User talk:BC1278/sandbox/Aircraft Blue Book

There are a number of factual mistakes in this article that I propose correcting. I'd also like to add some small updates. I am an experienced Wikipedia editor but have a WP:COI here as a paid consultant for VREF Publishing Inc., which is why I offer these edits as proposals for review, instead of direct edits. I always try to abide by the five pillars but to the extent you think I have fallen short, please let me know and I will address any issue as best I can.

In the section "Aircraft Value Reference":

1. Replace: "Aircraft Value Analysis Company" with "Vref Publishing"


 * Why?: The name of the company that owns Vref is incorrectly identified as Aircraft Value Analysis Company. The name of the current owner can be found on D&B Hoovers, (a Dun and Bradstreet company information directory. Hoovers and D&B are among the most reliable independent source of company data. I've also sourced to the company website to show the information is current. (See bottom of the Privacy Policy page for the company name.)

2. Replace: "is published twice a year" with "is published quarterly"


 * Why?: The cited source just has this wrong. It's always been published quarterly, going back 25+ years to the present. I have provided an independent source and the company website to show it's current information.

3. Insert: after "is published quarterly":


 * "and, since 2007, as an online service for aircraft market value data"


 * Why?: The product of this company is now also an online service, updated on a regular basis, not just in their quarterly print publication. Readers will be better served with the more current information. I have cited to an independent reliable source and also to the company website, so show it's current.

4. Insert: after "financial institutions":

", manufacturers, aircraft operators and suppliers"


 * Why?: the incomplete list of users makes it seem like the publication is exclusively for brokers and financial institutions, which is incorrect and misleading for the reader when it's considered in the context of the services of the other bluebook providers described here. Unfortunately, I could only find the company website as a source. While not ideal, for routine information, requiring no analysis, primary sources can be used with caution. WP:Primary