Talk:No. 77 Wing RAAF
Appearance
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the No. 77 Wing RAAF article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | No. 77 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. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
![]() | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on November 19, 2010. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that before the Battle of North Borneo, No. 77 Wing RAAF surgically attacked targets at Labuan as few as 100 m (330 ft) from Allied demolition teams laying charges on the invasion beach? |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:No. 77 Wing RAAF/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Thurgate (talk · contribs) 18:34, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- prose:
(MoS):
- prose:
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects):
b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars etc.:
- No edit wars etc.:
- It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
Comments
[edit]1. Wing headquarters. Suggest - No. 77 wing headquarters
- I didn't use "No. 77 Wing" because I'd used the name in the preceding sentence. Is there another construction you could go with, like "The wing's headquarters" or "Its headquarters"?
- Ah k, and yer your change is fine.
2. Suggest you add a second column to the notes to reduce the height of that section.
- Done.
I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow you to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns. Thurgate (talk) 18:34, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
- Tks for reviewing! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:30, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
- Passed. Good job Ian. Thurgate (talk) 13:28, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you very much. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:16, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
- Passed. Good job Ian. Thurgate (talk) 13:28, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
Categories:
- Wikipedia good articles
- Warfare good articles
- Wikipedia Did you know articles that are good articles
- GA-Class aviation articles
- WikiProject Aviation articles
- GA-Class military history articles
- GA-Class military aviation articles
- Military aviation task force articles
- GA-Class Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history articles
- Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history task force articles
- GA-Class World War II articles
- World War II task force articles
- GA-Class Australia articles
- Mid-importance Australia articles
- Mid-importance Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history articles
- WikiProject Australia articles