Talk:List of World War I flying aces/by nationality

Talk:List of World War I flying aces by nationality

Osterkamp

I deleted "(32 in WWI, 6 in WWII)" from Osterkamp; his WW2 score should be incl in a list of WW2 aces, since they didn't happen in WW1. Also, can somebody clarify the spellings of the Ger aces with the diresis? Trekphiler 03:20, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

German names

Should German pilots' names be written with their full titles?

i.e. Wolfram Freiherr von Richthofen

Or should they remain as per Manfred von Richthofen? Both Manfred and Lother von Richthofen had the title Freiherr. The same applies for Ritter also. Manfred was also a Ritter.

Which is the best form?

--Geck0 22:10, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

UK Aces

Just a note that nearly all the names on the list for UK are Irish born, we need to add some english, scottish and welsh names ! MilborneOne 21:16, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Wlliam C. Lambert (USA)

21.5

How the freakin' hell did he killed twenty-one AND A HALF victories? How is it counted? 189.5.143.155 00:28, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

In some air services victories were shared: if two or more pilots had all had a shot at an enemy aircraft that was seen to fall the victory was divided into fractions (depending on the number of pilots involved). Some British pilots, in particular, seem to have counted their "shares" as full victories, others totted up the value of the fractions, whereas others apparently didn't count shared victories at all. All makes the "tally" system a bit murky. "Fractional victories" were not credited by the Germans. In the German Air Service the senior pilot, or the one who got closest, was usually credited, although some victories were just chalked up to the the squadron as a whole, because so many were involved. Soundofmusicals 02:28, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Future Articles & Wiki-Links

As part of a larger project on WW1 Aces, I am gradually populating the UK list with additional names. In terms of notability, not every ace will justify a future article of their own (discussed at WP Military History Talk Pages), so these additions will not always have a Wiki-Link. I propose also to break the Wiki-Links for existing names where it appears that the individual concerned MAY not merit a full article in their own right. The link can always easily be re-established and the effect on the table hopefully will be to tidy it up a bit. Happy to listen to any comments anybody wants to make on this. Scoop100 13:03, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Further to comment as above, some of the Aces listed for other nations are also presently wikilinked but similarly may not eventually merit a full article, in terms of their notability. Again I'd propose to break the wikilinks as necessary and work towards tidying the whole list up. Still happy to listen to any comments from anybody. Scoop100 10:09, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the merger of these two lists, I’m wondering if in doing that, we could actually at the same time introduce some changes. Not all Aces, in truth, would justify a full WP article either from the point of view of notability or the availability of sufficient information.

I’d like to propose a re-categorisation as follows:

World War 1 Flying Aces – Principal Combatant or Otherwise Notable

World War 1 Flying Aces – Not Listed as Principal Combatant or Otherwise Notable

Under both categories, I’d propose then to list Aces by Nationality.

In the first category, every named Ace would have a wiki-link to their own article.

In the second category, there could be the facility to record a few details of the Ace, if these are available. But principally the purpose would be just to retain a list by nationality with the bare bones of name, Unit no., and number of victories. If ever the decision is made that there is sufficient information, and notability is established clearly enough, to transfer across to the first list, then that wouldn’t be a problem.

Any comments?Scoop100 (talk) 14:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

• Hi scoop! How would you define a Principal Combatant? This is a bit difficult and people will start arguing about which pilots were principal combatants. We could avoid this concurrence thinking situation if we modify the list by # of victories in separate lists by nationality but still sorted by numbers of victories. This would also make it easier to edit because the list grew rather long already. So we would have one page but with seperate lists for every nationality in the format of the actual list sorted by #of victories. What do you think? --Panth (talk) 12:00, 14 March 2008 (UTC)