User talk:SkipSmith
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hi.
[edit] Dubious Harrier statements
I'm curious behind your reasoning regarding the USMC's development (not "invention" - 2 different things) of VIFFing, per [this diff. Why did you feel it necessary to remove the whole sentence, rather than just add {{fact}} tags as is normally recommended? I've added one source already, and am getting at least two others ready to add. These three are print sources, but only one is written by an American (the other two are well-known British authors in the aiviation field). A fourth source is online at Greg Goebel's Vectorsite. While this is not an editorally-reviewed site, and as such not really a reliable source, he does list (but not cite) his sources. The two British authors have several works in the list, including two of the books I mentioned. THis will at least give you a quick overview of the concept of VIFFing and its development. I don't know how familar you are with military viation in general, or with the Harrier in particular, so I'm not trying to jump your case too hard here. However, I really can't see how you have any basis for considering this to be dubious enough not to add tags first rather than delete outright. It really is true that not everything in aviation was developed by the British - most, yes, but not all! :) - BillCJ (talk) 04:44, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Also, you stated "This whole section needs a rewrite." Could you be so kind as to be more specific? Nothing sticks out to me about the section as needing a rewrite. If it helps, just rewrite the section on the Talk:Hawker Siddeley Harrier page the way you think it should be written. Don't worry about the fact-checking, as this is just an exercise to help me understand your problems with the text - once I understand it, we can work on lining up sources either way. - BillCJ (talk) 06:51, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
