Talk:Fiat G.91

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fiat G.91 article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	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.	Aviation Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated projects or task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Aircraft WikiProject

	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 lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Associated task forces (general topics): Military aviation task force Associated task forces (nations and regions): Italian military history task force (c. 500–present)

[edit] Three-view

The three view is unfortunately of the G91Y, yet the data table is for the more common R variant. Has anyone got a usable R 3 view, or can post Data differences for the Y?Kitbag 12:44, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Some old talk about this table: Talk:Aeritalia G.91/Full Spec

[edit] Stefano's draft

Note: The extensive draft has been moved to Talk:Aeritalia G.91/draft, as it was overwhelming this talk page.AKRadecki^Speaketh 13:43, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

I expect that wiki-sherifs now will been happy. And i expect too, that someone that show good will not lasts too long to 'rewiev' it (go figure about NATO requests what hell of 'rewiev' is needed), not like happened with B-50 and CF-104.

PS. someone has one time more definitively disgusted me with last 'heroic action'. There are many wrong things with wikipedia, and not guiilth of mine, sorry.--Stefanomencarelli 10:05, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Stefo, why are you going after [1]?? What did he ever do to you? Per his contributions page, he's never even edited the same pages as you. Please leave the poor guy alone! - BillCJ 23:07, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I made some partial reverts on the modiphics soon happened after i dared to post part of the draft. Obsviously i cannot understand how nobody cares nothing until i write in a draft or talk, and cames swiftly to 'collaborate' when the stuff is posed in the main page.

BTW: the AGARD was led by V.Karman. This was not a marginally information. Bignamini was a test pilot simply decisive for the Gina success. Also this cannot be omitted. Another point, the task of project a light fighter was not a simply one at all, just like to project now a minicar like Opel Smart. These and some other omissions needed to be rettified to make a comple article, that this one of G.91 is far away to be.--Stefanomencarelli 14:46, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Okay you posted your text and it was edited - you can't just go back and reinsert the unedited text again, because someone edited your contribution. The original edit you made contained lots of great info and references too, but it also suffered from a lot of duplication with existing material and serious grammar and spelling issues that needed work. As it says on the edit form on every Wikipedia page "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed for profit by others, do not submit it." - Ahunt 16:06, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, this is another trolling statement. Not all the edits are good enough to be considered OK, or vandalism doesn't exist. If you are not able to edit something without harming the text, nobody ask to you to interest in it. But if you want to see some 'not duplicated' text you have to see the whole G.91 contribution i made.--Stefanomencarelli 17:41, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

So as I understand what you are saying: anyone who edits anything you have posted is a troll? Is that right? - Ahunt 18:24, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] From the scrath or copycat

Is this plane a genuine new design? It looks like some kind of remote F-86 Sabre derivative. 82.131.210.162 (talk) 17:44, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

It does resemble the F-86, and I've noticed that myself. However, all the sources I have read state it's a new design. It's possible the F-86 design was used as a starting point, but I haven't read that anywhere. - BillCJ (talk) 22:16, 7 January 2008 (UTC)