Jump to content

Talk:Consolidated Liberator I

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

New article

[edit]

New article on the Liberator B I have more pictures and information to add but looking always looking for more information - need pictures for AM912, AM913, AM914, AM915, AM917, AM918, AM919, AM921, AM925, AM926.

Also, was wondering if Liberator B I is too specific, was considering changing to just Liberator I (since article deal with all three versions (Liberator B I, Liberator GR I & Liberator C I) but unsure how to do a redirect. Davegnz 16:45, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

new color picture

[edit]

Not sure if Color picture is a Liberator I / B-24A series or a LB-30 / XB-24 (not of this AM910-AM929 series of aircraft).

Thinking this might be AM258 (?) which is not part of this article.

Need to add S/N if is actually a Liberator I

Davegnz 16:10, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article problems

[edit]

Wikipedia is NOT an indiscriminate collection of items of information. That something is 100% true does not automatically mean it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. This article needs to be cut back to the bare minimum of notable incidents and aircraft, with verifiable sources cited for each item, and merged into the B-24 Liberator article. I mean, do we really need to know that AM926 (ex 40-2365) flew into hill on ferry flight on 10 December 1941? That's not notable in any way, and there are many entries like that. While we appreciate the hard work and research, Wikipedia is not the place for information of this much detail.

As such, I have added tags to the article which denote the major problems:

  1. Notability: As stated above, many of the itmes are not notable. THis tag is not a PROD or AFD, but a precursor to them. I will only revert its deletion one more time, then I will seriously consider nominating this article for an AFD, as that cannot be deleted.
  2. Citations: Every item on each individual aircraft must have a citation denoting its sources. This is not a guideline, but Wiki policy, and as such is not optional, and must not be ignored.

Rather than simply slashing out every unsourced item in the article, or adding {{fact}} tags to each item (and making the article "ugly"!), I have added the tags. Please try to address the concerns I've expreassed here rather than removing the tag.

I do believe the article contains a lot of useful information (assuming it can be properly sourced), but that it would be best served merged into the main B-24 page. However, I am hesitant to recommend a merge at this time with the other problems the article has, and because someone might remove the merge tags :) . - BillCJ 18:30, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Read all of the article posted by BillCJ most of what he has written/edited are 1-2 paragraphs in length (and most with little references to support his alligations)- would Wickipedia be more efficient if all of these small chop articles be merged into one decent article under experimental helicopters
Good to know that this article "in-the-making" isn't due for the "chop". I think the various editors that have worked on this page have improved it and it is a good exercise for the original editor as he is learning the ropes. Bzuk 18:53. 9 May 2007 (UTC).
Tell them to mind their own business. That's the rouble wirh Wikipedia - 'areseholes everywhere'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.40.98.232 (talk) 20:50, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal

[edit]

See Talk:B-24 Liberator#Merge proposal for merge discussion, as these are to be on the page to be mreged TO per Wikipedia guidelines. - BillCJ 19:59, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Notability criteria moved from article notes

[edit]

Note: This article has more links (both internal Wikipedia links and Internat links) then a majority of the related internet subjects. Nobility for these aircraft come from: First Combat B-24's, 3 years early ASW experimentation. When these aircraft became retired, they transported high level dignatories between Canada & the UK, finally the last surviving B-24A / Liberator I is still flying with the CAF in Texas.

removed list of serials

[edit]

Way outside wiki guidelines - do not list or write about individual aircraft of their serials/registrations unless they are notable in their own right.Petebutt (talk) 07:20, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since someone restored the section there seems to be an opinion against that. I've started trimming down the text. Once the trivial detail has been dispatched, that which remains can probably be rearranged and precised into more general terms. GraemeLeggett (talk) 18:44, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Doesnt really need a list of serials and probably doesnt need a detailed history of every aircraft. Some of them dont appear to be particularly notable. Might need a bit more culling and tidy up to remove some of the enthusiast language and abbreviations. MilborneOne (talk) 19:32, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Liberator

[edit]

The RAF used the name Liberator for the early arrivals which included the LB-30MFs from the abortive French order, LB-30s and LB-30As, all of which had the initial short nose and reduced manually aimed armament.

Seven YB-24s, AM258 to AM263 were given the name Liberator, six being diverted immediately to the RAF Ferry Command, as un-armed transports for the North Atlantic run.


Liberator I

[edit]

B-24As from the initial USAAC order; (in fact the first 20 off the line); had the initial short nose and reduced armament.

thus AM910 to AM929 were Liberator Is

Liberator II

[edit]

Subsequent long-nose Liberators equivalent to the B-24C, which had powered turret armament, were named Liberator II

THUS AL503 to AL667 were Liberator IIs regardless of Mark no.

Some later Liberator deliveries only used the roamn numerals, such as the Liberator VII transports, (equivalent to the C-87).

Hoping I am making the muddy waters a little clearer.--Petebutt (talk) 10:04, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's own article?

[edit]

Why on earth should this one variant of the Liberator have its very own page? That doesn't make sense. It should be part of the main page of the B-24. If nothing else, that is more likely to inform people about its service with the RAF, as most casual readers aren't aware of this, and most aren't likely to click on a link just to find out about something..45Colt 01:33, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Consolidated Liberator I. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:13, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Consolidated Liberator I. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:24, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Consolidated_Liberator_I&oldid=1201111149"