Knowledge talk:WikiProject Aviation/Style guide

2028:

easier to keep it in check, otherwise the manufacturer page just becomes a duplicate of the pages it links to. The only addition I can think of would be some form of standard note for designs built under licence - and the use of brackets around dates for aircraft that didn't fly - but should still be mentioned. I see no reason why missiles should not be included, although drones, especially the smaller ones are more problematic - I lean toward leaving them out unless they are receiving a serial or registration number from an official authority. One other special case - there are quite a few companies that only produced one or two basic designs - no need for a table for this I think, so it should not be fully mandatory, but if more than four designs were made - then it becomes useful. Almost forgot - the aircraft manufacturer doesn't need to be mentioned in the list.

2688:

of the companies will simply have a long list of "utility" or "multirole" types. Those are the ones I am referring to when deleting the entire column, and the same applies to any column that locally only contains the same information in every entry. It adds nothing, makes the table wider, so it is less accessible on smaller screens, crowds out more relevant information, is unsightly, and often is left empty. I wonder - for those tables where most of the fields in a column are still blank - can the code be adjusted to automatically hide that column until 50-75% of them have been filled out (adjust percentage accordingly)?

1859:

bloat for those with limited bandwidth, which is most of the world. That said, it is good if the same basic table can be standard for aircraft manufacturer articles - it makes it easier to work from a common, consistent format so it is more obvious when there is a problem that needs to be fixed - as with the Bellanca page, which was very nearly a listing of types they didn't even design, while their entire decades long history, with dozens of important designs were ignored - which became more obvious once it was put in a table. Here is my take on the table from above - also, I have simplified several field names.

3224: 2586:

to be vastly different than say Stinson, or Command-aire. Many manufacturers would likewise have little use for it, so we could (on those) eliminate a space wasting column ie - {{avilisthead|nocountry|noclass}}. I agree that the title serves little purpose. The table is also getting more complicated, which means less likely to be filled out properly, or in full - and it is obvious when it isn't - which doesn't look good either. It also doesn't solve the problem of aircraft with either no clearly defined role - or many similarly important roles.

2722:

appears to have more or less originated in the 1920s and 30s to differentiate the enclosed airplanes from the ones with an open cockpit. I would hesitate to call a Cessna 172 or a Piper PA-28 Cherokee a "utility" aircraft, as, like the term "mulitrole", it seems (at least to me) to have a particular connotation in aviation – essentially light cargo carrying aircraft. However, it also ends up being a catch-all category for any light airplane. Unfortunately, it may be what we have to end up with as there seems to be nothing better to use.

2659:. Note that many changes from the standard format being discussed here will also apply to those existing list formats and I can truly promise you they will not be easy to gain consensus for. The default set of columns is the minimum that varying interests could agree on after much haggling - everybody has a reason for their favourite column - so I don't hold out much hope of consensus to trim any more just for manufacturers. I would recommend to all that you check whether your preferred options have already been discussed. 3295:

crewed, and aviation is actually no different. I don't believe there are any situations where crewed/uncrewed cannot be used in place of manned/unmanned. We already use the industry standard flight crew for the people flying the planes on commercial operations. This is in contrast to cabin crew who are non-flight personnel and who wouldn't count towards a craft being crewed or uncrewed. Not sure why aviation would be special compared to all other aspects of vehicular operations (spacecraft, tanks etc.)

160: 63: 32: 81: 1581:

number of engines-number of wings-role format. One thing I am not sure of is whether it should be exactly the same between all instances or should include some variation for each. For example, many companies existed for lengths of time such that they built both piston engine and jet aircraft. However, for a company that never built a jet aircraft it seems weird to specify for each entry that it has a piston engine.

91: 771:

it having been with the RAF. Peter Cooper, in his Farnborough history notes Fokker VIIa/3m J7986 in 1936 in the wireless wing; but even supposing this was really an Avro 618 (which from one other web ref it does not seem to have been), would this really justify including the RAF as a user of the aircraft? Yes, it wore an RAF serial, but is this what we mean by a user?

767:

ascribed to an AF on the basis of one or two of the type operating under military markings for trials or as a workhorse for the development of systems that might have military use. These were mostly civilians used in peace-time. Of course, there have been many civilian aircraft impressed into military use in war-time, sometimes with only a few of type.

1542:

and placing them in the greater context of the other models a company built. Similarly, the number built provides illustration of the size of the company itself and demonstrates the relative importance of each model to the company. On the other hand, more specific details about an aircraft can be found by clicking through to the dedicated article.

1266:'maintenance' will be a bit of overhead since it involves moving rows when an airline discontinues/terminates a flight. However for the user - this will really help in my view since in most cases, reader will be looking for operationally active ones ( i.e the first table for e.g while planning journey) rather than historical or special ones. -- 2328:

and if the production numbers are filled out, the difference between production types and prototypes should be clear. The more fields, the less that actually get filled out as well - a lot of aviation project tables now have entire columns that are blank - probably never to be filled out precisely because of this obsession with "classes".

3345:, so we have no grounds to force any such change in terminology. The reason Knowledge has stopped referring to spacecraft as "manned/unmanned" is because the sources have done so, not because Knowledge itself was trying to move away from gendered language. Until we see such a change in sources, we should not force any such change. - 2687:

Multi-role is a modern term very much tied with the Tornado development, and doesn't fit for 1930s aircraft, which were usually referred to at the time as "Utility" types - an equally meaningless word, since it simply throws everything into the pot and by doing so, says precisely nothing. Worse, some

2585:

Having the exact same value for every entry in a column is not particularly useful (or attractive) either - in this example, all of these are piston engine propeller powered monoplanes. What value could be entered that would be useful? Keeping in mind that the needs of a company like Boeing are going

2327:

Why not Model K then? That notation is used in the sources as well. Also a lot of aircraft have a very long list of vaguely defined roles - and status becomes repetitive when all of the types are retired - all of these are more appropriate to the aircraft's own page. This should be a brief overview -

1568:

I have been only converting lists of manned aircraft. However, a number of these companies have produced unmanned vehicles such as missiles. While separating aircraft into subsections based on role seems inappropriate, it also seems reasonable that missiles are separated in some manner. I am not sure

1560:

It results in a lot of extra white space on the right side of the article on desktop computers. This really isn’t noticeable on shorter lists, but it becomes a problem on longer ones. It is also worth noting that this isn’t a problem on mobile. One option is to see if there is a way to wrap the table

2604:

and other historical information that may not belong there. However, I agree that a title for the table is redundant. The number of engines still seems like an important quality to include, since it drastically affects the size of the airplane and there is large difference between a single and multi

1824:

Fair point, I admit I did a bad job of reading the style guide before I wrote the above proposal. I could see removing the bolded model names, color, and smaller text. However, I think the centered first flight dates and number built is particularly useful in improving legibility. Also, the Airlines

1580:

One other problem I have run into is coming up with a good uniform terminology for the type column. I know that information for this column should only describe the configuration and role of the aircraft – and not historical notes – but beyond that I am not entirely sure. So far, I have been using a

1556:

While it can accommodate references, it doesn’t handle them super well. However, I don’t feel like this is a major problem, because I don’t think there really should be references in the aircraft section anyway. The information there should be supported by either overall bibliographic references for

774:

In this particular case could you argue that the RAE was a user on the basis that the knowledgeable would know that the RAE hangers contained several one-offs. But would we list the RAE as a user of the Dornier Do335, for example; since it wore an RAF serial (AM223) in its brief U.K. life, should we

770:

Here is a specific example of the difficulty: currently we list the Avro 618 as being used by both the RAF and the RAE. The casual reader might suppose that these aircraft were in service in significant numbers with the RAF in the early 1930s. As far as I know (Thetford's book) there is no record of

2997:

Great - lets have the columns no-one ever fills out (and are utterly irrelevant to the manufacturer page anyway) right next to the name. That's going to look really professional. As for No. - it is pretty clear what number is referring to. Indeed - what other meaning can you imagine being included?

