User talk:RickyCourtney/Archive 4

< Archive 3

Archive 4

All Pages:

1 -  2 -  3 -  4 -  ... (up to 100)

Grammar on FedEx Express article

Referring to “The Memphis International Airport” or “The Indianapolis International Airport” is not grammatically correct in English. It should be simply “Memphis International Airport”, as a proper noun referring to a specific place. RedundancyAdvocate (talk) 08:42, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

November 2023

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Eurofighter GmbH. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. RedundancyAdvocate (talk) 08:48, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

@RedundancyAdvocate How exactly were my edits unconstructive? In my opinion, I changed the prose to be easier to read and understand. You apparently disagree, and that's okay. But we need to assume good faith when interacting with other editors. I feel it's unfair to accuse me of making unconstructive edits when my over 15 years of experience making over 33 thousand edits would show that I am just attempting to help the project, just like I assume you are. -- RickyCourtney (talk) 18:18, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Apologies, the warn was intended to mention the FedEx Express article. See the topic above this on this page. RedundancyAdvocate (talk) 20:45, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

@RedundancyAdvocate A grammar disagreement does not warrant an unconstructive edits warning. -- RickyCourtney (talk) 23:44, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

It is not a grammar disagreement, rather it is a grammar error on your part that I must now take the time to go and undo manually. RedundancyAdvocate (talk) 18:29, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Transilien logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Transilien logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:52, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Transilien

It appears that I wanted to revert an edit that falsely claimed "1969 to 2044" rather than "1969 to 1988", but I did not realise I reverted more than I should. --Minoa (talk) 21:36, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, RickyCourtney. Thank you for your work on Breslauer Platz/Hauptbahnhof station. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Hello my friend! Thank you for writing the article on Wikipedia! I genuinely appreciate your efforts in creating the article on Wikipedia and expanding the sum of human knowledge in Wikipedia. Wishing you and your family a great day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 05:47, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

Champigny Centre station moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Champigny Centre station. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 23:43, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Oakland International Airport

Hello, RickyCourtney. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Oakland International Airport".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. ✗plicit 02:05, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Alaska Airlines Flight 1282

Sorry about this, I must have had an outdated version of the article loaded when I made the edit. I meant to do this. - ZLEA _T\^C 19:54, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

JetBlue focus cities

Hi. Hope you are well. I recalled the discussion over focus cities and operating bases here. As mentioned, JetBlue's Form 10-K lists "New York" as a focus city, but includes multiple New York–area airports as part of its description (emphasizing JFK the most). I noticed that since that discussion, Newark and LaGuardia have been added in the infoboxes of the airline and the airports as JetBlue focus cities.

JetBlue's Form 10-K description of New York includes Westchester County Airport (White Plains) in the same way it does Newark and LaGuardia. Would it be apt to include White Plains as a focus city as well? It seems as strongly sourced as Newark and LaGuardia would be. Precision123 (talk) 18:46, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Destubbed your article

Toyota Motor Manufacturing Missouri is now a start-class article. The expansion was easy, but now I’m suspiciously getting ads for Toyota. Roasted (talk) 05:19, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Union Pacific Updates

Several weeks ago, I provided an updated locomotive roster on Talk:Union Pacific Railroad, but nobody has reviewed. I'd love to work with someone on this page. MJ UnionPacific (talk) 15:37, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

January 2024

Hello, I'm Graywalls. I noticed that you recently removed content from Unifi Aviation 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. You selective removed contents while leaving a misleading edit summary saying "add logo". Graywalls (talk) 03:14, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, RickyCourtney. Thank you for your work on Ram Heavy Duty (fifth generation). SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Hello my friend! Good day to you. Thanks for creating the article, I have marked it as reviewed. Have a blessed day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 15:39, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the correction

Regarding the KC Water Taxi- you were right, official policy is that you're supposed to have a reduced fare card to get a senior discount. In practice, that's not true, so I didn't realize that was official policy. Thanks for the correction. FPTI (talk) 02:42, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

