User Talk: Loned

Server-side rendered snapshot of this editor's Wikipedia talk page discussions.

'''Welcome!'''

Hello, {{BASEPAGENAME}}, and welcome ↗ to Wikipedia! {{#if:||Thank you for your contributions ↗.}}

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called '''Your first article ↗'''. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the '''New contributors' help page ↗''', where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type '''<code>{{tl|help me}}</code>''' on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

Your first article ↗

Biographies of living persons ↗

How to write a great article ↗

The five pillars of Wikipedia ↗

Help pages ↗

Tutorial ↗

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian ↗! Please sign your name ↗ on talk pages using four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question ↗ or ask me on {{#if:|User talk:{{{2}}}{{!}}my talk page|my talk page}}.  Again, welcome!--Biografer (talk) 20:23, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
{{Archives}}

KLJ-5A AESA for J-20

I have added multiple sources for KLJ-5A AESA radar for J-20. Do not revert. -Canberra2021 (talk)
:{{User|Canberra2021}}, the sources you provided are not suitable for Wikipedia. https://www.globaldefensecorp.com/2020/06/11/nriet-type-1475-klj-5-aesa-radar-for-j-20-fighters-the-russian-kret-assisted-china-with-mig-35s-zhuk-ame-technology/ The globaldefensecorp is an unnamed blog, with no reference provided inside the article to support the claim. In fact, simple online searching from other aviation blogs, which references the same picture, https://airpowerasia.com/2020/08/15/chengdu-j-20-overhyped-or-reality-a-comprehensive-story/ , points out that there's no official information about the J-20's radar and the transmitter module number ranges differently.

:Eurasian Times is a website with a notorious reputation. It often contains extremely obvious exaggerations, speculation, editorialized titles, and unsourced information. https://www.eurasiantimes.com/cracks-in-j-20s-stealth-with-no-buyers-exposure/ This source also combines two conflicting pieces of information together. It combines the KLJ-5 radar name with 2000-2200 transmitter module, which is established in other sources as "unknown". So your own source provided contradict each other.

:SP's Avaiation contains Template:Circular ↗ reference, in which it specially says it got the data from Wikipedia. Check out the link you provided: https://www.sps-aviation.com/story/?id=2854&h=J-20-of-PLAAF-and-JF-17-of-PAF-Analysed, underneath the "Specifications of JF-17 and J-20" the source it uses is the "Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chengdu_J-20 (as on September 20, 2020)" Wikipedia does not allow the usage of {{circular reference}}, and publications doing so is deemed not trustworthy.

:If there's no concert evidence for something, we can just leave it blank. we do not need to jump to the conclusion. -Loned (talk) 15:01, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

:China does not release information like the other countries do unless you see something in propaganda videos. Do you have official confirmation that J-20 has DAS, but you added some weird website reference about EOTS. It is evident that China used KLJ-5A series radar in J-20. Why do you want to leave it blank for speculation or something. China does not release information about military. China does not have public scrutiny or oversight on manufacturer. Either you mention that an AESA will be added, currently don't exist or KLJ-5A. Canberra2021 (talk) 02:50, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
::Your argument has nothing to do with the validity of the reference itself. The J-20 article contains many speculations that the Chinese government will not release, however, these speculations need to come from reputable sources, such as notable magazines, aviation-related think tanks, etc. The article contains sources such as this article from Popular Science: https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a28436/chinas-stealth-fighter-is-operational/, or this article from The War Zone: https://www.twz.com/22534/high-quality-shots-of-unpainted-chinese-j-20-stealth-fighter-offer-new-capability-insights. Or this article from Aviation Week https://aviationweek.com/defense/aircraft-propulsion/face-it-chinas-j-20-fifth-generation-fighter . They all talked about DAS on the J-20. You can access these articles using the Internet archive. Note: These websites also use speculative language, however, they are reliable sources without any editorialized titles, and use careful language and expert references, thus their speculation on the Chinese military is more authoritative than something like Euraisn Times or SP's Aviation, which has obvious MOS violation that cannot be used as reference.
::China also have multiple unknown AESA radars which we don't know the name of. Chengdu J-10C, Shenyang J-11, Shenyang J-15, Shenyang J-16 ↗. For example, in J-16 article, the sources say the fighter says AESA, but nobody specified the actual radar model because we simply don't know. So we don't add them.
::Most references on the articles were vetted by other editors. Two sources for the DAS section clearly state the aircraft could have/or have a passive electro-optical detection system that will provide 360° coverage, which is DAS. More references can be added (as I mentioned above), but they were not added because wikipedia also have rules on excessive ref ↗. Bottom line, no matter what you say about "public scrutiny or oversight on manufacturer", what you add needs to come from reputable sources at least at the level of The War Zone or Popular Mechanics, not something like SP's Aviation, which basically copy-paste Wikipedia.-Loned (talk) 03:06, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
<div class="ivmbox-image noresize" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">40px ↗</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the '''2024 Arbitration Committee elections ↗''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2024|end}}-1 day}}. 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 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 2024 election, please review the candidates ↗ and submit your choices on the '''2024|poll}}|voting page ↗'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 19 November 2024 (UTC)</small>

