Talk:No. 78 Squadron RAAF/GA1

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Ian Rose (talk · contribs) 01:59, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How can I say no? ;-) Should be able to get to it in the next day or two... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:59, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ian Nick-D (talk) 07:01, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review:

No issues with dup, dab or external links.

Structure, referencing, detail, neutrality and image licensing all okay.

Couple of minor points re. inforbox:

If using a flag for service then I guess we should use one for nationality/allegiance (I prefer not to see them at all myself, but they still seem to be the convention).
- I don't like them much either; removed.
I think we'd generally add "World War II" (unlinked) to the engagements, then indent or bullet point the linked campaigns beneath.
- Good point - done

I copyedited for prose so check you're happy with all that, otherwise I think we're about done. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 07:47, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for the review and edits Ian Nick-D (talk) 07:50, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- No prob -- passed as GA. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 08:00, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]