February 2024

Hey,

you changed the maximum seating of the 737MAX 8 to "188 or 202". That figures are for the 2-class config. But in the specifications table of the 737 MAX article the maximum seating is required: so the max. seating of a 1 class config. And that is 210 according to the stated source. 80.187.75.243 (talk) 03:28, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

So here’s my understanding… it’s 189 when configured as a MAX 8. That number goes up to 202 when configured as a MAX 200, which has mid-exit door. These doors are optional, which leads to the two different maximum seatings. Compare that to the MAX 9, which is always equipped with a door opening, but which can be plugged by an operator if they desire. The 210 maximum seats is new… but it’s on Boeing’s website. RickyCourtney (talk) 05:51, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Alright. Both figures are sourced now.

The 210 are sourced by https://www.boeing.com/commercial/737

The also given archive link confirms, that the 210 was stated on Boeing website in 2021 already.

And actually Boeing stated the figure 210 already in 2019: https://web.archive.org/web/20190405003324/https://www.boeing.com/commercial/737max/

80.187.75.243 (talk) 13:02, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Draft:N747GE

I have made a draft on N747GE and so I was thinking will you be able to give it the same treatment you did with N7470. Because I spent so much research and time into preparing it 110.175.169.245 (talk) 08:46, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

SEPTA ridership

FYI: Talk:SEPTA Regional Rail#Ridership figures. Mackensen (talk) 03:13, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:VTA Platform Layout Blue Green Line Downtown

Template:VTA Platform Layout Blue Green Line Downtown has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Mackensen (talk) 18:59, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Planespotters as a reliable source

Unfortunately in disagreeing so strongly about the edit [[1]] you reverted you are pitting yourself against a lot of discussion that says the opposite. Mostly available here [[2]].

In saying it is all OK because there is an error correction mechanism on planespotters just proves that the site has a non RS compatable user driven component. Wikipedia by contrast is certainly not a reliable source for the same reason and its error correction is remakably remarkable. Maungapohatu (talk) 20:45, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:VTA Platform Layout Blue Line/previous

Template:VTA Platform Layout Blue Line/previous has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 09:37, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:VTA Platform Layout Green Line/next

Template:VTA Platform Layout Green Line/next has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 09:37, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:VTA Platform Layout Green Line/previous

Template:VTA Platform Layout Green Line/previous has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 09:37, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:VTA Platform Layout Orange Line/next

Template:VTA Platform Layout Orange Line/next has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 09:38, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:VTA Platform Layout Orange Line/previous

Template:VTA Platform Layout Orange Line/previous has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 09:38, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:VTA Platform Layout Blue Line/next

Template:VTA Platform Layout Blue Line/next has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 09:38, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, RickyCourtney. Thank you for your work on N661US. SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Good day! Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia by writing this article. I have marked the article as reviewed. Have a wonderful and blessed day for you and your family!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 08:24, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Charter Tags

Hi Ricky, You’ll probably see I undid all your edits adding the “Public Charter” tags. Per WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT, it states “Do not include ad-hoc, irregular, or private charter services.” So we only include public charters under the “Charter:” tag. Thus, adding “public” is not necessary. If you are adamant about the change, I’d recommend bringing it up to the airports project.

Thanks! VenFlyer98 (talk) 00:30, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. Totally understand the request for discussion. -- RickyCourtney (talk) 17:36, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

DYK for N661US

On 27 April 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article N661US, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that N661US (pictured) was the prototype Boeing 747-400 and was involved in the Northwest Airlines Flight 85 incident, in which the aircraft suddenly banked hard to the left in flight? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/N661US. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, N661US), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

RoySmith (talk) 00:02, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Input requested

Your input is requested in the following discussion: Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2024_April_25#Template:Skytrain_MIA. Jackdude101 ^talk cont 00:25, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Game Boy

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Game Boy you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of ProtoDrake -- ProtoDrake (talk) 21:43, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:A Line (Los Angeles Metro)/detailed

