Hello, Omega LVIII, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your nameontalk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}}
on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! BilCat (talk) 23:24, 6 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.
Thanks again, and happy editing!
RPSkokie (talk) 12:30, 13 December 2021 (UTC)Reply
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.
Thanks again, and happy editing!
— Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 18:34, 22 November 2022 (UTC)ReplyHello, Omega LVIII! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! CNMall41 (talk) 18:29, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply |
I stumbled upon Draft:List of Lockheed C-130 Hercules Variants, and I have a few suggestions. Having written and reworked several aircraft variant articles myself, I have found that certain article structures enhance readability. While the current structure, which separates the variants into "Pre-production", "Transport", "British/foreign", "Civilian", and other miscellaneous roles may make superficial sense, there are much better ways to split up the variants (especially when many sub-sections will contain something along the lines of "Modified from baseline C-130 variant").
The highest level of section headers should be for the most drastic changes made to the aircraft, as is the case with the Curtiss P-40 Warhawk variants, North American P-51 Mustang variants, and Republic P-47 Thunderbolt variants articles. All three types underwent one or more drastic changes throughout their production which resulted in distinct families of variants.
In the case of the C-130, there are no easily-classifiable variant families, meaning the most drastic changes to the airframe were made between the variant letters (C-130A, C-130B, etc.). Therefore, I suggest a structure similar to Messerschmitt Me 262 variants and List of Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress variants, in which the top-level sections are for the primary variant designations, with major sub-variants having their own subsections and minor sub-variants being covered in a list. As such, aircraft with mission modifiers (AC-130, MC-130, WC-130, etc.) should be listed under their base-variants' sections. For example, the AC-130A, RC-130A, and WC-130A would be covered under the C-130A section as they are all modified from that baseline variant.
On a side note, you could probably get away with omitting the "-LM" production facility code from all variant designations, as all C-130s were built at Lockheed's Marietta plant and therefore no other code has been assigned to any C-130. You should probably also look into the C-130H1, H2, and H3 designations, as they do not follow the 1962 Tri-Service standard for designating production blocks and upgrades. If the designations follow the Tri-Service standard, they should be C-130H-1, H-2, and H-3. - ZLEA T\C 05:23, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
Hello, Omega LVIII. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "General Atomics Gambit".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. ✗plicit 00:19, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply