User talk:Dual Freq

Please:If you are here to post article deletion messages, don't waste your time posting them here. Instead, post them to the talk page of the project that they are associated with. For example, if it is a ship page, please post to WP:Ships so they can have the opportunity to respond since they are more likely to respond than I am. Thank you. Please remember that it is probably a better idea to start the discussion on the article talk page rather than here so others can participate in the discussion.

Archives Archive 1 - Archived May 15, 2006 Archive 2 - Archived October 28, 2006 Archive 3 - October 2006 to February 2007 Archive 4 - March 2007 - June 2007 Archive 5 - July 2007 - March 2008 Archive 6 - April 2008 -

Add new comments below, click New Section above to start a new section, but consider using the article talk page instead.

Hi Dual Freq, and thanks for keeping an eye on the Salem, Illinois page. The IP appears has now reverted a similar edit of mine on Washburn, Illinois. Different county, so that suggests I'm being stalked. Because the IP address keeps changing, do you have any ideas on the best way to handle this? Ken Gallager (talk) 13:33, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There's not a lot that can be done for changing IP's. Eventually they usually get bored though.-- Dual Freq (talk) 23:01, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated USS Wisconsin (BB-64) for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm _Talk 21:40, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wik.ipedia.Pro 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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing—Attacks on the MV Maersk Hangzhou—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. GoldenBootWizard276 (talk) 14:35, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing—Maersk Hangzhou—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. GoldenBootWizard276 (talk) 13:54, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maersk Hangzhou has an RfC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you.

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Dual Freq. I'm trying to work through the backlog of articles with coordinates requests in the United States, and many of them have been in the backlog for as far back as 2008, some even from 2006. Do you know where to find out the location of the shipwreck? I'm happy to put in the work to track it down but I don't know where to look.

The reason I moved it out of the backlog is that it sat there for fourteen years. There are so many messes to clean up in Wik.ipedia.Pro that no one wants to take the time to really look through the backlog to see what's there, so things sit and rot. I'm thinking that if someone knows where the shipwreck is and sees the page they can either say so in the Talk page or add the coordinates themselves. But if it sits in the backlog, people can't tell if it's one of the ones that's been there forever or a new request. Seriously. Some requests have been in the backlog for eighteen years.

Do you have an idea for how to get coordinates for this ship without leaving it to rot in the backlog? Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 19:32, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure, there's probably not a master list on the web. Maybe a specialized book about the ship. A specialized book/website about shipwrecks. A FOIA to the USN perhaps also of ships logs that were involved in the sinking operation. Diving or other ship wreck websites though this is likely far too deep for diving. Websites for former ship's crew. Certainly the Navy knows where they sunk it, but it's just not on the web. I don't think there's anything wrong with leaving it there. I just wanted to make it clearer that it was for the ship wreck location. NavSource has what might be an estimate, N31,W120, I don't know where they got that or if it's correct. --Dual Freq (talk) 22:19, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The coordinates were actually more detailed than that so I'm marking this "DONE!" \o/ (and the peasants cheered!) Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 00:37, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is another article that hasn't benefitted from having a coordinates tag for fifteen years. I've been going through the backlogs and I intend to check them regularly. But with over fifty backlogs for the United States, I'm not going to remember how many articles were there the last time I looked at a particular one and I'll either open one up unnecessarily, or worse yet, I'll skip it thinking it has only articles like this when it in fact has recent additions. Since fifteen years of bearing the coordinates tag hasn't motivated anyone to find it's location, can we just remove it? It hasn't worked, but not having it won't prevent a reader who knows it's location from saying where it is on the Talk page... Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 05:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you should be removing any of those tags unless the coordinates are found. The template does not say there is a time limit to finding the coordinates. Those shipwrecks without locations should all have coordinates. I didn't directly revert you because I thought you seriously didn't understand that it was a shipwreck with your edit summary: "Coordinates inapplicable as she is not berthed anywhere." Please don't remove any more tags on shipwrecks until someone posts their final resting place. --Dual Freq (talk) 11:18, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dual Freq Should we use infobox plane1 on articles use photo wreckage of the aircraft or photos are not of an airplane before the accident on infobox as US Airways Flight 1549 four flights on September 11 attack (AA11, UA175, AA77 and UA93) ? I think use plane1 then aircraft photo will be in a more visible position. I have made such edits. But user @User:Midori No Sora reverted that edits. Tô Ngọc Khang (talk) 12:04, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dude read this = Template:Infobox aircraft occurrence. Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 13:30, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dual Freq @Aviationwikiflight@Ivebeenhacked@Maungapohatu Should we use speedy deletion with photos has VRT permission awaiting processing ? Some photos I uploaded has VRT permission awaiting processing was deleted by @Midori No Sora. Regards Tô Ngọc Khang (talk) 08:47, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You should be using a template like Commons:Template:Permission pending using {{subst:PP}} to the image if permission is pending. (warning: template PP is different on english wiki than on commons) Otherwise it just looks like you copied a photo off the internet and people have to try to guess if you have submitted a ticket for permission. --Dual Freq (talk) 21:34, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Boeing 707 "Stratoliner", 3rd 707-121 production airplane, N709PA, later delivered to Pan Am.jpg Hi @Dual Freq. Do you think this photo is Public Domain and there in nothing suspicious about it ? In @RecycIedPixels, PD-US is seem suspicious and this user want to delete it. Tô Ngọc Khang (talk) 02:10, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

