Talk:Exercise Strikeback/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''


 * (a) ; yes
 * (b) . no
 * (a) ; no
 * (b) ; no
 * (c) . not sure
 * (a) ; yes
 * (b) . no
 * 1) . yes
 * 2)  yes
 * (b) . no
 * 1) . yes
 * 2)  yes

Summary style
Far too many flowery quotes. replace them with summaries. Wandalstouring (talk) 18:29, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
 * What is wrong with the quotes? &mdash; the _ ed  17  &mdash; 19:00, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I have truncated the Gruenther and Dulles quotes, eliminated the first Trainor quote, and retained the second Trainor and Time magazine quotes in toto. Marcd30319 (talk) 13:13, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia articles should use summary style. The quotes contain lots of non-essential information. Wandalstouring (talk) 08:14, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Suggestions

 * Implement the USS and warship tags where applicable. -MBK004 18:49, 30 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Good day! The USS and warship tags have been implemented to the extent that  it could be done.  Please note that Operation Strikeback transpired in 1957 prior to the 1975 realignment of the U.S. Navy's ship type designations.  Thus, for example, the USS Saratoga (CV-60) had the designation of an "attack aircraft carrier" (i.e., CVA-60) during Operation Strikeback, which cannot be so denoted with USS and warship taggging. Marcd30319 (talk) 18:53, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, they can as long as there is a redirect from that designation: i.e. USS Saratoga (CVA-60) -MBK004 18:57, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * All USS and warship tags that can be implemented have been implemented.Marcd30319 (talk) 21:59, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I see a few more, but I'll take care of them (they require specialized knowledge of the templates to implement). -MBK004 22:25, 3 October 2008 (UTC)