Talk:Utility helicopter

message: Please see User:Peter Horn/Sandbox.4#Navbox List of Utility helicopters to possibly replace Utility helicopter#List of utility helicopters with a Navbox. Peter Horn User talk 14:15, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: OK 
 Peter Horn User talk 14:19, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: This needs fixing, please help. Peter Horn User talk 14:27, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Partially fixed. Peter Horn User talk 14:37, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: We don't usually convert lists into nav boxes, mostly because there are probably 100 or more types of utility helicopters that could go in this box, making it unwieldy. - Ahunt (talk) 14:49, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Navbox 

message: Utility is an aircraft role, so I converted this list to the standard role format defined in the WP:AVILIST style guide. This format has a column for "Class", which is normally used to distinguish rotorcraft from jets, drones and the like. That usage is redundant here. Several options occur to me:
# Make the table a custom format and delete the Class column.
# Use the Class column for some helpful characteristic of utility helicopters. That might be something like light, medium and heavy, or something I have not thought of.
# Widen the scope of the article to all rotorcraft, as say Utility rotorcraft and use the Class to distinguish helicopters, autogyros, etc. However the term "Utility helicopter" is a lot more recognisable per WP:COMMONNAME.
This topic is to try and create a consensus for the best way ahead. Any ideas/comments? — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 14:08, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps use to indicate engines, like three-engined turobshaft helicopter, single engined piston etc. MilborneOne (talk) 14:26, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: To make the sorting meaningful we'd have to stick to one characteristic, either number or type of engine, and I'm not sure that "Class" would be the appropriate heading. I wondered about the rotor configuration, but almost all examples are conventional single-rotor. Light vs. medium is the only usefully sortable class criterion I could think of. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 13:18, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, do we have a re;liable source for the helicopter "weight" categories ? MilborneOne (talk) 16:24, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Presumably, as a lot of their article infoboxes say one or the other. I'd go with those for now. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 17:12, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table format and 'Class' 

message: Just got an edit reverted by you for using country banners in tables citing WP:MOSICON. It actually allows utilisation small flag icons for military equipment. Further, in case of this table, these flags are rather making navigation of the table easier than making it difficult. I would recommend to rethink over it. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 16:58, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: We have a longstanding consensus on WP:AIR to not put flags in infoboxes and tables because of the clutter it creates. The key guideline at WP:WORDPRECEDENCE is "Flag icons may be relevant in some subject areas, where the subject officially represents that country or nationality – such as military units or national sports teams." These are helicopters manufactured by companies for sale, they are not built to officially represent their countries. Also WP:FLAGCRUFT "Wikipedia is not a place for nationalistic pride. Flags are visually striking, and placing a national flag next to something can make its nationality or location seem to be of greater significance than other things". - Ahunt (talk) 17:15, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  My edit here had little to do with nationalism or decorating the article. Navigation of list is actually cumbersome. I do remove unnecesssary flags from Infoboxes everywhere on Wikipedia but keep them in tables for this reason. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 04:48, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: You are actually agreeing with the existing consensus and the MOS then they they don't belong here. Since we can't just ignore the consensus or the MOS perhaps the best compromise is just to remove the country column from the table, since it isn't needed anyway. It is supposed to be a list of helicopters not a list of countries. As it is it is too nationalistic anyway. - Ahunt (talk) 14:26, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Will do in a while. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 18:54, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  - Ahunt (talk) 19:21, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Country banners in table 

message: The list in the article is getting longer and longer and editors are adding many designs that were intended for other roles, like ASW, but may have been occasionally employed as utility helicopters. In most of these general role-type articles we normally do not have exhaustive lists of types, as in this case the list could run to hundreds of helicopters. In stead we usually just give a few examples, as in light aircraft. I propose that we change to a list of a few examples in this article. - Ahunt (talk) 14:26, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree (as this should be an overview not a list article). MilborneOne (talk) 17:19, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

text: Okay more than  a week has passed with no further discussion. I think we can close this as a WP:CONSENSUS and I will fix the article. - Ahunt (talk) 15:14, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Exhaustive list vs examples