07:53, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Air China, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Emirates.

(Opt-out instructions.) —DPL bot (talk) 19:53, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Emirates (airline), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sky Express.

(Opt-out instructions.) —DPL bot (talk) 07:56, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just a heads up, I’m fraid Aeroroutes has been deprecated as a source, as it was agreed it was not a reliable source – see WP:AEROROUTES. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 14:17, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Danners430 What is supposed to be the case now? I am feeling like the results was missing something there and there are now problems with how many airports articles uses them…. Metrosfan (talk) 15:50, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean with “what is supposed to be the case now”? Apologies, I just have no idea what you mean! Danners430 _{tweaks made} 15:53, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Danners430 What I meant was what can be done next Metrosfan (talk) 23:12, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In what sense? It just means that Aeroroutes isn’t classed as a reliable source any more. It’s one of the reasons that the discussions are ongoing around these route tables Danners430 _{tweaks made} 23:15, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Danners430 Would it be possible to reopen the discussion? I feel like the discussion had far less people there compared to in the RfC, I feel like there’s more that needs to be said Metrosfan (talk) 23:24, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t think it’s possible to reopen as such, as it was inactive for quite some time – but there’s absolutely nothing saying you can’t start a new RSN discussion and ping the editors that contributed to the old discussion Danners430 _{tweaks made} 23:27, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Must Read

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Leave a Comment