User talk:NAZAR HAYAT KHAN

I'd like to urge you to not continue with Civil_aviation/Personnel_Licensing/. You should read WP:NOT, especially the part about Wikipedia not being an indesriminant collection of information. I'm not so sure 17 pages detailing licensing requirements in civil aviation would be that useful to wikipedia. See you're at a catch-22 potentially. If you copy the information out of detailed handbooks, that's copyright infringement if its not the government. If you interpret how the licensing requirements yourself, that's a heafty bit of original research, which isn't allowed on wikipedia. Interpreting itself could alternative also not fall in line with the guidelines for articles on wikipedia. However, if you plan on copying it out of a public government document, it would be better suited for Wikisource. Its another wiki project that accepts source texts, which could then be linked from Civil aviation to it. I just don't want to see you create 17 complex pages of text that might not good for wikipedia. Kevin_b_er 09:12, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Kevin

I am new to Wiki. Ok. I get your point. I have been in aviation for the last 40 years. Fighter Pilot. Air Line Pilot. CAA regulatory official in licensing and now in an ICAO regional office as Licensing Expert.

I will cut it down to one page of giving a summery of the process of Personnel Licensing in Civil Aviation. This is all my own experience & work. No copy-pasting from documents. In fact, over the years, I have developed a comprehensive requirements set - generic in nature but conforming to the ICAO's SARPs.

I expect the others will write on Flight Operations, Airworthiness, Aerodromes etc. This will give a good picture, not a detailed one, but reasonable for a layman. thanks

--NHK 11:09, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Kevin

On a second thought, I think what I have already contributed is sufficient for the time being. it was almost a blank page when I ventured in.

this Subject `Civil aviation' requires to be developed wholesomely. May I suggest that you add some additional Stubs under this topic for it to get developed in all its areas:

Randomly, I could say History, Aviation technology, Flight safety, Ground safety, regulatory requirements (Personnel Licensing, commercial Operations, Aerodrome, Air Traffic Services, Aviation medicine, aircraft accident investigations etc), leasing of Aircraft, Aviation economics, Aircraft Manufactures,Commercial operators, private operation, aerial work, etc.

--202.124.190.204 12:58, 10 June 2006 (UTC)