Template:A Line (Los Angeles Metro)/detailed has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 12:45, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Game Boy

The article Game Boy you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Game Boy for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of ProtoDrake -- ProtoDrake (talk) 15:51, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Muni Market Street Subway

Template:Muni Market Street Subway has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 17:12, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Atlas Air logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Atlas Air logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --Min☠︎rax^«¦talk¦» 14:13, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

DMS

Is there a compelling reason to force DMS coordinate display, like in this edit? I don't think that most CA railway station articles use DMS - most that I see use decimal degrees, which are more intuitive to non-technical readers. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:46, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

@Pi.1415926535 No, I was just under the impression that most use DMS. I don't really care, just trying to bring some consistency. Frankly, I believe neither are intuitive to non-technical readers.

While we're chatting... I disagree with showing Chatsworth with the Metrolink signage. It also has plenty of Metro signage and a small amount of Amtrak signage. I agree that it's mostly Metrolink on the rail platform, but IMHO, it's just easier/better to go with the generic style.

-- RickyCourtney (talk) 23:55, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Well, there's not any way to present coordinates simpler than decimal degrees, unfortunately. Unless there's ever a discussion with consensus to mass-convert coordinate formats, I'd say just leave them whatever format they already are.

I see your point about the multiple signages. I strongly prefer using a style - the colored bars make the infobox more readable, and I like the consistency with other articles - but I'm not sure how much of that is just personal preference. The signage on the rail platforms seems to be primarily Metrolink, which is why I prefer keeping that style. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:10, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:K Line (Los Angeles Metro)/detailed

Template:K Line (Los Angeles Metro)/detailed has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. OrdinaryScarlett (talk) 07:29, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Vulcan Centaur dead ref ULA_tech_sheet2

In the edit [3] you added a an undefined reference <ref name="ULA_tech_sheet2" />, which now gives a big red error in the references section. Could you please take a look at that? Thanks in advance, Thue (talk) 11:25, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Super Heavy Lift launch Vehicles

Your recent edits severely decreased the quality of the article, including breaking the table.

Please self-revert. Redacted II (talk) 18:10, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

July 2024

Your recent editing history at Boeing Crew Flight Test shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Redraiderengineer (talk) 19:24, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

I see no evidence of edit warring here. The only other editor that made more than one edit to this article on July 12 is now blocked, so this issue is non-substantial. Jackdude101 ^talk cont 04:58, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Disney Transport Template

There were some additional edits not affecting the width of the Disney Transport template made within the past few days that you reverted along with everything else, such as an enlarge template for a brand-new station layout template I made for the TTC. I'm assuming you didn't notice them, or else you would not have done that. Anyway, if you want the width reduced more, we could get rid of the Disney Direct (employee only/blue) bus routes like how I had it in the past when I first created the whole thing years ago, though that would make the coverage for Lynx incomplete. Perhaps we should add a note to the template page specifying the scope, which in my mind is every location on WDW property covered by Disney Transport and Lynx. The only exception is the Shades of Green Resort, which is an oddball one that was originally built by Disney. Getting rid of that one won't reduce the width, BTW, as there will still be an outer elevated edge for the monorail occupying the same space. Jackdude101 ^talk cont 00:22, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Sorry for deleting more than the routeboxes. I’d argue that all routes that are not accessible to guests are out of scope and be deleted. RickyCourtney (talk) 01:14, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Your argument is actually 100% compatible with how the template is now. As opposed to the Disney Direct (blue) Lynx routes, which are designed specifically for employees, the regular (purple and orange) Lynx routes are for the general public, and every location with a blue route also has at least one purple route or something from Disney Transport. Jackdude101 ^talk cont 01:43, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

But including Disney University? Having 7 routeboxes? Wikipedia is not a travel guide. I also feel strange about having all these bus only destinations. Most templates like this only show fixed, permanent guideway routes. Bus routes can change quickly. Fixed guideways can’t. RickyCourtney (talk) 01:51, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm meeting you halfway and got rid of all the routeboxes, but kept the singular Lynx icons. Disney-related transportation is anything but normal (railroad crossings with roller coaster swing bridges, riverboats interchanging with gondola lifts, etc.). Jackdude101 ^talk cont 02:25, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

