User talk:OldAircraftInstructor

March 2021
Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to de Havilland Tiger Moth, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. BilCat (talk) 01:17, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

I am not sure how there could be a more reliable source than a flight instructor who owns, flies, and provides instruction to others in this type of aircraft. The prior source that was cited was incorrect. I know this because I fly the aircraft and know, from first hand experience, that the previously published information was incorrect.

So, what do I do?

OldAircraftInstructor (talk) 01:33, 27 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks for asking. All you can do is to find a higher quality, reliable source, and cite that, and your knowledge and background should help you to recognize a good source. The reason is that Wikipedia requires information to be verifiable and we aren't set up to verify your personal knowledge. Having reliable sources makes it verifiable. Obviously, that means some sources that get it wrong will slip in, but that's how it works. Please read Reliable sources for further explanation. BilCat (talk) 01:58, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

ARRGGH! This is nuts. There is no higher "reliable source" at this point in time than me because I am one of the few people in the world today, teaching people to fly this aircraft. I have articles published the, "The Moth", the publication from the UK that represents these aircraft. I suppose I could write a new article there and then reference it here. Regardless, that is the bottom line.

I repeat, this is nuts.

OldAircraftInstructor (talk) 02:23, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
 * You can't "cite yourself" - that's original research which is not allowed on Wikipedia.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   02:24, 27 March 2021 (UTC)


 * I understand your frustration. But by "higher quality source", I meant a better published source than the one cited in the article that you said is incorrect. BilCat (talk) 02:45, 27 March 2021 (UTC)