Talk:Air show

Safety
Although "Safety at airshows" is good topic for this page (especially after the disaster in Ukraine), the current paragraph only gives some safety measures when attending one; hardly encyclopedia content in my view, especially the "shouting". I'll remove it if nobody object; perhaps also write a new paragraph, but I can't promise that. Jeronimo 14:11 Jul 28, 2002 (PDT)

Well, I at least think it is marginally important -- otherwise I would have deleted it along with the other advice (just look at what I deleted). But I have no strong feelings on this, so do what you think is best for the article. --mav

Well, you deleted a lot of "crap", so good work. I don't think it's real content, or will we put at the page for knive: "Watch out, knives are dangerous. You could really hurt you or somebody near you. Please take care when using a knife." I hope not... But yes, it's not really harmful. Jeronimo 14:32 Jul 28, 2002 (PDT)


 * LOL -- I needed a laugh. :P --mav


 * I've bitten the bullet and removed the entire Safety paragraph because it spoilt the quality of the entire article. Hope this doesn't cause too much annoyance to whoever wrote it - Adrian Pingstone 20:36, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Farnborough
Surely Farnborough Air Show isn't considered one of the "2 major" air shows? It's just a trade show, with a few token flying exhibits... Ojw 23:19, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Fly-in
There's a separate fly-in article. I think it should redirect here, but I'm not sure what to do with the two NZ airshows listed there, so I'll leave it up to someone else to redirect it. PeepP 11:40, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Pictures
Do we really need a picture of the Thunderbirds AND two of the Frecce Tricolori? I say we should go for diversity: One picture of an aerobatic act, one picture of a warbird (or, ideally, a warbird formation), one picture of a solo jet demo, one picture of a jet-team demo, one picture of a helicopter display, etc... rather than multiple pictures of any of these things. It might be a good idea to have more than one picture of the crowds or static displays at an airshow, as these pictures can do a good job of capturing the airshow experience from the point of view of the spectator, which is what most readers may be most interested in. Luckily, I am an airshow photographer, so I'll go find some decent pictures of all this (good enough for Wikipedia, but "bad" enough that I won't mind releasing them into the public domain... By "bad" I mean not sharp enough to make a sharp 8x10" print from it, but sharp enough that it looks sharp when displayed on a computer screen a few hundred pixels on a side). - Malfita —Preceding unsigned comment added by Malfita (talk • contribs) 04:22, September 9, 2006 (UTC)

"Air show"
Correct me if I am wrong, but "airshow" is actually two words "air show." Flyguywayout (talk) 02:41, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Airshow is one word and is widley used in that form by the airshow community  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.251.184.172 (talk) 18:12, 28 November 2008 (UTC)


 * As far as Google is concerned, usage appears to be about equal. Rklawton (talk) 18:31, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Major airshows section
This section is turning into a spam magnet, do we really need it. Its not as bad as the external links section used to be, but I find it really hard to belive all of these could be considered "major." I'd suggest either removing the section, proseifying it (I think the list form attracts more spam and cruft), and/or creating a definition of "major" to use in the section. Mr.Z-man 17:20, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Folks interested in air shows will likely be interested in major air shows. Let's just define "Major airshows" as the "top 5 by attendance" or perhaps "top 3 by attendance in each continent".  This would reduce spam by defining the list as finite and by measuring using objective numbers (reliable sources, etc).  Rklawton (talk) 18:33, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Or re-label the section "Notable air shows" or "Significant air shows" and only include shows that are truly significant in the history of air shows, much like was done in the Snowbirds article where only major/significant historical milestones are mentioned .- B C talk to me  23:07, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * This approach would be difficult to objectively measure. We'd end up wasting a lot of time arguing about whether or not an airshow was or was not notable - and it would allow the list here go grow without limit.  Rklawton (talk) 18:19, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

IMHO some of them are so well-known that they really must be mentioned in the article, so I will attempt some clean to prevent complete deletion. Cleanup will be done by the rule of thumb of removing all airshows which don't have their own WP article as of this date. Also, I will remove all claims marked as unsourced, and most of the details which are better placed in the respective airshows article. -- 790 ♫ 10:50, 12 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Dont have a problem with only airshows with articles but I have deleted the Sunderland International Airshow. Despite having an article is is not significant just one of many seaside airshows in the UK. MilborneOne (talk) 11:23, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

This show inspired John Moisant...
The line on the Grande Semaine de l'Aviation de la Champagne ends with the sentence: This show inspired John Moisant. What did it inspire him to do? Become an aviator? Start an air show? Fly a kite? What?

Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 01:23, 2 December 2009 (UTC)