It’s better. I’d also say that the cast centers and shades of green should come off as they’re not open to the public, therefore it’s not really important for the broad audience of Wikipedia to know about them. Also, ESPN WWOS has pretty irregular service unlike the other bus locations. RickyCourtney (talk) 02:37, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

It's a "yes and no" situation with the general public having access to Shades of Green. On the one hand, you need to be working directly with the DoD or be active US military to be eligible to stay, but on the other hand, you can get that requirement waived a number of ways, so it depends on how strictly you define "general public." If it's a question of notability, besides having its own article, it's one of only five such resorts in the world run by the US DoD, and the only one in the continental US. And as I mentioned before, it was originally a Disney-owned resort named "Disney Inn." Jackdude101 ^talk cont 03:07, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Here’s another reason: Shades of Green isn’t served by the Disney buses. They’re contractors. That makes it just as notable as say the Bonnet Creek, Disney Springs or Flamingo Crossings hotels. RickyCourtney (talk) 03:21, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

For the record, Bonnet Creek and Flamingo Crossings are on the edge of the WDW property, but not within it, so they would never be included regardless. The third-party Disney Springs hotels are on property, but they weren't built by Disney. Shades of Green is on property and was originally built by Disney, so it's not quite the same as the others. Also, for the record, Disney buses do serve the cast member parking lots. Buses with marquees like "VIP Cast Member" or "Special" will likely go to them. It's true that these places are not things that the general public would see on a typical Disney trip, but that's precisely why I'm interested in including them. I want to establish that, despite the facade that Disney puts in front of everyone, there's more to the resort than what they want you to see. Jackdude101 ^talk cont 03:47, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

It’s already a huge route map template. Removing Shades of Green and the cast centers lets us slim width by one column and two rows. It doesn’t seem like a big sacrifice to me. RickyCourtney (talk) 03:55, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, deleting the two cast member parking lots would decrease the rows by two, but we'd still have seven columns if we got rid of Shades of Green. Even if there were no resorts in that column, the monorail's outermost edge on the left barely occupies that first column. Without Shades of Green, it would appear to the naked eye that there's an unused first column, and would lead to a lot of inexperienced editors trying (and failing) to correct that. I promise you there's no way to reduce the columns further than what you see now. Jackdude101 ^talk cont 04:08, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

The width can be reduced a little more if each line with text in parentheses is split like it was originally. You made them all single lines a few years ago, so I want to hear your thoughts on that. Jackdude101 ^talk cont 13:24, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

The splits are flawed. They look okay on desktop browsers. However they make the text unreadable on mobile browsers, where the vast majority of Wikipedia’s readers access the site. RickyCourtney (talk) 15:04, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:SLC Olympics bid logo.jpeg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SLC Olympics bid logo.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:54, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi RickyCourtney. Thank you for your work on Crew Dragon C213. Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for creating the article! I have marked the article as reviewed. Have a blessed day!

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

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 16:07, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Cnilep. Thank you for your work on Osaki Launch Complex. Another editor, Scope creep, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Needs more sources and the context explained better. Where is it?

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

scope_creepTalk 03:24, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority station platform templates

I've nominated the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority station platform templates for deletion; please see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024 September 10#Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority station platform templates. Best, Mackensen (talk) 12:39, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

CERT-2 launch

Heads up. Both you and I have changed the "Success" statement on the ULA CERT-2 mission to "TBD". When you're edit was changed, by the same editor, back to "Success", I undid it, and suggested that the editor take the discussion to Talk, since we don't have a source for "Success". Unfortunately, that editor changed it back to "Success" once again.

I've made my statements; and changed it to TBD twice. Will leave it to others to address further. Cheers. N2e (talk) 18:15, 4 October 2024 (UTC)