Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Military aviation task force/Archive 1

message: Howdy.
I'm not really a big aviation expert, but I would like suggest regardless that creating a standardized headings template for military aircraft articles should be among the first tasks done. Oberiko 02:22, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the WP:AIR group is in the process of creating aircraft templates. Meanwhile, sign up your name! Come on, the water's fine! :) Guapovia 03:57, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Template

message: How is this different from what WP:Air is already doing? WP:Air has covered the vast majority of better-known aircraft in good detail with an established (more or less) standardized layout, templates, etc. Please outline in detail what you are planning to do with these aircraft articles or how you plan to expand military aviation history beyond what's already there on Wikipedia. 
Lest I be misunderstood, I'm not hostile towards this Task Force. I just don't understand what it plans to accomplish.
- Emt147 Burninate! 05:30, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. There's no point in breaking out the military air stuff from the civil — they already are completely intertwined. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 05:49, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nobody's breaking it out. I just think that military aviation can be better blended in with 'the rest of history'. This is a task force, not a new WikiProject. :) The1exile claimed there's a bias against aviation in Wikipedia; oldwindybear had an idea about showing wars and battles in the grand scheme of things. Aviation had a significant role in military history; we can make sure that it's visible. This task force would help coordinate that effort. Guapovia 11:02, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed; the intent here is not to take over the purely technical descriptions already done by WikiProject Aircraft.  Of more interest to the military history project is their use: major pilots and commanders of aviation units, aerial warfare and major battles and campaigns involving it, the role of air power in wars, etc.  While we could obviously work on this on our own, we thought some WikiProject Aircraft members might be interested in these aspects of military aviation as well. —Kirill Lokshin 11:45, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Fair enough! :) Guapovia 19:21, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  How is this different? 

message: I'm not sure what the Airbox Template is but if it concerns the specs, I disagree with changing them. The Spit variants were different enough that they warrant a side-by-side comparison. - Emt147 Burninate! 00:58, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, what about one of those nice boxes on top? makes the article look nice. We can keep the comparisons in at the bottom. See, my not-so-secret little plan is to start with several famous aircraft and make them FA's. That could kickstart aviation interest in Wikipedia. We can use another aircraft, (say P-51?) Guapovia 14:17, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  P-51 needs a lot of copyediting (yes, it takes as long to fix as to complain, yadda yadda). A good infobox with useful links (the WWI one is a start but too brief) would be nice. Yes, it makes sense to start with the famous aircraft. - Emt147 Burninate! 20:30, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The famous are generally because they are important,eg  Merlin engined P51's improved the USAAFs losses over Europe.GraemeLeggett 09:47, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spitfire 

message: Let me know if I can lend a hand.  Have been adding entries for some more obscure aircraft.Winstonwolfe 21:14, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Let me know if I can help out 

message: I am a new and bigger aspiring Wikipedian who has been writing and correcting articles on Civil War Ballooning. By far this is the biggest story in the genesis of military aviation as it pertains to aerial reconnaissance, mind you, and not actual air combat warfare. 
We all  know Pancho Barns who had the tavern on Edwards Air Force Base in California, as seen in the movie "The Right Stuff." And that she is the granddaughter of Prof. Thaddeus Lowe the developer of the Union Army Balloon Corps. There was a time in the 50's when the base kicked her off the property. SHE SUED the Air Force claiming that her grandfather was the founder of the U. S. Air Force. On that premise she won her place back and a $375,000 restitution.
Well, I consider myself an authority on that part of military aviation and have written a book Intrepid: an account of Prof. T. S. C. Lowe, Civil War Aeronaut and Hero.
Lemme know Magi Media 02:29, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I can kick it off! 

