Talk:Salmson air-cooled aero-engines

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the aircraft engine task force.

Help! Moved this in error needs reverting to plain Salmson 9. I need to do more research into it before leaping off both feet first (SNAFU)Petebutt (talk) 07:11, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this is an engine family article. I fully intend to sort out the Salmson engines given time, I have a navbox on the go in my sandbox (somewhere) after another user asked me to help (see my talk page). Would appreciate if you could discuss any moves like this at WT:AETF in future, many thanks. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 19:49, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

Either build a better differentiated pair of articles - or put them together, at least for the time being - at the moment this is very confusing! --Soundofmusicals (talk) 02:26, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. There was some uncoordinated splitting/creation of articles probably by editors who were not aware of the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aircraft/Engines/Archive 1#Salmson radials. A navbox was created (Template:Salmson aeroengines) to try to help the situation, perhaps looking at that would indicate the best way to proceed? The water-cooled article has no citations at the moment. Needs an enthusiast to sort it all out. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 13:57, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree too. Seems that it is common, here, to list all engine manufacturers' specific models as a single group and it seems to me that liquid cooling, added, is no different from supercharging being added.

It might also be an idea to review the way the plural s is used in the article. In one case there is a 9Z's and in another there is a 9s (no apostrophe) and standard English, in all its varieties, accepts that the apostrophe is only used for possessive cases, except for a very few exceptions and the 9Z case is not one of those. Lin (talk) 09:26, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NO, NO. NO. The Canton-Unne was a completely different engine and it pre-dated the air-cooled Salmson 9s anyway. Leave it as it is! The only possible change worthwhile would be to change Salmson 9 to Salmson 9 (Air-cooled)Petebutt (talk) 02:46, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merge As per Petebutt, the water-cooled Canton-Unne radials were completly different (and rather unusual) beasts than the later air-cooled engines. They should be kept separate.Nigel Ish (talk) 14:38, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

article move

I have made a fairly drastic move, to get rid of lasting confusion and to allow people to write articles about individual engines without causing major upheaval; Witness British Salmson AD.9, Salmson AD.3 and Salmson B.9--Petebutt (talk) 11:20, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]