User talk:Houtyuhn

Hello, Houtyuhn, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Below are some pages that you might find helpful. For a user-friendly interactive help forum see the Wikipedia Teahouse.

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia or the Tutorial
• Create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• How to add those all-important references
• Simplified style guide

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. Again, If you need help visit the Teahouse or you can click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! We are so glad you are here!

Please don't put dates in the article unless you have a source that is verifying these exact dates, and the source meets the criteria in WP:RS. You can't just say "it has been certified", that doesn't mean anything in an encyclopedia article. Take it to the talk page of the article if you wish to discuss further, but continuing to add it back after it has been reverted out by two people will likely get you blocked for disruption. Accuracy is important, and the ability to VERIFY that accuracy is also important, so dates like this MUST be tied to a reliable source. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 07:30, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

That trading card photo was restored by an experienced editor. I find the newer photo does not convey his likeness, his appearance when he was best known, nor does it show him in a natural or useful pose. Please discuss such a change on talk:Jim Brown and get wp:consensus before changing photos again. See help:talk pages, and if you want all the details, wp:talk page guidelines. Also, please see wp:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle for suggestions and advice. Please don't wp:edit war. Thank you Adakiko (talk) 18:59, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Jim Brown. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. 11:10, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I'm SNUGGUMS. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Avoid calling people "legends" unless it is part of a quote or title. See WP:Neutral point of view#Attributing and specifying biased statements for more. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 15:54, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Piero Manzoni. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 18:05, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

Why? Houtyuhn (talk) 18:08, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

"I apologize for the edit. I am new to Wikipedia and was trying to understand how the editing interface works. I didn't realize my actions would be flagged as vandalism. I will use the sandbox for any future testing as suggested. Thank you for the guidance." Houtyuhn (talk) 18:09, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sydney Chaplin (American actor), a link pointing to the disambiguation page Circle Theatre was added. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 10:12, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to set Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary (or the default undo summary). Thanks! SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 12:06, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

Please do not put embedded external links (as here), or links to Commons pages (like you did here) to article text. Per the guidance in WP:External Links - "External links normally should not be placed in the body of an article". Note also that the guidance states that "one should generally avoid providing external links to...Any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it became a featured article". External links (other than those used as references, which your additions were not) should be added sparingly, and should generally go in a separate external links section. In addition, when people revert you for failing to follow this guidance, do not edit war to keep adding these links.Nigel Ish (talk) 14:48, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Okay, I just wanted to show everyone what many of the airplanes on display looked like. Houtyuhn (talk) 14:57, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

I usually only add it to the "Current Complete Models" list. I basically ignore it if it's limited to partial saving/front panel/head section. Houtyuhn (talk) 15:37, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

You continue to add inappropriate commons links, together with google image sources pretending to be references - they are not. Adding these links is disruptive and damages the article. Stop it.Nigel Ish (talk) 18:54, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

I noticed you've had concerns before about the GA process devaluing high-quality edits due to source verification issues. My goal is the same—to improve the article with visual evidence of these aircraft. I understand now that Google Search isn't the right way to do it. Could you help me format these as 'proper' references so we can keep the information without damaging the article's quality? Houtyuhn (talk) 19:03, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Photos are not proper references, and no attempt to repackage them will make them references. If an individual photo on Commons is appropriate for the article (and doesn't overwhelm it - there is a thing as too many pictures), then it can be added - otherwise, leave it out - the reader can use the Commons link at the bottom of the article to find photos. Note that survivor sections are fairly dubious anyway - they are generally not referenced to reliable sources and are only marginally encyclopedic.Nigel Ish (talk) 19:22, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

"My editorial philosophy prioritizes data and visual completeness for the benefit of the reader. However, I acknowledge that embedding Google search results in the body or refs doesn't meet our ELNO/RS standards. Houtyuhn (talk) 19:25, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Please note that sites like jetphotos and planespotters are not reliable sources WP:RS. They contain user generated content WP:UGC and should not be used. Thanks. 10mmsocket (talk) 14:08, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Vickers V-1000, you may be blocked from editing. You continue to make completely unsourced changes to articles. You must provide reliable sources for these changes. In addition edit summaries should be in English - why are you adding edit summaries in what appears to be Chinese??Nigel Ish (talk) 20:48, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi Nigel, thank you for the heads-up. I apologize for the unsourced edits and the non-English edit summaries. I realized that my browser's auto-translate tool might have caused the language issue in the summaries without me noticing. I am still learning the citation rules and will stop making further changes until I can provide reliable sources. I will ensure all future communication and summaries are in English. Sorry for the trouble." Houtyuhn (talk) 20:54, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Please don't use user generated content sites like secretprojects.co.uk - it's a forum not a reliable source 10mmsocket (talk) 22:03, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