message: This subject is a mess, it needs someone to rationalise the articles. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Archive 18#Aerial bombing and Talk:Strategic bombing during World War II#Title --Philip Baird Shearer 10:13, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aerial bombing 

message: There has been some talk on WP:MILHIST's talk page regarding the kind of articles this Task Force should actually cover. Since articles on military aircraft are already within the realm of WP:AIRCRAFT, it may be a good idea to come up with a new set of objectives for this Task Force, so as to avoid any possible overlapping, and to focus the efforts of the TF on maintaining articles outside the scope of WP:AIRCRAFT.
Thus, I propose the following objectives for the Military Aviation Task Force:
Our Goals
*To provide general suggestions for articles dealing with aerial warfare.
*To improve Wikipedia's coverage of military aviation by creating, expanding, and maintaining such articles.
Our scope 
Articles dealing with any of the following topics:
*Aerial warfare, including air battles or campaigns, air raids, bombing strikes.
*Individuals related to the history of military aviation, including leaders, pilots, crewmen, ground staff, strategists, as well as designers and researchers involved in the development of military aviation technology.
*Air units, air bases, significant individual airplanes or squadrons. 
*Air combat tactics, aerial warfare strategies, terminology, technology.
What's being left out: Articles about military aircraft and/or weapons. The former are already being taken care of by WP:AIRCRAFT, while the later may fall within the scope of the soon-to-be-created Weaponry Task Force. 
Please add any other items I may have left out, or revise the abovementioned ones. Any thoughts? Andrés C. 22:03, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks good to me.  I would point out, though, that even when a Weaponry task force is created, there's no reason why this one can't play a role in articles about aircraft weapons; the task forces are meant to have a certain amount of overlap (for example, an article on a British WWII anti-aircraft cannon could concievably be worked on by any of four different task forces). Kirill Lokshin 22:26, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I completely agree also. The goals and scope above fill a void left in between the Aircraft and Military history projects that is lacking attention. There is alot of things that need improvement. I see no problem with a secondary  focus of this task force being the aircraft and weapons themselves as Kirll said. I really look foward to being able to contribute to this task force. --Spot87 23:32, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Andrés C. 14:41, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Task Force Objectives 

message: There are two competing claims for the first RAF victory in WWII; the Fairey Battle (on 20 September 1939 according to the RAF website) and the Lockheed Hudson (on 8 October 1939 according to Terraine's The Right of the Line RAF history and others).  Does anyone know which one is right? Gsl 23:42, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  First RAF victory in WWII 

message: Like #Aerial bombing above, this area is mess, it needs someone to rationalise the articles. See Ground attack aircraft#Merge --Philip Baird Shearer 10:19, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Close air support - ground attack aircraft - strike fighter

message: What is one supposed to do with this article? Currently it redirects to history of military ballooning, but if we really plan to make a separate article I could do that.-KingPenguin 11:04, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm.  I would think there would be enough material on the topic to make a full article worthwhile.  I'm a bit surprised we don't have such an article already, though; maybe it's been misnamed somehow? Kirill Lokshin 13:56, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[History of military aviation]]

message: Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory.  This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you.  B2T2 21:37, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project directory 

message: There's a new request for A-Class status for Operation Commando Hunt that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 17:35, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[Operation Commando Hunt]] 

message: Sorry to trouble you, but a month ago, I saved List of Cold War pilot defections from an early grave at AfD. I feel a bit responsible for getting it into some sort of readable form, however I have no particular knowledge of or interest in military aviation or the Cold War, and it was only through a fluke that I recognized the article's significance in the first place. I'd originally hoped someone else might find it on their own, but that hasn't happened. So I'm coming here to see if anyone has any knowledge of the subject, I'm at a loss. Thank you. --tjstrf talk 11:06, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does anyone have any knowledge about this? 

message: This is a VERY long article, at over 200 kb. Unless anyone has a difficulty (maybe the writer), I'm going to reduce its size by moving the Strategic Wings (mostly the 1000+ numbered MAJCOM wings) to the Strategic Wings page, unless there are better suggestions. Buckshot06 22:30, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Meh.  I suppose that would work as a stop-gap solution, but at least the wings with significant histories probably ought to be split out to their own articles in the long run. Kirill Lokshin 23:50, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Mmm, is there some reason why just splitting out some of the meatier entries into their own articles won't work here? Kirill Lokshin 04:52, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Only the anticipated objections/reverts of the main contributer..Buckshot06 08:08, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Strategic Air Command wings]]

message: There's a new peer review request for List of United States Marine Corps aircraft squadrons that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 13:27, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review request for [[List of United States Marine Corps aircraft squadrons]] 

