Jump to content

Talk:Lists of World War II flying aces

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Article is hard to use without list

[edit]

This page used to be a great resource and is now much harder to use. I'd like to propose bringing back the list which, though long, was still much more usable than the current version - especially for cross country comparisons. HugeUranium (talk) 16:18, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Please bring it back. 78.80.115.226 (talk) 06:33, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Restored the long-standing, sourced list. Can't conceive a good reason to remove it. This is a list - it's going to be long. And one can easily have the template list the people by country or any other criterion. -- Director (talk) 12:38, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The breakdown of this list into different sections was discussed at Talk:List of World War II flying aces/Archive_1#Size: Should this list be all inclusive?. I will reinstate to the agreed format since the size of the article is not manageable. Obviously, if the consensus has changed again we can always fall back. See also WP:AS and WP:SPLITLIST. Cheers MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:42, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously it would be ideal to have the list in its entirety but being so large, but also incomplete, I found it was very hard to edit and maintain. It was on this basis I supported the breakdown of the list into more manageable sections to facilitate ease of editing. It seems to me that the majority, if not all, of the complaints are actually from IPs/editors who weren't involved in the maintenance of the original list. I note that the new list arrangement mimics the approach taken for the lists for the WWI aces, has there been any complaints about those? Zawed (talk) 09:52, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The WWI lists in parts is already a featured list, the breakdown of the list was discussed during the featured list review, see Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of World War I aces credited with more than 20 victories/archive1. Cheers MisterBee1966 (talk) 19:18, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think a better balance needs to be struck between including all aces and page usability. The page is called "List of World War II flying aces" but in its current form the title should be changed to "List of lists of.." as the page does not actually contain a list. This is confusing. I had this page bookmarked as a reference for a research project and it's missing the information I cited.
I propose keeping the current list of lists, but including a subset of the original list on the page. Perhaps aces with more than 20 kills and at least from from every country. HugeUranium (talk) 07:03, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that the current format is hard to use, maybe even completely useless. Here's a specific example of a major shortcoming:
Let's suppose somebody wants to find out who the highest-scoring RAF ace was. That person is Marmaduke Pattle, but with the current format, there's no realistic chance to learn that: Pattle does not even appear on the UK aces sublist, because he was born in South Africa (even though he very specifically flew with the RAF, and NOT with the South African Air Force). The current arrangement is not only hard to use, it's actively misleading for people who want to learn new things they don't already know.
Or, for another example, let's say somebody wants to know who the five top-ranking German aces were. Well, you can't do it. The German aces subpage has TWENTY-FIVE separate sub-sublists, one for pilots whose name starts with "A", one for pilots whose name starts with "B", etc.. You would have to combine the top portions of each of the 25 lists with pen on paper just to get a list of top 5 German aces regardless of name starting letter. And the separate "pilots with over 100 claims" list doesn't help you, either, because it doesn't record actual kill numbers.
I'm not a Wikipedia editor, so I can't speak to editing principles. I am, however, a user who used to refer to this page semi-regularly due to my work, and I have to say that however cumbersome the old giant list was, at least it could be used to look up specific data. In contrast, this new format is completely worthless, and I earnestly hope the old format will be restored soon. 89.134.4.25 (talk) 18:53, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's been a long time since I last saw this list, and I would say that I'm dissapointed with the changes, although it's somewhat understandable.
I do agree with IP user 89.134.4.25's concerns though, the alphabet surname-based sublist are horrendous. Since we already subdivided this list based on their respective countries, I propose that we done away with the sublists and replaced them with sortable table, so if someone wishes to see who's got the most kills can straight up look for it.
The list could also be still based on the surname if someone want it, we could use the "surname, forename" format. Jauhsekali (talk) 07:06, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The list needs to be mindful of MOS:LONGSEQ. Consequently, we either find some way of limiting the number of entries, or breaking out the list into sublists. One all inclusive list in not manageable, especially when providing a citation for every entry, which is also mandated. MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:03, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The article is currently missing the forest for the trees as it is titled "List of World War II Flying Aces", but in fact contains no such list.
    There seems to be agreement that the old list was better and a lot more informative, and there's some need to watch its overall length and possibly have sublists according to some criteria.
    I don't want to step on anyone's toes, but this change has been discussed for more than a year and I think it's time to make it. HugeUranium (talk) 06:22, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Donner60, HugeUranium, and Zawed: Acknowledging the benefits of an all in list, I don't think that we have an agreement as to how to consolidate the entries under one inclusive list. If we merge all the entries in one list, without some kind of reduction, the article violates Wikipedia:Article size. If we limit the list to X entries per country, the list seems pointless. The list is probably already in violation of WP:NOTDIRECTORY, see also WP:LISTCRITERIA. The article in its current format mimics the layout of the Wikipedia:Featured lists List of World War I aces credited with 20 or more victories. Thanks MisterBee1966 (talk) 14:00, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@MisterBee1966, So from what I understand, the only reason we aren't returning to the old list is because of new Wikipedia policy against longer articles, because, I think everyone here is in agreement that the old list was far superior to what we have now.
If the old list needs to be shorter, then why don't we shorten it to the maximum length permitted by Wikipedia policy? KingMoogoe (talk) 10:12, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@KingMoogoe: exactly the point, we need a suggestion, and then agree on that suggestion, that adequately reduces the number of entries. Possible options could be
  • Top X aces per country
  • Only aces with more than Y claims
  • Only aces which are notable and have an article on Wikipedia.
Cheers MisterBee1966 (talk) 11:12, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Another guideline to consider is Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Tables#Size, cheers MisterBee1966 (talk) 13:03, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge of two lists

[edit]

I am proposing to merge the content of List of World War II flying aces by country into this article and then create a redirect. The content of the other list seems redundant and is not well maintained. Let's discuss. Cheers MisterBee1966 (talk) 06:09, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the proposal. A redirect should be enough to discontinue a redundant list without losing information or misleading any readers who might look for the alternate title for the article. Donner60 (talk) 07:07, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
With respect, I disagree with this proposal. See the above discussion about restoring the original global list of aces, which was far more usable and better matches the title of the article.
What if we took the country-specific lists currently on this article and had them replace the country-specific article?
That would leave this page as an overall list, that links to a list by country if people are interested in more detail. HugeUranium (talk) 06:30, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting a move (21 October 2024)

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. The earlier discussion about page structure appears to have stalled out, so it seems time to adjudicate this discussion. The article's structure remains as it was since the RM was first opened, so the nominator's argument remains applicable and the one concern raised seems to have been addressed; this leads me to find a consensus to move the article as proposed. If further discussion leads to a change in the article scope, editors should feel free to propose a new move at that time. (closed by non-admin page mover) ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 17:13, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of World War II flying aces → Lists of World War II flying aces – This article is now a list of lists. The title should reflect that. RedDeadGuy (talk) 05:46, 21 October 2024 (UTC)— Relisting. —usernamekiran (talk) 18:34, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lists_of_World_War_II_flying_aces&oldid=1256810360"