This article is written in Australian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, program, labour (but Labor Party)) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
Australian Air Force Cadets is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Cleanup : * Get rid of useless information
--Pandaplodder (talk) 01:21, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
Remove abbreviations unless these are adequately explained
I am too close to this to be able to adequately review the abbreviations; could someone have a look at them please Callanecc (talk) 00:56, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
There is absolutely no information about what aircraft are used for flying (powered or gliding), there is a brief mention that the RAAF contracts this out to the private sector even so the types of aircraft can listed. Pandaplodder (talk) 09:58, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Aircraft added in infobox (some of these aircraft are owned by the AAFC/Commonwealth of Australia)Callanecc (talk) 13:22, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Per the request at WP:MHA, I have reviewed this article against the B class criteria. I don't believe it is up to that standard yet. I have the following suggestions for improvement:
a history section should be included. For instance, when did the organisation begin, what name changes did it go through? Why was it formed, who helped form it, etc? These sorts of questions should be answered. I believe that a source that could be consulted for this is: Barry J. Videon (1991) Air Training Corps : the first fifty years;
currently the article includes a number of lists. These could really be condensed into prose (full formed sentences). For instance the Aims and Activities sections could be combined and converted to prose;
currently there are very few references to independent sources. In order to meet B class requirements, each paragraph needs to be cited and where possible this citation should be to a third party source. In this case it might be difficult to get independent sources for some of the information, but the majority of the article should be sourced in this manner;
If you would like some more detailed comments, you might consider requesting a peer review. This can be done by going to Wikipedia:Peer review (general peer review) or WP:MHPR (military specific peer review). Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 03:15, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding 318 Squadron's name, there doesn't seem to be a source verifying ReindeerPilot33's belief that it is 318 (Shire of Sutherland) Squadron. If someone could weigh in on this and provide an official source, that'd be great. Until then, we must stick with what the official AAFC website says considering that's the you know... official website :/ Master1701 (talk) 10:08, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Care to explain that link? For starters, it's behind a login wall so the general public cannot see it, and even with my credentials I still cannot access it without some sort of further authorisation. So again, please find a publicly available source or stop editing. Master1701 (talk) 11:13, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure how a person can be considered "publicly available." I assume you're at home, therefore not being in public. Anyhow, you cannot reference yourself. If you want that Shire status so bad, contact your CO and have them submit a request to update the AAFC website. Master1701 (talk) 11:23, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that's you and what I can only assume are your new accounts posing as others from your SQN as they both were created minutes ago seemingly for the sole purpose of commenting about this. Master1701 (talk) 11:28, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Next time, just find sources before making such edits. I will also update other sqns that are "City of." Master1701 (talk) 14:31, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Bro, if you have time to be questioning what people from their squadron know about their squadron, then you have wayyyyyyy to much time on ur hands, probs should use that to police people in ur own squadron instead. if you want to believe that this is just reindeerpilot under a new name, then go ahead, but all i can say is, stop being a dickhead and just let us update what we want to update that isnt even incorrect unless you get all technical cause HQ is slow as. Cmon buddy, just calm down a bit, would ya? Nafodu (talk) 11:39, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why is that always everyone's go-to response on the internet? You're here too you know. And what would you know about policing considering you're just a LCDT? The very basis for Wikipedia is having sources. If there isn't a source, well then too bad. So can we please accept every "source" is either non-existent or flawed so I can revert the page and mark this resolved? Also, if this actually is a different person, sorry, but it's very suspicious when an account is created solely for the purpose of bolstering someone's opinion as it's typically a sock puppet. (A bannable offence on Wikipedia.) Master1701 (talk) 11:50, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
when would we put in the new programs changes to the article? Considering we don't know a lot about it? Turbotraveller115 (talk) 01:54, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
When there is a source for it. Master1701 (talk) 04:11, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]