Talk:Aviation archaeology/Archive2007

Main page: Talk:Aviation archaeology

See also: Talk:Aviation archaeology/Archive2006

Welcome to Talk:Aviation archaeology/Archive2007.

Archive 2007

All 2007 discusions has been moved to this location on April 18, 2010. Please do not continue discussion on any 2007 topics in this page. Highlight, copy and paste particular section or sentence that can be copied back to the primary page for further discussions and begin a new section. Thank you. LanceBarber (talk) 04:03, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Use of references

References are an excellant source of research for any article. The field of aviation archaeology, av-ar, has been going in many directions. A handfull of states and dedicated persons have been persuing the long and dedious process of investigating, researching, hiking, photographing, recording, and documenting all types of aircraft crash sites. Av-ar is becoming a science of its own, and guidance and regulations are needed to preserve our aviation history. Crash sites is only a part of av-ar, it also includes abandoned air fields and seldom used airstrips... abandoned missile silos... forever lost US air mail routes and navigation beacons. Such old Army Air Corp auxilary fields to never-to-be-used-again launch pads have hidden histories for us to search out and preserve through all types and levels of media. From California to Colorado to Maine to the UK av-ar websites are the tool of the century to help present the historic events and places AND tell about the dedicated aviators that lost their lives making aviation one of the greatest industries of the past century. Such topics as code of ethics for both the recreational and professional crash-site hounds and field agents, are needed to preserved the evidence of an av-ar site. Other topics as helping the US Forest Service in volunteering to record and collect data of crash sites on all Forest Service lands, are serious activities to be performed. Let's expand the av-ar article to help define and shape the science of av-ar. LanceBarber 04:50, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

This article needs assistance from other av-ar enthusiasts to help expand this article by providing details of archaeolody methodologies, convert their experiences in valid processes, and research the external links to bring the "cream" of the websites to the "top".

I am asking members of AAIR, BAAC, TIGHAR, and the states' wrecking chasing orgs to provide subject mattters and details to this article. Thank you. LanceBarber 19:48, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Code of Conduct?

Not that I misagree with the content, but where did this item come from?! It does not seem encyclopedic, nor within the scope of such as article. Check-Six 23:00, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Check-Six, thank you for participating... In many discussions with other interested av-ar enthusiasts and the US Forest Service, a code of conduct has come up on numerous occassions. Also, in AAIR website and direct talks with TIGHAR reps, the same discussion has ensued. Maybe the title of Code of Conduct is too strict for an encyclopedia NPOV, other titles of "rules to operate by", Your suggestions and input are important to av-ar, as you have been involved with av-ar for some time. Even the BAAC, in their website, have discussed rules and protocols. The points under the current heading are appropriate for av-ar; however to re-state the points... re-organize the points... change the section heading... re-write the points in a paragraph form is logical as well. What do you suggest? The basis of the section is to illuminate to the casual and recreational wreck chaser, that aircraft parts at site can be as important as to the casual hiker that even a simple arrowhead found on the ground in a national park or forest services lands can not be removed. How about "Common sense practices"? thanks, LanceBarber 03:27, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey Lance - I really think the bulk of that matter is beyond the scope of Wikipedia. To me (the originator of this article), it would be more digestible in a paragraph form, and the phrase "code of conduct" is definitely too harsh (and not NPOV) IMHO. Dunno - I like "Suggested Guidelines". I do, however, like how you expanding the scope of the article beyond just wreck sites, and a bit more into aviation history. But, I confess, I hate the handle "Av-Ar" - makes the hobby sound like a type of insecticide... Now "Avi-Arch"... I could get behind! Hmmm... Thanks! Check-Six 04:49, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Without sources, the list is Original Research. We need a verifiable source for this. - BillCJ 04:59, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Ay! That's right! Sorry, Lance, but I think it has gotta go. Check-Six 05:12, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Good point guys... lets wait a while, while I'll do some more research to bring some citations together... but in the meantime... since I've been called "verifiably nuts" at times, will that do for a sort time, lol?? I had a 3-beer break before dinner, helped smooth out our afternoon "Teamwork" session.LanceBarber 05:28, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

So noted - section removed... Good night! Check-Six 05:34, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Suggested guidelines ... for further research, citation, and discussion

• Uphold state, federal, and commonwealth antiquities laws.
• Acknowledge and respect the property rights of landowners.
• Support, study, educate, and train others through educational programs designed to protect our aviation heritage and archaeology sites, from our reseach and field work.
• Assist your local historicial societies and the US Forest Service in locating, mapping and recording their historic aviation archaeological sites.

LanceBarber 05:45, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Archived. LanceBarber (talk) 04:03, 19 April 2010 (UTC)