1541:

It includes a good amount of pertinent information, but not too much. When an airplane first flew and how many of it a company built is information that seems generally relevant to an aircraft manufacturer’s article. For example, first flight dates show the development of aircraft designs over time

3255:

generally. This latter meaning is often the correct technical usage in aviation. For example a drone carrying passengers cannot be described as "crewed" because it isn't. The generic term for both crew and passengers is "complement", but that has no related adjective. So we use "manned". Thus, say

2612:

The problem I foresee with using "date" as the heading instead of "first flight" is that it is too vague. I realize that it is an attempt to solve the issue that certain first flight vs. introduction dates aren't always both readily available for every aircraft, but if it is not specified and both

1858:

Agreed, no need for the excessive formatting - it makes editing harder, some of the code was unnecessary (ie: align left) as it was forcing the defaults, and it makes it more likely to end up broken in future (or even while entering the data), as has happened in the past. Cleaner as well, and less

1265:

May I please suggest a project to split airline destination wiki articles main table to two separate tables. The first table will list all the operationally active ones, and the second one will list terminated, seasonal, chartered flights etc with colour coding. There is a downside to this is. The

1182:

I dont think the project has any particularly guidelines and the standard rules apply, but in aviation most countries outside of the soviet union (even metric ones) use imperial measurements for height so it would seem normal to give the heights in feet first (which would reflect most references).

3066:

is ambiguous about how to format code-based entries on DAB pages, and putting designators/identifiers on DAB pages is a bit of a unique case anyway. Since there are quite a few of these entries out there, in the interests of consistency I propose adding a short section to the Aviation style guide

3012:

While I was thinking that the order of the columns would only have to be changed for a custom manufacturer's version of the list (the one you mentioned above as not having the country column), moving the discussion there sounds like a good idea. I should have started this discussion there anyway.

2027:

Individual models have no need to be covered at this level - it is supposed to be a overview of the types - detail on individual types should be left to their respective pages. Even when a variant has its own page, it would be linked from the base model anyway. The rest is bloat and this makes it

1836:

As I wrote above, I think the key with which columns to include is to focus on what is most pertinent to the manufacturer. Having multiple columns seems to dilute that a bit. On the one hand, the class/role columns would help to solve the awkward phrasing of the type column. However, on the other

766:

I have a general policy question about "users", and in particular military users. I get the impression that some contributors are rather keen to associate aircraft with, let us say, the RAF or some other AF. I've seen a few articles now where an aircraft whose use was mostly in the civil field is

208: 3294:

I strongly disagree that we should prohibit the use of the term crewed. Terminology is changing on this everywhere. I think we should be permitted to use crewed and uncrewed in place of manned and unmanned on aviation related articles. Spaceflight related articles have already moved entirely to

2721:

One problem I have encountered is that "roles" are geared much more towards military than civilian aircraft. Light civil airplanes especially don't usually have a role associated with them. One of the closest terms I could find was "cabin monoplane", but this is an admittedly obsolete term that

2633:

My bad, I should have removed the background style and bolded style, I just missed it. I had been focused on getting the date and number built columns centered – which I still feel is important. Also, I would say that each entry should only list the base model. For example, "66 Aircruiser", not

1398:

Rather, the style guide should say that such trivia should be left out altogether, precisely because it's trivia. The first or deadliest crash by type, airline or country is something worth of mention, but any other position in the 'death toll league table' is just trivia. The topic was already

1285:

Primary sources aren't normally permitted, but the certification process is an independent validation of aircraft performances. Can we use aircraft manufacturers as a reliable source when an aircraft is certified by a reputable authority? (FAA, EASA, JCAB, CASA, TCCA...) Most specs would not be

2669:

The Class column is sometimes used for other information, so if need be that can be adapted to suit the product range of the individual manufacturer, via consensus on the article talk page. Note that the guideline for the role already includes "Multi-role (use this only where the roles are of

2806:

Do you have any suggestions on how to deal with currently active manufacturers? So far, I have only been working on articles for manufacturers that are defunct. I am not quite sure how to deal with entries where the number of aircraft built will continue to increase. Would it just need to be

906:

have taken it upon themselves to chronicle any plane landing with its oil warning light on, which is about as serious as anything gets at a small airport which is little used. We could use some robust guidelines under "incidents and accidents." Right now, there aren't any. I would appreciate

2305:

I agree that most detail should be left to the dedicated articles. I also definitely agree there needs to be some sort of standard notation for aircraft built under license. The problem with not including the manufacturers name is you end up with entries that are too vague or short, such as

1006:

This all out war against the Hyphen has got to stop. If a Hyphen is used as part of a noun then it should be embraced with open arms. It is causing so much hassle having hyphens removed from article titles when they are patently supposed to be there. Let us have common sense prevail shall

1203:

I hope this is the correct place for this comment - if not, I apologize. Is there a reason why there are no tailfin designs as part of the airlines infobox? Could we add it, say, at the bottom of the infobox? Many designs are quite distinctive and different from the general airline logo.

2691:

As for the Aircruiser, the reason for the rest of the numbers is that the 66 by itself is meaningless in Bellanca's designation system - during that period it was always ##-##, although the cleaner alternative in hindsight would be to use 66-67 family (or whichever variant was the most

2835:

If we use a modified avlist template, is it possible to at least reorder the columns so that the most pertinent information (as mentioned in the second bullet point of my initial recommendation) comes first and similar information (class, role, and status) is grouped together? For

821:

I recently revamped the style guide page, dividing it up into separate subpages. Hopefully this makes it clearer and easier to cite in discussions. There are a few items to address in rounding out the page. Please expand on this list so we can come up with a definitive

844: 2331:

The |+ centres and bolds the title, so the extra text and the bolding is redundant, and if the header is kept short for the two number columns, the centering there has nothing to do - likewise the style="background:#efefef;" is a default and doesn't need to be

3119:, all of which start with a phrase that clearly relates back to term being disambiguated (which "General Juan N. Álvarez International Airport", for example, does not). In essence, it helps to clarify why the item in question appears on this DAB page at all. 3172:

suggest there is no need to uselessly start the entries by repeating the unlinked code at the start of each entry. There is no reason not to simply start each entry with the target link (airport, airline, etc) and include descriptive text afterwards.

1569:

the best way to do this. There could be entirely separate tables in separate subsections, or one table with a second title and set of column headers. (I have to look into wiki formatting to see if this second option is possible, but it seems doable.)

2546:

omitted can be easily introduced. It could be done now with the "nonstandard" option but that would not normalize the column headings. I used an existing format so you can see how short the wikitext code is. The new option would be something like

1805:

The logic of sortable tables requires your Type column to be broken out into separate Class, Role, etc. columns. Also, gratuitous coloring is against the style guide. Where a table is adopted, why not base it on the default format defined at

1522:

I would like to propose a common table for organizing lists of aircraft on aircraft manufacturer articles. At the moment, there is no standard format and it shows in the scattershot approaches to lists. Over the past few months, I have been

2613:

types of dates are used in the table it can cause problems (e.g. aircraft #1 incorrectly appears later in the list chronologically than aircraft #2, because aircraft #1 used an introduction date, while aircraft #2 used a first flight date.)

2717:

I would have to agree that the term multirole has a very specific connotation when it comes to aircraft. Most people would interpret the term in that military context rather than the more general meaning of "having more than one role".

3250:

In the wider context, the term "manned" is generally being replaced by euphemisms in order to avoid gender connotations. However it has dual usage, according to context referring either to the male of our species, or to "mankind", aka

3214: 1286:

sufficient, secondary sources for wikipedia. And I don't think aviation secondary sources (Flight, Aviation week, jane's...) could have the resources to verify performance with flight tests, they rely on manufacturers too. --

1591:

The first flight dates listed are for the date that the first airframe built by that company in that configuration flew. So, for example, even though the first Vought F4U flew in 1940, the first Goodyear FG-1 only flew in

1131: 1790:

Admittedly, it seems like a lot because I wanted to make sure I touched on every issue. However, it seems entirely reasonable to me that there is a uniform format. After all, is that not the purpose of the style guide?

1576:) and in this past these seemed to be included on the list by indenting under the main article. The table doesn’t seem to support this well – although it might be possible to mitigate this by indenting the model name. 2958: 2606: 3187: 1595:

Similar to the above, I have included only the number of airframes that company specifically built. So, for example, even though over 18,000 B-24s were built, Consolidated only manufactured around 9,000 to 1,000 of

2956:

Also, could we change the title of the "No." column to be more descriptive in some way? "No." is very vague since it is not clear what type of number it is referring to. The heading for the "survivors" section was

2743:

article – it has a large number of aircraft (73+) and therefore the problem would be particularly acute. The only partial solution I could come up with to solve it was to fill the space with thumbnail images.

3209: 1538:

It allows the information to be sorted in any order the user would prefer. I have been default ordering the entries chronologically, but the entries can also be sorted alphabetically or by number built.

