Talk:8-Pass Charlie

DYK

Thoughts for DYK? Is it good enough? --lTopGunl (talk) 17:22, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Ace claim

Not surprisingly, given his anonymity and status as a bomber pilot, I can't find anything that officially credits him as an ace. In fact, only zero to three Pakistani fighter pilots are accorded that status.[1][2] Clarityfiend (talk) 04:59, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Being known as an ace is present in the source given.... but to avoid confusion with officially awarded fighter aces, I've disambiguated it to "bomber ace". --lTopGunl (talk) 11:34, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Bomber ace is not a well-defined term and the source doesn't say "bomber ace" just "ace". GraemeLeggett (talk) 12:10, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Well make it "ace" then, no need to remove what the source states. --lTopGunl (talk) 12:21, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Also about "bomber ace" that's common sense that he was a bomber pilot. It would be lame to debate on "just ace" and "bomber ace". Whether we call him an ace or a bomber ace, both are per source and no personal commentary is being added. See WP:BRAIN. --lTopGunl (talk) 15:03, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

See WP:SYNTHESIS and WP:NEO, you will need proper sources to support the claim that he was an Ace do not revert without WP:BURDEN--DBigXray 05:46, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Source is already present. Review first. I removed the flying ace link so as not to confuse with that specific definition. --lTopGunl (talk) 11:54, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

I have seen it already, Military servicemen in their memoir say a lot of things in appreciation of their collegues and opponents. The ACE claim needs to be sourced properly not from a memoir. --DBigXray 11:58, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Well you're wrong in that, don't editwar over it. --lTopGunl (talk) 12:26, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

We can clearly see above that you are the one who is edit warring against consensus and and accusing me at the same time.--DBigXray 12:36, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

What consensus? Which ever version that is standing is the consensus. There's no such thing as "consensus version" as who ever reverts changes the consensus. You made a change to the standing version, editwarred over it and are now on 3RR. --lTopGunl (talk) 12:49, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

• Comment I think we're wasting productive time over this. Clearly, as far as the ace mention is concerned, he has been labelled as such in the source. Why this needless bickering then? Mar4d (talk) 12:38, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
• A person is referred to as Ace who is good in doing his job, this should not be confused with the term Flying ace who is given to a person who shoots a particular number of aircrafts in an aerial combat. --SMS ^Talk 13:47, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

The point I was making by delinking! --lTopGunl (talk) 13:55, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Identity

An IP added the name "Najeeb Ahmed" to the unknown pilot (which was ofcourse OR), but it led me to search for the Sqn ldr Najeeb Ahmed (later Air Cdre (R)), Sitara-e-Jurat, and I found a mix of non RS, primary sources and an ejection-history link referring to his name as a notable person: [3] [4] [5] [6]. I guess I'll need to check out some Urdu print sources later. --lTopGunl (talk) 19:21, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

any update on this @@TopGun:?

Garnhami (talk) 13:28, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 8-Pass Charlie. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120515215015/http://www.defencejournal.com/may99/b-57.htm to http://www.defencejournal.com/may99/b-57.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110608010603/http://www.defencejournal.com/2001/september/wars.htm to http://www.defencejournal.com/2001/september/wars.htm

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 10:59, 23 June 2017 (UTC)