message: There's a new peer review request for Invasion of Tulagi (May 1942) that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 13:42, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review request for [[Invasion of Tulagi (May 1942)]] 

message: There's a new request for A-Class status for Invasion of Tulagi (May 1942) that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 13:42, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[Invasion of Tulagi (May 1942)]] 

message: There's a new request for A-Class status for Battle of Khe Sanh that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 17:42, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[Battle of Khe Sanh]] 

message: Gzkn 11:45, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Convair B-36]] 

message: There's a new request for A-Class status for F-84 Thunderjet that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 02:53, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[F-84 Thunderjet]] 

message: There's a new request for A-Class status for F-105 Thunderchief that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 02:53, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[F-105 Thunderchief]] 

message: I would appreciate any help I can get with User:Raul654/favpics/Virginia2006. It's a gallery of pictures I took while I was visiting Virginia this weekend - mostly from the Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center, and a few from the new Marine Corps musuem in Quantico. There are a lot of red links there that need creating, and most of the rest need to be inserted into articles. Raul654 05:28, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Help needed

message: There's a new request for A-Class status for Operation Linebacker II that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 18:27, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[Operation Linebacker II]] 

message: There's a new request for A-Class status for B-17 Flying Fortress that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 20:02, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[B-17 Flying Fortress]] 

message: There's a new request for A-Class status for Operation Igloo White that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 17:05, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[Operation Igloo White]] 

message: There's a new peer review request for Kurt Welter that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 15:34, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review request for [[Kurt Welter]] 

message: There's a new request for A-Class status for Operation Linebacker that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 14:02, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[Operation Linebacker]] 

message: There's a new peer review request for HM-15 that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 23:36, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review request for [[HM-15]] 

message: There's a new peer review request for Sukhoi Su-30 that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 00:52, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Comments added. — Askari Mark (Talk) 03:41, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review request for [[Sukhoi Su-30]] 

message: There's a new peer review request for Operation Rolling Thunder that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 12:40, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review request for [[Operation Rolling Thunder]] 

message: There's a new peer review request for Flypast that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 04:40, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review request for [[Flypast]] 

message: There's a discussion going on at the military unit infobox talk page about adapting the infobox for national service branches (in particular, national air forces) that could use some additional input.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 03:43, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox for air forces 

message: There's a new request for A-Class status for Operation Rolling Thunder that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 13:41, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[Operation Rolling Thunder]] 

message: There's a new peer review request for Operation Igloo White that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 18:41, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review request for [[Operation Igloo White]] 

message: There's a new peer review request for P-38 Lightning that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 13:36, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review request for [[P-38 Lightning]] 

message: There's a new request for A-Class status for Operation Igloo White that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 21:38, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[Operation Igloo White]] 

message: There's a new peer review request for Operation Barrel Roll that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 00:15, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review request for [[Operation Barrel Roll]] 

message: There's a new request for A-Class status for Operation Barrel Roll that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 03:27, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[Operation Barrel Roll]] 

message: There's a new peer review request for Operation Menu that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 21:52, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review request for [[Operation Menu]] 

message: There's a new request for A-Class status for Battle of Khe Sanh that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 17:23, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[Battle of Khe Sanh]] 

message: There's a new request for A-Class status for Operation Igloo White that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 15:39, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[Operation Igloo White]] 

message: There's a new request for A-Class status for List of United States Marine Corps aircraft squadrons that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 04:42, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[List of United States Marine Corps aircraft squadrons]] 

message: This is a small bit of trivia that relates to the discovery of the jet stream. According to sources, one of the outlier cases that was noted by aviators was a 1943 RAF bomber squadron that encountered 380kph headwinds over the Gironde, apparently causing the planes to run out of fuel and the crews to parachute out in German-occupied France, whereupon they were taken prisoner. Our source(s), one of which is translated from German by proxy, says the planes "stalled" which seems aerodynamically unlikely. A better source for this incident would be helpful, but it doesn't seem to be documented anywhere I can google. Any suggestions? --Dhartung | Talk 05:38, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  1943 bomber bailout over Gironde 

message: There's a new peer review request for Robin Olds that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 09:09, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review request for [[Robin Olds]] 

message: There's a new request for A-Class status for Tupolev TB-3 that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 03:36, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[Tupolev TB-3]] 

message: There's a new request for A-Class status for Zveno project that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 08:33, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[Zveno project]] 

message: There's a new request for A-Class status for B-52 aircraft crash at Fairchild Air Force Base that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 10:56, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[B-52 aircraft crash at Fairchild Air Force Base]] 

message: How would I sign-up for this thing? Just stick my name on the list?
-AceFighterPilot 04:07, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, that's all. Kirill Lokshin 04:23, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sign-ups? 

