Difference between revisions of "Template:Did you know nominations/No. 75 Wing RAAF"

From blackwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>KCVelaga
(Comment)
imported>Ian Rose
(Add QPQ, modify hook)
Line 11: Line 11:
  
 
-->
 
-->
* ... that an officer brought in to investigate [[Vultee Vengeance]] accidents at '''[[No. 75 Wing RAAF]]''' himself crash-landed in a Vengeance when he left?
+
* ... that an officer appointed by [[North-Eastern Area Command (RAAF)|North-Eastern Area Command]] to investigate [[Vultee Vengeance]] accidents at '''[[No. 75 Wing RAAF]]''' crash-landed in a Vengeance on his return?
  
:* ''Reviewed'': TBA
+
:* ''Reviewed'': [[Template:Did you know nominations/Dynamism of a Dog on a Leash|Dynamism of a Dog on a Leash]]
 
<small>Improved to Good Article status by [[User:Ian Rose|Ian Rose]] ([[User talk:Ian Rose|talk]]). Self-nominated at 11:37, 19 July 2016 (UTC).</small>
 
<small>Improved to Good Article status by [[User:Ian Rose|Ian Rose]] ([[User talk:Ian Rose|talk]]). Self-nominated at 11:37, 19 July 2016 (UTC).</small>
 
<!--
 
<!--
Line 20: Line 20:
  
 
:* [[File:Symbol question.svg|16px]] Long enough, hook is interesting and sourced. No close paraphrasing or neutrality detected. Passed GAN a week ago. QPQ done. I think the word 'appointed' is preferable that the word 'brought' and reconsidering the arrangement of words and other wording which makes the hook; ''... that an officer appointed to investigate [[Vultee Vengeance]] accidents at '''[[No. 75 Wing RAAF]]''', got crash-landed himself while in a Vengeance when he left?''. Besides that everything seems fine. Regards, <span style="background:Gainsboro">[[User:Krishna Chaitanya Velaga|<font color="#FF9933">'''KC'''</font><font color="white">'''Velaga'''</font> ]][[User Talk:KC97|<font color="#128807"><sub>☚╣✉╠☛</sub></font>]] </span> 15:14, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 
:* [[File:Symbol question.svg|16px]] Long enough, hook is interesting and sourced. No close paraphrasing or neutrality detected. Passed GAN a week ago. QPQ done. I think the word 'appointed' is preferable that the word 'brought' and reconsidering the arrangement of words and other wording which makes the hook; ''... that an officer appointed to investigate [[Vultee Vengeance]] accidents at '''[[No. 75 Wing RAAF]]''', got crash-landed himself while in a Vengeance when he left?''. Besides that everything seems fine. Regards, <span style="background:Gainsboro">[[User:Krishna Chaitanya Velaga|<font color="#FF9933">'''KC'''</font><font color="white">'''Velaga'''</font> ]][[User Talk:KC97|<font color="#128807"><sub>☚╣✉╠☛</sub></font>]] </span> 15:14, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 
+
::*Actually I hadn't got round to the QPQ but have now. I definitely agree "appointed" but one doesn't "get" crash-landed so I don't think we should use that. The "himself" was to highlight the irony but I guess we can lose it if it reads oddly. See how the new version looks... Cheers, [[User:Ian Rose|Ian Rose]] ([[User talk:Ian Rose|talk]]) 16:35, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 
}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.-->
 
}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.-->

Revision as of 16:38, 21 July 2016

No. 75 Wing RAAF

Improved to Good Article status by Ian Rose (talk). Self-nominated at 11:37, 19 July 2016 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Long enough, hook is interesting and sourced. No close paraphrasing or neutrality detected. Passed GAN a week ago. QPQ done. I think the word 'appointed' is preferable that the word 'brought' and reconsidering the arrangement of words and other wording which makes the hook; ... that an officer appointed to investigate Vultee Vengeance accidents at No. 75 Wing RAAF, got crash-landed himself while in a Vengeance when he left?. Besides that everything seems fine. Regards, KCVelaga ☚╣✉╠☛ 15:14, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Actually I hadn't got round to the QPQ but have now. I definitely agree "appointed" but one doesn't "get" crash-landed so I don't think we should use that. The "himself" was to highlight the irony but I guess we can lose it if it reads oddly. See how the new version looks... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 16:35, 21 July 2016 (UTC)