598:
508:
245:
363:
215:
480:
532:
542:
418:
394:
718:
Avionics section of this article lack sources. So why did my CORRECT edit get deleted, yet all the others with NO sources get accepted? That is totally illogical and utterly inconsistent. (3) If it was you who deleted my edit, why didn't you apologise and restore my edit that you incorrectly deleted?
716:
And a few questions
Fnlayson: (1) If a source is absolutely required, why does Knowledge let people submit an edit without a source? That makes absolutely no sense. It would be easy enough technologically speaking to require an editor to provide a source before allowing the edit to be submitted. And
782:
If an editor feels strongly enough that short descriptions are generally worse than no annotation at all they can start a community wide RfC explaining why annotated links should not be used for this purpose, as in almost all cases there has been no pushback at all, and there is currently only one
778:
If any given short description can be improved, it should be improved, as that improves two articles at a minimum. If it cannot be improved, the annotated link template for that link should be either replaced by a better local annotation, ideally referenced to a reasonably reliable source, or an
689:
I just gave a source here. So why wasn't my edit restored? Bloody hell, what is wrong with established
Wikipedians? It's not hard to Google something to check if it's true or not. But no, instead someone just deletes the edit without checking if it's true or not. So much for
783:
place that agreement has been reached not to use them, which is in disambiguation pages, and most of those objections are no longer valid. Also disambiguation pages mostly have appropriate local annotations already, so there is no clear need. Cheers, · · ·
769:
There is nothing preventing any editor from replacing a sub-optimal annotation, or any other sub-optimal addition to an article with an optimal one (or even just a better sub-optimal one - better is better, removal of something which was better, is
719:(4) Why didn't you do a little Googling instead of deleting my edit? Or at the very least give me the benefit of the doubt? But nope, my edit got deleted. Are YOU here to build an encyclopedia? Seemingly not, if it was you who deleted my edit.
774:
Therefore reverting template generated annotated links without replacing them with something better or an adequate reason why the specific link should not be annotated, could be seen as tendentious at best, disruptive at worst.
333:
153:
487:
404:
766:
MoS recommends annotations to lists of links, for the benefit of the reader, including in 'See also sections'. Most short descriptions are better as annotations than no annotation.
147:
607:
518:
256:
206:
809:
633:
430:
734:
AN/ARC-182 VHF/UHF radio KY-58 VHF/UHF encryption ANDVT HF encryption AN/AAR-47 Missile
Approach Warning System AN/AYK-14 Mission Computers APQ-168 Multifunction radar
44:
824:
656:
819:
814:
655:
I added that the Osprey has DIRCM capability in the "Specifictions" section and this was deleted. Why? The MV-22B does have DIRCM capability according to:
79:
839:
717:
this would avoid this whole submission-deletion farce in the first place. (2) Apart from MY edit, ALL the other entries in the
Specifications: -->
844:
425:
399:
202:
198:
194:
190:
834:
759:
removed annotated links from the See also section, with the edit summary that they are not optimal. (This is opening the discussion in BRD.)
637:
434:
85:
829:
274:
168:
572:
135:
804:
738:
700:
659:
314:
262:
99:
30:
657:
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/32309/osprey-rear-ramps-and-carrier-aircraft-elevators-make-for-great-fast-rope-training
554:
513:
104:
20:
74:
129:
374:
65:
125:
763:
An edit does not have to be optimal, just better than what was there before, to justify it remaining in an article.
559:. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of
214:
185:
225:
641:
560:
175:
429:. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a
109:
24:
742:
704:
663:
787:
380:
244:
696:
141:
161:
55:
720:
678:
230:
70:
266:
51:
784:
227:
566:
547:
673:
No source was added IN the article to support that addition per WP:Cite and WP:Verify.
798:
674:
790:
746:
708:
682:
667:
645:
229:
779:
explanation provided why that specific link should not have an annotation at all.