I can understand your logic for wanting to split accidents and incidents, but the section heading is a standard thing defined by the relevant Wiki Project to ensure consistency across articles. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Aircraft/page content. Thanks. 10mmsocket (talk) 05:12, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

"I appreciate the need for consistency, but the WikiProject Aircraftguidelines also emphasize [WP:UNDUE] and [WP:CONTEXT].

The 2009 Bruntingthorpe event is a post-retirement incident involving a museum aircraft (XM715) on a 'fast taxi' run. Mixing it with a list of fatal RAF service crashes creates a false equivalence. It is functionally different from the operational losses and more relevant to the aircraft's status as a Surviving Aircraft.

If a separate section heading is strictly forbidden, I propose creating a sub-heading (Level 3) under 'Accidents and incidents' specifically for 'Post-retirement incidents', or moving the detailed narrative to the 'Surviving aircraft' section for XM715. Keeping it in a flat list of fatal crashes is a disservice to the reader's understanding of the aircraft's safety record." Houtyuhn (talk) 05:40, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

"I will resolve the section heading issue by moving the detailed account of the 2009 XM715 event to the 'Surviving aircraft' section under a Level 3 subheading (=== 2009 Bruntingthorpe incident ===).

This placement is more contextually accurate as the event involved a museum aircraft post-retirement, and it avoids cluttering the service-era 'Accidents and incidents' list with a non-fatal taxiing event. I will use formal book citations (Payne 2004) and remove all direct forum links." Houtyuhn (talk) 05:44, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

A subheading for a single item is pointless. Just integrate it into the content relating to that surviving aircraft. 10mmsocket (talk) 05:57, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at List of Boeing 757 operators. WikiPate (talk) 12:09, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page List of Boeing 707 operators, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters contains an invalid URL. Please edit the article to add the valid URL. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 13:35, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at Nigeria Airways, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. Jetstreamer ^Talk 17:41, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

At that time, BOAC was simply flying its own aircraft into the country. Nigeria Airways never owned or leased the Comet 4; the route was purely a codeshare and revenue-sharing pool agreement with BOAC. Nigeria Airways acted merely as a seat-reseller for the Comet 4, while the aircraft, crew, maintenance, and livery remained 100% with British Overseas Airways Corporation (BOAC).On the 1962 Lagos–London jet route, Nigeria Airways provided only its bilateral traffic rights and signed a revenue-sharing pool agreement. The actual operations were executed entirely by BOAC's Comet 4 aircraft and crew, and the aircraft maintained its original BOAC livery. Consequently, Nigeria Airways held no operational control over the aircraft type, nor did the arrangement meet the legal definition of a lease. Houtyuhn (talk) 18:01, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Tupolev Tu-154, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A unsupported parameter error. References show this error when you use a parameter name that does not exist. Please replace the parameter with one that the template supports, or remove it if no such parameter exists. (Fix | Ask for help). Below are the references causing this error:

• • Chita.ru https://www.chita.ru. Retrieved 2026-07-31. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help); Unknown parameter |title_ru= ignored (help)
• A bare URL and missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help). Below are the references causing this error:

• • Chita.ru https://www.chita.ru. Retrieved 2026-07-31. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help); Unknown parameter |title_ru= ignored (help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 04:54, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Boeing 727. Your talk page is full of warnings about the use of reliable sources, and yet you are still adding Wikimedia references. Stop. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 15:49, 12 August 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Boeing 747, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A ISBN error. References show this error when the ISBN value or formatting is invalid. Please edit the article to ensure the value is correct, that only one ISBN is used, that the proper optional separators are used, and that no other text is included. (Fix | Ask for help). Below are the references causing this error:
  • Endres, Günter (2002). Boeing 747: Designing, Building and Running the World's First Jumbo Jet. MBI Publishing. p. 112. ISBN 978-0760312411. {{cite book}}: Check |isbn= value: checksum (help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 00:11, 14 August 2026 (UTC)