User talk:John Pouliot
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] League of Copyeditors participation drive!
Dear League member,
We've started a participation drive for the remainder of February. If you can, please help clear the backlog by adopting the following goals each week:
- Select an article to copy-edit from the backlog. After your copy-edit, list the article in the articles ready for final proofread section.
- Select a different article to proofread from the articles ready for final proofread section.
Thanks for your help! BuddingJournalist 01:55, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] WP:LoCE template note
Hi there! While proofing Head-up display, I noticed that there was a bit of weirdness with the copyedit template on the talk page.
You had this code:
==Copyedit== {{WP:LoCE |{{subst:february}} {{subst:2007}} |[[User:John Pouliot|John Pouliot]] 13 February }}
Which resulted in this:
 |
This article, or a portion of it, was copyedited by the League of Copyeditors in {{subst:february}} {{subst:2007}}. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
|
You don't have to enter the current month and year in the template, it will do it automatically. Just paste the handy code from the League page in and you're set to go! (I fixed Head-up display, so no worries.) Thanks! Galena11 18:41, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Re:C-130J Image Deletion Question
It's fine now. enochlau (talk) 14:10, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Commercial HUD Discussion
This was my first nose dive into the Wiki community so I ran face first into the "don't grab an image off the net and use it" policy :)
I'm a bit confused also about:
Systems have been approved which allow reduced-visibility takeoffs and landings, and Category IIIc ILS landings[citation needed].
What is appropriate citation for this? I could, with a lot of work, obtain the FAA approval documents, however as these are not generally available to the public I'm not sure what utility that would be. I could point to a specific aircraft type approval, but that would require a link to a website - a practice which appears to be discouraged. Even if I said something like "the Q4000 has received FAA approval for Category III a landings" that itself would require some citation. And also clarification as some aircraft of this type may not have a HUD installed, or if installed the operator may not have obtained the necessary approvals to use the HUD in this manner (for a CAT III landing both the aircraft and flight crew require approvals)
I could point off to an industry magazine or journal, however I don't subscribe to them. I'm not at all sure how far this needs to be taken - or the amount of time that is appropriate to put into this. All of this is very non-controversial, generally free of opinion, and I can write what I know or just let it go.
Same for the discussion on synthetic vision (which I've been associated with for about 5 years.)
I saw an opportunity to expand on a field that I am familiar with; however it appears as if there is limited use of "expert testomny" and that only references to prior published material are acceptble- which in this field is very limited as there are limited players.
For example in the picture shown there is a symbol called a "flight path vector." Apparently I can't discuss what this is without being able to provide a citation? Or make the comment "the Flight Path Vector symbol, while originating as a HUD unique symbol, is being incorporated into new head down displays as it is a very useful means of informing the pilot where the aircraft is really going and not where it is pointed." ?? <sigh>
I've read the "attributed to a reliable source" material but fail to grasp the finer points. Guidance would be appreciated.
Brian —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ZazenCID (talk • contribs) 21:11, 28 February 2007 (UTC).
