Talk:List of women aviators

Order

Why are these folk listed (largely) by first name? The list of aviators, which should include everyone on this list, does it in the expected surname order. As for maiden vs. married, choose the name by which they were known in their day. Putting Princess Anne ... under P (but The Hon Mrs Victor ... under V) is inconsistent.TSRL (talk) 08:18, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

• The pages which are listed are sorted by article title. This works quite well, putting famous and important cases such as Aida de Acosta, Amelia Earhart and Amy Johnson at the head of the list. The complications of married names and titles make plain alphabetical order simplest. Andrew D. (talk) 18:00, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

The priority above is pot luck; did your parents call you Abby or Zola, nothing to do with "famous and important". The Category: Female aviators puts people in normal alphabetical order, so why not here?

Separately, balloonists eg Thible (the first woman to fly and also a stoker; what else can you do on a balloon?) and Sophie Blanchard amongst others are missing; policy or oversight? I'll add these unless there is some justification. Cheers,TSRL (talk) 22:53, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Nearly every list of names on Wikipedia is alphabetized by last names, and that is what people are used to when hunting for information here. There is no need to handle pages on women differently; for examples see pretty much any of the other lists of women by profession. Therefore I have gone ahead and reordered this page by last name and created a TOC as well. This is a fantastic list — kudos to Andrew D. for creating it — and it should be as easy to use as possible.Alafarge (talk) 20:07, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 26 August 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Consensus to move. (non-admin closure) jcc (tea and biscuits) 17:27, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

---

List of aviatrices → List of women aviators – Consensus is against using the term "aviatrix", per WT:Aviation#"Aviatrix". – —Granger (talk · contribs) 13:18, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 15:02, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

• @Mr. Granger and MilborneOne: The same arguments for not using the term aviatrix applies to "women aviators" so needs some discussion. MilborneOne (talk) 14:43, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
• "women aviators" is much clearer than "aviatrices", to people who do not know Latin. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 15:02, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
• The problem is, that if the objection to aviatrices is that it is discriminatory, then "women aviators" is no better. - Ahunt (talk) 15:09, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
• To add to the rationale: The term "aviatrix" is outdated, and its use is discouraged by the essay WP:Writing about women. Anthony Appleyard's point is also a good one. —Granger (talk · contribs) 15:13, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose The idea was to highlight pioneers of aviation such as Amelia Earhart for whom the term has a correct period feel. Without this, the list will turn into a list of any woman who just happens to have a pilot's licence. Andrew D. (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:43, 26 August 2016‎

  If that is the case, should that not be indicated? I would not infer that from the current title or lead. Graham (talk) 22:13, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

• Support, this is the more recognizable name. Nohomersryan (talk) 00:28, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
• Support. "Aviatrix" is (like "comedienne", "poetess" etc.) no longer used in English. Wikipedia is meant to be a generally accessible encyclopedia; we shouldn't be using gratuitously archaic and potentially confusing words.

@Andrew Davidson: Like Graham11, I wouldn't have realised from either the title or the lead that this list is meant to only refer to female aviators for whom the word "aviatrix" is of the correct period: and nor, apparently, have the editors of the list, who have added Eileen Collins, Pamela Melroy, Lynn Rippelmeyer and Beverly Burns (and that's just at a quick look through the list to find a few obvious examples). If that is the intention of this list, I suggest that it is instead moved to something like List of early women aviators, and have its lead edited to properly convey the scope of the article, but as it is there is nothing about the article that indicates that this is in fact the scope. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 08:58, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Support "List of early women aviators", that's a title which defines the intention of the page. Without "early" it's a list of women who obtain a pilot's license, so the "List of early women aviators" title seems to solve editors concerns. Randy Kryn 10:20, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Support "List of women aviators" on same grounds as above (aviatrix is archaic; WP:WAW). However, why make "List of early women aviators" when the "List of aviators" is not similarly restricted? This implies that women aviators are only notable in the early days, which is certainly not true, and such a list would be especially problematic in that it would cut out the entire generation of women who were space flight pioneers.Alafarge (talk) 16:22, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

• Comment: if singling out female aviators is considered "discriminatory", we can't have this standalone list. I don't think any editor would dispute that the topic of women in aviation is notable. Note that WP:WAW is an essay and does not necessarily have to be followed. SSTflyer 03:12, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
• Support per WP:COMMONNAME. The term "aviatrix" is not commonly used, in contrast with a term like actress. SSTflyer 03:19, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
• Support per WP:RECOGNIZABLE, as plain English, and per our (and society's) increased avoidance of gendered terms. Even out of the readers familiar with the increasingly obsolete term aviatrix (20%?) few (5%?) are likely to also recognize the plural aviatrices, which is one technically correct plural but rarely found in sources other than dictionaries.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  22:22, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

List lacks definition or terms of qualification

This is a brilliant list, clearly listing pioneering women in Aviation, however, it lacks a definition stating this, or stating qualification to be on the list, or cut-off date (if even relevant). In fact there are thousands more admirable women doing an exemplary job in aviation, but who are not on the list. 2A00:23C7:2E1B:2301:ECCF:3E0F:BA49:786D (talk) 18:59, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

• I started this list about 8 years ago. As it still seems to be working reasonably well, no major change is needed – "if it works, don't fix it". I have revised the language of the lead slightly to make it read more like the original. The key phrase is "women prominent in the field of aviation". This seems adequate as a more specific definition would tend to be arbitrary and unhelpful. Pioneers and extraordinary women tend, by their nature, tend to be sui generis. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:06, 8 March 2023 (UTC)