Talk:Per ardua ad astra

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Cleanup and translation[edit]

  • I added the Cleanup tag because of formulations as "As far as can be ascertained, the motto of the Royal Air Force dates to the 1912 newly formed Royal Flying Corps." (with no definition and translation) and "heroic and courageous deeds of our air forces", which is a bit POV.Apus 11:16, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • I see no problem with "As far as can be..." The definition of what? Motto? I added a link for the definition now, if that's what you meant.

About the POV, I agree and removed de phrase.

  • British and Commonwelath Air Forces translate it as 'Adversity' not, 'Struggles'. This article is incorrect. 'Struggles' is the translation of others. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.55.62 (talk) 19:08, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
NO that is incorrect. Click on the reference! And plus, I am ex-RAF. --Capitana (talk) 20:14, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
  • This page needs tidying, as a large chunk of it is lifted wholesale from the RAF's page. Also some material needs excising from the article to the Talk page. IxK85 (talk) 10:36, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
  • 'Ardua' is properly translated as 'hardship' as I was instructed during my national service with the RAF ('54-'56)202.150.115.30 (talk) 02:09, 6 March 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by IxK85 (talkcontribs)
It's often difficult to translate word for word directly form one language to another. It's the meaning of the word that is important, not the particular word used. Ardua can be translated in many ways, but the words used are fairly synonymous. None of the popular translations are "wrong": struggles, struggle, adversity, difficulties, hard work, and hardship. Some organization may use one word instead of another more often. Even the RAF uses the term in more than one way. So, there really is no argument about what word is the "correct" word. On another topic, I agree that this article was largely lifted wholesale from the RAF's page, and this needs fixing. There are also some stuff that really isn't notable enough to be included in the article (Brylcreem?).--BC (talk) 20:19, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Raf-600.jpg[edit]

The image Image:Raf-600.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --03:52, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

File:RCAF Badge.JPG Nominated for Deletion[edit]

Icon Now Commons orange.svg An image used in this article, File:RCAF Badge.JPG, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests July 2011
What should I do?
A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:06, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Other uses[edit]

This section needs to be cleaned up and limited in some way. The list is getting too long, and most, if not all of the entries are trivial and not notable in the least. We don't need every little school and every obscure group or TV show listed here. I'm not saying we should necessarily remove this section, but we should be making sure that each entry is cited and judged somehow on its notability.  BC  talk to me 17:52, 1 February 2012 (UTC)