This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
List of active United States naval aircraft article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
@
FOX 52:, not sure why you need to keep disrupting the article instead of using the talk page. In
your edit summary you mention: "
WP:IMGLOC doesn’t say anything about 4 squaring -
WP:BRD
"
The images disrupt the table, hence the reason I moved them. As for "4 squaring"... just below imgloc, mos:sandwich specifically mentions "As an alternative, consider using the {{multiple image}} template", which is what I did. It's not clear however, why you are trying to edit-war the that image arrangement out (along with specific images and the short description template).
As for "BRD", you
update sourcing 2022 - clean up", but no mention of images or their location.
Meanwhile, I have now moved the images down to a gallery instead, as they were still distupting the table after your last edit, and I have started this discussion, giving you the opportunity to explain your edits. - wolf 23:26, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
When I move images that disrupt a page (and I've moved many over the years), I often cite "imgloc", and I've never had an issue. But even still, if you were confused by the changes and/or summary the first time I made a change, all you had to do was leave a quick post here on the talk page to ask me about it and I would be happy to discuss it with you. The further disruption, including unexplained removal of images and the unrelated short description template was unnecessary. I'm not sure why you are so vehemently against the multiple image placement in the lead section (it works well on many other articles), but just the same, I have instead moved the images to a gallery, an arrangrment found on numerous articles. If you would care to provide some more clarification, that would be good, but if not, then I will trust the matter as now resolved. - wolf 06:54, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
You wrote: "On a smartphone, the only difference I see is in my layout is the images come through first (then the table), on your's the images come after the table.
", but that is not what I wrote. On my screen, the images are placed next to the table, with the table squished to the left, and lettering made even smaller, and the images to right, with a large block of whitespace below them. So, in actuality, the real question is why do you need a layout that suits you, but is compromised and disrupted for so many others, when there are two layout options that I have suggested, that are already used on numerous other articles, and do not cause any issues for anyone? I explained the problem with your edit, but you still have not explained the problem you had with the layout in my first edit that you repeatedly reverted (the version using the multi image template in the lead section), nor have you explained your issue with the second layout of my last edit, with the images placed in a gallery. So again, if you care to provide some clarification to help explain your edits, that would be helpful. If not, then as I said, I will take it that the issue is resolved. -
wolf 15:04, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
I edited it to reflect the accurate current multi-engine trainer and an approximation to the number of aircraft. 2600:1700:4AA1:D010:BDC6:1E7A:3637:36DA ( talk) 21:08, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
The United States Navy does not classify the Osprey as a helicopter and should be moved to either the transport section or under a unique tiltrotor section. V instead of H in both the tri-service designator and Squadron designator indentify the V-22 as a type of short/vertical takeoff fixed-wing aircraft. Benroethig ( talk) 13:05, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
List of active United States naval aircraft article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
@
FOX 52:, not sure why you need to keep disrupting the article instead of using the talk page. In
your edit summary you mention: "
WP:IMGLOC doesn’t say anything about 4 squaring -
WP:BRD
"
The images disrupt the table, hence the reason I moved them. As for "4 squaring"... just below imgloc, mos:sandwich specifically mentions "As an alternative, consider using the {{multiple image}} template", which is what I did. It's not clear however, why you are trying to edit-war the that image arrangement out (along with specific images and the short description template).
As for "BRD", you
update sourcing 2022 - clean up", but no mention of images or their location.
Meanwhile, I have now moved the images down to a gallery instead, as they were still distupting the table after your last edit, and I have started this discussion, giving you the opportunity to explain your edits. - wolf 23:26, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
When I move images that disrupt a page (and I've moved many over the years), I often cite "imgloc", and I've never had an issue. But even still, if you were confused by the changes and/or summary the first time I made a change, all you had to do was leave a quick post here on the talk page to ask me about it and I would be happy to discuss it with you. The further disruption, including unexplained removal of images and the unrelated short description template was unnecessary. I'm not sure why you are so vehemently against the multiple image placement in the lead section (it works well on many other articles), but just the same, I have instead moved the images to a gallery, an arrangrment found on numerous articles. If you would care to provide some more clarification, that would be good, but if not, then I will trust the matter as now resolved. - wolf 06:54, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
You wrote: "On a smartphone, the only difference I see is in my layout is the images come through first (then the table), on your's the images come after the table.
", but that is not what I wrote. On my screen, the images are placed next to the table, with the table squished to the left, and lettering made even smaller, and the images to right, with a large block of whitespace below them. So, in actuality, the real question is why do you need a layout that suits you, but is compromised and disrupted for so many others, when there are two layout options that I have suggested, that are already used on numerous other articles, and do not cause any issues for anyone? I explained the problem with your edit, but you still have not explained the problem you had with the layout in my first edit that you repeatedly reverted (the version using the multi image template in the lead section), nor have you explained your issue with the second layout of my last edit, with the images placed in a gallery. So again, if you care to provide some clarification to help explain your edits, that would be helpful. If not, then as I said, I will take it that the issue is resolved. -
wolf 15:04, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
I edited it to reflect the accurate current multi-engine trainer and an approximation to the number of aircraft. 2600:1700:4AA1:D010:BDC6:1E7A:3637:36DA ( talk) 21:08, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
The United States Navy does not classify the Osprey as a helicopter and should be moved to either the transport section or under a unique tiltrotor section. V instead of H in both the tri-service designator and Squadron designator indentify the V-22 as a type of short/vertical takeoff fixed-wing aircraft. Benroethig ( talk) 13:05, 27 February 2024 (UTC)