Talk:Aérospatiale Alouette III

France Low‑importance

	France portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France 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.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Aviation / European / French

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history 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

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	European military history task force
	French military history task force

Aviation: Rotorcraft

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 rotorcraft project.

Merge IAR 316[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was there is no consensus to merge at this point. --Born2flie 16:24, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Seems to be only a license-built aircraft and there is precedent to cover those aircraft under the variant they were license-built as, unless there is a large amount of unique coverage. - BillCJ 01:41, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Guess I forgot to throw my own vote in here. A scrap of an article that simply refers back to information that is in this article. It begs to be merged! --Born2flie 02:10, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Seems reasonable to merge - the IAR article doesn't add much new information anyway.Nigel Ish 18:04, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Although the article does not currently cover much new material, I think there is potential for some expansion, espiecially considering several Romanian varients that are unique to IAR (including two gunship versions). I would be willing to help expand the article a little, but I will need some time, not much but a little, perhaps a week. I suggest we should wait until then to make a final decision.SAWGunner89 15:44, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm prepared to wait until at least 8 April 2007. --Born2flie 22:54, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I have the same opinion like SAWGunner89.The IAR 316 is a quite popular helicopter in Romania and I strongly oppose the merge of this article with the Alouette III. I will also try to expand this article. Eurocopter Tigre , 19:27 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Oppose See also TR-85 and AIM (rifle) for example, which are independent articles. If we merged the IAR 316 to the Alouette article, then you should probably consider moving all the articles in the Category:Kalashnikov derivatives to AK-47 or all the T-55 variants to the main article as well. Mentatus 20:12, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have added to the article. I do not have any experience posting pictures though, so if someone could help me out there it wouldbe much appreciated.SAWGunner89 17:18, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article is still a Stub-class article. --Born2flie 16:23, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

South African flag[edit]

Please, please change the 'operators' link to the post-apartheid South African flag -- the old one is the subject of much contention; only activists still use it.152.111.1.29 19:57, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's there because that was the flag of South Africa during the period in which the Alouette III was in use. There is a difference between history and activism. I would think you'd want the correct flag of the period used, especially since it represents a government you apparantly disagree with, and who probably use the helicoter in support of their policies. But heck, if you want to give your approval to the government of that period by changing the flag to that of the current nation, then go ahead and change it yourself. I'm not going to get into a revert war with you over it - I just won't assist your history revisionism. - BillCJ 21:06, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]