206:
Yes I have said I may pitch in, but I am not bothered about this section to be honest. I agree it feels a bit like trivia. ZLEA is right that itās a standard section, but if user(s) have strong feelings about maintaining this section then they need to work on verifability. Failing that, letās remove
131:
The article contains a few cn tags, a failed verification tag, and cites many sources flagged up as unrealible (most natable F-16.net). I think the aircrafts on display section is trivia, and removing that may bring the article closer to GA, but some more work is needed.
187:
What type of sourcing can be used for those sections? At the moment, it seems to be primarily sourced to F-16.net, which shows up as red in my source-checking script (generally unreliable). To note here
147:
I don't usually comment on GA reassessments, but I'll chime in to say that "Aircraft on display" or "Surviving aircraft" are a standard section on aircraft articles, especially for military aircraft. -
80:
76:
61:
53:
173:, but a section containing 83 aircraft (1.8% of all of these planes built) seems a bit unnecessary. And this is a plane which is still being not only flown, but built.
101:
69:
250:
230:
216:
201:
182:
164:
141:
124:
46:
17:
39:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
266:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
246:
226:
178:
120:
242:
222:
174:
116:
110:: Many sentences/paragraphs tagged for improvement, while numerous statistics are not cited, failing
212:
279:
197:
137:
155:
111:
273:
221:
If no opposition makes itself known, I'll remove the sectionin a couple of days.
208:
189:
193:
133:
170:
149:
114:, along with concerns over stability (see recent edit-warring).
237:
192:
has indicated at talk that they may work on the articleĀ :).
96:
88:
57:
8:
28:General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon
7:
35:The following discussion is closed.
18:Knowledge:Good article reassessment
24:
262:The discussion above is closed.
97:Watch article reassessment page
1:
231:18:44, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
217:12:22, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
202:16:29, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
183:16:23, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
165:16:20, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
142:12:17, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
296:
125:15:20, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
251:11:13, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
264:Please do not modify it.
37:Please do not modify it.
169:I would usually agree
243:~~ AirshipJungleman29
223:~~ AirshipJungleman29
175:~~ AirshipJungleman29
117:~~ AirshipJungleman29
235:Section removed by
102:Most recent review
38:
36:
287:
240:
163:
158:
152:
115:
99:
93:
84:
65:
295:
294:
290:
289:
288:
286:
285:
284:
270:
269:
268:
267:
236:
161:
160:
156:
150:
112:GA criterion 2b
106:
95:
74:
51:
45:
41:
31:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
293:
291:
283:
282:
272:
271:
261:
260:
259:
258:
257:
256:
255:
254:
253:
233:
185:
154:
129:
128:
127:
104:
42:
33:
32:
30:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
292:
281:
278:
277:
275:
265:
252:
248:
244:
239:
234:
232:
228:
224:
220:
219:
218:
214:
210:
205:
204:
203:
199:
195:
191:
186:
184:
180:
176:
172:
168:
167:
166:
159:
153:
146:
145:
144:
143:
139:
135:
126:
122:
118:
113:
109:
105:
103:
98:
92:
91:
87:
82:
78:
73:
72:
68:
63:
59:
55:
50:
49:
44:
43:
40:
29:
26:
19:
263:
130:
107:
89:
85:
71:Article talk
70:
66:
47:
34:
27:
190:User:Mark83
58:visual edit
194:āFemke š¦
134:āFemke š¦
274:Category
81:history
62:history
48:Article
280:GAR/70
238:buidhe
209:Mark83
108:Result
90:Watch
16:<
247:talk
227:talk
213:talk
207:it.
198:talk
179:talk
171:ZLEA
151:ZLEA
138:talk
121:talk
77:edit
54:edit
276::
249:)
229:)
215:)
200:)
181:)
140:)
123:)
100:ā¢
94:ā¢
79:|
60:|
56:|
245:(
241:.
225:(
211:(
196:(
177:(
162:\
157:T
136:(
119:(
86:Ā·
83:)
75:(
67:Ā·
64:)
52:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.