Portal talk:Aviation

message: I'm aware of touching a sensitive matter :)
The current approach of most people seems to be waiting for publication of the monthly official Order&Delivery data on the according website of the manufacturer (Airbus and Boeing). I absolutely understand why this is the most desired way. It avoids the mess usually created by occasional editors who quickly raise a number and don't bother to update tables and graphs too. Leaving an inconsistent article and pulling their numbers from shady sources. Often not even able to distinguish between an announcement and an order.
On the other hand I also understand people who wonder about the fact that well known orders are not incorporated into Wikipedia for weeks. Or when people do so and others revert their edits it's probably often rather demotivating to have editing work disregarded sometimes without any comment on the reasons. And a third point - it does lead to inconsistency when for example a first machine is delivered (like in the recent case of the A320neo) which is of cause mentioned in the article but not reflected by the numbers in the same article where the delivery counter is still at 0.
My suggestion is the following:
* Incorporate all new numbers which come from the manufacturer in press releases and the O&D.
* Do a full update from O&D when published.
* Mention this policy in the source of every article in question as a comment that people with good intentions won't get disappointed
Any thoughts on this? --Rabenkind (talk) 20:24, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Policy of updating order&delivery information of airplanes 

message: Portal:Aviation/News/Wikinews has been deactivated and will not be updated by bot. The source page specified in the configuration is not properly configured. Please see User:JJMC89 bot/tasks/5 for proper configuration. — JJMC89 (T·C) 10:43, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikinews 

message: Hi, I need help:
A nameless user always delete a map for the Prague airport, because of violation of guidlines that were supposedly discussed here, he mentioned. But I don't find anything like this here in the portal. What does he mean and what is the problem with the Map? </br>
Discussion: Prague Airport Talk.</br>
Thanks! CellarDoor85 (talk) 08:21, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: This is the talk page for the Portal.  Adding an image should not require a consensus, unless another image has to be removed to make room. Guidelines are at WP:AVIMOS and WP:WikiProject Aviation/Style guide/Layout (Airports).  Maybe ask at WP:WikiProject Airports's talk page. -Fnlayson (talk) 17:19, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Useless" Map 

message: Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals is back!
The project was rebooted and completely overhauled on April 17th, 2018.
Its goals are to revitalize the entire portal system, make building and maintaining portals easier, and design the portals of the future.
As of April 29th, membership is at 56 editors, and growing.
There are design initiatives for revitalizing the portals system as a whole, and for each component of portals.
Tools are provided for building and maintaining portals, including automated portals that update themselves in various ways.
And, if you are bored and would like something to occupy your mind, we have a wonderful task list.
From your friendly neighborhood Portals WikiProject.      — The Transhumanist    03:24, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Status report from the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals|Portals WikiProject]] 

message: I think that the disambiguation page Vought Corsair should be moved to Vought Corsair (disambiguation) and the title changed into a redirect to Vought F4U Corsair. Its page views have an overwhelming edge over the earlier aircraft. The only question is how often the LTV A-7 Corsair II, reaching a similar dimension of page views, is labelled "Vought Corsair" without additions. I think the redirect would still be the better solution. Opinions? --KnightMove (talk) 08:33, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Vought Corsair]]