Template talk:aircraft

Not a context -- Liliana • 21:03, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Move or redirect to Template:aviation? 21:05, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep, but make it display (aviation) instead. — Ungoliant (Falai) 00:13, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Then why not just redirect it to Template:aviation? —Angr 09:01, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Because it would categorize in Category:en:Aircraft still. Not strictly forbidden to do this; see as an example. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:39, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * But why exactly would a term like fighter plane be restricted to an aviation context? -- Liliana • 04:36, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
 * We still don't know whether we really mean these things to be usage contexts or subject-matter indicators. I'd like them to be usage contexts. After checking whether the terms which now use this are restricted to an aviation of other context, change the context tag appropriately and delete. DCDuring TALK  03:37, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, we do know. They are usage contexts, not subject-matter indicators. We've voted on just this issue: context labels are not to be used just to add topical categories. Q.v. &#x200b;—msh210℠ (talk) 16:16, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
 * On reflection, while the vote msh210 links do doesn't say anything about what context labels display and how they categorize, I don't see how this template can ever be used in a way that doesn't violate the vote. As Liliana-60 says, why would the name of any aircraft be restricted to experts? NB I wouldn't mind updating that vote, I wonder if there's any appetite for it. Delete. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:31, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

D These just encourage new editors to label referents. —Michael Z. 2013-02-21 22:00 z