Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aviation/Resources

Linking

I am thinking that we should make this page a bit more prominently and permanently linked on the Aircraft and Aviation project pages. As far as I can see it is only linked from discussions that will eventually be archived and I think this page is worth making permanently available, especially to new editors. Ideas on how to best do this? - Ahunt (talk) 12:40, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

 Done I was thinking that too, so I went ahead and did it! Mjroots (talk) 08:41, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Super, thanks for doing that! This page is really taking form, hopefully people will make use of it! - Ahunt (talk) 14:22, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Issues

If any editor has any issues with the reliability or otherwise of sites mentioned on the resources page, with the exception of those specifically marked as non-reliable but useful for further research, please raise them on this page for discussion. Mjroots (talk) 21:49, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Evidence for Baugher as a RS

Clarifying here from the RfA where it came up: a Google Books search for "Joe Baugher" shows that he is, in fact, a published source who is widely recognised as an expert in the field. To wit: "Military aviation expert Joe Baugher" [1]; "Joe Baugher, aviation historian" [2]; "Joe Baugher, "American Military Aircraft Encyclopedia," [3]; "A special acknowledgment has to go to Joe Baugher, whose magnificent web site on military aircraft serial numbers I visited over and over again seeking confirmation of data I had received on individual planes. Anyone doing military aircraft research must visit (address). It will be a visit well spent" [4]; "According to Joe Baugher's magnificent website" [5]; he is also cited as a source by [6] and [7]. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:23, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

His work has also been extensively discussed in the past on WikiProject Aircraft and the consensus decision at that time was that his information is reliable as a source. - Ahunt (talk) 01:51, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Ahunt, could you please provide some links to back up this assertion? Errors in his work were also pointed out in at least one article. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:59, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

The issue has been raised at WP:RSN#Joe Baugher for discussion. Mjroots (talk) 10:12, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Previous discussions: Jan 2008, Oct 2008 - Ahunt (talk) 14:56, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Goodness, the further I read into the links provided in this discussion, the more diparaging of good faith editors I find. "Tag team"? Honestly, folks, deal with policy and avoid personalizing issues; that is not the way forward. Any way, none of the links so far show consensus that this site is reliable. We should also add an example of an error here:

At Talk:Lockheed P-38 Lightning, the accuracy of Joe Baugher came up. He was on record saying the P-38 engines were prone to overheating and also had problems with the oil never warming up enough—a clear contradiction. I think Joe Baugher must be assessed on a page-by-page basis rather than accepted at face value regardless. All of this concern about Baugher should not affect anybody's suitability for adminship. Binksternet (talk) 01:13, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:52, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Actually in reviewing the article in question and understanding these sorts of liquid-cooled engine installations as used in the P-38, I can only conclude that Baugher's text is not-inconsistant and that those who think it is are not correct. I think you will have to try harder to find errors. I have to note that even if you did find one error I am not sure that proves anything. Even the most reliable sources contain the odd error and that article is not even within the scope of what is being discussed at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Joe_Baugher as that specifically deals with "Does Joe Baugher's website pass WP:RS in respect of his lists of American military aircraft serials?" and thus excludes the paqe that is worrying you. - Ahunt (talk) 16:07, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Disagree-- incorrect regurgitation of other more reliable sources impacts potentially all of his work, which is why SPS advises caution in using self-published sources by authors who are not published in the relevant field, particularly when more reliable sources are available. We can avoid the opinions about whether Baugher is correct or not by simply going to the original sources. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:13, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

You have completely missed the point though - there is no error in his work there, despite unsubstantiated claims to the contrary. - Ahunt (talk) 16:19, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

That is your opinion: others disagree. More importantly, in this example, more reliable sources are available. The argument here appears to boil down to the problem that those sources are harder to locate offline. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:51, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

While the reliable source discussion is ongoing, to address (at least partially) Sandy's concern, I've added a note on the Resource page next to Baugher's website. This emphasizes that it's a self-published source, and reminds editors that Wikipedia has a policy specifically for such sources (which cautions against them). Mlm42 (talk) 20:32, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm happy with that, but I converted it to a reference-style note. Mjroots (talk) 09:06, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

I've summed up the discussion at RSN in the note. Baugher is useable, but effort should be made to find alternative sources where possible. Mjroots (talk) 11:38, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Google Earth as Source for Basic Airport Data

This magnificent geographical tool called Google Earth should be a good resource for obtaining basic data about airports. You can zoom into any airport to know such things as its coordinates and runways. However, I found that using Google Earth as a resource is not welcomed by many contributors. Why would such a genuine source of information be discarded? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imdashti (talk • contribs) 05:04, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Aviation International News

I just added Aviation International News to the "problem sources" section. It was used as a source to establish notability at an article that recently came up for AfD, and some digging reveals that one service that the publication offers is self-published articles, for a price, according to the company's media kit. Feel free to discuss if you disagree with me. RecycledPixels (talk) 19:03, 13 May 2019 (UTC)