Talk:Politechnika Warszawska PW-5

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

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion not met Supporting materials: criterion met

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

Poland

	Poland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PolandWikipedia:WikiProject PolandTemplate:WikiProject PolandPoland
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

I suggested the page title for this and the PW-6 be changed to "Politechniki Warszawskiej PW-5" and "Politechniki Warszawskiej PW-6". PZL is not the design originator, only manufactures the type under license. Please have also a look at the PZL Wiki article to appreciate how the designation PZL PW-5 would look out of context there. They make a lot of other designs under license, too, keeping the originators type designator.Francisco de Almeida 12:08, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! The name of the article is incorrect, because "Politechniki Warszawskiej" is genitive case from "Politechnika Warszawska", so the correct name should be maybe "Politechnika Warszawska PW-5". I'm a polish native speaker and "Politechniki Warszawskiej PW-6" sounds for me really strange. Amstell.

The several edits made in 2008.03.18 by 202.161.43.233 are in my opinion detrimental to the article: - they violate the NPOV (neutral point of view) policy of Wikipedia and constitute, in fact, advertising. - they delete all negative comment about the performance and handling of the aircraft and about the decline of interest in the type and class. - the level of detail given to the proceedings of the IGC design competition is out of place in this article (could merit a separate, well written article). - several statements introduced are debateable. - the comparison between the PW-6 and other two seaters is out of place (this article is about the PW-5), cronologically incorrect (uses the future tense for developments that have already occurred), and has unreasonable or false statements.

In view of these failings, I will revert sections of these edits within a few days if no improvement to the above points is forthcoming. Regards, Francisco de Almeida (talk) 11:44, 20 March 2008 (UTC).[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on PW-5. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ssa.org/Johnson/85-1997-04.pdf
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070608193143/http://www.sailplanedirectory.com/PlaneDetails.cfm?planeID=329 to http://www.sailplanedirectory.com/PlaneDetails.cfm?planeID=329

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:32, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]