Talk:RIM-101

Military history: Technology / Weaponry / North America / United States / Cold War

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

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	Cold War task force (c. 1945 – c. 1989)

Possibly?

I wasn't sure about the term "possibly" in the Lead section, until I read further down. But then "Some sources" cites two works by the same author. Perhaps another source, or leading the sentence with "It is speculated..."? Also, a short paragraph, even a sentence or two, comparing the two projects could justify to the reader why the RIM-101 might have been a derivative project of RIM-7. Clear these up, and I'll come back with a "B"! Good luck! Boneyard90 (talk) 03:13, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed "some sources" to "it has been...", and added a bit about the timing of RIM-101 vs the RIM-7 variants. Hope that helps! :) - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:19, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And B-class it shall be! Boneyard90 (talk) 04:26, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]