Not really much for me to pick at here, which is a good thing but also makes a reviewer question whether or not they've done a good job. But anyway, here goes...
"the air force" --> not sure about the capitalisation here. At least from an organisational perspective, in the Army we would capitalise in this case as a de facto proper noun. For instance, where one is refering to a generic organisation (any "air force") we don't, but where it is unambigiously a specific brand of air force, for instance the Royal Australian Air Force or the US Air Force, we would use "the Air Force". I'll leave it up to you, though, as it is not a major issue (I note, though, that later you use "the Army");
was there a reason for this: "In November 1971, two Phantoms flew non-stop from Amberley to RAAF Base Darwin"? For instance, was it to test the aircraft's endurance/range?
"If the Phantoms had remained in service they would have been used to provide close air support for the Army". I wonder if this should be clarified just a little. For instance, "would have been re-roled to provide close air support for the Army, as the F-111s assumed the strike role";
That's as much as the source says, unfortunately. I've added the 're-rolled' as that's a logical extension of the sources though. I think that the F-111s also had a close air support role (though whether this was a good idea is open to interpretation!).
Nick-D (
talk)
03:54, 29 July 2012 (UTC)reply
a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
It is stable.
No edit wars etc.:
It contains
images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
a (tagged and captioned): b (Is illustrated with appropriate images): c (non-free images have
fair use rationales): d public domain pictures appropriately demonstrate why they are public domain:
Not really much for me to pick at here, which is a good thing but also makes a reviewer question whether or not they've done a good job. But anyway, here goes...
"the air force" --> not sure about the capitalisation here. At least from an organisational perspective, in the Army we would capitalise in this case as a de facto proper noun. For instance, where one is refering to a generic organisation (any "air force") we don't, but where it is unambigiously a specific brand of air force, for instance the Royal Australian Air Force or the US Air Force, we would use "the Air Force". I'll leave it up to you, though, as it is not a major issue (I note, though, that later you use "the Army");
was there a reason for this: "In November 1971, two Phantoms flew non-stop from Amberley to RAAF Base Darwin"? For instance, was it to test the aircraft's endurance/range?
"If the Phantoms had remained in service they would have been used to provide close air support for the Army". I wonder if this should be clarified just a little. For instance, "would have been re-roled to provide close air support for the Army, as the F-111s assumed the strike role";
That's as much as the source says, unfortunately. I've added the 're-rolled' as that's a logical extension of the sources though. I think that the F-111s also had a close air support role (though whether this was a good idea is open to interpretation!).
Nick-D (
talk)
03:54, 29 July 2012 (UTC)reply
a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
It is stable.
No edit wars etc.:
It contains
images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
a (tagged and captioned): b (Is illustrated with appropriate images): c (non-free images have
fair use rationales): d public domain pictures appropriately demonstrate why they are public domain: