Template talk:Aviation accidents and incidents in 2011

Highly unusual formatting practices at this template
I cannot understand why this template has to be so different from all the rest in terms of its use of so many different fonts, font sizes, italicisation etc... I have just regularised this inconsistent and irregular formatting in this template down to one standard unitalicised typeface. -- Ohconfucius ¡digame! 03:12, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Read the notes at the bottom of the template and it will all become clear to you.... YSSYguy (talk) 07:24, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

RFC: Aviation accidents and incidents template change
Hi, I'd like to propose a change to the Aviation accidents and incidents template. The purpose of the change is a) to improve the readability of the respective yearly Aviation accidents and incidents pages and b) to simplify the underlying page code. Currently it is difficult to identify accidents that had 50 or more fatalities or the most deadly accident, as, under the current scheme, they don't really stand out from "regular" accidents.

I propose to change the template as follows:
 * 1) Change incidents resulting in at least 50 deaths to be shown in bold, instead of italics.
 * 2) Change the deadliest incident for the year to be shown in bold italic, instead of bold smallcaps . Contrary to bold smallcaps, bold italic does not require any custom html code thus simplifying the page code. C1010 (talk) 04:35, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Thoughts? Thanks


 * These templates came into being in mid-2009; please see Template talk:Aviation accidents and incidents in 2009 and Template talk:Aviation accidents and incidents for previous discussions regarding formatting. As the discussion doesn't just affect this particular template maybe it would be better to continue this discussion at the latter. YSSYguy (talk) 03:50, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, that looks like a logical place for such discussion. Please see new and improved RFC: Aviation accidents and incidents template change. C1010 (talk) 05:34, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I support the change
This poll is now closed. Please see the new and improved RFC: Aviation accidents and incidents template change for further discussion. C1010 (talk) 05:34, 1 August 2011 (UTC)


 * 1) I support the change. C1010 (talk) 04:24, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) Support This proposal would bring it inline with the other templates of this type.--Adam in MO Talk 14:59, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) It improves readability and is more conventional. Seriously, what other template uses smallcaps like this template does? (For what it's worth, you shouldn't even need an RFC to do this; just try it out and then hold the discussion if someone reverts.) hare j 16:19, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) Support the change per above and also agree that really an RFC isn't needed — Preceding signed comment added by Cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 02:29, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not supporting or rejecting anything but just wish to comment that the change has been reverted already and the RFC is not a superfluous process; I would also like to ask which other templates would the change bring these into line with? There is one of these templates covering each year, and AFAIK (I haven't looked at every single one) they are all formatted the same way. YSSYguy (talk) 05:28, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Nothing has been done yet, so there's nothing to revert. The change, as I see it, would imply changing the template itself and the respective yearly pages, that is, quite a number of pages will have to be changed. Hence the RFC, as I wanted to be sure the change is well supported before embarking on it. C1010 (talk) 13:11, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Support Yes, better to not need special code to do the formatting. -Fnlayson (talk) 02:24, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Show/Hide
How do you get this to default to collapsed display ? -- John (Daytona2 &middot; &#32; Talk &middot; &#32; Contribs) 16:18, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Domodedovo International Airport bombing
Its been decided after some talk, that this and other airport bombings or massacres are not to be put in aviation accident templates or categorized as a aviation accident or incident. If you disagree, don't revert, but instead come over to this discussion and we'll listen to your opinion....William 19:54, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

No fatalities
May I recommend that another font choice or symbol be used for aviation incidents with 0 fatalities? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.146.160.31 (talk) 04:18, 10 January 2013 (UTC)