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.