Talk:Gyrodyne

message: Some anonymous person keeps coming in and deleting half of the Gyrodyne article. I suspect it might be the same person using different IP addresses, but who knows?
Would contributors please Talk before doing really big changes? Some of the changes made have been contentious, to say the least, and while some lovely new material has been added, quite a lot of the old stuff was just removed without a discussion.
My feeling is this: if material is incorrect, the Wiki article should discuss why the material is incorrect. This is informative. To replace a chunk of definition with something along the lines of "The FAA are Wrong" is pretty unhelpful.
What do other contributors think?
n.b. It appears that three of the anonymous contributors have only made changes to this article, and a couple of other articles.
OrangUtanUK 14:46, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Radical Changes

message: Sorry, guys, Graeme and Biblbroks both got in while I was doing a large edit.
I hope my edit is agreeable to you, but if I have missed some bits out please yell so I know what to put back in. Not that I regard myself as the owner of the page or anything, just I feel I ought to correct any damage I've done. Sorry again.
OrangUtanUK 17:07, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No problem. I only made a little reformulation of two sentences. Your edit is a major improvement to that what I have tried to clarify. Biblbroks 18:30, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Edit Conflict

message: I'm not convinced about the changes to the structure of the article - all due respect to GraemeLeggett. We now have basically one long article with no subsections. I'd like to propose that we subdivide it in some form: perhaps --
* Basic Description
* History
* Current Development
OrangUtanUK 10:21, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Valid point, I was able to start the rearrangement but not finish. My thinking was 
#Intro paragraph to explain what a gyrodyne and a heliplane are
#History - which would be subdivided into Bennett, the 1950/1960s efforts and then current development
#Examples as a separate list for those who read the article but don't veer off part way through
#links/see also as expected.
GraemeLeggett 10:48, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  structural changes 

message: Hi all; I propose to go ahead and do the suggested merger, during the first weekend of November, unless anyone objects?
OrangUtanUK 14:41, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  merge in from [[Gyrodyne_Trademark]] 

message: Someone, apparently with some useful inside knowledge, keeps making changes to the article. They appear to have an agenda against "gyrodyne" in its modern usage, and often replace established text with strongly opinionated material. Frequently the material is misplaced or duplicated. This has been going on for some time now, and always such changes are made by an anonymous contributor, in clusters of 5 or more changes at a time. We set up the Gyrodyne_Trademark article as a playpen for this user, but they've come back to us.
I relish the opportunity to learn from all input, but it seems to me that the proper way to proceed would be to note that the modern usage exists, and to respect and build upon the effort of other contributors. Erroneous material could be placed in its correct context, and accompanied with a balanced discussion of the merits of each viewpoint. I hope other contributors agree.
Since the contributor in question is always anonymous, we are denied the opportunity of confronting them about their lack of etiquette, or simple poor academic practice. I would like to propose that if this continues, we should apply to have the page protected so that it can only be changed by logged-in users. I think this capability exists.
What do other contributors think? OrangUtanUK 15:12, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, based on the contents of the page, I am pretty confused as to what a gyrodyne is compared to a compound gyroplane or a compound helicopter and even a compound gyrodyne. Strictly speaking, the patent definition of Bennett wasn't that difficult to gather, and neither is the FAA's definition. What messes the conversation up is all the compound definitions that attempt to clarify but only muddy the water. --Born2flie 04:10, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  anonymous changes 

message: :The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 
Gyrodynes and Heliplanes → Gyrodyne — Per the naming convention criteria for simplicity, being precise and preference for the singular. Born2flie 16:38, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Add  # Support  or  # Oppose  on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.  Please remember that this is not a vote; comments must include reasons to carry weight.
*  Support  - WP:NC prefers singular instances, which is why the Helicopter, Autogyro, and Rotorcraft articles are all singularly titled. Heliplane was previously only used for Air & Space Manufacturing's marketing for the 18A autogyro, and now solely used in reference to DARPA's research project. It should be included within the Gyrodyne article and Heliplane should redirect to the Gyrodyne article or to a specific article for the DARPA research project. --Born2flie 16:44, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

text: The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal.  Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
This article has been renamed  as the result of a move request. --Stemonitis 16:39, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 

