Talk:Commando (aircraft)

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 met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by the aircraft project.
	This article is supported by the Aviation accident project.

Military history: Aviation / World War II

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 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
	World War II task force

Lyneham[edit]

My dad was at Lyneham in 1943 as an instrument fitter and vivdly remembered working on the auto-pilot of a visiting Liberator because it was not working correctly. Was it Commando? I think it was.--Petebutt (talk) 07:18, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Curtiss Commando[edit]

This Commando (aircraft) page requires

An explanation that Commando was an given name, not an aircraft type.
A disambiguation for the Curtiss Commando — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.154.71.198 (talk) 07:24, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

two photos don't appear to show the same aircraft[edit]

One photo shows an aircraft with twin rudders and a glazed nose, the other not. One of the photos must be wrong, but I don't know which one. I suspect that the photo with the twin rudders and glazed nose is wrong since the other aircraft seems to display the correct number. Tupelo the typo fixer (talk) 14:17, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

From the third paragraph under Commando (aircraft)#Background: On delivery Commando had a regular Liberator nose and tail configuration despite the internal modifications but was later converted to have a covered nose and also to have a single tail fin. - BilCat (talk) 02:47, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A situation perfectly illustrating the reason I stopped contributing articles such as this one for Wikipedia. At least in this instance the non-specialist editor raised a query before removing the photo(s) they were unsure of, in so many other cases the changes were simply executed and the subject matter removed. Allowing non-specialists access to take these type of actions is fraught with danger. Researcher1944 (talk) 17:55, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As a "non-specialist" editor, I have removed information added by a "specialist", generally because they didn't cite a reliable source, expecting us to take their word for it. Which is odd, because most specialists work in fields where they are required to cite sources, and so know full well how to do it. I've been on the other side too, where I've seen things added by people claiming to be specialists that were nothing of the sort. And I spend most of my time on Wikipedia removing patent nonsense added by juveniles who shouldn't be anywhere near a computer in the first place! It's one of the more frustrating aspects of Wikipedia, but it's not going to change anytime soon. Overall, it can be a rewarding experience, but it does take a lot of patience. It's not something everyone can do, especially those used to working by themselves, or with a team of professionals. But I have seen professionals who are able to work within the system, and they are some of our best contributors. - BilCat (talk) 19:02, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The photos actually both show the same aircraft, it was initially built with twin tails, before later being modified with a single tail and having its camouflage removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.241.96 (talk) 12:02, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]