Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Peer review/Flypast

Flypast

The page is somewhat UK-centric, but is well-sourced and well-written - and the author seems extremely motivated to make improvements to the page, but is yet not that familiar with the assessment and improvement process and is looking for feedback. I upgraded it from 'Start' to 'B' and nominated for GA, despite the concerns about scope.

(Kind of interesting to see a military page without enough US focus, usually we have the opposite issue. Should be easy to fix.)

It could definitely use a "United States" section and would probably be better off without some of the less significant examples. Once it's improved, this article would probably be a good merge destination for Missing man formation. - RJASE1 04:29, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Kirill Lokshin

It's a good start, but there's still a massive amount of work to be done. The article is, essentially, a list of flypasts and flypast performers; there's no real background provided here. More attention needs to be devoted to the basics of the flypast itself. What is the history of the practice? How are flypasts organized? How are planes arranged, and how to they perform the flypast? How do civilian flypasts differ from military ones? And so forth.

Beyond that, the prose needs to be greatly condensed. As it is, much of the article consists of single-sentence paragraphs; there needs to be a move towards larger blocks of prose. The same applies to very short sections, which should be combined with the surrounding ones to create more reasonably-sized breaks in the article. Similarly, the gallery should be broken up in favor of sprinkling images all through the article. Kirill Lokshin 05:11, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Nick Dowling

This is an interesting and worthwhile topic, but the current article is a bit disjointed. As noted by Kirill, the article is dominated by a somewhat random collection of flypasts over the last 50 years. My suggestion for improving the article would be to focus on the various occasions on which flypasts often occur (the current content has a number of excellent examples which could be used to illustrate these occassions) and how flypasts are organised. --Nick Dowling 23:22, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

PocklingtonDan

I'd like to see the article build in more sections and work into a coherent article rather than the current semi-list of flypasts. You could have separate sections on the origins of the flypast internationally, on crashes and incidents, on techniques used (coloured smoke), on the mechanics of it (distance between planes, pilot training level, suitable and non-suitable planes, difficulties in getting permission for flypasts over urban areas). Basically the current article content (list of events) should be just one sub-section of the article, not the main thrust of it. - PocklingtonDan 08:46, 1 February 2007 (UTC)