1259:

At present, the core content of airline destination article is in a huge table with 'colour coded' rows. It contains information mixed up. This makes it a bit technical and clumpsy in my view. For e.g

2777:

also includes "Utility (includes mail, agricultural, firefighter, air-sea rescue, etc)" in the list of values. The values listed were drawn from a solid evidence base of printed directories such as

3240: 2605:

engine airplane. I don't think the idea of the number built column being just "No." is good because it is not clear what the number refers to. (As support, I would reference the rationale for the

2564:

To make more fundamental changes from the current default, including all the examples suggested above here, would require more long discussion, as it would impact the other popular formats/usages.

3028: 2781:

and other RS, they are how the industry does it and what informed readers expect, they are not merely editorial opinion pulled out of the air. Changing them needs more that the latter. — Cheers,

709: 2739:

and, while I realized it works well on mobile, it would result in a bunch of unused space on the right side of the screen when accessed on desktops. This was the reason I never converted the

2528:

We do not need a title telling us what should already be in the main text, either as a subheading or as an explanatory paragraph, or for the more prolific manufacturers in the article title.

1075:

still exist and in this case, a few are still flying. I submit that only aircraft that do not exist anymore, even if the only examples of survivors are in museums, should begin with "The

339: 705: 1361: 1373: 679: 3274:

The generic term for both crew and passengers is "complement". For the adjective, use "manned". Thus, say autonomous e-drones are classified as manned or unmanned; none is "crewed" .

3126:

should apply (since ICAO and IATA codes are often treated as alternative names), which would require putting the DAB link on the code itself to a code-specific redirect page, i.e.:

1295: 3130: 699: 3196:

about the criteria for listing aircraft introductions and retirements by individual operators; I think that in most cases, only the first and last operator should be listed, per

2024:

Personally, I don't like the class columns - a notes column is more flexible, and pertinent, not least it can have a link for a reference without having to add yet another field.

1604:

Another decision is whether to use the manufacturer’s internal model numbers/designations or the more common service designations. For example, Sikorsky S-70 versus H-60. As per

1588:

I have been careful to list only first flight dates in the first column. Many aircraft articles have include introduction dates in addition to or in place of first flight dates.

1149: 2767: 2319: 1636: 1615:

It is important to note which aircraft were actually built by which version of a company, since so many of the companies have changed ownership over the years. For example, the

1275: 1254: 646: 1029:

Somebody has compared the current aircraft against aircraft X for reason Y and we've got a place in the article where we use this comparison and an inline reference to follow.

719: 3228: 3216: 890:

Section on Foreign characters in article and infobox. Its ok in the intro (foreign names of foreign airline/aircraft etc), but not elsewhere, esp. in article name or infobox.

3315:"manned". Contrary to your claim, some aspects of aviation are indeed different from spaceflight. I wonder whether you understand the example I gave: an autonomous air taxi 675: 2725:

All that being said, my purpose for this discussion is not to rehash the particular words used to define certain aircraft, so I don't mean to seem overly focused on that.

1527:

and converted a bunch of aircraft manufacturer articles to use sortable tables. I will note that the table is not of my own creation, but was (I believe) first designed by

1443:

I've removed the addition to the guidelines for now, as we need to work out the best wording here first, and agree on it. As written, it's just not ready for prime time. -

3319:

has passengers but no crew. It is therefore manned but not crewed (unlike any spacecraft). Do you have a problem with the use of "manned" in such circumstances? — Cheers,

1517: 1355: 1176: 695: 1280: 748: 642: 1314: 1125: 964: 804: 715: 689: 625: 176: 1512: 313: 3341:

of aircraft without a pilot. A vast majority of sources still refer to aircraft as "manned" or "unmanned", as opposed to "crewed" or "uncrewed" for spacecraft.

1412: 1392: 1246: 1228: 1192: 986: 946: 3022: 2992: 2970: 2830: 2816: 2790: 2682: 2578: 1853: 1819: 386: 3007: 2701: 2595: 1104: 1800: 1785: 1482: 425: 360: 3151: 3040: 2755: 2656: 1769: 1430: 1330: 1154: 2643: 2341: 1993: 3181: 2037: 800: 787: 685: 621: 1452: 1119: 1041: 3158: 1056: 503: 837: 1350: 3328: 3306: 2670:

comparable importance)", so that criticism is misplaced. See also comments above on changing the broader consensus for the aviation list style guide.

1830: 1163:, an article about a Russian plane crashing in Indonesia, my change to place metric units first for flight level, mountain height and crash site was 916: 369: 354: 350: 3288: 937:

The accident invoked a change in procedures, regulations or process that had a wide effect on other airports or airlines or the aircraft industry.

447: 282: 3165:). I expect any guidelines developed here without input from the disambiguation project will likely be disregarded by the members of that project. 3095: 1079:

is a ....", since "was" implies that none still exist. I have noticed that in other fields, it is handled that way. For instance, in cars, the

406: 271: 2821:

It has to be done the hard way. Whenever somebody publishes a reliable update we can adopt it and add a cite it in the Notes column. — Cheers,

3265: 1826: 741: 343: 254: 3115:

While stating the code at the beginning of the entry is probably redundant, my sense is that it is more consistent with the examples given in

3333:

Steelpillow is right. While "crewed" is gradually replacing "manned" in many areas, aviation has yet to see any such change. Terms such as

1608:, the choice is generally weighted towards whichever is more common. One exception to this may be when it comes to license built models. The 578: 418: 293: 261: 1383:

The style guide should mention the deadliest crash trivia and about how it sometimes uses original research and needs a reliable source(s).

1062: 955:

None of the incidents listed were notable and the one accident appears to have been unconnected with the airport. I have removed them all.

574: 379: 365: 317: 3361: 3058: 923: 614: 457: 443: 396: 278: 3311:

Yes, we should absolutely not ban "crewed", thank you for clarifying that. But this proposal is not about banning "crewed", it is about

1110:

What about aircraft that are no longer used for the purpose for which they were created, to the extent that ZERO armed B-17s fly today?

1473:

did say that "The first or deadliest crash by type, airline or country is something worth of mention," so those could be an exception.

1378: 402: 303: 267: 1213: 1164: 3162: 1016: 761: 734: 524: 335: 299: 250: 3380: 1837:

hand, it would miss certain seemingly important characteristics such as number/type of engines, number of wings, and land/seaplane.

496: 412: 289: 792:

AM223 is not a RAF serial number, it stands for Air Ministry and they were applied to captured axis aircraft during and after WW2.

1400: 1021: 996: 375: 1167:

with the justification "As this is an aviation article, we should use imperial first". Is this indeed policy, and if so where?

3385: 1494: 610: 463: 453: 392: 243: 852:

Expand on naming incl. section on pagemoves (avoiding controversial mass moves, keeping series' in line with each other, etc).

1326: 1160: 834: 592: 520: 513: 2983:

would need to be overturned by a new consensus. Do you want to suspend this discussion and open one over there? — Cheers,

2735:

Your concern about the table being too wide is surprising because in my initial proposal my worry was that the table was

1616: 1302: 1219:

Not sure they are notable enough for the infobox, it may worth asking at the airlines project you may get more opinions.

808: 656: 635: 603: 328: 233: 17: 1627:

All-in-all, I think the table is a good solution, but I would like to hear if anyone else has suggestions or comments. –

1134:

is a proposal to greatly simplify entries in that list by reducing wikilinks to one per event. As that list is given in

666: 482: 472: 239: 121: 3256:

autonomous e-drones are classified as manned or unmanned. There have been a few edit conflicts over this recently.

903: 108:. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of 3245: 1067:

I noticed that many articles about aircraft that are no longer being manufactured start with something like "The

1001: 897: 855:

Expand on redirects (create for all possible variations) eg. Horten Ho XVIII, Horten Ho.XVIII, Horten Ho 23, etc.

509: 2561:

value "Propeller" can be subdivided into piston and turboprop. This might even be backported to the Style Guide.

1776:

No - it's rules for rules sakes - and entirely unnecessary - every article does not need to be exactly the same.

1600:

Finally, there are a few other issues I have run into that are irrespective of what type of formatting is used:

1561:

so that there is a second column of entries to the right of the first, but I don’t know if this is possible. (I

652: 631: 599: 229: 213: 103: 68: 3080:

State the type of code ("ICAO"/"IATA", "airline designator"/"location identifier") followed by the word "for"

1320: 662: 568: 557: 546: 535: 478: 468: 2534:

This format and its columns were thrashed out through long discussion some years ago, and revised last year.

1260: 43: 1072: 816: 3108: 1132:

Talk:List of accidents and incidents involving commercial aircraft#Reconsidering_linking_in_this_article

3137:

This seems silly to me, and would create a lot more work (and redirects) that all add little of value.

