Cryfe

Cryfe, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Cryfe! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Come join experienced editors at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a space where new editors can get help from experienced editors. These editors have been around for a long time and have extensive knowledge about how Wikipedia works. Come share your experiences, ask questions, and get advice from experts. I hope to see you there! Dathus (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:10, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Duroc

Is there a reason that you feel that Géraud Duroc is a most logical choice for redirection of the Duroc page (as opposed to redirection to the disambiguation page (or simply leaving Duroc as a disambiguation page)? In general, we only select on of the available options as the main redirect target if that meaning is overwhelmingly the likely choice of a user who has searched a particular term. For example, IBM will mosly likely refer to the computer manufacturer, but it may also refer to Inclusion body myositis. In this case, leaving the computer manufacturer as the target of the title IBM makes sense. In the case of Duroc, I don't believe the French soldier is any more likely a search target as any of the other options. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 19:58, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Alberto Santos-Dumont

Do you know anything at all about the history of avition? I suggest you don'r make edits about things about which you are ignorant.TheLongTone (talk) 19:51, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

What are you talking about? If this is about the "able to take off under its own power" the very next line in the article contradicts this, saying that the planes just took off with external help. And watch out your tone when talk with me.

"The Wrights used a launching rail for their 1903 flights and a launch catapult for their 1904 and 1905 machines". Nothing about a catapult for the first flights. And I always watch my tone when I talk to peopleTheLongTone (talk) 20:14, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

I made the same mistake, I am sure a lot of people do. But then something nagged at my peace of mind so I went to check. The Wrights used some form of gravity assist, whether sloping the launch rail down a hill or the weight-and-rope gimmick, on pretty much every flight at that time except for that magic first. So I had to revert my own edit and it's sort of all my fault really. Sadly there are a handful of contentious topics which seem to bring out the worst in editors, challenges to the Wrights' primacy being one of them. Best to shrug and put the kettle on, IMHO. Don't know if this helps. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 09:24, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

October 2014

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from one or more pages into another page. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. Dougweller (talk) 12:49, 17 October 2014 (UTC)