Talk:Aeronautical phraseology

	Engineering portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EngineeringWikipedia:WikiProject EngineeringTemplate:WikiProject EngineeringEngineering articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Science

	Science portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject ScienceTemplate:WikiProject Sciencescience articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Transport

	Transport portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Transport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TransportWikipedia:WikiProject TransportTemplate:WikiProject TransportTransport articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Style

I think this article needs tidying up. In particular, there is an over-use of capitals and bold type. Biscuittin (talk) 22:22, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Blown Up

This article had the worst-written lede I have ever seen:

Set of communication rules of simplified English language (given, by definition by ICAO), adjusted for simpler (by grammar, semantics and phonetics), non-conflictial and standardized, clear and efficient way of substantial inter-understanding between Air Traffic Control Officer and Pilot-in-Command, between Air Traffic Control Officer and other Air Traffic Control Officer or between one Pilot-in-Command and other Pilot-in-Command, intended solely for professional aviation use, for the best theoretical and practical flight safety performance, at given level of aviation technology.

The content of the article was similarly incomprehensible. Accordingly, I decided to WP:BLOWITUP. I hope someone will add to the minimal shell that remains.198.58.172.228 (talk) 08:38, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

THIS ARTICLE OBVIOUSLY WAS WRITTEN BY ABSOLUTE NON-AVIATION ANTI-EXPERT & MONEY-GREEDY JERK, WHO HAVE NO IDEA ABOUT THE VERY POINT OF THE ARTICLE; EXCEPT HE JUST STOLE SOMETHING FROM ORIGINAL ARTICLE, THIS ARTICLE HAS NOTHING OF VALUE AND IS ONE OF MOST MISLEADING ARTICLES ON WIKIPEDIA, WHICH WAS ALLOWED (WHY !!!???) ONLY BECAUSE WIKIPEDIA POLICY TO ALLOW COMPLETE JERKS EARN SOME MONEY. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.255.144.103 (talk) 21:39, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Needs at least a few examples of how it works

During this article's history a lot of verbose or badly written material has been deleted, but what's left is now a stub. It might be sensible to go through the deletions to see what the sources were, and what might be of use in the article.

For instance, a long list of guidelines for radio communication isn't needed and was deleted. But the existence of such guidelines is relevant, as is at least one example from them. Musiconeologist (talk) 17:15, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]