2391: 2194: 2082: 1905: 1671: 1584:

A couple notes about the way I have been using the table so far, specifically accuracy of information:

1562: 192: 3301: 3193: 2531:

The Notes column provides a home for arbitrary remarks and any citations which might prove necessary.

1508: 1047:

Wouldn't it be nice to reduce the scope for "More reason-less, unexplained nationalist POV-pushing"?

829: 2600:

I am somewhat against an undefined notes column, as I am afraid it will end up becoming a place for

1565:

on the table help talk page.) Another option would be to fill some of the blank space with pictures.

1360:

I've started a discussion on whether claim lists should be included in fighter pilot biographies at

977:

Thanks for your help. Hopefully, the draft content will make it into the outline in the near future.

778:

I'm new to this and may have overlooked some guidelines; but if they don't exist, maybe they should?

3197: 2740: 564: 553: 542: 531: 109: 1552:

When compared to the existing lists, there are a couple downsides to the table I have been using:

3334: 2445: 2238: 2114: 1937: 1707: 1500: 1369: 1143: 2979:, they are not special to manufacturer's lists that I can see. As such the consensus reached at 2980: 1291: 3324: 3284: 3205: 2988: 2826: 2786: 2678: 2574: 1815: 1310: 1224: 1188: 960: 942: 49: 3338: 3296: 2471: 2419: 2355: 2260: 2216: 2130: 2098: 1953: 1921: 1725: 1689: 1504: 1478: 1388: 824: 796: 1642:

Whoops! It would be really helpful if I included an example of the table, don't you think?

8: 3236: 2601: 2307: 1781: 1408: 2554:

Endless repetition of the manufacturer's name is uninformative and downright irritating.

1365: 1242: 1209: 1172: 1012: 982: 912: 3178: 3036: 3018: 2976: 2966: 2812: 2774: 2763: 2639: 2351: 2315: 1849: 1841: 1807: 1796: 1765: 1632: 1609: 1336: 1287: 907:

suggestions on eliminating this section from BTV, which is now quite boring. Thanks.

859: 3320: 3280: 3201: 3003: 2984: 2822: 2801: 2782: 2749: 2697: 2674: 2618: 2591: 2570: 2337: 2033: 1989: 1811: 1605: 1448: 1418: 1306: 1220: 1198: 1184: 1139: 1135: 1100: 956: 938: 1305:

as it is not really relevant to the style guide and that page gets more visitors.

3147: 1499:

There is a discussion ongoing on the conventions concerning units in aviation at

1474: 1426: 1384: 1115: 1052: 1037: 931:

The accident was fatal to either the aircraft occupants or persons on the ground.

115: 96: 1026:

Just as we want the refs inline, the comparable aircraft should also be inline.

893:

Expand external links, perhaps add common links considered non-encyclopedic/spam

3352: 3232: 3229:

Talk:List of Lockheed C-130 Hercules operators § Flag icons in section headings

3217:

Talk:List of Lockheed C-130 Hercules operators § Flag icons in section headings

2497: 2282: 2146: 1969: 1777: 1743: 1620: 1524: 1470: 1404: 1271: 1138:

as the stylistic prototype for similar lists, editors here will be interested.

1084: 783: 2634:"66-67, -70, -75, -76, -80 Aircruiser". Listing every variant is too clunky. – 2623:

Could you provide a link to the discussions you mentioned in your third point?

1362:

WT:WikiProject Military history#Victory claim lists in fighter ace biographies

188: 3374: 3342: 3157:

The proper place to discuss guidelines applicable to disambiguation pages is

1528: 1238: 1205: 1168: 1008: 978: 934:

The accident involved hull loss or serious damage to the aircraft or airport.

908: 159: 1844:

guidelines. However, some of the above issues still need to be worked out. –

3174: 3133:, General Juan N. Álvarez International Airport, Acapulco, Guerrero, Mexico 3123: 3032: 3014: 2962: 2808: 2759: 2650: 2635: 2311: 1845: 1792: 1761: 1628: 1080: 3188:

Service introductions and retirements on individual Year in Aviation pages

3169: 2999: 2730: 2693: 2664: 2628: 2587: 2333: 2029: 1985: 1572:

A number of aircraft have separate articles for separate variants, (e.g.

1444: 1096: 1417:

I have to agree, its an encyclopedia, so we don't include trivia as per

194: 3143: 3102: 2057:

A few more refined test tables. First in the initially proposed style:

1422: 1111: 1048: 1033: 3346: 1840:

After considering it, I am warming to the idea of a basing it on the

1557:

the entire article or by the individual aircraft articles themselves.

1329:. I have started a discussion about this on that article's talk page 1267: 1092: 779: 207: 80: 62: 1088: 190: 3116: 3063: 3077:

Add "former" in the case of IATA codes that have been reassigned

2754:

I can see now that I should have started this discussion on the

926:

which says: Accidents or incidents should only be included if:

195: 2354:

approach further, here is a variant based on our established

1071:

was a ....". In this particular case, many examples of the

2609:

to rename the "survivors" section to "surviving aircraft".)

1833:

that in certain situations special formatting is permitted.

1573: 1755:

Prototype single engine mononplane ground attack aircraft

2157:

Prototype single engine monoplane ground attack aircraft

1980:

Prototype single engine monoplane ground attack aircraft

2655:

The original discussions are either at, or linked from,

1255:

Suggestion to modify airline destinations wiki template

2807:

periodically updated? Or is there some better method? –

1301:

You may be better asking at the main project talk page

1032:

Anything else is a needless editorial value judgment.

3086:

For airports, add another comma and state the location

1325:

Today, there was mass removal of aircraft images from

2657:

Knowledge talk:WikiProject Aviation/Style guide/Lists

2551:

and would save endless future arguments over columns.

1087:

begin with "is" as well as camera articles about the

3074:

Start with the code in question, followed by a comma

1518:

Proposed Aircraft Manufacture Aircraft Section Table

1364:

that may be of interest to this project's members.--

1356:

Discussion on victory claims in fighter ace articles

153: 86: 3159:

