Back to Profile

User Talk: YSSYguy

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

User talk:YSSYguy/Archive 1

User talk:YSSYguy/Archive 2

User talk:YSSYguy/Archive 3

User talk:YSSYguy/Archive 4

User talk:YSSYguy/Archive 5

User talk:YSSYguy/Archive 6

User talk:YSSYguy/Archive 7

Indigo fleet

But IndiGo has huge number of orders and only IndiGo 100 A320neo than any other airlines in the world The list is the evidence that IndiGo largest operator Of A320neo and A321neo Ktdk (talk) 06:08, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Indigo fleet

Indigo is the largest operator of A320neos and A321neos because Only IndiGo has placed 640 A320neo and A321neo Ktdk (talk) 04:32, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
:But most of those aircraft don’t exist yet, therefore IndiGo doesn’t operate them. YSSYguy (talk) 11:27, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Unsourced nickname

Hi YSSYguy, could you take a look at this this edit ↗? It's unsourced, but is it even common in Australia, much less noteworthy? Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 04:12, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Deletion of DC-3 Photos earlier today.

Hi, {{ping|YSSYguy}} You deleted all the photos I put into the DC-3 article on the grounds that they don't aid understanding of the subject. This is a first for me and, being new, I didn't know the procedures for objection to your action, so I added a question to the Teahouse: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse#Diverse_Photos_Added_to_DC-3_Article_on_17_May_Deleted_This_AM%3B_Other_Opinions%2C_Please%3F". Could you please have a look there to see if my points make sense for you to rescind your deletion? TIA. BrettA343 (talk) 06:10, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
:Hi again, {{ping|YSSYguy}} I'm disappointed that you haven't responded either here or at the Teahouse, but I did get one reply at the Teahouse and have now responded to it (he had different arguments than you did). Please take a look (the link is above) and let me know what you think of my proposed resolution (basically, deleting 3 existing photos and reducing my count to 4). I'm unclear how you'll feel about that since you had no complaints about the total number of photos, but Fabrickator did. Please note that I do address your concern about aiding understanding of the subject. Have a great day! Cheers, BrettA343 (talk) 19:38, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
::Hello {{ping|YSSYguy}} I've added another reply to Fabrickator at the Teahouse... Please join in at your convenience. TIA and cheers. BrettA343 (talk) 21:09, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

<table class="messagebox " style="border: 1px solid #AAA; background: ivory; padding: 0.5em; width: 100%;">
<tr><td style="vertical-align:middle; padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">40px ↗</td><td>Hello! Voting in the '''2020 Arbitration Committee elections ↗''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2020|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 2020 election, please review the candidates ↗ and submit your choices on the '''2020|poll}}|voting page ↗'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:42, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
</td></tr>
</table>

Aircraft photos

As a crap editor to one who has just made some worthwhile improvements to an article on my watchlist, I hate to point out that "None of these images have been treated or altered in any way" on your userpage could be better written "None of these images has . . ." I mention it only because you've clearly put a lot of effort into that page, unlike Doug butler (talk) 11:47, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Edit summary

Hi. "fixes arising from edit by Mark83 (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Boeing_E-3_Sentry&diff=next&oldid=996554708) saved at 19:43 on 27 December last year" This feels a bit "gotcha". I made a lot more improvements than these 2 mistakes. Am I happy I made mistakes? No. But I feel your time would be better spent improving Wikipedia than investing time doing an autopsy of every error to call fellow editors out in edit summaries. Mark83 (talk) 06:21, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