idk. Because it's an air to air photo, I guess it was probably a press hand out photo from Boeing. Maybe they didn't put it out with a copyright notice like the license suggests. It's impossible to know now. Alamy also has it as PD, but they may have copied it from Commons. That's the danger of allowing copyrighted works on Commons. After a few years, they get spread around as public domain and you can't do much to get rid of them after that. At this point, if Boeing wants to contact Commons and say that the photo was copyrighted, that's probably what it would take to remove that photo. The way to prevent this from happening in the future is to not upload works that you are not sure about. Don't copy photos from Flickr users that share photos where they are not the photographer. --Dual Freq (talk) 11:39, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Boeing 737-401, N416US, Piedmont Airlines.jpg I uploaded to Commons with license PD-US-1978-89. And it's an air to air photo, and taken by Boeing https://www.facebook.com/groups/43874717796/permalink/10157349100432797/ Tô Ngọc Khang (talk) 12:07, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly recommend against taking photos from the web, especially Facebook, and uploading them to Commons. You have no realistic way of knowing if Boeing was the author. You're not helping, you're only making more work for others to fix. Please stop. You've been blocked twice for this already. --Dual Freq (talk) 12:52, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dual Freq Now @Ivebeenhacked using photos of similar aircrft on infobox and put accident aircraft photo while in service with other operators in below. But I think anyway photo of the aircraft involved should still be given priority. Should we use the photo of aircraft involved in accidents when in service with other opreators or previous livery on infobox, and put the similar photo in below ? Ex VASP Flight 168 or TAM Airlines Flight 3054 Tô Ngọc Khang (talk) 12:31, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Work with the editors on those article talk pages. Also, stop stealing photos from the web. It's not worth stealing a photo so that each aviation accident article has multiple livery photos of the accident aircraft. --Dual Freq (talk) 13:04, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So do you think two photos is PD-US ? File:N7711G Cessna 172.jpgFile:San Francisco Airport Jul 24, 1960 Jetway into United Douglas DC-8 jet N8013U.jpg Tô Ngọc Khang (talk) 00:38, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would never have uploaded them. I would need to know who the author was, when / where it was first published. The estimated date the photo was taken is not necessarily when it was first published. If we do not know who the photographer was or where / when it was published, how can we know for certain that it did not have a copyright notice. --Dual Freq (talk) 01:09, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What about these 3 photos?

File:N6902C Star of the Seine.jpgFile:N802E Delta Air Lines DC-8.jpgFile:Trans World Airlines (TWA) Boeing 707-331B N8734.jpg

All from Commons, and used PD-US Tô Ngọc Khang (talk) 23:19, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would never have uploaded them. I would need to know who the author was, when / where it was first published. The estimated date the photo was taken is not necessarily when it was first published. If we do not know who the photographer was or where / when it was published, how can we know for certain that it did not have a copyright notice. --Dual Freq (talk) 01:07, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]