Talk:Early Birds of Aviation

This article 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 article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

This article is supported by the aerospace biography project.

Icons[edit]

I restored the icons. The MoS guide cautions on overuse of icons and flags. It does not demand their removal. Every article on an olympic medal winner has a symbol for the medal. Every military person has a symbol of their medals.

Date[edit]

What is the significance of 17 December 1916? Emeraude 17:51, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On that date the US Army started training pilots in larger numbers for WWI. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 21:16, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Early Birds of Aviation. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111024112451/https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/administrators/fdupont.htm to http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/administrators/fdupont.htm

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 12:42, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Should we have so many redlinks in an article[edit]

I have doubts we can justify every creating an article on so many people, and also doubts that it makes sense to have so many redlinks. With the number of redlinks we have here I also have to wonder, have people made sure all the currently listed links actually go to the right article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:00, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's a page that doesn't know if it's an article or a list. If the list of members is noteworthy it should probably be spun off into its own page. Retswerb (talk) 02:57, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The opening and explanation is a mess[edit]

There are evidently 2 different organizations with this name. The first disolved, and then a later organization was formed using the same name. Part of me thinks we maybe should have seperate articles on the two different organizations. We should at a minimum not use the description of the current organization in 1 paragraphy, then give the history of the other, and then explain how the current organization came to be.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:02, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nationality[edit]

This appears to only have US members with the odd exception. I think this needs to be made clear upfraot if not in the title. I came here looking for all pioneers and this is not what I expected. 86.15.94.125 (talk) 16:09, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]