Talk:Doomsday plane

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Doomsday plane article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Aviation

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 not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

Major Restructuring[edit]

Doomsday_plane was redirecting to Boeing E-4, however other countries have "doomsday planes" too but the official name that they're using could be different so the page cannot be a disambiguation in my opinion, simply a general page on the topic with a list of such aircraft from various countries, therefore the redirection is removed and sections are made, for example Russian section has the text imported from Doomsday_plane_(Russia), which is then deleted. Additional reason is because the russian page was more general which included a list of other aircraft, while the american one was just a redirect to one specific aircraft, which just doesn't make sense. Herakotamo (talk) 13:33, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

sourcing[edit]

A quick google search revealed several articles on this subject, regarding usage. It is suggested that more sourced prose be added as well as additional sources for the existing text. Edaham (talk) 04:16, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]