User talk:Gijs

From FlightGear wiki
Revision as of 17:47, 31 October 2013 by Gijs (talk | contribs) (→‎Again..)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Archives
2008-2011
2012


"Talk:Eurocopter EC135" (Author request: Author blanked page)

Did I miss something? Can't remember seen that... Can you tell what it was about? Cheers --HHS 12:24, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi,
F-JJTH wrote " Heiko, is V1.0 full "Rembrandt compatible" ?" on the page but blanked it shortly thereafter. I think he found the answer already... So all I did was delete that blank page.
Gijs 16:08, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

About the wiki..

Hi Gijs, hope all is well. I was stopping by because I noticed the words "Please post only encyclopedic information that can be verified by external sources. Please maintain a neutral, unbiased point of view. " in the editor. Its really not right to say this, because the FlightGear wiki has to be a "primary source". The contributions are typically original writing, and it specifically includes opinions (such as reviews), as well as first-hand accounts. Thank you. Fg 20:19, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Again..

The wiki is mostly a primary source, saying "Please post only encyclopedic information that can be verified by external sources. .. " makes no sense. Most of what is written here is orginal content, and it does not make sense to have this in the edit box. Also, I don't agree with many of the articles you have deleted. These are small issues in view of your large contributions to the project, and I want to thank you for those, but I must also bring up these issues. Thanks again. Fg (talk) 20:32, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi,
You're right about the "external sources" statement. That was just a default from MediaWiki but is not very applicable to our wiki. I've removed it now. Thanks for notifying me!
What is it that you don't agree with? Is it the airport articles? Those were not deleted yet, they were only marked for deletion. The notice mentioned why I think they should be deleted. Feel free to share your arguments that make you think they should be kept. As the template stated "Do not remove this tag until the discussion is closed.", so I've placed the templates back and am looking forward to your (argued) opinion.
Cheers,
Gijs (talk) 17:47, 31 October 2013 (UTC)