message: :Add  # Support  or  # Oppose  on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.  Please remember that this is not a vote; comments must include reasons to carry weight.
*  Support  - WP:NC prefers singular instances, which is why the Helicopter, Autogyro, and Rotorcraft articles are all singularly titled. Heliplane was previously only used for Air & Space Manufacturing's marketing for the 18A autogyro, and now solely used in reference to DARPA's research project. It should be included within the Gyrodyne article and Heliplane should redirect to the Gyrodyne article or to a specific article for the DARPA research project. --Born2flie 16:44, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal.  Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.</div>
This article has been renamed  as the result of a move request. --Stemonitis 16:39, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: The image :Image:Fairey Rotodyne.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --03:01, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:Fairey Rotodyne.jpg

message: Two editors continue to insert this information. Both usernames indicate a direct connection. This is contrary to the behavioral guideline dealing with conflict of interest. The link included to the website is directly described under the guideline for external links as what not to link due to the self-promotion of the user's website. Even if the user's intent isn't to promote his product/design, the appearance is that is exactly the purpose when the user continually adds it back in after the conflict of interest has been pointed out. I assume the users are actually one user, and recommend that they join the discussion here to explain how their participation does not constitute a conflict of interest. 
I will also lodge a further objection to the way the information is presented, as if the concept/design has progressed beyond a radio-controlled model. Mr. Challis' website mentions a UAV capable of autonomous takeoff and landing, but that isn't demonstrated or displayed on the website. The other designs mentioned in the Gyrodyne article are either previous aircraft prototypes or current proposed full-size prototypes. While Mr. Challis may be hopeful that his design will be considered for production, he Mr. Challis has not met the verifiability and reliable source guidelines necessary for self-published sources. --Born2flie (talk) 00:53, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Challis-heliplane 

message: Substituted at 01:01, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Gyrodyne. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060927042104/http://www.vtol.org/pdf/summer06robb.pdf to http://www.vtol.org/pdf/summer06robb.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:29, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Gyrodyne. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141009164412/http://www.darpa.mil/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=1631 to http://www.darpa.mil/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=1631
*Added  tag to http://trade.mar.cx/US71571611
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051231140840/http://www.enae.umd.edu/AGRC/Aero/Leishman_giro_paper.pdf to http://www.enae.umd.edu/AGRC/Aero/Leishman_giro_paper.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070303111734/http://vstol.org/wheel/ to http://vstol.org/wheel/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060619133449/http://gyropilot.co.uk/downloads/Rotodyne%202%20RTF%20Mod.pdf to http://www.gyropilot.co.uk/downloads/Rotodyne%202%20RTF%20Mod.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060718115428/http://www.cartercopters.com/heliplane_overview.html to http://www.cartercopters.com/heliplane_overview.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060128064102/http://www.aero51.plus.com/html/exhibits/gyrodyne.htm to http://www.aero51.plus.com/html/exhibits/gyrodyne.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Gyrodyne. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070105103132/http://www.groenbros.com/gyrodyne_tech.php to http://www.groenbros.com/gyrodyne_tech.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:37, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The introduction states that the  gyrodyne is an intermediate rotorcraft without defining what it is intermediate to.  It is simply assumed the general reader will know.  If one reads the patent quote in the History subsection in the article from where this expression was drawn, it is clear that the gyrodyne was envisioned as an intermediate rotorcraft type between the helicopter and autogyro types (and not between the helicopter and fixed wing aircraft). Here's that patent quote:
::" a rotary wing aircraft intermediate in type, hereinafter referred to as "gyrodyne", between a rotaplane (with the rotor free for autorotation and an upward total axial flow through the rotor disc), on the one hand, and a pure helicopter (with the rotor driven, and a downward total axial flow through the rotor disc), on the other hand, that is with a mean axial flow through the rotor disc substantially zero at high forward speed "
Note where it says " between a rotaplane (with the rotor free for autorotation  and an upward total axial flow through the rotor disc) is an exact technical description of an autogyro and therefore "rotaplane" is clearly a synonym here for "autogyro".  The sentence in the second pararaph of the introduction should be modified to state unambigiously: "The gyrodyne was envisioned as an intermediate type of rotorcraft between the helicopter and the autogyro:" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.166.15.95 (talk) 20:43, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Intermediate rotorcraft type to what?