Talk:Imperial Airways

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

Air Mail section[edit]

I added some much needed citations yet there is plenty of statements I can't find citations for. Someone with more knowledge and resources will need to finish that section out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrianFrench1995 (talkcontribs) 00:34, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Speedbird logo.gif[edit]

Image:Speedbird logo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:30, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The list has little potential of expansion and currently sits unreferenced with no substantial information. I propose a merge into a section of this article. Airplaneman 04:14, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support, unless there were images available for all types, it'd be better served as part of the article. - The Bushranger (talk) 05:12, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support, because it doesn't make sense that the list of an airline's fleet is in a seperate article from the article for the airline. This article isn't that long, and it wouldn't hurt to add some extra info to this article. Compdude123 (talk) 20:42, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support there's insufficient detail here to overwhelm the other article, and the others not oversize. GraemeLeggett (talk) 22:20, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose comments by nominator have been addressed, little potential of expansion - not true as it has been expanded, and currently sits unreferenced - now referenced, with no substantial information - information added. Still needs more work but has enough to stand alone in my opinion. MilborneOne (talk) 14:34, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The original nominators concerns have been addressed in part, but I'm yet to be convinced it needs to be a standalone article. GraemeLeggett (talk) 15:37, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - the addition of the list to the airline article would unbalance the latter. List needs expansion particularly in relation to retirement dates. These should not be too hard to source. Mjroots (talk) 10:35, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - IMHO there's an evident increasing interest in operators' fleets, both by aircraft type and individual aircraft, in both current and historical groupings. Perhaps we just need thresholds for numbers of types, and numbers of individual aircraft, for candidacy for separate articles? PeterWD (talk) 11:27, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Source[edit]

History of Imperial Airways, Flight, 16 April 1954 (I'm busy elsewhere atm, feel free to use) Mjroots (talk) 21:10, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Imperial Airways. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:50, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]