Talk:Sikorsky CH-124 Sea King

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


The section on the replacement seems to be biased in favour of the EH101, or maybe against the Liberal Party. There are a few paragraphs that are written out of style, and containing usage or spelling errors- can this be made fairer to the competing helicopter entries/ Liberal Party? I noticed it around the paragraph describing a "slow, tortured process" which seems to state the critics' claims as fact. Thanks! - (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:57, 30 May 2010 (UTC).

I suppose the word tortured could be left out, but 'long' certainly applies. A replacement order that should have gone out in the mid nineties was delayed by about fifteen years! In its current form the article doesn't show a bias in favor of the EH101 as an aircraft. In fact no real performance comparison is made. All the section does, is point out that the governments course of action ended up being more expensive then the original order and delayed the replacement of airframes that were already at the end of their useful lifes when the whole thing started. The Liberal party doesn't end up looking good, but there doesn't seem to be much positive to be said about their policy in this respect.Avmarle (talk) 09:38, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

The section about the replacement problems seems to overwhelm the article and as much of it has nothing to do with the Sea King itself should it be reduced to a paragraph or two rather than most of the article? MilborneOne (talk) 19:18, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

It has been a several-decades long issue here in Canada, so it bares some telling, but perhaps it should be a separate article, with a short mention here and a Main template. - Ahunt (talk) 20:33, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page[edit]

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

    Triggered by \bnaval-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 10:07, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

 Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 19:59, 9 April 2014 (UTC)