Talk:No. 75 Wing RAAF

No. 75 Wing RAAF has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: July 14, 2016. (Reviewed version).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the No. 75 Wing RAAF article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Military history: Aviation / South Pacific / World War II

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

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history task force
	World War II task force

Australia: Military history Low‑importance

	Australia portal No. 75 Wing RAAF 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

A fact from No. 75 Wing RAAF appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 26 July 2016 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that an officer appointed by North-Eastern Area Command to investigate Vultee Vengeance aircraft accidents at No. 75 Wing RAAF, crash-landed in a Vengeance on his return?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2016/July. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/No. 75 Wing RAAF.

Wikipedia

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:No. 75 Wing RAAF/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Zawed (talk · contribs) 06:54, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I will review this one, comments to follow in due course. Zawed (talk) 06:54, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, having reviewed this, it looks in good shape. Three things:

The infobox states its role as Fighter; attack. From the lead/body of the article, I wouldn't have thought that this was the primary role of the wing.
- Well I used "fighter" as synonymous with "air defence" but I could use the latter and change "attack" (which I used to cover the role of the Beauforts and Vengeances) to "anti-shipping" to better reflect what's said in the body. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:51, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The lead refers to the wing forming at Townsville but the history section states it was formed at Garbutt (the base at Townsville); I think it would be worthwhile expanding the history section to mention Townsville to avoid confusion.
- Will do. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:51, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Could we have an OOB as a separate section, like for the North-Eastern Area Command article?
- I'm always a bit dubious about creating OOB sections that aren't essentially taken verbatim from one source stating "this was the formation's OOB at this time", and we don't have that in the 75WG sources, we just have several sources stating that such-and-such a unit was under 75WG, or 75WG controlled the units at this base and I then report the units at that base. Not an exact science I'm afraid...! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:51, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hope that is useful, I'll check back in a few days. Cheers. Zawed (talk) 10:41, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, bit busy lately -- tks for review and will address as soon as I can. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 04:03, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your changes/feedback look good Ian, passing as GA now. Zawed (talk) 09:13, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]