Category talk:Aircraft stubs

This category is maintained by WikiProject Stub sorting, an attempt to bring some sort of order to Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can choose to improve/expand the articles containing this stub notice, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Stub sortingWikipedia:WikiProject Stub sortingTemplate:WikiProject Stub sortingStub sorting articles

Aviation: Aircraft

	Aviation portal This category is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles
	This category is supported by the aircraft project.

Untitled

There are a lot of items here, maybe we should put in more sub-categories - eg. country of origin, era, engine type, etc. --GW_Simulations 10:06, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, prehaps we could set it up something like this: Pre-WWI, WWI, Interwar period, WWII, something about the 50's, and 60's, the Vietnam war or the 70's/80's, and 90's-today. Opinions? --Change1211

Companies for modern aircraft, and decades for older aircraft. Somewhere along that. -- WB 07:15, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well there are a great number of companies now and chances are we would have a bunch of subs for just one page, I think that time periods would be the best way to go. Change1211 01:33, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- So something like "This is a 80's aircraft stub. Help us by expanding it." Kind of thing. OK then. -- WB 07:47, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - I quite like that idea, sort them by decade.--GW_Simulations 19:02, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - That does seem like the way to go, would it just be the three/two of us doing it? I'll get started either way --Change1211
  - OK, I'm making a template called Aero-year-stub that takes one parameter of the time. So it may look like {{Aero-year-stub|1950}} and it will display This 1950s aircraft- or aerospace-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. Everyone fine with that? -- WB 00:30, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - That does sound good, would you like to create one for each decade? We'll just do 2000-now for that one. Change1211 00:33, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - It creates the stub type by itself. It's done here. -- WB 00:37, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      - Outstanding, WB and I have been working on them, we've gotten through A already, it's looking good. Change1211 00:03, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

After looking over this bunch of pages it seems like there are hundreds of pages that shouldn't even be in here at all. This is an aircraft section, not airshows and airports/companies, any ideas what we should do about this?

We'll make a separate stub type for those as well. But in the mean time, we'll only stub sort the aircraft ones. Nearly one thousand page to go through. We are the only ones. -- WB 06:14, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- That'd be the existing type {{Aviation-stub}}/Category:Aviation stubs, surely. I'm not sure that parameterised templates are necessarily regarded as a wildly good idea, and in any event, please see WP:WSS/P, where schemes for such splits are customarily discussed: indeed, there's still one proposed from several months ago. Alai 06:45, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Hmm. Nobody has come up with anything for over a month, starting with this now is rather a better idea than to wait till even more things get piled up in there. I realize it's not the most popular idea, but I think it makes a job of editors a lot easier since we only have to change a few numbers and continuously editting without typing 1960-1969 every time. That was what I was thinking when I made that. -- WB 06:54, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - I'd at least moot the idea there: better that than to sort 100s of articles, and then have them all unsorted by 'bot. It's not clear that the template is any easier to use: {{aero-60s-stub}} would be shorter, and a bit more standard. As it stands, it requires additional "how-to" (which doesn't exist on the corresponding category pages, btw). Alai 07:19, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      - Very true. But that would mean a creation of at least 10 templates. I think I can work that out. -- WB 20:13, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A general category could be useful. Also, maybe someone could program a bot to help us. --GW_Simulations 12:59, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Also, maybe categories for engines, accidents, etc. --GW_Simulations 13:07, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yeah. All I gotta say, it's really crowded right now. Should I stop using the current one for now then? -- WB 20:13, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - Well I've been putting all the non-aircraft pages in the aviation section itself for further sorting after we've gotten rid of the mass of aircraft pages. Change1211 01:32, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - Alright, news. The A section is finished and gone. We're making progress folks! Change1211 02:15, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stub-sorting by year is a great idea. Anything to shrink the list down into more manageable chunks. - Emt147 ^Burninate! 07:27, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- This category is now gone and has been sorted into the diffrent subcategories Change1211 21:29, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Well done & Thank you to all those who have worked on this. --GW_Simulations 20:25, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Now a question, when did the WikiProject: Stub sorting group start helping out in this section? Change1211 01:30, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aircraft component stubs

Shouldn't the category Aircraft component stubs be a subcategory of this? The tag template for that is {{Component-aircraft-stub}}. FerralMoonrender (MyTalk • MyContribs • EmailMe) 00:37, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]