</div>
</div>

ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message

<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
<div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;flex-basis: 40px">40px ↗</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the '''2025 Arbitration Committee elections ↗''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2025|end}}-1 day}}. 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 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 2025 election, please review the candidates ↗ and submit your choices on the '''2025|poll}}|voting page ↗'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:44, 18 November 2025 (UTC)</small>

</div>
</div>

Happy First Edit Anniversary Loned 🎉

Hey @Loned. Your wiki edit anniversary is today, marking 10 years of dedicated contributions to English Wikipedia. Your passion for sharing knowledge and your remarkable contributions have not only enriched the project, but also inspired countless others to contribute. Thank you for your amazing contributions. Wishing you many more wonderful years ahead in the Wiki journey. :) -<span style="color:#990000">❙❚❚</span><span style="color:#339966">❙❙</span><span style="font-variant:small-caps;color:#000"> GnOeee </span><span style="color:#006699">❚❙❚</span><span style="color:#339966">❙❙</span> ✉ 15:44, 23 November 2025 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

{| style="background-color: var(--background-color-success-subtle, #fdffe7); border: 1px solid var(--border-color-success, #fceb92); color: var(--color-base, #202122);"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | 100px ↗
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Original Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | For creating the article electrostate ↗ -- sometimes finding these gaps, especially in energy and climate topics, is one of the most important things we can do for creating greater clarity and understanding about topics! Sadads (talk) 23:49, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
|}

Revert...

I did that because I had to do it in sequence. @GangesCommander provided no neutral or credible source for his conclusion so I had to revert them all in sequence.

I have provided my source in the Talks section Hammadarif1947 (talk) 12:08, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

:I assumed the edits were based on goodwill. though next time you could manually replace the part without any sources. You don't go through legitimate edits, hence the revert cannot be used as an edit message.-Loned (talk) 21:44, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Universe01

Hey, most of what I'm saying isn't in the domain of NORN, so I figured I'd come to your talk page. First, a word of caution: WP:NOTVAND ↗ may be worth remembering, as calling Universe's edits vandalism isn't great. They can be wrong without being malicious.
Now on to the more important stuff. They don't seem to have reverted to their preferred version since your last exchange, so the article seems to be okay for now. That is, there's no ongoing disruption. I'd suggest trying WP:ANI ↗, but given that they've made a grand total of 8 edits to HQ-11, I doubt anything other than a finger wag. I'd say your best bet is to continue to warn them (ideally with the <nowiki>{{subst:uw-unsourced1}} through {{subst:uw-unsourced4}}</nowiki> templates to avoid using too much of your own time). One they get a level 4 warning and still introduce OR, going to ANI would be likely to result in action, and the warnings would be proof that it's a chronic and intractable problem.
I hope some of this advice is useful. Thanks, EducatedRedneck (talk) 22:59, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

:Yeah, I think their edits are on the unconstructive side rather than straight up vandalism. It's difficult to seek admin actions on users like that, who only pop up occasionally to revert stuff and never engage in discussion. I’m satisfied that his OR is getting recognized and second inputs from you and others are very welcome. I will do the warning if their behavior is persistent from this point. Cheers -Loned (talk) 06:31, 13 April 2026 (UTC)