Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/File:Airfield traffic pattern.svg

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Airfield traffic pattern.svg

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 21 Apr 2013 at 17:37:32 (UTC)

Airfield traffic pattern
Reason
The diagram is misleading, incomplete, and incorrect. Compare to http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/06/Airport_Traffic_Pattern_with_Upwind_Leg.svg which correctly places the upwind leg.
  • It is not among Wikipedia's best work. It is a diagram which is a poor example of the subject. Superior diagrams exist in the public domain.
  • It illustrates the subject in a controversial and complex yet incomplete way, leaving the viewer with questions about how a circuit is defined, entered, and exited.
  • It is not verifiable. It is contradicted by facts in the article and by references cited; it is not from a source noted for its accuracy.
  • It was created based on original research and subsequently modified pursuant to arguments on this nomination page. See Wikipedia:NOR#Original images.
Articles this image appears in
Airfield traffic pattern, Final approach (aviation), Non-towered airport.
Previous nomination/s
Nominator
75.210.97.82 (talk)
Left and right hand traffic patterns as depicted in the Pilot's Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge issued by the Federal Aviation Administration in the United States of America.
  • Comment. Don't know it it was the right thing to do (and shoot me if it wasn't) but I edited the source file on the Commons to change "Upwind" to "Departure" and tidied the 3D shadow effect a little. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 19:34, 7 April 2013 (UTC) [Updated] Happy to make any other changes needed, e.g. adding the upwind loop, if any get agreed here. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 19:39, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unsure Are we certain we're not just enforcing an American bias, by insisting on American terminology, or is upwind called departure worldwide? Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:10, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Please explain precisely how we are "enforcing an American bias" by delisting as a featured image an image which illustrates a uniquely American pattern using only American terminology? 75.210.240.193 (talk) 04:43, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • It would be slightly odd if the "departure leg" was referred to as "departure" when the aircraft flying it was not departing. Both terms are correct, depending on context; an aircraft taking off or making touch-and-goes would make "departure" correct, while in the latter case it could also be "upwind" - as it would be for an aircraft arriving and making a full pattern. - The Bushranger One ping only 22:44, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Final and Departure are in line with the runway. Upwind and Downwind are parallel to but offset from the runway. The Departure leg can be flown only by an aircraft on climb out. The Final Approach leg can be flown only by an aircraft intending to land (or to make a low pass over the runway). See [1] for a diagram. 75.208.82.237 (talk) 16:15, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've heard both depending on the activity of the aircraft. The terms crosswind, downwind, base, and final are in seemingly universal usage. The upwind/departure leg doesn't seem to have worldwide agreement. The European Aviation Safety Agency has a document that includes a diagram remarkably similar to the original image on which this SVG is based (page 33). In that document, it is referred to as upwind with no mention of departure. A document from the UK based flying school Purple Aviation has the leg labeled as both upwind and departure (page 2). The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (Australia) doesn't label the leg on anything I could find (page 11 for an example). The Civil Aviation Authority of New Zealand refers to it as the "climb out" and labels it as such on their diagrams (pages 5 and 6). --auburnpilot talk 22:53, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Australia's page 23 identifies the climb out as the Initial leg (which is the semantic mirror of Final). Curiously, the upwind leg is also shown, but it is not labeled. 75.208.220.22 (talk) 05:19, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Calling Departure by the name Upwind is wrong for the same reason that Final is not called Upwind: They are not the same place in the pattern. Yes, Departure is called Upwind by some non-professional pilots; but these same pilots use other incorrect terminology for other things, so that is no basis to mislabel a diagram. Yes, this could be US-centric terminology. So why not just include the official FAA version for what it is and the EASA version for what it is? There are other problems with this diagram being incomplete. Just changing one label does not correct the whole problem. With public domain versions available, I see no reason to reinvent a diagram. If another diagram is needed beyond the FAA and EASA versions, it should be a super-simplified version that omits all entries and exits from the pattern. The EASA document cited by AuburnPilot is not instructive; it does not appear to discuss the traffic pattern - rather it is a pictorial presentation of accident statistics (apparently created in conjunction with NASA).
  • Comment. The issue here is whether the image should be delisted from being a featured picture (not whether it should be edited or deleted). This picture is not among the best on Wikipedia. 75.210.56.4 (talk) 07:24, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Reason updated. --75.208.173.163 (talk) 22:52, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delist. Following initial criticisms I edited the image. That did not settle the matter. Until this is settled and the image conforms to the outcome, I think featuring it is a bad idea. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 09:37, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delisted --75.208.219.58 (talk) 20:49, 29 April 2013 (UTC) - Reverted - there is clearly an insufficient quorum for this action, and it certainly can't be judged by the nominator. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:47, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kept No consensus to delist. --Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:44, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's not how the rules work. Adam Cuerden (talk) 06:27, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates#Nominations_for_delisting: "For delisting, if an image is listed here for fourteen days with five or more reviewers supporting a delist or replace, and the consensus is in its favor, it will be delisted from Wikipedia:Featured pictures. Consensus is generally regarded to be a two-third majority in support, including the nominator. However, images are sometimes delisted despite having fewer than five in support of their removal, and there is currently no consensus on how best to handle delist closures. Note that anonymous votes are generally disregarded, as are opinions of sockpuppets. If necessary, decisions about close candidacies will be made on a case-by-case basis." This was not so clearly a delist as to merit an exception, and, while you are welcome to renominate after a decent amount of time, if you keep up this sort of behaviour, you're just going to drive everyone away from touching this, you know. Adam Cuerden (talk) 04:59, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Continuing discussion

[edit]

I have made further changes to the diagram since the above discussion, and have started a continued discussion on its Commons talk page. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 11:11, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/delist/File:Airfield_traffic_pattern.svg&oldid=1138148750"