Talk:Folland Gnat

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
AVIATION This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.

The photo on the Folland Gnat page, titled 'Folland Gnat T.1', is not a trainer (T.1), but a fighter, therefore 'F.1'. It is one of the Gnat fighters of the Finnish airforce.

[edit] WP:MILHIST Assessment

I think it might be helpful to make it more explicit in the intro that this is a British-designed/built aircraft. When I got to "Although it was never used as a fighter by the British Royal Air Force (RAF)...", I was quite thrown off. Not knowing it was a British plane, I could have expected just as much to see "Although never used by the USAF," or "never used by the Australian Air Force..." This sentence implies that it's a British plane, but without knowledge of who WEW Petter is, the reader is not made explicitly aware of the origins of the craft. LordAmeth 13:16, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Edit change made to clarify origin of the aircraft. Thanks for the reminder, I'm just slow to react. :} Bzuk 16:20, 3 July 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Editing changes

Major reverts should first be discussed in an open forum. I invite your comments. FWIW Bzuk 04:55, 11 June 2007 (UTC).

After a considerable period, I have made some editorial changes to the format and not to the context or information of the article. IMHO, a bit of POV was actually diffused. FWIW Bzuk 16:17, 3 July 2007 (UTC).
No problem. I think it looks better now perhaps? Idleguy 16:48, 4 July 2007 (UTC)