Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/No. 78 Wing RAAF

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article promoted Hawkeye7 (talk) 09:47, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No. 78 Wing RAAF

[edit]
Nominator(s): Ian Rose (talk)


Why stop when I'm enjoying it? Yet another active RAAF wing, an appropriate companion piece to No. 81 Wing, which I've just nominated -- both were fighter formations in the Pacific during WWII, and operated Sabres in the 1960s. After that things began to diverge, as fighters became more complicated and expensive, and therefore fewer in number. The Air Force couldn't sustain two fighter wings, so it now has one (No. 81), plus a fast-jet training wing in support (No. 78). The latter's story is no less interesting for that and, as the sources are pretty well interchangeable, I hope that running the pair at ACR simultaneously will make reviewing them relatively straightforward. Tks/cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:27, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support: again, good work and not much for me here. I have the following points:

  • is there source information for "File:78WingRAAF.jpg"?
    • Can't imagine why I didn't note that at the time, same for 81 Wing's crest I think -- would've been the RAAF website as it was then, think we should just say "RAAF" somewhere.
  • is there any more that could be said about the types of operations undertaken during the invasion of Tarakan and the Battle of Balikpapan? Did the wing continue to fly ground attack missions, or had something changed after the "Mutiny"?
    • Will re-check Odgers and co...
  • as per the 81 Wing review, can something be added of casualties or losses in the World War II section?
  • "Sabres flew missions against communist guerrilla forces" --> ground attack missions?
    • Indeed, will do.
  • "six months to one year-long rotations". Should this be: "six month- to one year-long rotations"? AustralianRupert (talk) 02:50, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support
    • I reviewed for GA over a year ago, so due to the passage of time and the changes that have occurred since then I have done a full review. Article meets ACR criteria in my opinion.
    • No dab links [1] (no action req'd).
    • External links all check out [2] (no action req'd).
    • Images lack Alt Text so you might consider adding it [3] (not an ACR requirement - suggestion only).
    • The Citation Check Tool reveals no issues with reference consolidation (no action req'd).
    • Images are all PD or have a valid fair use rationale and are appropriate for the article (no action req'd).
    • The Earwig Tool reveal no issues with copyright violation or close paraphrasing (only a wiki mirror) [4] (no action req'd).
    • No duplicate links per WP:REPEATLINK (no action req'd).
    • A little repetitive here: "The relegation of No. 1 TAF to areas of operations bypassed by the main Allied thrust towards the Philippines and Japan led to poor morale in late 1944 and early 1945. In April 1945, the newly appointed Officer Commanding No. 78 Wing, Group Captain Wilfred Arthur, helped bring about the so-called "Morotai Mutiny" in protest at the relegation..." (relegation twice).
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Anotherclown (talk • contribs) 08:01, 19 May 2013‎

Comments.

  • "By the middle of the year, the wing's rate of effort in New Guinea operations was consistently higher than its counterparts in the US Fifth Air Force.": ... than that of its ... (if I understand right); also; what's a rate of effort?
  • "which had been delayed moving its aircraft": This could mean two different things; I suggest "which had been delayed while it moved its aircraft", if that's accurate.
  • "May–June": May and June
  • "No. 79 Squadron continues to provide": Any thoughts on "As of (date) ...."?
  • Support on prose per new standard disclaimer. - Dank (push to talk) 22:46, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment/No._78_Wing_RAAF&oldid=647916455"