Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/No. 1 Squadron RAAF

No. 1 Squadron RAAF

This is the archived discussion of the TFAR nomination for the article below. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests). Please do not modify this page.

The result was: scheduled for Wikipedia:Today's featured article/12 January 2015 by Brianboulton (talk) 11:03, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No. 1 Squadron is a Royal Australian Air Force unit headquartered at RAAF Base Amberley, Queensland. It operates F/A-18F Super Hornet multi-role fighters (pictured). The squadron formed under the Australian Flying Corps in 1916 and saw action in the Middle East during World War I. Initially equipped with obsolete B.E.2s, it converted to more modern Bristol Fighters in 1917. No. 1 Squadron was re-established as part of the RAAF in 1925. During World War II, it flew Lockheed Hudson bombers in the Malayan and Dutch East Indies campaigns, suffering heavy losses. It later operated Bristol Beauforts and de Havilland Mosquitos. The squadron re-formed with Avro Lincoln heavy bombers in 1948. From 1950 to 1958 it was based in Singapore, and bore the brunt of the Commonwealth air campaign during the Malayan Emergency. On returning to Australia it re-equipped with English Electric Canberra jets. It operated F-4E Phantoms from 1970 to 1973, as a stop-gap pending delivery of the F-111C swing-wing bomber. The F-111 remained in service for 37 years until replaced by the Super Hornet in 2010. A detachment deployed to the Middle East in September 2014, as part of Australia's contribution to the military intervention against ISIL. (Full article...)

Most recent similar article(s): 509th Composite Group on 17 December
Main editors: Ian Rose
Promoted: 2014
Reasons for nomination: Topicality as much as anything -- since September the squadron has been involved in its first combat operation since the Malayan Emergency more than half a century ago.
Support as nominator. Ian Rose (talk) 07:54, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:25, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support this high quality work. — Cirt (talk) 15:23, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(For the first time in a couple of years...) Support. I've added a (pictured), and the blurb is now 1,285 characters. Not my problem now, though... ;-) Bencherlite^Talk 13:14, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Tks Bench -- your relief at being able to do this again is palpable... :-) Trimmed 50 characters or so, maybe that'll be enough... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:30, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: In December, there were three TFAs about bombing Japan over a space of 10 days. This is another article about an Allies squadron who bombed Japan in WWII. I understand that WWII is a very interesting period in history, and that all of these are high-quality articles written with NPOV. Still, I think a string of four articles related to bombing Japan in less than a month may be excessive. -- Danny (talk) 22:54, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Just for the record, please read the article -- this squadron never bombed Japan (nor did any other RAAF squadron). Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:03, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - The article says: "No. 1 Squadron launched a series of assaults on the Japanese forces, becoming the first aircraft to make an attack in the Pacific War. The Hudsons sank a Japanese transport ship, the IJN Awazisan Maru, and damaged two more transports, the Ayatosan Maru and Sakura Maru, for the loss of two Hudsons, an hour before the attack on Pearl Harbor." Yes, they attacked Japanese units, not Japan itself, but I think my point still applies. -- Danny (talk) 23:36, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    - The article is about rather more than the squadron's role in WW2, though. Bencherlite ^Talk 23:45, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support High quality work and deserves to be a TFA. I'm not convinced by the Japan argument - the Second World War activity of the squadron is only one part of the its 98 year history. - SchroCat (talk) 08:30, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]