:{{tps}} When another editor fixes your mistakes and actually lets you know that you made a mistake, it would be better to take it as an opportunity to learn, not repeat the mistakes and thank the editor, rather than complaining. It is probably worth keeping in mind that the aim of Wikipedia is to build an encyclopedia, not to assuage your ego. - Ahunt (talk) 14:07, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
:: Thanks for your feedback. If you review the page history I made changes 23-27 December rectifying major issues which would have been compelling reasons to question the article's GA status. Calling out mistakes is constructive if it was an error using a template, or referencing, or image placement etc. etc. If I was being corrected on a fundamental misunderstanding of such issues (or the myriad of others we could all name) I'd welcome that feedback, publicly or privately and take it as an opportunity to learn. This was clearly a minor oversight and the fact that someone is spending time to trawl back through edit summaries to pinpoint such trivialities is not (in my opinion of course) a good use of time in the effort to build an encyclopedia. Mark83 (talk) 17:02, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
:::I didn't "trawl back through edit summaries to pinpoint such trivialities", it was necessary to go through the edit history in order to find out why there was a fragment of a sentence in the middle of a paragraph. I did not know what had been there before, so I could not tell whether there was something removed that should not have been, or there was half a sentence that should have been removed in its entirety. I only came across the article at all, because in the same edit you had typed "aicraft" instead of "aircraft" and I periodically hunt for the word "aircrafts" and for typographical errors that editors have made when they typed the word "aircraft" (I refer you to the first paragraph of the Edits section of my User page; plenty of us have done the latter - MilborneOne has done it because sometimes the 'r' key of his keyboard didn't work. GraemeLeggett has done it; Ahunt has done it. I have done it because sometimes when I type rapidly I get 'finger dyslexia' and type "aircrfat". I just happened to notice the sentence fragment while doing a quick scan of the text around the typo. I wanted to draw your attention to the typographical error and I thought there was a possibility that you had the article on your watchlist. I'd already spent a good ten minutes locating the edit that introduced the sentence fragment and copy-pasting the diff into the edit summary was simply a matter of me saving time instead of posting something to your Talk page. Well, here we are, turns out I didn't save time at all; I have cost all three of us time and for that, I apologise. The rest was down to an error of judgement on my part and, while I acknowledge such errors when I make them, I do not apologise for them. YSSYguy (talk) 22:58, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Daily Mail reference at International MXT-MV

Hi. Please do not use the Daily Mail as you did at International MXT-MV ↗. It is not a reliable source. See WP:DAILYMAIL ↗. Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 08:25, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

<table class="messagebox " style="border: 1px solid #AAA; background: ivory; padding: 0.5em; width: 100%;">
<tr><td style="vertical-align:middle; padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">40px ↗</td><td>Hello! Voting in the '''2021 Arbitration Committee elections ↗''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2021|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 2021 election, please review the candidates ↗ and submit your choices on the '''2021|poll}}|voting page ↗'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
</td></tr>
</table>

Your access to AWB may be temporarily removed

Hello '''YSSYguy'''! This message is to inform you that due to editing inactivity, your access to AutoWikiBrowser ↗ may be temporarily removed. If you do not resume editing within the next week, your username will be removed from the CheckPage ↗. This is purely for routine maintenance and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You may regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB ↗. Thank you! — MusikBot II talk 17:22, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of :Capital Express Route ↗ for deletion

<div class="afd-notice">
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">48px|alt=|link= ↗</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article :Capital Express Route ↗ is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines ↗ or whether it should be deleted ↗.

The article will be discussed at '''Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Capital Express Route ↗''' until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
</div> Dfadden (talk) 05:56, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of :List of British Airways destinations ↗ for deletion

<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">48px|alt=|link= ↗</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article :List of British Airways destinations ↗, to which you have significantly contributed ↗, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines ↗ or if it should be deleted ↗.

The discussion will take place at '''Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of British Airways destinations ↗''' until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by ''SDZeroBot'' (talk) 01:01, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Nomination of :2016 Nepal bus crashes ↗ for deletion

<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">48px|alt=|link= ↗</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article :2016 Nepal bus crashes ↗, to which you have significantly contributed ↗, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines ↗ or if it should be deleted ↗.

The discussion will take place at '''Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2016 Nepal bus crashes ↗''' until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by ''SDZeroBot'' (talk) 01:01, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 23

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited PC-461-class submarine chaser ↗, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 96th Infantry Division ↗.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:56, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

June 2026

25px|alt=Information icon ↗ I reverted your edit to :Billy Tipton ↗ because you inserted a gallery with two images, both :File:Example.jpg ↗. I assume this was possibly a test but most certainly is a mistake. Peaceray (talk) 17:26, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
:Not a test, definitely a mistake; I just wanted to replace the word ‘sum’ (which you can also see in the change if you scroll down), which to me belongs in mathematics or when talking about money - ever had one of your fingers spasm when you are trying to edit WP on an iPad while half asleep? As of a little while ago, I have… cheers YSSYguy (talk) 17:36, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

PROD removal

It would be nice to know why you removed a PROD tag from an article which fails WP:GNG ↗? I’ve sent it straight to AfD as it has no place on Wikipedia. Danners430 tweaks made ↗ 09:49, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

Sokoto

I've reverted your edit, although I'm about to restore one paragraph of the history section, for the following reasons:

The majority of the history section was unsourced, save for that first paragraph

The entirety of the destinations table was sourced to unreliable sources - FR24 isn't reliable to verify routes, per an RSN discussion

That incident wasn't notable per WP:AIRCRASH ↗, which says incidents are notable if they result in fatality, hull loss, serious damage or document procedure change.

