Talk:No. 9 Squadron RAF

Citations

From my talk page:

Why have you completely changed the reference format on this article? You have used the excuse "homogenised the format of the citations" to completely change the format of all references and citations to a form that wasn't in use at all. Where is the consensus for such a change? What was wrong with the existing format?Nigel Ish (talk) 17:34, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

@Nigel Ish There were at least two different citation styles: some using in-line long citations, some using in-line short citations, with corresponding long citations in the references section. In addition, some citations used templates some did not, and there were some books in the references section that had no short in-line citations. At least one of the in-line citations (Tirpitz Bulkhead) was a duplicated dead link. As I said in my note in the history "[I have] added one new source, updated some broken links and homogenised the format of the citations. link in archived copies of web pages to future proof the web site changes".

On my talk page you mention WP:CITEVAR the first sentence says "Editors should not attempt to change an article's established citation style merely on the grounds of personal preference". There was no established style, and I have not altered it "merely on the grounds of personal preference" (as I have explained above). You may have been within the wording of WP:CITEVAR when you reverted this edit by Jgrantduff, but given the use of templates on the page, why did you revert that change and what was your justification for doing so? -- PBS (talk) 17:53, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

There was clearly an established reference style, but it is clear that some editors feel that they can force the efn style on an article. Clearly my presence here is unwelcome.Nigel Ish (talk) 18:05, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

second RAF Tranche 1 Squadron

https://twitter.com/RoyalAirForce/status/1017012567062048768

Sammartinlai (talk) 12:43, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Unbroken service: re-equipped at 0931hrs 1 April 2019, not disbanded / reformed

http://aviationweek.com/defense/f-35-and-typhoon-partner-raf-s-new-backbone?NL=AW-05&Issue=AW-05_20190122_AW-05_878&sfvc4enews=42&cl=article_2&utm_rid=CPEN1000001745486&utm_campaign=18178&utm_medium=email&elq2=3ee159959e9d47b183b2fc795d877b1f

"The first of these will become active with 9 Sqdn. this May, dedicated to the QRA and red-air aggressor training mission."

Requires subscription

BlueD954 (talk) 12:34, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Air Chief Marshal Hillier is quoted in Janes as saying that 9 Squadron would immediately re-equip with Typhoon aircraft upon Tornado's retirement. The May date appears to have been inferred from the parade date being advertised, which has no special significance in this regard. Experience would suggest that the transition will take effect on 1 April as that is the beginning of the UK Government's financial year. Eazix (talk) 01:16, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

According to Military Aircraft Markings, 9 Squadron has already been allocated 4 Typhoons at RAF Lossiemouth http://www.militaryaircraftmarkings.co.uk/updates/MAMupdate165-2019.pdf Is this worth adding? F4JPhantomII (talk) 10:06, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

See https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/770656/16194.pdf this. BlueD954 (talk) 12:01, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Video statement by outgoing and incoming squadron commanders, published through official RAF channels on Facebook and Twitter, indicates unbroken handover from Tornado to Typhoon at 0931hrs GMT on 1 April 2019 as predicted in my talk contribution of 12 February. Typhoon activity during February and March probably best considered as 'shadow squadron' buildup ahead of transfer of identity; not worth complicating the main article with such detailed explanation. Dates of parades (14 March and 2 May) not considered pertinent given the unequivocal nature of commanders' statements. Eazix (talk) 22:57, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

References

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• 9 Squadron in Formation 1939-45.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:22, 10 March 2019 (UTC)