Knowledge talk:Manual of Style/Disambiguation pages

2975:These issues appear relevant to all the options at 1281:aircraft manufacturer as a reliable primary source 1126:Style change for lists of accidents and incidents 3372: 1829:that uses both colors and smaller text and the 3343:Knowledge is not a place to right great wrongs 2998:Number of seats, engines and wings do not fit. 2961:to "surviving aircraft" for the same reason. – 1548:Most importantly, it creates a uniform format. 887:Infoboxes - limiting item lists in the infobox 3096:General Juan N. Álvarez International Airport 1155:Metric vs imperial units in aviation articles 742: 2539:Some notes on what we might customise here: 2525:Some notes on the existing default version: 775:list both RAF and RAE as users? Surely not? 924:Knowledge:WikiProject Airports/page content 3269:and explain it there, along the lines of: 3227:You are invited to join the discussion at 749: 735: 3163:Knowledge talk:WikiProject Disambiguation 3122:I suppose an argument could be made that 3107:IST, former IATA location identifier for 3070:For formatting, I suggest the following: 42:does not require a rating on Knowledge's 2758:page, thanks for linking to it there. – 14: 3373: 2141:Single engine monoplane naval fighter 2109:Single engine monoplane naval fighter 1964:Single engine monoplane naval fighter 1932:Single engine monoplane naval fighter 1737:Single engine monoplane naval fighter 1701:Single engine monoplane naval fighter 120:. To use this banner, please see the 2168:Summary of aircraft built by Brewster 2125:Single engine monoplane scout bomber 2093:Single engine monoplane scout bomber 2062:Summary of aircraft built by Brewster 1948:Single engine monoplane scout bomber 1916:Single engine monoplane scout bomber 1719:Single engine monoplane scout bomber 1683:Single engine monoplane scout bomber 1650:Summary of aircraft built by Brewster 1327:List of United States bomber aircraft 1161:Mount Salak Sukhoi Superjet 100 crash 876:Badges section for military aircraft? 102:This page is within the scope of the 3083:Give the link to the airport/airline 1063:tense (was vs. is) in lead paragraph 31: 29: 25: 3200:. Your input is obviously welcome. 3067:specifically for DAB page entries. 3059:ICAO/IATA code DAB entry formatting 1810:, just omit the Country? — Cheers, 1617:Curtiss Aeroplane and Motor Company 1303:Knowledge talk:WikiProject Aircraft 871:Colour schemes and markings section 843:Tense - is vs. was. Cite examples. 48:It is of interest to the following 23: 18:Knowledge talk:WikiProject Aviation 3094:ACA, IATA location identifier for 1612:article is a good example of this. 206: 24: 3397: 3101:ACA, ICAO airline designator for 2310:", which seem a bit ridiculous. – 2166: 2060: 1648: 849:Expand flags to include roundels. 762:Military aircraft policy question 3222: 1534:There are a number of benefits: 904:Burlington International Airport 862:, avoiding bold/blinding colors. 158: 89: 79: 61: 30: 3381:Project-Class aviation articles 3259:So I propose that we add a new 2542:A new template option with the 2059: 1647: 1545:It generally looks much better. 1022:Push comparable aircraft inline 997:Naming convention for Accidents 3131:ACA (IATA location identifier) 3031:. I hope I did it correctly. – 1495:Discussion on unit conventions 676:Aerospace biography task force 130:Knowledge:WikiProject Aviation 13: 1: 3386:WikiProject Aviation articles 3362:16:47, 16 December 2023 (UTC) 3329:14:46, 16 December 2023 (UTC) 3307:12:23, 16 December 2023 (UTC) 3289:10:54, 16 December 2023 (UTC) 3263:subsection to the section on 3192:I've started a discussion at 2163:Second, in the AVLIST style: 1483:14:53, 18 December 2018 (UTC) 1453:22:09, 17 December 2018 (UTC) 1431:21:41, 17 December 2018 (UTC) 1413:18:32, 17 December 2018 (UTC) 1393:18:09, 17 December 2018 (UTC) 1374:02:01, 19 December 2017 (UTC) 1351:22:09, 30 November 2017 (UTC) 1150:16:51, 21 February 2012 (UTC) 1120:18:20, 21 February 2012 (UTC) 1057:16:55, 24 February 2012 (UTC) 1042:13:38, 10 November 2010 (UTC) 133:Template:WikiProject Aviation 3246:Terminology: manned/unmanned 3098:, Acapulco, Guerrero, Mexico 2289: 2286: 2267: 2264: 2245: 2242: 2223: 2220: 2201: 2198: 2153: 2150: 2137: 2134: 2121: 2118: 2105: 2102: 2089: 2086: 1751: 1748: 1733: 1730: 1715: 1712: 1697: 1694: 1679: 1676: 1513:20:37, 29 October 2019 (UTC) 1261:British_Airways_Destinations 987:15:13, 23 October 2009 (UTC) 965:18:53, 19 October 2009 (UTC) 947:18:46, 19 October 2009 (UTC) 917:15:10, 19 October 2009 (UTC) 884:Expand images, esp. captions 706:Military aviation task force 696:Aviation accident task force 240:Announcements and open tasks 7: 1563:asked about the possibility 1077:Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress 1073:Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress 1069:Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress 838:08:14, 15 August 2009 (UTC) 788:08:26, 12 August 2008 (UTC) 643:Defunct Airlines task force 521:Aircraft occurrence infobox 10: 3402: 3210:18:36, 22 April 2021 (UTC) 3182:19:43, 27 April 2020 (UTC) 3152:18:42, 27 April 2020 (UTC) 3041:23:50, 26 April 2020 (UTC) 3023:23:44, 26 April 2020 (UTC) 3008:23:22, 26 April 2020 (UTC) 2993:10:19, 26 April 2020 (UTC) 2971:21:28, 25 April 2020 (UTC) 2831:07:53, 24 April 2020 (UTC) 2817:22:51, 23 April 2020 (UTC) 2791:08:46, 22 April 2020 (UTC) 2768:19:54, 21 April 2020 (UTC) 2702:17:11, 21 April 2020 (UTC) 2683:20:57, 20 April 2020 (UTC) 2644:20:37, 20 April 2020 (UTC) 2596:17:36, 20 April 2020 (UTC) 2579:10:04, 20 April 2020 (UTC) 2557:I have realised that the ' 2342:02:51, 20 April 2020 (UTC) 2320:00:02, 20 April 2020 (UTC) 2038:23:43, 19 April 2020 (UTC) 1994:23:30, 19 April 2020 (UTC) 1854:23:19, 19 April 2020 (UTC) 1820:21:37, 19 April 2020 (UTC) 1801:21:31, 19 April 2020 (UTC) 1786:21:15, 19 April 2020 (UTC) 1770:21:43, 26 March 2020 (UTC) 1754: 1741: 1736: 1723: 1718: 1705: 1700: 1687: 1682: 1669: 1637:21:39, 26 March 2020 (UTC) 1501:Talk:Airbus_A350_XWB#Units 858:add section on colors per 716:Soviet aviation task force 3241:21:42, 13 July 2023 (UTC) 3194:Talk:Timeline of aviation 2549:{{avilisthead|nocountry}} 1276:22:25, 26 July 2012 (UTC) 1229:18:56, 29 June 2012 (UTC) 1214:10:59, 29 June 2012 (UTC) 1017:17:26, 16 June 2010 (UTC) 811:) 12.10, 1 September 2009 74: 56: 3109:Istanbul Atatürk Airport 2741:Douglas Aircraft Company 1379:"Deadliest crash" trivia 1315:15:11, 19 May 2016 (UTC) 1296:08:08, 19 May 2016 (UTC) 1247:06:54, 2 July 2012 (UTC) 1193:07:14, 12 May 2012 (UTC) 1177:11:24, 11 May 2012 (UTC) 1105:23:23, 7 June 2011 (UTC) 881:Types of lists to avoid? 3335:Unmanned aerial vehicle 2239:Brewster SB2A Buccaneer 2115:Brewster SB2A Buccaneer 1708:Brewster SB2A Buccaneer 898:Incidents and accidents 3277: 510:Aircraft begin infobox 211: 3271: 1503:. Please do chip in. 1321:Recent image removals 686:Air sports task force 622:Rotorcraft task force 210: 3029:RfC has been created 2356:template:avilisthead 2293:Single piston engine 2271:Single piston engine 2261:Brewster F3A Corsair 2249:Single piston engine 2227:Single piston engine 2217:Brewster F2A Buffalo 2205:Single piston engine 2131:Brewster F3A Corsair 2099:Brewster F2A Buffalo 1831:MOS seems to suggest 1726:Brewster F3A Corsair 1690:Brewster F2A Buffalo 873:in aircraft, etc... 438:Project organization 105:Aviation WikiProject 2170: 2064: 1887: 1652: 817:Revamped style page 376:Outreach department 222:General information 1883: 611:Engines task force 387:Current newsletter 212: 44:content assessment 3198:WP:INDISCRIMINATE 3161:(or perhaps also 2939: 2938: 2879: 2878: 2522: 2521: 2303: 2302: 2161: 2160: 1984: 1983: 1885:Brewster aircraft 1825:subproject has a 1759: 1758: 1610:Atlantic Aircraft 1346: 1148: 860:Knowledge:Colours 813: 799:comment added by 759: 758: 504:Infobox templates 230:Main project page 201: 200: 182: 181: 152: 151: 148: 147: 144: 143: 136:aviation articles 122:full instructions 3393: 3360: 3355: 3349: 3226: 3225: 3168:The examples at 2914: 2913: 2854: 2853: 2805: 2773:On roles again, 2753: 2734: 2668: 2654: 2632: 2622: 2550: 2414:(citations etc) 2362: 2361: 2171: 2165: 2065: 1888: 1882: 1653: 1349: 1344: 1146: 1142: 832: 827: 812: 793: 751: 744: 737: 653:Airports project 632:Airlines project 600:Aircraft project 575:Navigation boxes 479:Project category 368:(NB: Inactive) ( 203: 202: 196: 173: 172: 162: 154: 138: 137: 134: 131: 128: 99: 94: 93: 92: 83: 76: 75: 65: 58: 57: 35: 34: 33: 26: 3401: 3400: 3396: 3395: 3394: 3392: 3391: 3390: 3371: 3370: 3358: 3357: 3353: 3347: 3298:Canterbury Tail 3266:Content/English 3248: 3223: 3220: 3190: 3061: 2799: 2747: 2737:not wide enough 2728: 2662: 2648: 2626: 2616: 2548: 1619:had a bunch of 1520: 1505:ExcitedEngineer 1497: 1381: 1358: 1342: 1334: 1323: 1283: 1257: 1201: 1157: 1144: 1128: 1065: 1024: 1004: 999: 900: 830: 825: 819: 794: 764: 755: 726: 725: 663:Gliding project 595: 585: 584: 565:Company infobox 554:Aviator infobox 543:Airport infobox 532:Airline infobox 499: 489: 488: 439: 431: 430: 331: 197: 191: 167: 135: 132: 129: 126: 125: 97:Aviation portal 95: 90: 88: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 3399: 3389: 3388: 3383: 3369: 3368: 3367: 3366: 3365: 3364: 3351: 3337:are still the 3247: 3244: 3219: 3215:Discussion at 3213: 3189: 3186: 3185: 3184: 3166: 3135: 3134: 3113: 3112: 3105: 3099: 3088: 3087: 3084: 3081: 3078: 3075: 3060: 3057: 3056: 3055: 3054: 3053: 3052: 3051: 3050: 3049: 3048: 3047: 3046: 3045: 3044: 3043: 3010: 2947: 2946: 2945: 2944: 2943: 2942: 2941: 2940: 2937: 2936: 2933: 2930: 2927: 2924: 2921: 2918: 2904: 2903: 2902: 2901: 2900: 2899: 2898: 2897: 2887: 2886: 2885: 2884: 2883: 2882: 2881: 2880: 2877: 2876: 2873: 2870: 2867: 2864: 2861: 2858: 2844: 2843: 2842: 2841: 2840: 2839: 2838: 2837: 2794: 2793: 2715: 2714: 2713: 2712: 2711: 2710: 2709: 2708: 2707: 2706: 2705: 2704: 2689: 2671: 2660: 2624: 2614: 2610: 2567: 2566: 2565: 2562: 2555: 2552: 2537: 2536: 2535: 2532: 2529: 2520: 2519: 2517: 2514: 2511: 2508: 2505: 2502: 2500: 2494: 2493: 2491: 2488: 2485: 2482: 2479: 2476: 2474: 2468: 2467: 2465: 2462: 2459: 2456: 2453: 2450: 2448: 2446:SB2A Buccaneer 2442: 2441: 2439: 2436: 2433: 2430: 2427: 2424: 2422: 2416: 2415: 2412: 2409: 2406: 2403: 2400: 2397: 2394: 2388: 2387: 2384: 2381: 2378: 2375: 2372: 2369: 2366: 2360: 2359: 2347: 2346: 2345: 2344: 2329: 2301: 2300: 2297: 2294: 2291: 2288: 2285: 2283:Brewster XA-32 2279: 2278: 2275: 2272: 2269: 2266: 2263: 2257: 2256: 2253: 2250: 2247: 2244: 2241: 2235: 2234: 2231: 2228: 2225: 2222: 2219: 2213: 2212: 2209: 2206: 2203: 2200: 2197: 2191: 2190: 2187: 2184: 2181: 2178: 2175: 2159: 2158: 2155: 2152: 2149: 2147:Brewster XA-32 2143: 2142: 2139: 2136: 2133: 2127: 2126: 2123: 2120: 2117: 2111: 2110: 2107: 2104: 2101: 2095: 2094: 2091: 2088: 2085: 2079: 2078: 2075: 2072: 2069: 2055: 2054: 2053: 2052: 2051: 2050: 2049: 2048: 2047: 2046: 2045: 2044: 2043: 2042: 2041: 2040: 2025: 2007: 2006: 2005: 2004: 2003: 2002: 2001: 2000: 1999: 1998: 1997: 1996: 1982: 1981: 1978: 1975: 1972: 1966: 1965: 1962: 1959: 1956: 1950: 1949: 1946: 1943: 1940: 1938:SB2A Buccaneer 1934: 1933: 1930: 1927: 1924: 1918: 1917: 1914: 1911: 1908: 1902: 1901: 1898: 1895: 1892: 1869: 1868: 1867: 1866: 1865: 1864: 1863: 1862: 1861: 1860: 1838: 1834: 1773: 1772: 1757: 1756: 1753: 1750: 1747: 1744:Brewster XA-32 1739: 1738: 1735: 1732: 1729: 1721: 1720: 1717: 1714: 1711: 1703: 1702: 1699: 1696: 1693: 1685: 1684: 1681: 1678: 1675: 1667: 1666: 1663: 1660: 1657: 1644: 1643: 1625: 1624: 1623:designs on it. 1621:Curtiss-Wright 1613: 1598: 1597: 1593: 1589: 1578: 1577: 1570: 1566: 1558: 1550: 1549: 1546: 1543: 1539: 1519: 1516: 1496: 1493: 1492: 1491: 1490: 1489: 1488: 1487: 1486: 1485: 1460: 1459: 1458: 1457: 1456: 1455: 1436: 1435: 1434: 1433: 1380: 1377: 1357: 1354: 1341: 1338: 1322: 1319: 1318: 1317: 1282: 1279: 1256: 1253: 1252: 1251: 1250: 1249: 1232: 1231: 1200: 1197: 1196: 1195: 1156: 1153: 1127: 1124: 1123: 1122: 1085:Chevrolet Vega 1064: 1061: 1060: 1059: 1023: 1020: 1003: 1000: 998: 995: 994: 993: 992: 991: 990: 989: 970: 969: 968: 967: 950: 949: 935: 932: 928: 927: 922:Have you seen 899: 896: 895: 894: 891: 888: 885: 882: 879: 878: 877: 863: 856: 853: 850: 847: 818: 815: 763: 760: 757: 756: 754: 753: 746: 739: 731: 728: 727: 724: 723: 713: 703: 693: 683: 672: 671: 670: 660: 650: 639: 629: 618: 607: 596: 591: 590: 587: 586: 583: 582: 572: 561: 550: 539: 528: 517: 506: 500: 495: 494: 491: 490: 487: 486: 476: 469:Project banner 466: 461: 451: 440: 437: 436: 433: 432: 429: 428: 422: 410: 400: 389: 383: 373: 363: 357: 347: 332: 327: 326: 323: 322: 321: 320: 311: 297: 286: 275: 264: 262:Article alerts 258: 247: 237: 224: 223: 219: 218: 215: 199: 198: 193: 189: 187: 184: 183: 180: 179: 169: 168: 163: 157: 150: 149: 146: 145: 142: 141: 139: 101: 100: 84: 72: 71: 66: 54: 53: 47: 36: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 3398: 3387: 3384: 3382: 3379: 3378: 3376: 3363: 3356: 3350: 3344: 3340: 3339:WP:COMMONNAME 3336: 3332: 3331: 3330: 3326: 3322: 3318: 3317:by definition 3314: 3310: 3309: 3308: 3305: 3304: 3300: 3299: 3293: 3292: 3291: 3290: 3286: 3282: 3276: 3275: 3270: 3268: 3267: 3262: 3257: 3254: 3243: 3242: 3238: 3234: 3230: 3218: 3212: 3211: 3207: 3203: 3199: 3195: 3183: 3180: 3176: 3171: 3167: 3164: 3160: 3156: 3155: 3154: 3153: 3149: 3145: 3141: 3138: 3132: 3129: 3128: 3127: 3125: 3120: 3118: 3110: 3106: 3104: 3100: 3097: 3093: 3092: 3091: 3090:For example: 3085: 3082: 3079: 3076: 3073: 3072: 3071: 3068: 3065: 3042: 3038: 3034: 3030: 3026: 3025: 3024: 3020: 3016: 3011: 3009: 3005: 3001: 2996: 2995: 2994: 2990: 2986: 2982: 2978: 2974: 2973: 2972: 2968: 2964: 2960: 2955: 2954: 2953: 2952: 2951: 2950: 2949: 2948: 2934: 2931: 2928: 2925: 2922: 2919: 2916: 2915: 2912: 2911: 2910: 2909: 2908: 2907: 2906: 2905: 2895: 2894: 2893: 2892: 2891: 2890: 2889: 2888: 2874: 2871: 2868: 2865: 2862: 2859: 2856: 2855: 2852: 2851: 2850: 2849: 2848: 2847: 2846: 2845: 2834: 2833: 2832: 2828: 2824: 2820: 2819: 2818: 2814: 2810: 2803: 2798: 2797: 2796: 2795: 2792: 2788: 2784: 2780: 2776: 2772: 2771: 2770: 2769: 2765: 2761: 2757: 2751: 2745: 2742: 2738: 2732: 2726: 2723: 2719: 2703: 2699: 2695: 2690: 2686: 2685: 2684: 2680: 2676: 2672: 2666: 2661: 2658: 2652: 2647: 2646: 2645: 2641: 2637: 2630: 2625: 2620: 2615: 2611: 2608: 2603: 2599: 2598: 2597: 2593: 2589: 2584: 2583: 2582: 2581: 2580: 2576: 2572: 2568: 2563: 2560: 2556: 2553: 2545: 2541: 2540: 2538: 2533: 2530: 2527: 2526: 2524: 2523: 2518: 2515: 2512: 2509: 2506: 2504:Piston engine 2503: 2501: 2499: 2496: 2495: 2492: 2489: 2486: 2483: 2480: 2478:Piston engine 2477: 2475: 2473: 2470: 2469: 2466: 2463: 2460: 2457: 2454: 2452:Piston engine 2451: 2449: 2447: 2444: 2443: 2440: 2437: 2434: 2431: 2428: 2426:Piston engine 2425: 2423: 2421: 2418: 2417: 2413: 2410: 2407: 2404: 2401: 2398: 2395: 2393: 2390: 2389: 2385: 2382: 2379: 2376: 2373: 2370: 2367: 2364: 2363: 2357: 2353: 2349: 2348: 2343: 2339: 2335: 2330: 2326: 2325: 2324: 2323: 2322: 2321: 2317: 2313: 2309: 2298: 2295: 2292: 2284: 2281: 2280: 2276: 2273: 2270: 2262: 2259: 2258: 2254: 2251: 2248: 2240: 2237: 2236: 2232: 2229: 2226: 2218: 2215: 2214: 2210: 2207: 2204: 2196: 2195:Brewster XSBA 2193: 2192: 2188: 2185: 2182: 2179: 2176: 2173: 2172: 2169: 2164: 2156: 2148: 2145: 2144: 2140: 2132: 2129: 2128: 2124: 2116: 2113: 2112: 2108: 2100: 2097: 2096: 2092: 2084: 2083:Brewster XSBA 2081: 2080: 2076: 2074:Number built 2073: 2071:First flight 2070: 2067: 2066: 2063: 2058: 2039: 2035: 2031: 2026: 2023: 2022: 2021: 2020: 2019: 2018: 2017: 2016: 2015: 2014: 2013: 2012: 2011: 2010: 2009: 2008: 1995: 1991: 1987: 1979: 1976: 1973: 1971: 1968: 1967: 1963: 1960: 1957: 1955: 1952: 1951: 1947: 1944: 1941: 1939: 1936: 1935: 1931: 1928: 1925: 1923: 1920: 1919: 1915: 1912: 1909: 1907: 1904: 1903: 1899: 1896: 1893: 1890: 1889: 1886: 1881: 1880: 1879: 1878: 1877: 1876: 1875: 1874: 1873: 1872: 1871: 1870: 1857: 1856: 1855: 1851: 1847: 1843: 1839: 1835: 1832: 1828: 1823: 1822: 1821: 1817: 1813: 1809: 1804: 1803: 1802: 1798: 1794: 1789: 1788: 1787: 1783: 1779: 1775: 1774: 1771: 1767: 1763: 1746: 1745: 1740: 1728: 1727: 1722: 1710: 1709: 1704: 1692: 1691: 1686: 1674: 1673: 1672:Brewster XSBA 1668: 1664: 1662:Number built 1661: 1659:First flight 1658: 1655: 1654: 1651: 1646: 1645: 1641: 1640: 1639: 1638: 1634: 1630: 1622: 1618: 1614: 1611: 1607: 1603: 1602: 1601: 1594: 1590: 1587: 1586: 1585: 1582: 1575: 1571: 1567: 1564: 1559: 1555: 1554: 1553: 1547: 1544: 1540: 1537: 1536: 1535: 1532: 1530: 1526: 1515: 1514: 1510: 1506: 1502: 1484: 1480: 1476: 1472: 1468: 1467: 1466: 1465: 1464: 1463: 1462: 1461: 1454: 1450: 1446: 1442: 1441: 1440: 1439: 1438: 1437: 1432: 1428: 1424: 1420: 1416: 1415: 1414: 1410: 1406: 1402: 1397: 1396: 1395: 1394: 1390: 1386: 1376: 1375: 1371: 1367: 1366:Sturmvogel 66 1363: 1353: 1352: 1348: 1347: 1343: 1339: 1332: 1328: 1316: 1312: 1308: 1304: 1300: 1299: 1298: 1297: 1293: 1289: 1278: 1277: 1273: 1269: 1263: 1262: 1248: 1244: 1240: 1236: 1235: 1234: 1233: 1230: 1226: 1222: 1218: 1217: 1216: 1215: 1211: 1207: 1194: 1190: 1186: 1181: 1180: 1179: 1178: 1174: 1170: 1166: 1162: 1152: 1151: 1147: 1141: 1137: 1133: 1121: 1117: 1113: 1109: 1108: 1107: 1106: 1102: 1098: 1094: 1090: 1086: 1082: 1078: 1074: 1070: 1058: 1054: 1050: 1046: 1045: 1044: 1043: 1039: 1035: 1030: 1027: 1019: 1018: 1014: 1010: 988: 984: 980: 976: 975: 974: 973: 972: 971: 966: 962: 958: 954: 953: 952: 951: 948: 944: 940: 936: 933: 930: 929: 925: 921: 920: 919: 918: 914: 910: 905: 892: 889: 886: 883: 880: 875: 874: 872: 869:in articles. 868: 864: 861: 857: 854: 851: 848: 846: 842: 841: 840: 839: 836: 835: 833: 828: 814: 810: 806: 802: 801:81.136.213.16 798: 790: 789: 785: 781: 776: 772: 768: 752: 747: 745: 740: 738: 733: 732: 730: 729: 721: 717: 714: 711: 707: 704: 701: 697: 694: 691: 687: 684: 681: 677: 674: 673: 668: 664: 661: 658: 654: 651: 648: 644: 640: 637: 633: 630: 627: 623: 619: 616: 612: 608: 605: 601: 598: 597: 594: 589: 588: 580: 576: 573: 570: 566: 562: 559: 555: 551: 548: 544: 540: 537: 533: 529: 526: 522: 518: 515: 511: 507: 505: 502: 501: 498: 493: 492: 484: 480: 477: 474: 470: 467: 465: 462: 459: 455: 452: 449: 445: 442: 441: 435: 434: 427: 426:Current issue 423: 420: 416: 415: 414:The WikiEagle 411: 408: 404: 401: 398: 394: 390: 388: 384: 381: 377: 374: 371: 367: 366:Collaboration 364: 362: 358: 356: 352: 348: 345: 341: 337: 334: 333: 330: 325: 324: 319: 318:Popular pages 315: 312: 309: 305: 301: 298: 295: 291: 287: 284: 280: 276: 273: 269: 265: 263: 259: 256: 252: 248: 245: 241: 238: 235: 231: 228: 227: 226: 225: 221: 220: 217: 209: 205: 204: 186: 185: 178: 175: 174: 171: 170: 166: 161: 156: 155: 140: 123: 119: 118: 113: 112: 107: 106: 98: 87: 85: 82: 78: 77: 73: 70: 67: 64: 60: 59: 55: 51: 45: 41: 37: 28: 27: 19: 3316: 3312: 3302: 3297: 3278: 3273: 3272: 3264: 3260: 3258: 3253:Homo sapiens 3252: 3249: 3221: 3191: 3142: 3139: 3136: 3124:MOS:DABREDIR 3121: 3114: 3089: 3069: 3062: 2778: 2746: 2736: 2727: 2724: 2720: 2716: 2602:WP:LISTCRUFT 2558: 2543: 2350:To push the 2304: 2211:Operational 2167: 2162: 2061: 2056: 1884: 1742: 1724: 1706: 