Talk:List of large aircraft

Grammar in title?
Why does it say "List of large aircraft" instead of "List of large aircrafts"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.91.213.42 (talk) 09:50, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * "Aircrafts" is not part of the English language. The plural of "craft", meaning multiple vehicles, is "craft". &mdash; Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 13:35, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

c-17
list of large aircraft, its a large aircraft. not the largest of its time, doesnt matter. Jackson883941 (talk) 02:06, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose inclusion and establish a criteria for inclusion. I'm surprised a criteria for inclusion hasn't already been established in writing.  Since there is no clear definition of a "large aircraft", I propose that the current unwritten rule of record holders (current and former) be made more clear. -  ZLEA  T \ C 04:35, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Boeing C-17 Globemaster III
 * read the first line of this article... it has already been defined as a large aircraft, im simply updating the registrar.
 * also dont touch my talk page. Jackson883941 (talk) 16:41, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:OWNTALK and WP:NOBAN. From the latter, "editors should not make such requests lightly, especially concerning their talk pages, as doing so can impede the ordinary communication which is important for the improvement and smooth running of the project."  Your request that everyone must stay off your talk page without your permission is not a reasonable request and goes against the spirit of collaboration. -  ZLEA  T \ C 21:47, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * " users may freely remove comments from their own talk pages" please read WP:OWNTALK.
 * aswell as the unhappy camper section of my talk page... aswell read the first line of Boeing C-17 Globemaster III
 * this discussion is about the c-17, not my talk page. Jackson883941 (talk) 22:50, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Do you realize how ridiculously long this list would be if we included all large aircraft? We have to draw the line somewhere and establish a clear criteria for inclusion.  Aircraft which broke records for being large is a relatively easy criteria to maintain.  The C-17 has not broken any records for being large, so it would not fit in this criteria.  Lists don't have to be exhaustive, especially if its scope is very broad.
 * Also, please read WP:OWNTALK again. "Editors who refuse to use their talk page for these purposes are violating the spirit of the talk page guidelines, and are not acting collaboratively." -  ZLEA  T \ C 23:09, 9 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Oppose inclusion like ZLEA. I cleaned up the table 2 years ago using this unwritten rule of record holders on a timeline, I support clarifying it. (BTW, there is a clear definition of a large aircraft: the over 12500lb, FAR-25 certification rules. Listing them all would be useless)-- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marc Lacoste (talk • contribs) 09:17, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I was unaware of the FAR-25 definition, but another question is if it is internationally recognized. Do other countries have similar definitions.  Whatever the answer, I agree that we can't list them all. -  ZLEA  T \ C 21:37, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * indeed the EASA JAR definition is similar, and this is close to a worldwide definition in practice.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 22:27, 9 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Oppose inclusion - I agree that the criteria for inclusion should be clarified. It just wouldn't make sense to list every single large aircraft as it would make the list unnecessarily long. Michael60634 (talk) 08:25, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * What is the most useful list to offer? A simple chronological list of the largest as they get bigger? I believe that was what this list started out as, as a section within the article on large aircraft. This would dramatically shrink the size of the list and probably result in a re-merge back into the parent. If we wish to accept the scope creep, then we need a verifiable definition of a "large aircraft". Definitions by the FAA and EASA are available so we should, at least by default, run with those. If it ends up being a very long list, we might need to drop the table format and go for a bulleted list. So, lacking a lucky break, we have three options:
 * Revert to a chronological list of the largest built, and merge back into the parent article.
 * Extend the list as required by published criteria, and accept the consequences.
 * Mess around with woolly and unsupported definitions, and blindly hope to avoid editorial bitchfights.
 * &mdash; Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 13:52, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Title
Perhaps a slight change to "List of the largest aircraft" (akin to List of longest ships). Just a thought... - w o lf  09:28, 2 September 2023 (UTC)