Danners430 tweaks made ↗ 13:53, 28 June 2026 (UTC)
: Quite the zealot, aren’t you? Heaven forbid that I should go to bed with an expansion of an article half-formed. I bow to your superior knowledge of Policies. Toodle-pip. [wanders off to find some snakes to hug.] YSSYguy (talk) 01:12, 29 June 2026 (UTC)
::If you went to bed with the article half finished, you should never have published it. That's what sandboxes are for, so you can work on an article before publishing it. We cannot have half-finished articles in mainspace for multiple hours just because we took a break half way through. Danners430 tweaks made ↗ 05:42, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

July 2026

Please remember to assume good faith ↗ when dealing with other editors. This is regarding :Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sadiq Abubakar III International Airport ↗. Whatever your opinions on the editor in question, please keep them to yourself and stay on topic. Disregarding your four-paragraph comment ↗ on the behaviour of an editor which was completely unrelated to this discussion, this ("{{Tq|I seriously doubt that there would ever be a deletion discussion about an airport serving a state or provincial capital elsewhere, such as Helena, Montana in the US; or Yellowknife, Northwest Territories in Canada}}") adds nothing at all to this discussion. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 07:23, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

Warning

25px|alt=Information icon ↗ Please do not add or change content, as you did at :Bundaberg Airport ↗, without citing a reliable source ↗. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources ↗ to see how to add references to an article. Thank you. Danners430 tweaks made ↗ 13:45, 3 July 2026 (UTC)
:What’s your motivation? I’m genuinely curious about what you hope to achieve. Is it YSSYguy (talk) 06:34, 4 July 2026 (UTC)
::Quite simple - getting rid of content that should never have been added to Wikipedia in the first place, because it doesn’t have reliable sources. The Verifiability policy has been policy for many, many years, so there’s no excuse for unsourced content being added. Danners430 tweaks made ↗ 08:02, 4 July 2026 (UTC)
::: {{reply to|Danners430}}So you don’t want destination tables in airport articles? They are a magnet for inexperienced editors and are a pain in the arse to maintain, but you are not making any effort to maintain them - after all it’s much quicker and easier to just scythe through them and in the process make the articles misleading to their readers, as your recent edit to the Gold Coast Airport article did. To not permit Virgin Australia to be included in the airlines table in that article because the information wasn’t sourced?

:::It can take a while to find the necessary reliable sources, which we both know exist, but are often awkward to add to a WP article - I for one am trying to figure out how best to present an airline’s website flight-booking engine as a source, do you have any suggestions on how to go about that? Maybe you are about quantity of edits over not misleading the readers. Infinitely better to find a good source, also better to leave it in than to remove it - you chose the worst of the available options and I reckon you’ll keep doing so (by the way, to chip Wikipicked ↗ for carelessness in reverting someone else’s edit exactly one hour after you did basically the same thing to the Bundaberg Airport article, including adding back “the invisible text that's now irrelevant” ↗, is a bit uncool; I guess you didn’t realise what you had done). I’m left none the wiser by your reply as to what is your hoped-for end result. If your goal is to increase your edit count as quickly as possible, I can actually respect that. YSSYguy (talk) 09:07, 4 July 2026 (UTC)
::::My personal view is no, I don't - however, an RfC on the topic yielded no consensus so I'm abiding by that. My personal views do not stop me abiding by consensus.
::::The simple fact is - if content is not sourced, it has no place on Wikipedia. See WP:V ↗. That is one of the five pillars of Wikipedia. It should never have been added in the first place.
::::As for booking engines - they fall under WP:SYNTH ↗, per a discussion at RSN some time ago. What's needed is a page that states, unequivocally, that a flight operates between X and Y by airline A.
::::My end goal is to improve the verifiability of these tables. As to my methods, I was done arguing about them over a year ago, and won't be arguing the point any further. As for Bundaberg… rolling back to add invisible comments is one thing, but adding unreliable sources is another and definitely not the same thing. Danners430 tweaks made ↗ 09:13, 4 July 2026 (UTC)
:::::I get it, it’s sometimes hard to admit to a mistake. If you look at the edit in question closely, you will see that ~95% of it should have been kept. Perhaps you are too busy purging articles to have done so. YSSYguy (talk) 09:26, 4 July 2026 (UTC)
::::::No, no mistake. You added an unreliable source - it's as simple as that. How much clearer do you want me to make it? Danners430 tweaks made ↗ 09:36, 4 July 2026 (UTC)
::::::It's quite simple. If you disagree with what I'm doing, then you know the venues to go to. If you persist in adding unsourced or unreliable sources, then expect to be reverted. It is that simple. Since you can't seem to have a constructive discussion without throwing aspersions, I wish you good day. Do not contact me again unless you are capable of having a discussion without flinging aspersions about. Danners430 tweaks made ↗ 09:37, 4 July 2026 (UTC)