Talk:Aeroplane

Text and/or other creative content from Fixed-wing aircraft was copied or moved into Aeroplane with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Article title

I bet Aeroplane is British and Airplane is an American English, so I moved the page to Airplane. -- Taku 22:10 Jan 6, 2003 (UTC)

Yes, but don't use cut&paste to move page contents. And either British or US english is ok on wikiepdia -- Tarquin

Quote from the history:

M 09:44 Sep 28, 2002 . . Mintguy (Only americans call it an airplane)

But as the title, I heard we should stick to American usage. Isn't it? Oh, because there exists already airplane article, so I couldn't use Move the page. Is there any way to move the page in such a case without cut&paste? -- Taku 22:15 Jan 6, 2003 (UTC)

Not necessarily. And if it's only Usians who use "airplane", then they are greatly outnumbered by other English speakers. If the destination page exists, you need to ask an admin to delete it -- Tarquin 22:17 Jan 6, 2003 (UTC)

What's more, ALL direct continuity to other dialects comes from British English, e.g. here in Australia. Americanisms have to make a jump to get into other cultures, which might not have any continuity with English of either sort in the first place. So if in doubt, use "aeroplane". See, for instance, a discussion of this point in "Reach for the Sky", a biography of the RAF pilot Douglas Bader, written by the Australian Paul Brickhill. PML.

Wikipedia has no preference for which side of the pond your spelling is on, neither for content nor titles. Gratuitously respelling existing text from one to the other is frowned upon (though it's considered good form to try to stay consistent within any given article). --Brion 22:20 Jan 6, 2003 (UTC)

That's more than just spelling though - it's a different word, though (so far, until the dialects change further) referring to the same thing. PML.

"Airplane" certainly grates on me, just as I imagine that "aeroplane" grates on American English speakers. In nearly all contexts, however, the more general term "aircraft" can be substituted for either word without offending anyone. (The meaning is not precisely the same - an "airplane/aeroplane" is always an "aircraft", but not all aircraft are aeroplanes/airplanes.) The main article is at present under "aircraft", and that is entirely appropriate. Is there anything here, under aeroplane/airplane that could not be more usefully incorporated into the main article, so that both "aeroplane" and airplane could be redirected to it? Tannin

I agree. Both the "right" and "wrong" spellings of this page should redirect to aircraft. Any content in aeroplane should be merged into the larger article. --mav 07:50 Jan 7, 2003 (UTC)

Article reconfiguration

Well, I decided to be WP:BOLD and implement what I saw as the best interests of the encyclopedia and its readers, and what was largely supported by the germane comments to my poorly-framed question just above. In a nutshell, I moved much of the material formerly at Fixed-wing aircraft to this page, and rewrote that article as a summary article after the fashion of its cousin Rotary-wing aircraft.

This benefits the readers because now we actually have an article about planes, just as we do about helicopters, gliders, and kites. We also have a concise summary article about fixed-wing craft, the same way we do about rotary-wing craft.

As for the title, I picked "Aeroplane" because from what I can tell, that was the original title of the article oh so many years ago. I think we're all mature enough to handle an article at a title we're unfamiliar with. Please see Color, Aluminium, and Maize. I think even those who would prefer "Airplane" agree that "Aeroplane" is better - and more accurate - than "fixed-wing aircraft". Because that's really the issue - while all planes are fixed-wing aircraft, not all fixed-wing aircraft are planes. The whole purpose of an encyclopedia is to provide accurate, non-misleading information. Now we do. I obviously expect this to be controversial. But I also firmly believe that this is the will of the community, and that we now have a better encyclopedia. Dohn joe (talk) 01:09, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Airplane which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 11:35, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]