531:
507:
737:
I'm not saying they're wrong, but what I AM saying is that sources are required.
756:
597:
537:
632:
Hull losses and fatalities need to be consistent between this article and
479:
691:
417:
393:
721:
https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Here_to_build_an_encyclopedia
356:
231:
15:
596:
478:
326:
307:
160:
461:
634:Accidents and incidents involving the V-22 Osprey
33:for general discussion of the article's subject.
272:If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
174:
8:
694:
692:https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Be_bold
628:Semi-protected edit request on 29 Aug 2023
502:
458:
388:
286:
239:
810:Engineering and technology good articles
553:This article is within the scope of the
423:This article is within the scope of the
257:Engineering and technology good articles
731:All the following enties lack sources:
504:
390:
571:. To use this banner, please see the
443:Knowledge:WikiProject Military history
433:. To use this banner, please see the
825:Military aviation task force articles
446:Template:WikiProject Military history
7:
362:
360:
820:GA-Class military aviation articles
752:Annotated links in See also section
379:It is of interest to the following
23:for discussing improvements to the
815:GA-Class military history articles
14:
265:. If you can improve it further,
540:
530:
506:
416:
392:
361:
243:
213:
45:Click here to start a new topic.
840:Rotorcraft task force articles
581:Knowledge:WikiProject Aviation
253:has been listed as one of the
1:
845:WikiProject Aviation articles
747:11:19, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
709:19:40, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
683:15:14, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
668:08:16, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
605:This article is supported by
584:Template:WikiProject Aviation
42:Put new text under old text.
835:GA-Class rotorcraft articles
488:Military aviation task force
426:Military history WikiProject
791:07:25, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
646:05:12, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
50:New to Knowledge? Welcome!
861:
830:GA-Class aviation articles
604:
525:
486:
457:
449:military history articles
411:
387:
347:
289:
285:
80:Be welcoming to newcomers
805:Knowledge good articles
462:Associated task forces:
334:WikiProject peer review
251:Bell Boeing V-22 Osprey
25:Bell Boeing V-22 Osprey
727:Entries lacking souces
608:the rotorcraft project
601:
483:
369:This article is rated
75:avoid personal attacks
600:
482:
263:good article criteria
207:Auto-archiving period
100:Neutral point of view
556:Aviation WikiProject
315:Good article nominee
105:No original research
602:
484:
431:list of open tasks
375:content assessment
290:Article milestones
86:dispute resolution
47:
711:
699:comment added by
623:
622:
619:
618:
615:
614:
587:aviation articles
573:full instructions
501:
500:
497:
496:
493:
492:
435:full instructions
355:
354:
343:
342:
281:
238:
237:
66:Assume good faith
43:
852:
589:
588:
585:
582:
579:
550:
545:
544:
543:
534:
527:
526:
521:
510:
503:
469:
459:
451:
450:
447:
444:
441:
440:Military history
420:
413:
412:
407:
400:Military history
396:
389:
372:
366:
365:
364:
357:
348:Current status:
329:
310:
287:
270:
247:
240:
232:
218:
217:
208:
179:
178:
164:
95:Article policies
16:
860:
859:
855:
854:
853:
851:
850:
849:
795:
794:
785:Peter Southwood
754:
729:
653:
638:139.218.233.166
630:
586:
583:
580:
577:
576:
548:Aviation portal
546:
541:
539:
516:
467:
448:
445:
442:
439:
438:
402:
373:on Knowledge's
370:
325:
306:
234:
233:
228:
205:
121:
116:
115:
114:
91:
61:
12:
11:
5:
858:
856:
848:
847:
842:
837:
832:
827:
822:
817:
812:
807:
797:
796:
772:
771:
767:
764:
753:
750:
728:
725:
724:
723:
713:
712:
686:
685:
652:
649:
629:
626:
621:
620:
617:
616:
613:
612:
603:
593:
592:
590:
552:
551:
535:
523:
522:
511:
499:
498:
495:
494:
491:
490:
485:
475:
474:
472:
470:
464:
463:
455:
454:
452:
421:
409:
408:
397:
385:
384:
378:
367:
353:
352:
345:
344:
341:
340:
337:
330:
322:
321:
318:
311:
303:
302:
299:
296:
292:
291:
283:
282:
248:
236:
235:
226:
224:
223:
220:
219:
181:
180:
118:
117:
113:
112:
107:
102:
93:
92:
90:
89:
82:
77:
68:
62:
60:
59:
48:
39:
38:
35:
34:
28:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
857:
846:
843:
841:
838:
836:
833:
831:
828:
826:
823:
821:
818:
816:
813:
811:
808:
806:
803:
802:
800:
793:
792:
788:
786:
780:
776:
768:
765:
762:
761:
760:
758:
751:
749:
748:
744:
740:
735:
732:
726:
722:
715:
714:
710:
706:
702:
698:
693:
688:
687:
684:
680:
676:
672:
671:
670:
669:
665:
661:
658:
650:
648:
647:
643:
639:
635:
627:
625:
610:
609:
599:
595:
594:
591:
574:
570:
569:
564:
563:
558:
557:
549:
538:
536:
533:
529:
528:
524:
520:
515:
512:
509:
505:
489:
481:
477:
476:
473:
471:
466:
465:
460:
456:
453:
436:
432:
428:
427:
422:
419:
415:
414:
410:
406:
401:
398:
395:
391:
386:
382:
376:
368:
359:
358:
351:
346:
338:
336:
335:
331:
328:
327:July 16, 2010
324:
323:
319:
317:
316:
312:
309:
308:June 22, 2010
305:
304:
300:
297:
294:
293:
288:
284:
279:
277:
276:
268:
264:
260:
259:
258:
252:
249:
246:
242:
241:
222:
221:
216:
212:
204:
200:
196:
192:
189:
187:
183:
182:
177:
173:
170:
167:
163:
159:
155:
152:
149:
146:
143:
140:
137:
134:
131:
127:
124:
123:Find sources:
120:
119:
111:
110:Verifiability
108:
106:
103:
101:
98:
97:
96:
87:
83:
81:
78:
76:
72:
69:
67:
64:
63:
57:
53:
52:Learn to edit
49:
46:
41:
40:
37:
36:
32:
26:
22:
18:
17:
781:
777:
773:
755:
736:
733:
730:
695:— Preceding
654:
631:
624:
606:
567:
561:
555:
424:
381:WikiProjects
350:Good article
349:
332:
313:
273:
271:
267:please do so
255:
254:
250:
210:
184:
171:
165:
157:
150:
144:
138:
132:
122:
94:
19:This is the
568:task forces
148:free images
31:not a forum
799:Categories
739:2.25.65.76
701:2.25.65.76
660:2.25.65.76
562:open tasks
519:Rotorcraft
261:under the
675:-Fnlayson
88:if needed
71:Be polite
21:talk page
697:unsigned
578:Aviation
514:Aviation
405:Aviation
371:GA-class
339:Reviewed
275:reassess
211:365 days
186:Archives
56:get help
29:This is
27:article.
770:worse.)
298:Process
154:WP refs
142:scholar
757:BilCat
377:scale.
320:Listed
301:Result
126:Google
651:DIRCM
169:JSTOR
130:books
84:Seek
743:talk
705:talk
679:talk
664:talk
642:talk
565:and
295:Date
162:FENS
136:news
73:and
176:TWL
801::
789::
745:)
707:)
681:)
666:)
644:)
636:.
517::
468:/
403::
278:it
269:.
209::
201:,
197:,
193:,
156:)
54:;
741:(
703:(
677:(
662:(
640:(
611:.
575:.
437:.
383::
280:.
203:4
199:3
195:2
191:1
188::
172:·
166:·
158:·
151:·
145:·
139:·
133:·
128:(
58:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