message: There's a new peer review request for DFS 346 that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 10:58, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review request for [[DFS 346]] 

message: There's a new request for A-Class status for Sukhoi Su-25 that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill 16:18, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[Sukhoi Su-25]] 

message: Gransden Lodge Airfield the former RAF Gransden Lodge has beed nominated for deletion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gransden Lodge Airfield, this may be of interest to task force members. MilborneOne 12:06, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gransden Lodge Airfield 

message: Just wanted to let you know about this article.  Hopefully, it does not duplicate the content of any other existing article.  --Richard 07:57, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New article:[[South Atlantic air ferry route in World War II]] 

message: Hi there,
I'm forwarding this question to this project as suggested in the Village pump.
I would like to request your help do clarify a doubt of mine. I've been lately working more on articles related to the Portuguese Air Force here at Wikipedia and have ran intro some trouble when translating correctly the squadron's number format. I took a look around and tried to adopt a format already used in another air force article (i.e. USAF and Royal Air Force) but they ended up seeming incorrect.
Just to show you the problem and the type of formats that I tried I'll post here a brief explanation. In Portuguese the naming used for squadrons - and using an real example - is Esquadra 201 Falcões - Esquadra = Squadron, Falcões = Falcons. Now, I don't have any problems translating Falcões, but I'm in doubt about the right translation for Esquadra 201. Here are some examples of the translations that I tried so far:
* 201st SquadronThis is the format used by the USAF (i.e. 18th Fighter Squadron), and I personally have used this once but it is incorrect, since the PoAF's squadron numbers aren't just "plain numbers", instead they are a set of three algorithms in which the first two indicate the squadron's primary mission and the type of aircraft operated.
* No. 201 SquadronThis is the form used by the Royal Air Force and other commonwealth air forces.
* 201 SquadronThis naming was already used in some articles by other users and seems correct but there is still another option.
* Squadron 201This one is actually the one used at the official PoAF website in English, but still I'm in doubt about using it.
This is probably something really simple, but I would appreciate any help to clarify this.
Best regards, Get_It 17:45, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the main guideline on this is WP:MILHIST#UNITNAME; in the absence of a convincing reason to do otherwise, I would just follow whatever the PoAF itself uses in its translated texts. Kirill 17:59, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your help. I also asked for help at an Portuguese aviation forum and they replied that although the PoAF uses 'Squadron 201' in their website, the most common translation used is '201 Squadron'. Best regards, Get_It 17:15, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "201 Squadron" would be best. "Esquadra 201" does not express an ordinal number, so that should definitely not be used. The other three are all options, given the lack of firm translation rules, but "Squadron 201" is not a normal style. "No. 201 Squadron" wouldn't actually be wrong, but would be more appropriate if it were used to translate "Esquadra Numero 201". Askari Mark (Talk) 23:27, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correct PoAF squadron name writing? 

