Talk:Aircraft spotting
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Greece and Plane spotting
"Aircraft spotting was not until recently recognised as a legitimate hobby in Greece where the military authorities remain concerned about note-taking and photography on or near airfields. This attitude resulted in an international dispute in 2001/02 between the Netherlands, United Kingdom and Greece following the arrest on spying charges of 2 Dutch and 12 British plane spotters travelling together, who had been invited to the Hellenic Air Force Open Day at Kalamata. After they had spent over a month in prison, three judges sitting as a Panel in Kalamata reduced the charge on 12th December to "accessing national secrets" and on payment of bail the 14 spotters were allowed to travel home. A trial was eventually held in a local Greek court and on 26th April 2002 they were found guilty of espionage. For some of the group a three year jail sentence seemed likely, all were allowed to travel home on payment of bail money pending an Appeal.
All except one of the group (who did not return to an Appeal court in Kalamata for medical reasons) were acquitted of all the charges on 6th November 2002. Some media continue to suggest that they had taken photographs on or of military facilities or operational aircraft. At least one is still fighting to recover his bail money."
Is this even worth mentioning in an encyclopedia?It's not hugely relevant to the history or specifics of plane spotting, it is a partial account of a complicated event ,it takes more than one third of the article without really informing anyone about planespotting and the way it is worded seems to accuse Greek authorities.Not to mention being a testament of human stupidity( Both the authorities for turning this sort of incident in a international legal incident, and the tourists for just shooting away without at least asking somebody if it was OK)."
Also, "Aircraft spotting was not until recently recognised as a legitimate hobby in Greece" is the writer's idea and not a fact, since there is no legislation against it, hence why these people were arrested on charges of military espionage and not some imaginary "Anti-Planespotting" law.Planespotting is fine and legal everywhere - besides inside military installations. --Jsone 07:38, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] External links
All of the commercial external links have been removed. There really was no justification for them per our policy on this at WP:EL. The remaining link to DMOZ is a neutral directory which IMO is superior to anything we can offer here anyway. Please: no more links! —Moondyne 00:44, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
- You know I think you have been draconian. DMOZ is updated very badly nowadays. It's a really poor shadow of its former self. I think you should emulate other areas where, if external links are contested, they should be looked at individually on the talk page here. Fiddle Faddle 23:15, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Proposed external links
In view of Moondyne's wholly ethical action I believe it is appropriate to propose links for inclusion, here Fiddle Faddle 23:12, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Plane Spotting World
I wish to propose Plane Spotting World as a practical and growing example of a site dedicated to web 2.0 style communities and plane spotting. It is not a source as such, since much of its initial material comes form WP, but is an example of a site that is non encyclopaedic, but that caters wholly for the community of hobbyist spotters. I believe it to be wholly in accordance with the WP ethic to use it as an example. Fiddle Faddle 23:12, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
- In view of the lack of comments I am adding this back to the article page as a resource. Fiddle Faddle 10:13, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Bruce's Planespotting Guide
I would like to propose adding an external link to Bruce's Planespotting Guide. This is a totally non-commercial page that is also aimed at the community of aviation hobbyists. It is a page where people can learn how to distinguish different kinds of aircraft that they might see at their airport and also a map of some really good hassle free airports to watch planes at. The subject matter is directly related to the topic of this article. 06:02, 16 October 2007 (UTC)Bleibo
[edit] Inclusion of Sites
So we can all just suggest sites to be included into the article. But who really decides what is and isn't suitable for inclusion into the article? Are we going to let the folks at DMOZ do the work we're supposed to be doing? I think that as long as WP:EL is generally followed, there shouldn't be any problem. We just have to make sure that there aren't so many external links, and that the ones that are on are the most informative about the subject (so no Neil's Weekend in LAX and that type of thing). Why bother with DMOZ or other external projects? Heck, we should have a wikimedia project for directories or something. Syamil (talk) 04:50, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Registration vs. serials
I changed "serials" to "registration numbers" in the lede, because they're not the same thing. For example, the registration of my (Canadian) Piper Warrior is C-FBJO, printed in huge letters on the side. The serial number is 28-7916067, stamped on a tiny metal fireproof plate, too small for a planespotter to see without standing a few inches from the empennage. The registration changed when a previous owner imported my plane from the U.S. into Canada; the plane will keep the same serial until it is scrapped. David (talk) 18:51, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