1688: 1670: 1649: 1626: 1599: 1583: 1579: 1551: 1533: 1521: 1498: 1382: 1359: 1337: 1335: 1324: 1288:Marc Lacoste 1284: 1264: 1258: 1202: 1158: 1129: 1081:Ford Model T 1076: 1068: 1066: 1031: 1028: 1025: 1005: 901: 870: 866: 865:Sections to 823: 820: 791: 777: 773: 769: 765: 593:Sub-projects 444:Coordinators 413: 361:Instructions 307: 279:New articles 164: 116: 110: 104: 50:WikiProjects 40:project page 39: 3321:Steelpillow 3313:not banning 3281:Steelpillow 3261:Terminology 3202:Carguychris 3170:MOS:DABACRO 2985:Steelpillow 2896:Instead of: 2823:Steelpillow 2802:Steelpillow 2783:Steelpillow 2750:Steelpillow 2675:Steelpillow 2619:Steelpillow 2571:Steelpillow 2472:F3A Corsair 2420:F2A Buffalo 2277:Production 2255:Production 2233:Production 2068:Model name 1954:F3A Corsair 1922:F2A Buffalo 1827:fleet table 1812:Steelpillow 1656:Model name 1333:. Thanks - 1307:MilborneOne 1221:MilborneOne 1185:MilborneOne 1140:LeadSongDog 957:MilborneOne 939:MilborneOne 902:Editors at 795:—Preceding 403:Peer review 329:Departments 304:Style guide 268:Maintenance 216:WikiProject 117:task forces 3375:Categories 3279:— Cheers, 3140:Thoughts? 3103:Air Canada 2981:WT:AVILIST 2977:WP:AVILIST 2775:WP:AVILIST 2692:numerous). 2673:— Cheers, 2569:— Cheers, 2487:Production 2461:Production 2435:Production 2352:WP:AVILIST 2299:Prototype 1842:WP:AVILIST 1808:WP:AVILIST 1475:Tigerdude9 1399:discussed 1385:Tigerdude9 1145:come howl! 336:Assessment 300:Notability 251:AfD record 111:open tasks 3233:Marchjuly 2513:Prototype 2408:Prototype 2399:Propeller 2332:included. 2180:No. Built 1778:Nigel Ish 1606:WP:AIR/NC 1471:Deeday-UK 1419:WP:TRIVIA 1405:Deeday-UK 1136:wp:AVLIST 1093:Canon F-1 497:Templates 290:Resources 177:Archive 1 3111:, Turkey 3000:- NiD.29 2836:example: 2694:- NiD.29 2607:decision 2588:- NiD.29 2334:- NiD.29 2030:- NiD.29 1986:- NiD.29 1529:FlugKerl 1239:BigSteve 1206:BigSteve 1199:Tailfins 1169:Jpatokal 1165:reverted 1159:Over at 1089:Nikon F2 1009:Petebutt 979:Student7 909:Student7 831:MacInnis 809:contribs 797:unsigned 314:Showcase 214:Aviation 165:Archives 127:Aviation 69:Aviation 3117:MOS:DAB 3064:MOS:DAB 3033:Noha307 3015:Noha307 2963:Noha307 2959:changed 2809:Noha307 2760:Noha307 2651:Noha307 2636:Noha307 2544:Country 2481:Fighter 2429:Fighter 2368:Country 2312:Noha307 2274:Fighter 2230:Fighter 2189:Status 1846:Noha307 1793:Noha307 1762:Noha307 1629:Noha307 1237:Thanx! 1002:Hyphens 845:present 464:Portals 454:Members 393:Contest 355:A-Class 351:B-Class 2935:Notes 2932:Status 2875:Notes 2872:Status 2779:Jane's 2731:NiD.29 2665:NiD.29 2629:NiD.29 2507:Attack 2455:Bomber 2402:Bomber 2396:(omit) 2386:Notes 2380:Status 2296:Attack 2252:Bomber 2208:Bomber 1897:Number 1445:BilCat 1097:rogerd 1095:. -- 826:Trevor 822:guide. 46:scale. 3179:wiser 3175:older 3144:RAult 2920:Class 2866:Class 2756:lists 2559:Class 2498:XA-32 2371:Class 2183:Class 2151:1943 2135:1943 2119:1941 2103:1937 2087:1936 2077:Type 1974:1943 1970:XA-32 1958:1943 1942:1941 1926:1937 1910:1936 1900:Type 1891:Model 1749:1943 1731:1943 1713:1941 1695:1937 1677:1936 1665:Type 1596:them. 1592:1943. 1469:Well 1423:Ahunt 1345:child 1112:Hcobb 1049:Hcobb 1034:Hcobb 867:avoid 38:This 16:< 3348:ZLEA 3325:Talk 3303:talk 3285:Talk 3237:talk 3206:talk 3148:talk 3037:talk 3027:The 3019:talk 3004:talk 2989:Talk 2967:talk 2926:Date 2923:Role 2917:Type 2869:Role 2860:Date 2857:Type 2827:Talk 2813:talk 2787:Talk 2764:talk 2698:talk 2679:Talk 2640:talk 2592:talk 2575:Talk 2510:1943 2484:1943 2458:1941 2432:1937 2405:1936 2392:XSBA 2377:Date 2374:Role 2365:Type 2338:talk 2316:talk 2287:1943 2265:1943 2243:1941 2221:1937 2199:1936 2186:Role 2177:Date 2174:Type 2138:735 2122:771 2106:509 2034:talk 1990:talk 1961:735 1945:771 1929:509 1906:XSBA 1894:Date 1850:talk 1816:Talk 1797:talk 1782:talk 1766:talk 1734:735 1716:771 1698:509 1633:talk 1574:B-24 1525:bold 1509:talk 1479:talk 1449:talk 1427:talk 1421:. - 1409:talk 1403:. -- 1401:here 1389:talk 1370:talk 1340:WOLF 1331:here 1311:talk 1292:talk 1272:talk 1268:Smet 1243:talk 1225:talk 1210:talk 1189:talk 1173:talk 1116:talk 1101:talk 1091:and 1083:and 1053:talk 1038:talk 1013:talk 1007:we?! 983:talk 961:talk 943:talk 913:talk 805:talk 784:talk 780:TSRL 720:talk 710:talk 700:talk 690:talk 680:talk 667:talk 657:talk 647:talk 636:talk 626:talk 615:talk 604:talk 579:talk 569:talk 558:talk 547:talk 536:talk 525:talk 514:talk 483:talk 473:talk 458:talk 448:talk 419:talk 407:talk 397:talk 380:talk 370:talk 344:talk 316:and 308:talk 302:and 294:talk 283:talk 272:talk 255:talk 244:talk 234:talk 114:and 3231:. 2929:No. 2863:No. 2490:735 2464:771 2438:509 2383:No. 2268:735 2246:771 2224:509 1130:At 342:) ( 340:Log 3377:: 3327:) 3287:) 3239:) 3208:) 3177:≠ 3150:) 3039:) 3021:) 3006:) 2991:) 2969:) 2829:) 2815:) 2789:) 2766:) 2700:) 2681:) 2642:) 2594:) 2577:) 2340:) 2318:) 2154:2 2090:1 2036:) 1992:) 1977:2 1913:1 1852:) 1818:) 1799:) 1784:) 1768:) 1752:2 1680:1 1635:) 1531:. 1511:) 1481:) 1451:) 1429:) 1411:) 1391:) 1372:) 1313:) 1294:) 1274:) 1245:) 1227:) 1212:) 1191:) 1175:) 1118:) 1103:) 1055:) 1040:) 1015:) 985:) 963:) 945:) 915:) 807:• 786:) 641:→ 620:→ 609:→ 563:→ 552:→ 541:→ 530:→ 519:→ 508:→ 424:→ 391:→ 385:→ 359:→ 353:/ 349:→ 288:→ 277:→ 266:→ 260:→ 249:→ 3359:\ 3354:T 3323:( 3283:( 3235:( 3204:( 3146:( 3035:( 3017:( 3013:– 3002:( 2987:( 2965:( 2825:( 2811:( 2804:: 2800:@ 2785:( 2762:( 2752:: 2748:@ 2733:: 2729:@ 2696:( 2677:( 2667:: 2663:@ 2653:: 2649:@ 2638:( 2631:: 2627:@ 2621:: 2617:@ 2590:( 2573:( 2516:2 2411:1 2358:: 2336:( 2314:( 2308:K 2306:" 2290:2 2202:1 2032:( 1988:( 1848:( 1814:( 1795:( 1791:– 1780:( 1764:( 1760:– 1631:( 1507:( 1477:( 1447:( 1425:( 1407:( 1387:( 1368:( 1309:( 1290:( 1270:( 1241:( 1223:( 1208:( 1187:( 1171:( 1114:( 1099:( 1051:( 1036:( 1011:( 981:( 959:( 941:( 911:( 803:( 782:( 750:e 743:t 736:v 722:) 718:( 712:) 708:( 702:) 698:( 692:) 688:( 682:) 678:( 669:) 665:( 659:) 655:( 649:) 645:( 638:) 634:( 628:) 624:( 617:) 613:( 606:) 602:( 581:) 577:( 571:) 567:( 560:) 556:( 549:) 545:( 538:) 534:( 527:) 523:( 516:) 512:( 485:) 481:( 475:) 471:( 460:) 456:( 450:) 446:( 421:) 417:( 409:) 405:( 399:) 395:( 382:) 378:( 372:) 346:) 338:( 310:) 306:( 296:) 292:( 285:) 281:( 274:) 270:( 257:) 253:( 246:) 242:( 236:) 232:( 124:. 52::

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Knowledge

talk:WikiProject Aviation/Style guide - Knowledge

Index