Talk:Braathens fleet

excessive lead

The lead is supposed to be a summary of the article - not the whole article, hence why I split it up. - NiD.29 (talk) 08:45, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Because of the edits, the lead is now too short to really meet modern featured list standards, which call for an "engaging lead". I don't understand the obsession I've seen with reducing the size of FL leads. There's nothing wrong with a three- or four-paragraph lead for a list, and I don't know why a lot of editors such as yourself feel the need to make them stubby. Oh, well. I'm not interested enough in the article to edit-war over it, but it does make it much harder for me to make a blurb for TFL, should I decide to choose this list, since the lead doesn't provide enough material to write from. That's really too bad, since we don't have many lists related to aircraft to choose from. Giants2008 (Talk) 13:19, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

As per MOS:LEAD, "Editors should avoid lengthy paragraphs and over-specific descriptions, since greater detail is saved for the body of the article."

If it is more than a dozen lines it is no longer going to do its job unless it is a very complex topic - people will simply read the first few lines - any more than they'll skip the rest anyway. - NiD.29 (talk) 19:55, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Origin

The main table includes a column headed Origin, which I believe is a huge waste of space, compromising the other column-widths, purely in order to inform us that a particular aircraft type was made in either the US, the UK, or the Netherlands. Does this information really need to be in the table? Who is going to feel the need to sort it by country, and what information will it really give them here in 2025?

These days the choice is either A or B, Airbus or Boeing. With the parts often being manufactured in one place, and the final assembly in another. Historically there was a wider choice, but national origin is generally only relevant when an airline restricted itself to buying aircraft from one specific source, either by choice, or by Government intervention e.g. in the case of the Communist Bloc countries. Airlines using aircraft from a variety of sources is entirely natural, and therefore not noteworthy. Finding out that the UK and Netherlands once had an aircraft industry of their own is a wonderful thing, but is it a lesson that this Braathens article needs to impart?

The simple comment already in the accompanying text serves the purpose better, without specifically waving any flags around;

The airline had 118 aircraft of 15 types, consisting of three or more models each from Douglas, Fokker and Boeing, as well as the de Havilland Heron and British Aerospace 146. The Boeing 737-200, with 20, was the most bought type. Braathens operated five variants of the 737, totaling[sic] 64 aircraft

Despite the fact this is a Featured List, I propose removing the Origins column completely, and leave it to readers who are interested in such WP:CRUFT to work it out for themselves?

WendlingCrusader (talk) 11:35, 22 February 2025 (UTC)