Talk:Fairey Gordon

Why I changed the things I changed

Nigel Ish undid my changes for this reason: "unexplained changes to reference format - contrary to WP:RETAIN)" (wikilink mine, all else his in toto). WP:RETAIN does not discuss changes to reference format.

So, here are the explanations. The changes that I made to this article are:

• Convert templates: the use of convert templates standardizes the look of the page.

• Copyediting: changed some wikilinks, I tweaked some spelling - here is where WP:RETAIN might apply, though I don't think that I've transgressed much here.

• Reference format: Now here is where I made the biggest changes. I believe that references should have a standardized look one article to another. The {{Cite book}}, {{Cite web}} and similar templates make that easy. I also think that the vertical alignment that I used is easier to for editors to read, and once done that way, also easier for editors to see what has changed when using the dif link on View history pages or when using the Show changes button on an edit page (and white-space on an edit page is free). Part of the changes I made was to use the {{harvnb}} because several places in this article individual page numbers in the cited text are referenced. {{harvnb}} makes it easy to display that information in a standardized way. In no place have I changed the content of those references except to enhance them by adding information that wasn't there - Air Vice Marshal Dudgeon's citation comes to mind.

Please make sure that you view the changes made to this or any article before you undo an editor's work. If these changes that I've made are somehow detrimental to the quality of this article I invite you to explain how and why. --Trappist the monk (talk) 01:22, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

The actual text is in Wikipedia:CITE#Variation in citation methods -

"It is therefore considered helpful:

• when adding citations, to try to follow the system and style already in use in the article (if any);
• to improve existing citations by adding missing information (for example, replacing bare URLs with full bibliographic citations);
• to replace (or supplement) some or all general references with inline citations;
• to change existing citations to make them follow a consistent system and style, if there is currently inconsistency within the article. If there is disagreement about which style is best, defer to the style used by the first major contributor;
• if you think another system or style would be more appropriate for the article than what is already in use, to propose the change on the talk page, and wait for consensus to emerge.
• Editors should not attempt to change an article's established citation style merely on the grounds of personal preference, or without first seeking consensus for the change."

i.e. you shouldn't just barge in to an article and edit war to get your preferences - please reconsider your unnecessary changes which have added no new content to the article and just added templates for the sake of it.Nigel Ish (talk) 10:41, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

I've edited your message to restore the bullets and the highlighting as they appear in WP:CITEVAR. I did this because it makes the text more readable - it was rather a wall-of-text.

I never edit an article just for the sake of editing it. I always intend that my edits improve upon what is already there. I think that in this case I've done so.

1. In §Service: Gudgeon's citation in the last paragraph was plain-text in the article. I put it in a {{Cite book}} template inside <ref></ref> tags so that the reference would be listed with all of the other references in §References.
2. In §Survivors: The reference was a raw-url link to an external source inside <ref></ref> tags. Raw-urls look something like this in a reference list: ^[1] (with the little external-link icon attached). I moved that into a {{Cite web}} and gave it a temporary title so that readers would have some idea where the link goes. Turns out that the link is a dead link. I forgot to add that template. Done.
3. In §Operators and §Specifications (Mark I): I changed three citations in these sections to use the {{harvnb}} template. The result in §References looks the same as the previous version except that there is a space between "p." and the page number.
4. In §References: To support the {{harvnb}} templates, I changed the citations to Harvard-style {{Cite book}} templates. This creates an intra-page link between the reference text from the {{harvnb}} template and the citation - very handy as the list of cited works grows. I also put Thetford in a {{Cite book}} template for consistency.

Taking your WP:CITEVAR quote point by point:

1st bullet point: I did not add references or citations;

2nd bullet point: This I did (items 1 & 2 above) so therefore considered helpful;

3rd bullet point: I did not replace but did supplement (item 1); considered helpful;

4th bullet point: In this article there were three different reference formats (items 1-3). This is clearly an improvement consistent with the first clause of the 4th bullet point; considered helpful. Given that inconsistency, the second clause does not apply.

5th bullet point: Because of the inconsistency just mentioned, this point does not apply;

6th bullet point: Again, because of the inconsistency just mentioned, this point does not apply;

As you can see, I have carefully considered the changes I made. I do not find them to be unnecessary.

--Trappist the monk (talk) 14:28, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

You added no content to the article, just ignored a clearly established citation style and edit warred to keep it in place. I'm not going to argue with you further, or edit the article again as I have no interest with editors who have an obsession with style over substance.Nigel Ish (talk) 15:08, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fairey Gordon. 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:

• Replaced archive link http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:B1bk9HQ15BMJ:newsletter.adf-serials.com/news0404.pdf+Fairey+Gordon+NZ629&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1 with https://web.archive.org/web/20061104211428/http://newsletter.adf-serials.com/news0404.pdf on http://newsletter.adf-serials.com/news0404.pdf

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) 20:44, 23 May 2017 (UTC)