This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
List of equipment of the Royal Malaysian Air Force article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Equipment of the Royal Malaysian Air Force. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 21:22, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Equipment of the Royal Malaysian Air Force. 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:49, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Equipment of the Royal Malaysian Air Force. 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:24, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello, anyone can add in the VIP transports? The page is incomplete Dougan law ( talk) 07:29, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
@ GlobalEditorEx:Refer to your edit summary of removal duplication tag which said No, there is no duplication with page of (List of aircraft of the Malaysian Armed Forces) because in this page there is a section that not includes in the page of (List of aircraft of the Malaysian Armed Forces) such as ammunitions section, development section and incidents section. The another page ONLY consist of the aircraft from all branch of Malaysia Military and not the mentioned sections. So, deleted this page will cause a lot of data missing.
IMO "Current inventory" table of aircraft section on this page is duplication of List of aircraft of the Malaysian Armed Forces#Current aircraft. Please note the duplication is only for aircraft, which you acknowledged on the edit summary above. So, I'm talking about only the aircraft itself not amunitions/development/incident, I don't have issue with those points so they can stay. The issue of duplication is if you want to update the content then you will need to update both pages (there is possibility that we update them differently and create may end up create different table of the exactly same thing).
My proposal are :
No...Why cannot put it??..all that I see from another country air Force, they put their list of their Aircraft in their equipment of their air Force. Klueng ( talk) 13:17, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Another country also do 2 type of page...first equipment of their air Force..second is their list of their armed forces Aircraft..they also put the list in both page Klueng ( talk) 13:20, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
@CKfasdf why we need to put the accident and incident in equipment page? Why? The title is the equipment but you want put incident and accident Klueng ( talk) 13:22, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
@ Klueng: If you want to put that table make sure we follow the international standard for air foce page where there is no image in the table. Just copy it from existing page or follow the table format in this page which is no image. GlobalEditorEx ( talk)
Ok. But I also see many page of equipment of air force with their table have pictures. Why? Klueng ( talk) 13:45, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
@ Klueng: IMHO follow the page format that you want to edit, in this case this page from the beginning used the table without the image inside it. But you still need to discuss with other editor about this until the concensus reach. GlobalEditorEx ( talk)
It seems like the page of List of equipment of the Royal Malaysian Air Force is more MAIN rather than the page of List of aircraft of the Malaysian Armed Forces because the List of equipment of the Royal Malaysian Air Force talk mostly about the air force while the List of aircraft of the Malaysian Armed Forces talk all about the three branch of the army, navy and air force. In addition, in the main page of Royal Malaysian Air Force, the wikilink of List of equipment of the Royal Malaysian Air Force placed first followed by the wikilink of List of aircraft of the Malaysian Armed Forces. In addition, if reader want to search about the aircraft inventory they will need to click more to reach the table inventory. In example if reader click wikilink in the main page of Royal Malaysian Air Force they will reached the page of List of equipment of the Royal Malaysian Air Force then they need to click once more wikilink to reach the table inventory in the next page. Due to this, I suggested that the full inventory table we place in the List of equipment of the Royal Malaysian Air Force page while the wikilink we place in the List of aircraft of the Malaysian Armed Forces page. This actions/edits still not broke the rule of the duplication issue because I just SWAP the table and wikilink between this two page only.
What say you? @ Ckfasdf:, @ FOX 52:, @ MilborneOne:, @ CommanderWaterford:, @ Nick-D:, @ Klueng:
Kistara ( talk) 07:50, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Hi FOX 52 (@ FOX 52:), based on your recent edit, I want to address some minor correction here.
Currently, as I wrote this, RMAF has a total of seven (7) CN-235 in service (acctually eight (8) but one (1) crashed in 2016). World Air Forces false reported this quantity at the beginning of it release until now so it is not fair to uses World Air Forces reference anymore for the CN-235 quantity. If this happened it is better to find other reliable source as the backup. Here some of the sources you can refer. There are also sources that just newly released in 2020 by Janes and other reliable source.
Janes Defence News NST Malaysian Defence
RMAF has a total of fourteen (14) C-130 in service where 10 transport and 4 tanker. Again, World Air Forces false reported this quantity at the beginning of it release until now so it is not fair to uses World Air Forces reference anymore for the C-130 quantity. If this happened it is better to find other reliable source as the backup. Here some of the sources you can refer.
FlightGlobal The Star NST Malaysian Defence
Fot this helicopter I think its better to put main design (Sikorsky UH-60) in aircraft column and its variant (S70A) in variant column same like other aircraft; Sukhoi, Hornet, Hawk, C-130 and CN-235 and other. For example of Sukhoi: Sukhoi Su-30 in aircraft column and its variant Sukhoi Su-30MKM in variant column.
Example:
Aircraft | Origin | Type | Variant | In service | Notes | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Helicopters | ||||||
Sikorsky UH-60 | United States | VIP / utility | S-70A | 4 |
BTW thanks for your edits and persistent guard of the World Air Force page. Waiting for your reply to reach consensus here. Kistara ( talk) 03:48, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
(@ FOX 52: Alright then..thanks for your response..and another thing..like I said before...just because World Air Force release its report annualy doesnt mean it can be uses as reference IF its report already false from the beginning. Even in 2019 and previous years also, World Air Forces still reported false quantity of the said aircraft. To add more, from that timeline, other reliable source like Janes and FlightGlobal itself ( here) said 14 C-130 in service, contradicted with the World Air Force reported. Kistara ( talk) 06:44, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Klueng has taken this paragraph, and turn it into this, which I see is a bit of a mess. And it is an exact duplicate of this section on the RMAF page. Pretty sure this table goes against points raised in WP:WHENTABLE, WP:EXCESSDETAIL, WP:CRYSTALBALL, and IMHO lacks some notability - thoughts on any corrective solutions -@ MilborneOne:, @ Neovu79: @ Garuda28: -Cheers FOX 52 talk! 05:51, 14 September 2021 (UTC)