Talk:Battle of Britain Day: Difference between revisions
→BBC and legion sources: new section |
Willy turner (talk | contribs) m Adding importance ratings |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= |
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= |
||
{{WikiProject European history |class=GA}} |
{{WikiProject European history |class=GA|importance=low}} |
||
{{WikiProject Military history|class=GA|British=yes|WWII=yes}} |
{{WikiProject Military history|class=GA|British=yes|WWII=yes}} |
||
{{WikiProject United Kingdom|class=GA}} |
{{WikiProject United Kingdom|class=GA|importance=mid}} |
||
}} |
}} |
||
{{ArticleHistory |
{{ArticleHistory |
Revision as of 12:23, 30 November 2017
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Battle of Britain Day 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. | ||||||||||
|
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on September 15, 2011, September 15, 2012, September 15, 2013, September 15, 2014, September 15, 2015, September 15, 2016, September 15, 2017, and September 17, 2017. |
Untitled
Although some may disagree the Battle of Britain Day, 15 September 1940, is still an important commemoration for many British, Commonwealth and other nationals and their descendants, who participated in or witnessed these events. It was also an interesting, often confused and hectic day of air-to-air combat, which is worth describing in its own right. For example, the debates about the efficacy of Bader's "Big Wing" really started because of this day. Minorhistorian (talk) 10:53, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
- Very few people today have even heard of "Battle of Britain Day". I have lived in the UK all my life and had never heard of it until I found this article. (2A00:23C4:638A:5000:847A:1847:3221:E76E (talk) 10:58, 21 June 2017 (UTC))
GA Review
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Battle of Britain Day/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Harrison49 (talk) 22:53, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
I was pleased to see this article up for GA status. It's nearly ready, but there are a few small things that need fixing first.
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
- The quality of prose is good.
- B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
- The lead section is of a good length and provides a good summary of the subject.
There are disambiguation links for Berwick, Cormeilles, Preston and Shoreham which need to be addressed. The Preliminary engagements section should be expanded or the small paragraphs joined together to avoid reading through it becoming choppy.
- The lead section is of a good length and provides a good summary of the subject.
- A. Prose quality:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- References are used well.
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- Citations are correctly placed and used well.
- C. No original research:
- The article does not appear to contain original research.
- A. References to sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- The article is very broad and covers the subject very well.
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- The article is written from a neutral point of view.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- It does not appear to be subject to edit wars.
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Most images are freely available on Commons; two are pre-1957 British Government images made available under public domain rules.
- B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- Captions are good and informative.
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
On hold - nearly there though. Harrison49 (talk) 19:32, 23 March 2011 (UTC)Passed - maybe Battle of Britain could be the next one to be worked on? Harrison49 (talk) 20:05, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
- Pass or Fail:
That is one can of worms! The BoB article is around 10 years old and has been the subject of running debates, battles/wars etc. It has calmed down over the last few months, but I think it will be too difficult to get to GA. Its just one of those articles Dapi89 (talk) 20:18, 23 March 2011 (UTC).
- Congrats on getting this through to GA. B of B page? As Buddy Holly once sang "That'll be the day..." Minorhistorian (talk) 02:05, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
Messerschmitt Bf 110 units had 60% of crews against unauthorised strength
Is this vandalism or does "unauthorised strength" have some specialised meaning?©Geni (talk) 23:32, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
BBC and legion sources
An article populated by good, and in same cases, expert sources should not be using BBC and British legion websites. The charge that the RAF in it's entirety was engaged in this battle is absurd, and not supported by the sources that matter. Coastal Command and Bomber Command played no part. And it was not a decisive air battle. 77.101.14.149 (talk) 18:12, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
- GA-Class European history articles
- Low-importance European history articles
- All WikiProject European history pages
- GA-Class military history articles
- GA-Class British military history articles
- British military history task force articles
- GA-Class European military history articles
- European military history task force articles
- GA-Class World War II articles
- World War II task force articles
- GA-Class United Kingdom articles
- Mid-importance United Kingdom articles
- WikiProject United Kingdom articles
- Wikipedia good articles
- Warfare good articles
- Selected anniversaries (September 2011)
- Selected anniversaries (September 2012)
- Selected anniversaries (September 2013)
- Selected anniversaries (September 2014)
- Selected anniversaries (September 2015)
- Selected anniversaries (September 2016)
- Selected anniversaries (September 2017)