This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
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:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
@ K.e.Coffman: I see you have attacked another air biography with your editorial scalpel. Your reason cited was to remove "non-RS or likely non-RS" sources. Can you give us your reason you consider the Osprey book by Robert Forsyth and non-RS, yet have chosen to keep the other Osprey books by John Weal included? Do you feel that the company's editorial standards have slipped significantly in the years between Weal's last book and the newer book by Forsythe. I am also interested what is defined as "likely non-RS"? Is this a new Wiki-reference category - does it just not "feel right"? Or is it just your subjective opinion having read the book yourself and compared it to other books you have read on the subject? Philby NZ (talk) 23:57, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the editor is referring to this edit. Neither book was used for citations, so I removed them per WP:FURTHER. The edit summary "non RS or likely non RS & not used for citations" is a canned edit summary I have saved in my browser. Hope this clarifies. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:06, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]