Talk:Douglas Cloudster II
Latest comment: 11 minutes ago by A-37Dragonfly in topic Should'nt the Douglas Cloudster not be in see also, but on the top as not to be confused with?
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Douglas Cloudster II article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | A fact from Douglas Cloudster II appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 26 November 2010 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
Should'nt the Douglas Cloudster not be in see also, but on the top as not to be confused with? edit
The Douglas Cloudster could be confused with the Douglas Cloudster II, and both are unrelated, so shouldnt it be at the top as, "not to be confused with"? A-37Dragonfly (talk) 20:05, 26 May 2024 (UTC)