message: I looked, and I could not find the definition of these terms. Further there is no page for airfield, there being a redirect to aerodrome. However aerodrome is no longer in common use, these having been replaced by airports or aeroports. Civilian airports are the equals of military air bases. Of course to further confuse the issue RAF and the US Navy/USMC calls their aerodrome, air stations. 
An even further confusion is from this entry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Air_Forces_in_Europe that states:
AB = Air Base. Flying/Operational base with permanently assigned aircraft.
AS = Air Station. No permanently assigned aircraft, may or may not have a runway and flying facilities.
The reason I was looking is because I was trying to find information on operation of tactical combat airfields, their organisation and operation during WW2.
It seems to me that an air base/station is a fairly permanent establishment (many date to WW1), usually located within the national territory of a country, with a permanent non-flying operational component. An airfield seems to me to be a temporary establishment for the duration of particular operational requirements of a short period of campaign (hence the use of 'field'!), and most often will be a part of a flying unit, and commanded by the flying unit officer.
An air base may have non-combat flying related missions such as receiving replacement aircraft and their assembly and maintenance/repair, pilot training and type conversion, communications and radar installations, medical and administration facilities, and even housing for the personnel, including civilian employees.
An airfield will concern itself with combat functions only, and will have only limited maintenance and  medical capability for field repair and treatment, and all of the installation will be temporary and mobile. Usually they will operate aircraft capable of taking of from unprepared or temporary runways.
I appreciate that in the United States some historical air bases are in fact called Airfield, and that in UK and France the word used is Aerodrome http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airfield, and often for both types of installations, but essentially its all about the difference of having permanent and makeshift (field!) runway which is not covered by this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runway article. 
No article seems to cover the construction, and operation of field runways and airfields.--Mrg3105 07:15, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Air bases, aifields, field runways, and forward operating bases 

message: The A-Class review for George Jones (RAAF officer) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated!  Thanks! Kirill 14:22, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[George Jones (RAAF officer)]] now open 

message: At one time, weren't aircraft categorized by war in addition to being categorized by decade?  Is there some kind of policy regarding this? Oberiko 23:17, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Aircraft by war

message: There's a new peer review request for Richard Williams (RAAF officer) that may be of interest to you; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill 01:39, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review request for [[Richard Williams (RAAF officer)]] 

message: There's a new peer review request for B-52 Stratofortress that may be of interest to you; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill 01:06, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review request for [[B-52 Stratofortress]] 

message: There's a new peer review request for Air Force of the Army of the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution that may be of interest to you; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill 20:21, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review request for [[Air Force of the Army of the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution]] 

message: The A-Class review for Richard Williams (RAAF officer) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated!  Thanks! Kirill 03:43, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[Richard Williams (RAAF officer)]] now open 

message: Hi there, Xian H-8 a new article on a Chinese bomber has been created, but I can't find anything about this on the web. Is this genuine? Tim Vickers 18:15, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Help request

message: As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I'm specifically going over all of the "Conflicts, battles and military exercises" articles and just reviewed Battle of Britain. I believe the article currently meets the majority of the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues considering sourcing that should be addressed, and I'll leave the article on hold for seven days for them to be fixed. I am leaving this message at this task force, along with the other relevant task forces to the article, since the article falls under this topic and figured you might be interested in helping to improve the article further.  The article needs some more inline citations, and if added, I'll pass the article. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page, and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Nehrams2020 05:21, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: After leaving the article on hold and the issues I mentioned were not addressed, I have listed the article at Good article reassessment to get a better consensus on the articles' status. Issues needing to be address are listed there. Please join the discussion to see how the article can be improved to prevent delisting. If you have any questions about the reassessement, leave me a message on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. Regards, --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:56, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Battle of Britain]] GA Sweeps Review: On Hold

message: The peer review for 2007 United States Air Force nuclear weapons incident is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated!  Thanks! Kirill 04:28, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review for [[2007 United States Air Force nuclear weapons incident]] now open 

message: The A-Class review for 2007 United States Air Force nuclear weapons incident is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated!  Thanks! Kirill 13:53, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[2007 United States Air Force nuclear weapons incident]] now open 

message: The A-Class review for C-5 Galaxy is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated!  Thanks! Kirill 20:23, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[C-5 Galaxy]] now open 

message: The A-Class review for 1962 South Vietnamese Presidential Palace bombing is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated!  Thanks! Kirill 12:41, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[1962 South Vietnamese Presidential Palace bombing]] now open 

message: The peer review for 1994 Black Hawk shootdown incident is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated!  Thanks! Kirill 03:19, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review for [[1994 Black Hawk shootdown incident]] now open 

message: The A-Class review for 1994 Black Hawk shootdown incident is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated!  Thanks! Kirill 02:18, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[1994 Black Hawk shootdown incident]] now open