Talk:Wisley Airfield

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 not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

This article is supported by the airport project.

Military history: Aviation / British / European

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 not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force

Anecdotal history

This diff shows material that I have reverted as being unsourced. The material is interesting, of that I have no doubt, but it is unsourced. Accordingly I am bringing this to the talk page for interested parties to discuss and reach a conclusion. I am neutral about the material, which looks like grist to the mill, but I oppose the introduction of unsourced material. Thus I have reverted the re-addition on that important technicality.

Find sources and it should go in. WP:42 applies in all cases. Fiddle Faddle 12:49, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison with Crichel down

I have no expertise on this but wonder whether there is any comparison with the constitutionally famous Crichel Down affair. JRPG (talk) 15:42, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]